San Diego Econ Indicators

[barnaby33]

Yeah it was a bit over the top. In his defense he says his analysis isn’t beholden to anyone that pays his salary. That made it worse to me. At least David Lereah was lying for a paycheck. Whats Gin’s excuse?
Josh

[jpinpb]

I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind.

[jpinpb]

I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind.

[jpinpb]

I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind.

[jpinpb]

I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind.

[jpinpb]

I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind.

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=jpinpb]I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind. [/quote]

Actually it was not anything worthy imho. The thread was begun by a certain former poster who had great difficulty being in disagreement with anyone without resorting to personal attacks and accusing that person of lying. True to form the thread was framed as Gin being a liar as opposed to simply being wrong.

Now I actually agree he was wrong, and as far as I can tell he really never “got” that housing was in a huge bubble. So criticism is deserved for that.

However, it is not ok in my book to accuse someone of lying just because you disagree with their opinions (unless there is actual evidence that they are lying, of course — which there was absolutely none of, in this case). And unfortunately what could have been a very useful debate about Gin’s take on the matter was greatly cheapened by the personal attacks.

Gin did actually sign in and reply with what I thought was a pretty classy and well-reasoned reply given the situation. He was still wrong about the actual housing analysis, of course — but his handling of the personal attacks took him up a notch in my opinion.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=jpinpb]I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind. [/quote]

Actually it was not anything worthy imho. The thread was begun by a certain former poster who had great difficulty being in disagreement with anyone without resorting to personal attacks and accusing that person of lying. True to form the thread was framed as Gin being a liar as opposed to simply being wrong.

Now I actually agree he was wrong, and as far as I can tell he really never “got” that housing was in a huge bubble. So criticism is deserved for that.

However, it is not ok in my book to accuse someone of lying just because you disagree with their opinions (unless there is actual evidence that they are lying, of course — which there was absolutely none of, in this case). And unfortunately what could have been a very useful debate about Gin’s take on the matter was greatly cheapened by the personal attacks.

Gin did actually sign in and reply with what I thought was a pretty classy and well-reasoned reply given the situation. He was still wrong about the actual housing analysis, of course — but his handling of the personal attacks took him up a notch in my opinion.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=jpinpb]I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind. [/quote]

Actually it was not anything worthy imho. The thread was begun by a certain former poster who had great difficulty being in disagreement with anyone without resorting to personal attacks and accusing that person of lying. True to form the thread was framed as Gin being a liar as opposed to simply being wrong.

Now I actually agree he was wrong, and as far as I can tell he really never “got” that housing was in a huge bubble. So criticism is deserved for that.

However, it is not ok in my book to accuse someone of lying just because you disagree with their opinions (unless there is actual evidence that they are lying, of course — which there was absolutely none of, in this case). And unfortunately what could have been a very useful debate about Gin’s take on the matter was greatly cheapened by the personal attacks.

Gin did actually sign in and reply with what I thought was a pretty classy and well-reasoned reply given the situation. He was still wrong about the actual housing analysis, of course — but his handling of the personal attacks took him up a notch in my opinion.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=jpinpb]I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind. [/quote]

Actually it was not anything worthy imho. The thread was begun by a certain former poster who had great difficulty being in disagreement with anyone without resorting to personal attacks and accusing that person of lying. True to form the thread was framed as Gin being a liar as opposed to simply being wrong.

Now I actually agree he was wrong, and as far as I can tell he really never “got” that housing was in a huge bubble. So criticism is deserved for that.

However, it is not ok in my book to accuse someone of lying just because you disagree with their opinions (unless there is actual evidence that they are lying, of course — which there was absolutely none of, in this case). And unfortunately what could have been a very useful debate about Gin’s take on the matter was greatly cheapened by the personal attacks.

Gin did actually sign in and reply with what I thought was a pretty classy and well-reasoned reply given the situation. He was still wrong about the actual housing analysis, of course — but his handling of the personal attacks took him up a notch in my opinion.

Rich

[Rich Toscano]

[quote=jpinpb]I am so sorry to have missed that. I’m sure you guys all gave him a piece of the Piggs’ mind. [/quote]

Actually it was not anything worthy imho. The thread was begun by a certain former poster who had great difficulty being in disagreement with anyone without resorting to personal attacks and accusing that person of lying. True to form the thread was framed as Gin being a liar as opposed to simply being wrong.

Now I actually agree he was wrong, and as far as I can tell he really never “got” that housing was in a huge bubble. So criticism is deserved for that.

However, it is not ok in my book to accuse someone of lying just because you disagree with their opinions (unless there is actual evidence that they are lying, of course — which there was absolutely none of, in this case). And unfortunately what could have been a very useful debate about Gin’s take on the matter was greatly cheapened by the personal attacks.

Gin did actually sign in and reply with what I thought was a pretty classy and well-reasoned reply given the situation. He was still wrong about the actual housing analysis, of course — but his handling of the personal attacks took him up a notch in my opinion.

Rich

[Author]

Posts