Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
eavesdropper
Participant[quote=carlsbadworker][quote=eavesdropper] TG, don’t you think you’re being a little picky over the whole data thing?[/quote]
Excuse me, but I only wish I could be as funny as TG. We are not the same person although we do live in the same city.[/quote]
carlsbad, thank you for the heads-up on my misidentification. I would not want to give credit for being picky to TG when it rightfully belongs to you.
However, your post did cause me to notice the glaring absence of a similar notification from TG. Since he lives in your city, I think that you should march right on over to his house, and demand to know why he’s taking credit for an insult that rightfully belongs to you.
Seriously, sorry about the error. But it was 4:30 a.m. EST, and I really should have known better than to still be responding to Piggs posts, given my level of extreme fatigue. And you’re not really picky. It’s just that the WSJ has been turned another version of the London Daily Mail, with meaningless graphs instead of pictures of 8 year-olds who use Botox.
Participant[quote=carlsbadworker]Well, it is a lousy article. But I guess it is better than an article with only opinion but no data. He actually tries to bring data to illustrate his points. Unfortunately he used a very small subset of data just to back his points.
I am getting tired of people using last century’s US equity return to predict the next century. After all, from global equity market’s point of view, US was just a special case last century.
We are always in uncharted territory. Planning for your retirement 30 years from now is a crap shoot at best. It is important to hedge your bets.[/quote]
TG, don’t you think you’re being a little picky over the whole data thing? C’mon, how was the reporter supposed to know that someone was actually reading the article? And using it to get information?
Besides, you shouldn’t be too hard on the WSJ this week. They’re all depressed over the Rupert Murdoch/ NewsCorp scandal unfolding in England. After all, where are they going to get material for their stories now that the FBI is checking NewsCorp’s stateside media outlets for cellphone hacking activities.
In all seriousness, TG, I’ve always eyed the Journal with a modicum of respect. At least until a couple months ago, when I made the tactical error of reading the “comments” section on an article about the commodities market. It gave me a clear idea of just how much the content had been changed at the WSJ……and not for the better, I’m afraid. I was genuinely disillusioned and disappointed.
Participant[quote=carlsbadworker]Well, it is a lousy article. But I guess it is better than an article with only opinion but no data. He actually tries to bring data to illustrate his points. Unfortunately he used a very small subset of data just to back his points.
I am getting tired of people using last century’s US equity return to predict the next century. After all, from global equity market’s point of view, US was just a special case last century.
We are always in uncharted territory. Planning for your retirement 30 years from now is a crap shoot at best. It is important to hedge your bets.[/quote]
TG, don’t you think you’re being a little picky over the whole data thing? C’mon, how was the reporter supposed to know that someone was actually reading the article? And using it to get information?
Besides, you shouldn’t be too hard on the WSJ this week. They’re all depressed over the Rupert Murdoch/ NewsCorp scandal unfolding in England. After all, where are they going to get material for their stories now that the FBI is checking NewsCorp’s stateside media outlets for cellphone hacking activities.
In all seriousness, TG, I’ve always eyed the Journal with a modicum of respect. At least until a couple months ago, when I made the tactical error of reading the “comments” section on an article about the commodities market. It gave me a clear idea of just how much the content had been changed at the WSJ……and not for the better, I’m afraid. I was genuinely disillusioned and disappointed.
Participant[quote=carlsbadworker]Well, it is a lousy article. But I guess it is better than an article with only opinion but no data. He actually tries to bring data to illustrate his points. Unfortunately he used a very small subset of data just to back his points.
I am getting tired of people using last century’s US equity return to predict the next century. After all, from global equity market’s point of view, US was just a special case last century.
We are always in uncharted territory. Planning for your retirement 30 years from now is a crap shoot at best. It is important to hedge your bets.[/quote]
TG, don’t you think you’re being a little picky over the whole data thing? C’mon, how was the reporter supposed to know that someone was actually reading the article? And using it to get information?
Besides, you shouldn’t be too hard on the WSJ this week. They’re all depressed over the Rupert Murdoch/ NewsCorp scandal unfolding in England. After all, where are they going to get material for their stories now that the FBI is checking NewsCorp’s stateside media outlets for cellphone hacking activities.
In all seriousness, TG, I’ve always eyed the Journal with a modicum of respect. At least until a couple months ago, when I made the tactical error of reading the “comments” section on an article about the commodities market. It gave me a clear idea of just how much the content had been changed at the WSJ……and not for the better, I’m afraid. I was genuinely disillusioned and disappointed.
Participant[quote=carlsbadworker]Well, it is a lousy article. But I guess it is better than an article with only opinion but no data. He actually tries to bring data to illustrate his points. Unfortunately he used a very small subset of data just to back his points.
I am getting tired of people using last century’s US equity return to predict the next century. After all, from global equity market’s point of view, US was just a special case last century.
