If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
I love it when they go off on one.
Its the same in every thread, the same argument. They must never get bored!
Yes... somewhere back there debate was happening. It got lost though.
No - rather after a while I get bored of taking part in an exchange of pithy insults....
Yes, that's exactly why you left the discussion about right to buy and homelessness isn't it?
No - actually I left because I went on holiday for a week....
Why else would you take so much shit down a phone because YES for the third time, it IS turned on. It's because there aren't exactally any other jobs over there that pay that well. It's still disgracefully low, mind.
Hahaha. At least he's a Torie with standards I guess.
:crying:
Poor Blagsta you must lead such a hard life messing around on the internet and 'helping people back into employment' which gives you such great insight into the life of an Indian call-centre worker obviously.......
Everything you say must be true because you're working class (which you probably aren't).
and obviously I am 'spoilt' because I disagree with you.........
Kermit care to enlighten me as to the 'agenda' of those authors? Easy to say that anyone who says something you don't like has an agenda isn't it? Equivalent of putting your hands over your ears and going NANANANANANANANA
Maybe you would like to criticise the substance of their investigation...............
Try again, Mr Economics.
factor in developing countries."
Yes this is true, this is the very point I was bringing your attention to, do you know something that shows this to be wrong?
Which negates the entirety of your point that it was "unbiased". It isn't unbiased if you prove what you think, and omit everything else.
The premise is obvious, the agenda is obvious. And I don't say that because it is talking bunkum, I say that because no apparent effort was made to consider the full range of facts.
GDP is meaningless as a barometer of wealth, don't forget that folks.
Their empirical conclusions could well have shown that FDI had a negative effect on growth, as it happens it doesn't because it is a well supported fact, as they state that FDI is good for growth.
Which is the point I have been trying to make though it is obvious that you will desperately come up with any reason to deny the truth.
Oh well...........
I post on here in my lunch break. I currently work with people who have a history of drug or alcohol problems, helping them access education, training and employment. I leave here at the end of next week for a job workign with street homeless drug users in the West End. I think that gives me more of a clue than you about the realities of life for people on the sharp end.
What the fuck are you on about now?
No,, you're quite obviously spoilt (or at the very least naive) if you think that most people have much of a "choice" when it comes to work.
I don't believe you're doing an MA in economics as you claim. If you really were studying at that level, (or even undergraduate level) you would be able to understand critiques of sources and agendas. As it is, you're understanding appears to be at sub-GCSE level.
I notice you've completely failed to address any of my points.
"deny the truth"
I deny biased sources as empirical. That is a biased source, and not simply because it disagrees with my viewpoint as you will no doubt claim.
When the first sentence says what it does, any sensible critique would be that the authors of that report have an agenda, or at the very least a deep-seated bias.
Even more importantly, that source again labours under the mis-apprehension that GDP is a barometer of wealth. It isn't- never has been, never will be.
Would you rather be in a field shovelling shit, one of your clients down the west end or answering the phone all day?
I take it you can't wait for them to form businesses etc and make pots of cash for themselves once they leave their horrible lives behind?
Theres always choice. If you think there isn't your thinking is faulty.
I shouldn't expect better from people that don't know anything about economics even ones with university educations.
never mind, I wasn't going to change your mind anyway was I?
This talk of bias and agendas and bizarre criticisms of GDP is just a ploy to avoid confronting the facts, oh well........
"I can't be convinced". How the fuck did Blagsta manage it then? I never used to agree with him.
GDP does not define anything, least of all wealth. That entire source of yours was based on GDP. Therefore that source was meaningless.
No, I'm not an economics expert. I seriously doubt you are.
But any fool can see that the GDP of a country has little or no impact on the wealth of the population. Such a shame the fools on your source didn't- if the GDP rises, its good.
After all, it was once said the best person for a country's GDP was a person dying of cancer doing through a costly divorce. That's a really good barometer of wealth.
Next?
Frying pan or fire isn't a choice worthy of the name.
Oh the irony
You wouldn't know a fact if it came up and smacked you in the face. That's clear from the way you are avoiding the issues...
Quite. Its the usual neo-liberal "trickle down" guff, discredited long ago.
Two choices? How many ways to get from your front door to your kitchen? Can you think of them all?
Theres always a choice. Fact that people miss it is sad.
Trickle down does work. It's crap, but it does work.
The statistical inference at the end more than suffices to test the validity of the data or hypotheses in the paper.
Do you know what GDP is?
I don't remember you supplying any 'facts' in this thread.........