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 am not stating personal opinion. I am merely pointing out different ways of gathering and looking at information, and cautioning about sampling methods in studies (i.e., corporate and gov't "research" can slant their findings in any number of ways, and they are usually the ones conducting the studies --hardly an "objective" study done by "disinterested" researchers).
Research on the state of anything can involve methods other than quantitative analysis. I would not call what a number of economists are warning us about "word of mouth" and "hearsay." These sources are as good as any out there. Nor would I call the huge numbers of jobless, underemployed, homeless, foreclosed-upon, and elderly on diminishing resources "my opinion," "hearsay," or "word of mouth." To imply that is nearly laughable if it weren't so disturbing. You could state "we are winning the war on cancer" (statistically) while more and more people get cancer every year and the nation's overall health rate declines.
Oh and what "facts" are you referring to? The "official unemployment rate"?
Qualitative analysis such as yours is only valuable to those without the patience or know-how to compute factual data.
If 90% of your friends told you the moon really didn't exist, would you believe them because that is what you heard through word of mouth? Following your logic, you would have to. Sorry, but I will stick with my mathematics, statistics and actual facts.
I notice that you have a habit of interpreting what people say thru your filters then telling them they are saying something they haven't said.
I notice that you have a habit of completely misunderstanding anything that is at all nuanced. The point of my comment was clearly not an attempt to "interpret" what the other poster was saying, but rather to point out the very obvious folly. You see, like you, the other poster is thinking in a realm of strawman.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CosmicWizard
I don't think you really want to do that, but that's how you often come across.
I'm not concerned with whether or not I'm condescending here, I'm not trying to win any favors. Although I don't try to be intentionally condescending, it is hard to treat plebs with the same respect you'd treat the more civilized.
Economist speculate on all sorts of things, there is no way to predict with certainty future economic events.
Quote:
Originally Posted by newenglandgirl
I'm not making any blanket predictions here, just saying what is already happening, observable (by anyone) who chooses to see it.
Right, you are irrationally clinging to your personal experiences despite numerous amounts of data conflicting with them. And what is already happening? The original topic was regarding the past.
Babyboomers will ultimately be forced out by more tech-savy youngsters. Expect this to happen on a macro economic scale in roughly 10 years. In certain industries--like IT--it has already happened.
The one edge that baby-boomers have is accumulated knowledge. But one of the big themes of the internet age is that information is becoming commoditized--easily accesible to everyone. Right now, the internet basically deals with trivia--like what is the capital of so and so. In ten years, the internet along with AI will deal with skills--like how do a build a beam to support a bridge. Those that can effectively harness this information will thrive. Those that play by the rules of the good ol' days will end up working at the GAP.
Qualitative analysis such as yours is only valuable to those without the patience or know-how to compute factual data.
If 90% of your friends told you the moon really didn't exist, would you believe them because that is what you heard through word of mouth? Following your logic, you would have to. Sorry, but I will stick with my mathematics, statistics and actual facts.
Qualitative analysis as an adjunct to quantitative analysis gives the most comprehensive picture of the truth when dealing with the human condition. You can play the numbers game all you want to make yourself and the support system around you feel good and safe, but what's happening to real people in America today--the growing segments poverty, the reversing fortunes of many in the middle class, and the soon reversing security of many elderly cannot be argued in terms of numbers for several reasons -- faulty or incomplete or biased studies (usually based on sampling) and the underreporting by the media which drive so much of so-called "research." How many times were public demonstrations against wars and for civil rights reported as "in the hundreds" when in fact it was more often than not "in the thousands." And then the media research gurus run around spouting off the lesser numbers (or greater, depending on which interest group they work for).
Qualitative analysis as an adjunct to quantitative analysis gives the most comprehensive picture of the truth when dealing with the human condition. You can play the numbers game all you want to make yourself and the support system around you feel good and safe, but what's happening to real people in America today--the growing segments poverty, the reversing fortunes of many in the middle class, and the soon reversing security of many elderly cannot be argued in terms of numbers for several reasons -- faulty or incomplete or biased studies (usually based on sampling) and the underreporting by the media which drive so much of so-called "research." How many times were public demonstrations against wars and for civil rights reported as "in the hundreds" when in fact it was more often than not "in the thousands." And then the media research gurus run around spouting off the lesser numbers (or greater, depending on which interest group they work for).
I trust numbers over people any day. People lie, numbers always tell the truth.
When you read a study, or view a graph, you cannot take it at face value (obviously). I always look at how the statistics were calculated and look at the functions from which the graphs were derived. You CAN find the root data (the facts) with statistical information. When a person lies (qualitative analysis), that is all there is to it.
Babyboomers will ultimately be forced out by more tech-savy youngsters. Expect this to happen on a macro economic scale in roughly 10 years. In certain industries--like IT--it has already happened.
The one edge that baby-boomers have is accumulated knowledge. But one of the big themes of the internet age is that information is becoming commoditized--easily accesible to everyone. Right now, the internet basically deals with trivia--like what is the capital of so and so. In ten years, the internet along with AI will deal with skills--like how do a build a beam to support a bridge. Those that can effectively harness this information will thrive. Those that play by the rules of the good ol' days will end up working at the GAP.
So you thing replacing human intelligence with AI is a good thing?
I am afraid you have things a little confused. The baby-boomer will become more valuable as more of them leave the workforce.
The boomers are a “hands on” generation whose knowledge based on real world experience. Most of the engineers in the boomer generation grew up repairing their bicycles as young boys, in their teens they were learning hands on how to modify the engines of their cars and motorcycles to make horsepower.
They built their electronics from kits. They spent 4 to 6 years of their primary education learning metallurgy, welding, and machining, studying electric and mechanical theory. They learned carpentry, plumbing, and other building trades.
When they went to college the things they were taught made sense because they had experienced the theories hands on.
Today’s engineering graduates are the most confused group I have ever seen. They struggle with simple concepts and make elementary mistakes. This is not their fault; it is the fault of educators who do not understand real world principals or how the human mind relates to complicated problems. It is the fault of teachers who go straight from college to the classroom or administration without ever really living and struggling in the real world.
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.