We are always in uncharted territory. Planning for your retirement 30 years from now is a crap shoot at best. It is important to hedge your bets.[/quote]
TG, don’t you think you’re being a little picky over the whole data thing? C’mon, how was the reporter supposed to know that someone was actually reading the article? And using it to get information?
Besides, you shouldn’t be too hard on the WSJ this week. They’re all depressed over the Rupert Murdoch/ NewsCorp scandal unfolding in England. After all, where are they going to get material for their stories now that the FBI is checking NewsCorp’s stateside media outlets for cellphone hacking activities.
In all seriousness, TG, I’ve always eyed the Journal with a modicum of respect. At least until a couple months ago, when I made the tactical error of reading the “comments” section on an article about the commodities market. It gave me a clear idea of just how much the content had been changed at the WSJ……and not for the better, I’m afraid. I was genuinely disillusioned and disappointed.
Participant[quote=carlsbadworker]Well, it is a lousy article. But I guess it is better than an article with only opinion but no data. He actually tries to bring data to illustrate his points. Unfortunately he used a very small subset of data just to back his points.
I am getting tired of people using last century’s US equity return to predict the next century. After all, from global equity market’s point of view, US was just a special case last century.
We are always in uncharted territory. Planning for your retirement 30 years from now is a crap shoot at best. It is important to hedge your bets.[/quote]
TG, don’t you think you’re being a little picky over the whole data thing? C’mon, how was the reporter supposed to know that someone was actually reading the article? And using it to get information?
Besides, you shouldn’t be too hard on the WSJ this week. They’re all depressed over the Rupert Murdoch/ NewsCorp scandal unfolding in England. After all, where are they going to get material for their stories now that the FBI is checking NewsCorp’s stateside media outlets for cellphone hacking activities.
In all seriousness, TG, I’ve always eyed the Journal with a modicum of respect. At least until a couple months ago, when I made the tactical error of reading the “comments” section on an article about the commodities market. It gave me a clear idea of just how much the content had been changed at the WSJ……and not for the better, I’m afraid. I was genuinely disillusioned and disappointed.
Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper][quote=jpinpb]eavesdropper – Thank you for so eloquently stating things![/quote]
At your service, jp. Wish that eloquence would work on my husband. Baby wants new hardwood on the second floor…..[/quote]
Eavesdropper, you seriously need to run for public office. I think you just got your first two votes! :)[/quote]
Now that I think about it, CAR….isn’t that how most public officials get their hardwood floors?
I think you may be on to something…..
Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper][quote=jpinpb]eavesdropper – Thank you for so eloquently stating things![/quote]
At your service, jp. Wish that eloquence would work on my husband. Baby wants new hardwood on the second floor…..[/quote]
Eavesdropper, you seriously need to run for public office. I think you just got your first two votes! :)[/quote]
Now that I think about it, CAR….isn’t that how most public officials get their hardwood floors?
I think you may be on to something…..
Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper][quote=jpinpb]eavesdropper – Thank you for so eloquently stating things![/quote]
At your service, jp. Wish that eloquence would work on my husband. Baby wants new hardwood on the second floor…..[/quote]
Eavesdropper, you seriously need to run for public office. I think you just got your first two votes! :)[/quote]
Now that I think about it, CAR….isn’t that how most public officials get their hardwood floors?
I think you may be on to something…..
Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper][quote=jpinpb]eavesdropper – Thank you for so eloquently stating things![/quote]
At your service, jp. Wish that eloquence would work on my husband. Baby wants new hardwood on the second floor…..[/quote]
Eavesdropper, you seriously need to run for public office. I think you just got your first two votes! :)[/quote]
Now that I think about it, CAR….isn’t that how most public officials get their hardwood floors?
I think you may be on to something…..
Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=eavesdropper][quote=jpinpb]eavesdropper – Thank you for so eloquently stating things![/quote]
At your service, jp. Wish that eloquence would work on my husband. Baby wants new hardwood on the second floor…..[/quote]
Eavesdropper, you seriously need to run for public office. I think you just got your first two votes! :)[/quote]
Now that I think about it, CAR….isn’t that how most public officials get their hardwood floors?
I think you may be on to something…..
Participant[quote=jpinpb]eavesdropper – Thank you for so eloquently stating things![/quote]
At your service, jp. Wish that eloquence would work on my husband. Baby wants new hardwood on the second floor…..
Participant[quote=jpinpb]eavesdropper – Thank you for so eloquently stating things![/quote]
At your service, jp. Wish that eloquence would work on my husband. Baby wants new hardwood on the second floor…..
Participant[quote=jpinpb]eavesdropper – Thank you for so eloquently stating things![/quote]
At your service, jp. Wish that eloquence would work on my husband. Baby wants new hardwood on the second floor…..
-
AuthorPosts