Jump to content

Cartman

Members
  • Posts

    999
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Cartman

  1. Oh, so we have a few experts in economics here? Let me see. As you are both so knowledgeable, surely you know the basics of economic modeling. Either one of you want to explain what is hierarchical or linear about hierarchichal linear modeling? This is a basic technique used by econometricians. Would you both agree that it should really be called multilevel modeling? Level 1: Yij=b0j +b1j *Xij + eij Level 2: b0j = g00 + g01*Wj +u0j b1j = g10 + g11*Wj +u1j Using the above equation, can you identify the "fixed" and "random" effects? Do you know what the error term stands for? If you don't know the basics about measurement in economics, you might not want to make claim to the economics hall of fame.
  2. http://money.cnn.com/2005/09/24/news/inter....reut/index.htm I suppose we should not be surprised by this, but it is kind of scary if it is true.
  3. That is a pretty bleak outlook August. Playing devil's advocate, I would argue that as long as the NDP can work with the minority government, we should not have an Italian phase. The problem will be if the Conservatives ever form a minority government and they are unable to work with the NDP. I wonder, could these two parties work together? On the surface, it seems hopeless.
  4. I voted to keep things the same because any change will anger the US and its just not worth it. Besides, apart from raising the price of drugs and creating criminal records for a few, government policy is irrelevant. People will do drugs regardless of what is written on a piece of paper in Ottawa.
  5. I still say the Liberals keep a minority government no matter when the election takes place. I just don't think they can muster a majority. The Conservatives have no chance unless they stumble upon something big. Judging by their strategy thus far, I am not convinced they are up to the task. They do not appear to be a credible government in waiting.
  6. I think Harper is the better leader. MacKay lost most credibility when he lied in the agreement with Orchard and the last of it was gone when he did that sad assed interview with CBC when Belinda dumped him but good. I really want that wimp in power.
  7. Check out this story. Pretty sarcastic. http://tinyurl.com/ad4rx
  8. I disagree, I purport that this is the issue though it should not be.
  9. I should try it out. Burns, really how old are you?
  10. That was not my intention. I suspect that the cumulative negative effects of alcohol on society are worse. I would guess that relatively few people use cocaine and that a lot of people use alcohol. As such, alcohol is probably more harmful to society than is cocaine. You have to worry about drunk drivers more than you do cocaine drivers. In terms of effects upon the user, why should I care what he does to himself?Look, I don't know this guy or his politics. My point is that it is hypocritical to accept addicted drunks presently in office, but frown upon a guy who claims to have used cocaine in the past. Again, we are not talking about two premiers who simply drink here, we are talking about two guys so mentally screwed up and out of control that one gets caught for DD in a foreign country and the other goes out into the streets and starts kicking people. How many times have you done that shoop? I would like you to explain how anyone can justify using alcohol. Why drink? Why use any drugs at all?
  11. Why on earth would you lump together the data derived from the first two response categories and not the last two response categories? You either coalesce similar sentiment or you do not. If you choose not to, then you see the highest category by far is the belief that the US cannot win the war in Iraq.Let us review the results again in an attempt to ascertain whether I and CNN are being honest or not. This time, I strongly suggest that you ask someone to help you follow along using a sock puppet (we will call him "Mr. Wizard") and by stacking Lego blocks (it might give you the much needed visual). % who believe the US will definitely win 21% % who believe the US will probably win 22% Total % of those who think the US will win 43% % who believe the US will probably not win 20% % who believe the US cannot win 34% Total % of those who think the US will not win 54% Now, if you stack 43 blue Lego blocks beside 54 red Lego blocks, you will see that the red Lego blocks are taller! And if you stack 100 yellow Lego blocks beside the 43 blue Legos, you will see the 43 blocks are less than half the way up. "Mr. Wizard" should be nodding at this point. Just make sure your Lego are the same size though you silly Billy. You make it sound as though I am colluding with CNN. If we all agree that a half = 50%, and that 43% is less than a half, then the title "Poll: Fewer than half think the US will win in Iraq" is a very accurate description of the data gathered. Ergo, your attack on my integrity has once again been easily refuted. Here's an idea Burns, if you don't want sarcastic responses, stop questioning my honesty. It is poor manners to do so in case you did not know.
  12. I would like someone to respond to Eureka's argument that once a private system is allowed to operate in full force, the public system will collapse due to pressure from US firms. Thoughts? Is he correct?
  13. Agreed. It's not like us Albertans put the oil there or anything. August brought this up a long time ago and I thought it was an interesting question (I think it was something like "what entitles Albertans to the oil up north"). If memory serves, the responses were not as strong as the original query.
  14. I am with Argus on this one even though it is an unpopular position. I believe that part of the reason why immigration is so popular with the Liberals is that it is a vital area of political support for them. Are there any politicians left who are not falling all over themselves to demand more immigration, 'cuz it seems every party is in favour of current immigration levels? What is China going to do when they must deal with lop-sided demographics (i.e. too few young and too many elderly)? This is a sincere question.
  15. Pretty good advice if you ask me. Quite a few Canadians could probably use the extra exercise anyways.
