Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-03-2011, 06:28 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,934,632 times
Reputation: 7314

Advertisements

his thread cracks me up, for it exposes both wings, left and right, as being hypocritical. Below is a well known Obama quote spoken early in his term. Lefties had no issue with it, by and large. Right-wingers did. Perry and 49 other govs, 48 of whom would no doubt say the same about Ct or any state but their own, are simply believers , as they should be, in their own states exceptionalism. So the lefties who had no issue with Obama's statement below should back Perry on his remarks. The right-wingers who back Perry's remarks should back Obama's remarks copied below. To back just 1 of 2, no matter the 1, is hypocritical.


Obama quote :. “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism,” the president said.

Obama Too Is An American Exceptionalist | Swampland
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-03-2011, 06:55 PM
 
Location: Coastal Connecticut
21,623 posts, read 27,915,166 times
Reputation: 6687
Malloy on Ron Paul's attack on FEMA: 'I think he's an idiot' | The Connecticut Mirror

Them's fightin' words!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-03-2011, 07:14 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,934,632 times
Reputation: 7314
PS the danger lies in any citizens who do not believe in their own states', towns', or nations' exceptionalism. Like Tim Mcveigh, they have little reason to not seek its demise, be it by any means at their disposal. A belief in ones' exceptionalism is always a good thing. (PS, That does not mean a belief in the exceptionalism of the individual actions of the town, state, or nation..100% of the time!)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2011, 10:52 AM
 
1,844 posts, read 2,419,437 times
Reputation: 4501
Default You don't understand the oil industry and it shows

Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff View Post
Also from the very article you cite:



So in other words, a Democrat, or Bozo could have been governor and the same growth would have occurred. So while I am sure the tea party types would LOVE to give Perry credit, it is undeserved.
To me, it's bothersome when people in the throes of narcissistic certainty - e.g., they are right because THEY SAY SO - contaminate public discourse with delusions. Point of fact: the oil industry has the highest operating leverage of any industry in the world.

When I left, the company I worked for had been in the Fortune 1-2 or 3 for over twenty years. It was managed, operated and administered by a global work force of fewer than 90,000 employees.

I jumped ship to IBM. Well below the oil major in revenues and other measures, they had 458,000 employees. At the time, GM was a large company. They had 700,000 employees.

If the oil majors had concentrated ALL of their global work forces in Texas, the total headcount would not reach 825,000 employees.

The facts are nowhere near your wishful thinking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2011, 12:22 PM
 
Location: New London County, CT
8,949 posts, read 12,108,670 times
Reputation: 5145
Quote:
Originally Posted by jane_sm1th73 View Post
To me, it's bothersome when people in the throes of narcissistic certainty - e.g., they are right because THEY SAY SO - contaminate public discourse with delusions. Point of fact: the oil industry has the highest operating leverage of any industry in the world.

When I left, the company I worked for had been in the Fortune 1-2 or 3 for over twenty years. It was managed, operated and administered by a global work force of fewer than 90,000 employees.

I jumped ship to IBM. Well below the oil major in revenues and other measures, they had 458,000 employees. At the time, GM was a large company. They had 700,000 employees.

If the oil majors had concentrated ALL of their global work forces in Texas, the total headcount would not reach 825,000 employees.

The facts are nowhere near your wishful thinking.
So my "thoughts" which can and are generally backup with sources are "narcissistic certainty", but your inconsistent ramblings which are filled with your own personal experiences and anecdotes about companies not in the oil business, are biblical fact. Got it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2011, 04:26 PM
 
1,844 posts, read 2,419,437 times
Reputation: 4501
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlassoff View Post
So my "thoughts" which can and are generally backup with sources are "narcissistic certainty", but your inconsistent ramblings which are filled with your own personal experiences and anecdotes about companies not in the oil business, are biblical fact. Got it.
I am not interested in oneupsmanship. If I ramble on, I couch the ramblings as opinions. If I have facts, I cite the sources. Employment numbers from IBM, the oil majors, and General Motors are verifiable from annual reports, for example. If I cite opinions about self-evident truths (like, any job that only requires a computer terminal and a desk can be offshored and WILL be offshored), I couch them as opinions.

