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.
I do know that. Did you read what you just wrote? The failure rate is the EXPECTED number of pregnancies. Contraception is expected to fail a certain percentage of the time. It's effective 97-99% of the time. EVERY time you have sex, you run the risk of your contraception failing. EVERY time.
Yes, but the EVERY time statistic is SIGNIFICANTLY different than the yearly statistic, which is what I posted: 1-3% failure PER YEAR of use.
He's not resourceful enough. Go look at Monster, career builder, dice.com There are MANY, MANY good paying jobs out there. Someone has to be onsite to support stuff. What. do you and your brother think that computers and datacenters don't exist in US companies and they all reside overseas or in the "cloud" somewhere?
My brother has a job, his job is to send jobs to India and Russia, that is what he does. That is all he does. He will get a project and work on the project, but then end goal is to send the work to another country. Sometimes a project is 5 weeks other times it is a year, but those particular jobs aren't coming back.
Perhaps you could direct us to where you've discovered what kind of AVERAGE the labor board is using in their statistics. Is it a median average? A mean average? You see, statistically speaking, "average" is vague, because there are several different ways to determine an "average" and how you determine it makes a difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient
Ah, how simple the world is when you're a conservative. It really helps with the formulation of stereotypes.
Please revisit the difference between mean, median, and mode.
The mean wage is not at all necessarily representative of the frequency distribution of wages. It doesn't mean that most people earn that wage or that the amount of people earning more or less than that is roughly even. If you have 90% of people making a really low wage and then 10% with really high earnings, then your "average wage" is actually being enjoyed by a pretty small number of people. And that's what is happening in America. There is a mountain of evidence about how income has increasingly become skewed towards the top few richest percent while middle and lower classes have been squeezed as formerly well-paying manufacturing jobs have moved overseas. You really think the average Walmart / McDonald's / whatever retail store person is making $23.78 an hour? Get real.
Quote:
Average hourly earnings estimates are derived by dividing the estimated industry payroll by the corresponding paid hours. Average weekly hours estimates are similarly derived by dividing estimated aggregate hours by the corresponding number of jobs.
In other words, BLS compiles payroll data for the plethora of industries that comprises the American workforce and computes the hourly wage relative to reported payrolls. The AVERAGE of all industries is $23.78 per hour. In other words, there would have to be far more industries paying more than $23.78 per hour in order for the low-wage industries to pull the AVERAGE wage down to $23.78.
So, again, the question begs: Why aren't people bettering themselves when in fact the data is out there proving that there are plenty of industries that offer better than minimum wage jobs?
What is it about the New American Worker that sees itself as a victim instead of someone who can harness what's actually available to them???
(I need to add about 20 other poster's to this post to prove to them that they are wrong. For now, you two get to be poster children for being wrong about your conerns over my use of the term "average.")
Last edited by AeroGuyDC; 02-01-2013 at 02:25 PM..
You're right. It should be: 80% of millionaires are self-made. I stand corrected.
So, again, I'll ask. For what point was the comparison between the percentage of millionaires and contraceptive fail rates made?
IF 4% of Americans are millionaires or self-made millionaires then, the chance of becoming pregnant while on contraceptives is still MUCH greater than the chance of being a millionaire.
Yes, but the EVERY time statistic is SIGNIFICANTLY different than the yearly statistic, which is what I posted: 1-3% failure PER YEAR of use.
Um, no.
For someone who proclaims themselves an expert on statistics, so you really don't understand them at all. The failure rate is the risk someone has of getting pregnant EVERY time they use the contraceptive. How the failure rate is calculated is based on the past success of the contraceptive.
Each time someone buys a lottery ticket, they are hoping that that lottery ticket will be a winner. How the rate is calculated doesn't change my chances.
For someone who proclaims themselves an expert on statistics, so you really don't understand them at all. The failure rate is the risk someone has of getting pregnant EVERY time they use the contraceptive. How the failure rate is calculated is based on the past success of the contraceptive.
I think he's right, that stats that I found stated
Quote:
Male condoms: 98% effective if used correctly. Two women in 100 whose partners use a condom will get pregnant in a year.
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.
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.
