Let GM go Bankrupt

@okie,

Quote:

Do you really need t0 go into your pointless mode of criticizing my math skills? It is I that pointed out to MJ the fallacy of using a median and calling it an average, so apparently MJ did not know the difference when he used a median family income to define an average family. And apparently you did not catch it either until I pointed it out?

You shot yourself in the foot once again.

Several years ago, you misused median and mean and I corrected you on them. You screamed at me, as you tend to do, but a third poster intervened and told you I was right. A fourth poster came in and added another sort of averaging to the mix.

Now, since you have difficulties following conversations, this how this thread ran.

Monterey Jack used the term average. I googled the average income for a family of four and was immediately presented with the Census Bureau's median income, which I reported to MJ.

Then you came in with Admiral Puff'n'Stuff attitude and presented MJ with a long harangue on average having a "far different meaning" than median.

Quote:

Now, in regard to the average family income, the term "average" has a far different meaning than the term "median." For example, you can have a few families making a couple million a year thrown into the mix of families making 30K per year, you can average them together to come up with a "median" income, which might be 60K per year, but it by no means indicates the average family in that group makes 60K.

Well, once again, not only have your math skills failed you, but your linguistic skills and your memory and your ability to check up on a post have all let you down.

Why do you insist on wading out beyond your depth?

2 Replies

@plainoldme,

It never occurred to me that okie would get his back up at MJ because I quoted the first set of figures I found and used median because I was quoting them! I should have known that he never fails to look for an opportunity to pontificate.

Okie, I suspect that you are not a Roman Catholic, but have you considered using the pope's miter or the Vatican flag as an icon for yourself? It would suit.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

You shot yourself in the foot once again.

Several years ago, you misused median and mean and I corrected you on them. You screamed at me, as you tend to do, but a third poster intervened and told you I was right. A fourth poster came in and added another sort of averaging to the mix.

Can you provide a link, or proof of what you are claiming about several years ago? I doubt you can do it, pom. And what is the silly reference to the Vatican flag all about, pom?

1 Reply

@okie,

Can't read, can you? I told you exactly why: you are arrogant and you're seldom correct. You pontificate constantly, despite being wrong. If you are as you represent yourself, an employer and not an employee, I bet your turn over rate is astronomical.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

Quote:

he never fails to look for an opportunity to pontificate.

To be fair if seem that almost all of us on this website and that in my opinion cover both you and I tend to pontificate.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

Can't read, can you? I told you exactly why: you are arrogant and you're seldom correct. You pontificate constantly, despite being wrong. If you are as you represent yourself, an employer and not an employee, I bet your turn over rate is astronomical.

In regard to the last sentence, you are wrong again, as usual. Turn over rate is near zero. Again, as previously posted, provide a link to prove your accusation. I don't expect you to deliver, as you seldom do.

1 Reply

@okie,

So predictable, instead of providing an answer, or any proof of the accusations she regularly tosses out there, pom clicks on thumbs down.

3 Replies

@okie,

okie wrote:

So predictable, instead of providing an answer, or any proof of the accusations she regularly tosses out there, pom clicks on thumbs down.

so says the okie who puts posters on ignore and then advertises that he puts them on ignore. not exactly the sign of an adult. I think it's very rational to use the ignore function as well as the thumb down function but exceedingly infantile to feel a need to continually post that one is doing so.

2 Replies

@dyslexia,

This Ignore thing really frosts your old ass doesn't it Dys?

Don't worry, you have plenty of fans here that can't get enough of your crusty ruminations.

After all, you consistently make POM chuckle. How can poor Okie compete with that?

I thought humility was a pillar of the wizened old sod buster character.

2 Replies

@okie,

Hey, sluggo, why don't you look through more than 6,900 posts? And, no, because it is so old, it doesn't register on the google custom search.

What's wrong with you that you can't remember having had that discussion before? Oh! How silly of me! Why you can't remember that the median is one type of average.

0 Replies

@okie,

BTW, I did not vote your post down.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

I like to compliment people and dys is intelligent and funny. okie is generally wrong but is so belligerent when corrected.

0 Replies

@dyslexia,

I wish he had acknowledged that Monterey Jack did not make the statement about median income. He could have graciously accepted my explanation that I simply used . . . and correctly identified the Census Bureau's statement of the median familial income.

I suspect he is a tad embarrassed at having been called on incorrectly identifying the median as something separate from the average and for having accosted MJ for something I wrote.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

yes it's true finn, I do value integrity which is why I disregard both you and okie.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

I suspect he is a tad embarrassed at having been called on incorrectly identifying the median as something separate from the average and for having accosted MJ for something I wrote.

Why would I be embarrassed about being correct? I correctly pointed out that median is not the same as average, as used by Monterey Jack.

1 Reply

@okie,

okie wrote:

Why would I be embarrassed about being correct? I correctly pointed out that median is not the same as average, as used by Monterey Jack.

Actually, I think MJ should clarify what he used, and where he got the number. I thought he used median, but if wrong, my apologies. Also, before tax or after tax would be pertinent. Not that it all matters much anyway, as I think most people know that cars have gotten more prohibitive in price than ever, to the point that it seems to make little sense to me to buy a new car off the showroom floor. Let them depreciate a year or two, then buy one.

1 Reply

@okie,

The information that you request in this post has been supplied.

MJ did not . . . let me repeat . . . Monterey Jack DID NOT use the word median. Go back a few pages and try to figure it out for yourself.

1 Reply

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

The information that you request in this post has been supplied.

MJ did not . . . let me repeat . . . Monterey Jack DID NOT use the word median. Go back a few pages and try to figure it out for yourself.

Okay, I have already done that more than once. It is true that MJ referred to "the price of an entry-level car being on the order of three months income for an average family." I questioned him on that and asked for where he got that information, to which I never received an answer, but you provided data for median income for a family of four. After you provided that data, I did point out to MJ that median is not the same as average, but I have yet to receive any source from MJ for his data on family income, or even any clarification from MJ as to whether his average is truly an average. That is why I again asked MJ in my last post to provide the source of his information on how much income an "average family" makes in 3 months, and whether it is in fact an average or a median, or what it is? I also am interested in whether it is before tax or after tax income, and so I asked that as well.

So to correct you, pom, the information I requested has not been supplied as you claimed.

1 Reply

@okie,

Maybe Monterey Jack doesn't give a tinker's damn!

0 Replies

That's right, American labor costs are too high, that's why the company is going under. Give everyone in the company a 20% paycut and keep the company running. It's better than a skills drain, rent seeking period of 2.5M people being unemployed on government handouts and redundancy packages and a sell off of distressed assets to foreign competitors.
Housing prices have gone down enough to offset the pay cut anyway.

0 Replies

Let GM go Bankrupt

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know