If I have been a professional in an industry, long enough to know its nuances, and am therefore qualified to speak about it, I consider my opinions to have credibility akin to that of the "expert witness".

In this case, you attempted to shore up your position against the Texan candidate by claiming that 800,000+ jobs were attributable to the oil industry. I responded by citing global employment numbers from the top dogs in the oil industry, the leading company in the IT industry, and the leading company in the automotive industry at a given point in time. As substantiation for the fact that the oil industry has the highest operating leverage of any of the non-virtual industries.

I regret your agitation, upon reading my numbers. I stand by my numbers, and would caution anybody against grasping at straws in an attempt to shore up his or her posture of infallibility.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2011, 07:06 PM
 
Location: New London County, CT
8,949 posts, read 12,108,670 times
Reputation: 5145
Quote:
Originally Posted by jane_sm1th73 View Post
I am not interested in oneupsmanship. If I ramble on, I couch the ramblings as opinions. If I have facts, I cite the sources. Employment numbers from IBM, the oil majors, and General Motors are verifiable from annual reports, for example. If I cite opinions about self-evident truths (like, any job that only requires a computer terminal and a desk can be offshored and WILL be offshored), I couch them as opinions.

If I have been a professional in an industry, long enough to know its nuances, and am therefore qualified to speak about it, I consider my opinions to have credibility akin to that of the "expert witness".

In this case, you attempted to shore up your position against the Texan candidate by claiming that 800,000+ jobs were attributable to the oil industry. I responded by citing global employment numbers from the top dogs in the oil industry, the leading company in the IT industry, and the leading company in the automotive industry at a given point in time. As substantiation for the fact that the oil industry has the highest operating leverage of any of the non-virtual industries.

I regret your agitation, upon reading my numbers. I stand by my numbers, and would caution anybody against grasping at straws in an attempt to shore up his or her posture of infallibility.
If your argument is so strong, and mine is completely incorrect why do you have to mischaracterize what I am saying? If experience is the validator here, perhaps my 17 years living in Texas should have some weight?

No, not all 800,000 jobs are attributable to the oil industry.

At least 115,000 of them are government jobs.

Many of the others are ancillary to the oil industry and support the growth that oil and shale have provided.

Still others are created in technology companies... (Some of which support o&g others don't...)

Since Perry was MY governor (and I have been far from anything but neutral about him) I think I am in a position to know something.

But please, don't let me stop you from posting yet another diatribe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2011, 08:58 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,934,632 times
Reputation: 7314
mlassoff, Your facts on this thread are all wet. 825,400 was PRIVATE sector only, the 115k are to be added to it, not subtracted. The whole industry (oil) US had 311k jobs.in tons of states.

When it comes to private sector job growth, Texas is the 2011 gold standard. > 1 in 3 US private sector new jobs!!!!

I'd suggest you post links if you have them to suggest otherwise. Not statements-L-I-N-K-S, from reputable mainstream industry sources or the BLS. (I have not seen you post any. I posted the oil industry link to verify the 311k national headcount!)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2011, 09:25 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,934,632 times
Reputation: 7314
Rockwall County-Official Website - Rockwall County 2nd Nationally in Job Growth!

L-3 Communications sure doesn't sound like a corp in the oil or shale industries.


Texas total nonfarm employment increased by 29,300 jobs from June to July. Between July 2010 and July 2011, Texas gained 269,500 jobs.
Over the past year, Texas added jobs in most sectors, including Trade, Transportation, and Utilities, professional and business services, educational and health services, leisure and hospitality, manufacturing and mining and logging. (source: http://www.texasahead.org/economy/tracking/)

(Great site for those who like credible data)

http://www.texasahead.org/economy/in...1.html#nonfarm Professional & Bus Services +243k since 2000!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-08-2011, 07:48 AM
 
24 posts, read 39,181 times
Reputation: 18
Who cares about your vote???!!!! Go vote for the depression man
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Connecticut
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:53 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top