  16. I do not vote Liberal partly as a result of health care funding slashes, I vote NDP. So the answer to your sarcastic question about demanding questions of Ottawa is "yes". This does not, however, absolve the provincial governments of their legislated responsibilities on the matter. They agreed to block funding transfers in return for the ability to spend it as they please. If the system needs money as you agree and the Province of Alberta clearly has a lot of extra cash as we all agree, then how about spending it on health care? Clearly, my $400.00 will do little to change health care in Alberta, but $400.00 from every man, woman and child would likely make a big difference. This is not the stated goal of the government and even if it was, then they should have cut taxes. This is not a tax cut. It is a legal political bribe using our own money and I bitterly resent it. This is why I will probably send it to the Alberta NDP as I personally have no need for it.
  17. You are correct that the comparison is not entirely accurate, but not for the reasons you suggest. If alcohol were not so readily available due to the fact that it is a legal substance, it would cost much more. Make it illegal and we shall see how much an addict can spend on it annually. The price of a drug does not reflect its potential harm. A study? I believe that this demonstrates her arguments are not simply whimsical claims based on "a study". If he is functioning normally when he used the drug, why worry now that he is not using the drug? That is my main point after all. If he was just an occasional user, what is the big deal? I highly doubt he would admit to cocaine use if he was involved in illegal behaviour other than using the drug. I can see judging him for using drugs, but I see no reason to dislike him for using cocaine compared to other harmful and impairing drugs.I certainly can and will make the comparison to Klein and Campbell. My point is that impairment should be our main concern, not the arbitrary classification of drugs. I don't care whether a politician is high on crystal meth, cocaine or alcohol, if they are unable to perform their duties, they should not be working. As well, Campbell was so drunk that we KNOW he was involved in illegal behaviour (drunk driving) in a foreign country no less. We know Campbell engaged in a crime that hardly anyone would condone. He could have easily killed someone. This dude is simply admitting to recreational use in the past. If there is no comparison to be made here, it should be because this guy admitted to recreational drug use in the past whereas Gordo lies about problematic drug use in the present.
  18. http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/22/iraq.poll/ Maybe Bush should start another war and cut taxes at the same time.
  19. My employer pays my premiums so I am not given such a reminder. I would rather have the money go to health care which everyone complains is always strapped for money, has long line-ups and is killing people. Which is it? Is it in need of money or not? I am thinking of sending my cheque to the Alberta NDP as they need it more than I do.
  20. Sorry, alcohol is not just another drug. It is quite addictive and can be expensive. It is so widespread that there are places in society where people use the drug openly. Pushers (Molson, Labatts) make quite a bit of money as do the distributors of the drug (bars, pubs etc). Alcohol is big business.From Patricia Erickson's "The Selective Control of Drugs". "The currently dominant notion of cocaine's powerful addictive quality is a considerable overstatement: between 5 per cent and 10 per cent of those who ever try cocaine will use it weekly or more often; most users will not continue, and the majority of those who do will use it infrequently. Of the more frequent users...about one-tenth will develop uncontrolled use patterns at some time (p.65). People who drink are stupid. People who smoke tobacco are stupid. People who are overweight are stupid and people who have unprotected sex are stupid. By this criteria, we would have few people left to choose from. I know this escapes many people, but still. The guy has said he does not use anymore and to my knowledge, never showed any overt signs of using it. That is, he continued to do his job effectively. King Ralph, by contrast, went out and kicked people and reporter's cameras. He is well known to be an addict. Gordo drove drunk and was caught which IMO, is a pretty good indicator that the guy is unable to control his alcohol use. Not only was he found to be drinking and driving, he was driving fast and on the other side of the road. He then publicly, blatantly and obviously lied about how much he consumed. Amazingly, the ONE time he drove drunk, he was caught. Pretty bad luck if you ask me. We accept and re-elect drunks whose judgement is impaired, but hey, an open declaration that a person used cocaine in the past and no longer uses now is met with such condemnation. If you want this politician booted fine, but let's make sure we apply such strict stupidity standards to everyone, not just politicians. I am up for any drug/weight/physical endurance testing.
  21. Well, I suspect that corporations benefit from us having a publicly funded health care system. These costs are shared with workers. In many other places, corporations have to pay for employees health insurance and it is expensive. Burns, you can tout the US tax cuts, but I really think they are in serious financial trouble. You can't keep spending, cutting taxes and borrowing forever. At some point, things fall apart. Even some Republicans are getting nervous about the deficit in the US. Just as a bank gets nervous when an individual borrows too much, US lenders must be getting worried. I guess time will tell. I pity the next US president that will have to deal with this mess (Republican or Democrat).
  22. Big deal, the guy did some blow. Next, politicians will be forced to admit whether they enjoyed Playboy or not. Ralph also did a lot of alcohol and he was drunk on the job; so was Gordo. I am sure a lot of other politicians drink and use other drugs. Whether he used drugs doesn't matter to me, it is whether he can do his job properly. Sheesh, you would think this was the Victorian era or something.
  23. Well, I consider that a tax with a fancy name. Premium sounds better than tax even though the same people have to pay them. Eliminating these "premiums" would be my first choice, but given that the Tories are always screaming about taxes, I thought that would be a possibility. It really angers me when Klein gets up there and talks about how they have managed money so well that they have too much of taxpayer's money. That is not good fiscal management, it shows they have taken too much to begin with. No, but I don't like them giving it to teens who live at home with mom and pop and I don't like them giving it only to homeowners and not renters. By basing it on "residency", they are sure to screw this up again as usual.
  24. He better handle this but quick so that it does not become a big issue during the campaign. As a New Democrat, I might have the most to lose if Harper is booted.
×
×
  • Create New...