Politics and stuff

[GeorgesGoons]

First, a warrant doesn't automatically mean they'll find shit. Second, someone in plain clothes breaks into your home and doesn't announce yourself, if you have a gun, you're probably going to shoot at them. So when a person does shoot at them, it's hard for me to say that person is wrong for defending themselves from what is essentially unknown intruders. Third, there's been way too many incidents of no knock warrants at actual incorrect addresses where innocent people tried to defend themselves and died. If you can't do it right, they need to scrap it at least until they can get a handle on that.

But yea, body cams for these should be mandatory for all cops so you'd know if they announced themselves or not and probably have a good idea of who shot first.

From all the COPS I used to watch in the 90's the no-knock's were usually them kicking in the door and yelling police. It's not like they are sneaking in their windows. Maybe things have changed since then

[shel311]

If only they turned those body cams on, they'd be able to easily prove they did yell police, but for some reason, they don't like to turn those pesky body cams on all too often.

[GeorgesGoons]

If only they turned those body cams on, they'd be able to easily prove they did yell police, but for some reason, they don't like to turn those pesky body cams on all too often.

It should go on anytime they leave their vehicle. Not sure why it's that hard for them. It could end up saving them. I just doubt that there is a huge influx of horrible police officers out there, and those would be the only ones that would have a hard time following the camera on rule.

I bet if they started charging these officers with crimes if they don't have their camera on they all would turn the damn thing on

[ReignOnU]

damn billys been living too long in the eastern euro block. starting to warp his perception. just dont become a gypsy or i'll find you and kick your teeth in.

I've got the gypsy, any takers?

[nick]

Romina gypsy**

Also you could of picked Tyson Fury

[nick]

[nick]

[GeorgesGoons]

That's a lot of hate going on! The one guy saying find Jesus, that town needs to find Jesus

[shel311]

"Fuck black lives!! And I have black friends"

[shel311]

I was a little slow to catch on, I think it was near the 30 second mark or so before I realized what was going on

https://twitter.com/M2Madness/status/12 ... 70177?s=20

[GeorgesGoons]

I was a little slow to catch on, I think it was near the 30 second mark or so before I realized what was going on

https://twitter.com/M2Madness/status/12 ... 70177?s=20

A little slow today I see

[cougnix]

GDP lost 32.9%. I was told I am not good at math so can someone tell me if that means the economy is soaring?

[GeorgesGoons]

GDP lost 32.9%. I was told I am not good at math so can someone tell me if that means the economy is soaring?

soaring like a shot duck

[ReignOnU]

GDP lost 32.9%. I was told I am not good at math so can someone tell me if that means the economy is soaring?

You weren't told you're not good at math, you proved it.

I'll go with a 99% chance that 1.) you have no idea why what you posted is factually wrong and 2.) you have no idea why.

While this isn't as absurd as your previous work, it's highly misleading. It looks incredibly bad to run it as a headline, so of course that's what we're going to see right now. There are tons of different reasons why that 32.9% shouldn't be thrown about, but the 1 reason why it should (make the president look bad) is why it's going to be out there.

[GeorgesGoons]

GDP lost 32.9%. I was told I am not good at math so can someone tell me if that means the economy is soaring?

You weren't told you're not good at math, you proved it.

I'll go with a 99% chance that 1.) you have no idea why what you posted is factually wrong and 2.) you have no idea why.

While this isn't as absurd as your previous work, it's highly misleading. It looks incredibly bad to run it as a headline, so of course that's what we're going to see right now. There are tons of different reasons why that 32.9% shouldn't be thrown about, but the 1 reason why it should (make the president look bad) is why it's going to be out there.

I'll go with 100% why I have no clue why it's factually wrong, and I have no idea why

[ReignOnU]

GDP lost 32.9%. I was told I am not good at math so can someone tell me if that means the economy is soaring?

You weren't told you're not good at math, you proved it.

I'll go with a 99% chance that 1.) you have no idea why what you posted is factually wrong and 2.) you have no idea why.

While this isn't as absurd as your previous work, it's highly misleading. It looks incredibly bad to run it as a headline, so of course that's what we're going to see right now. There are tons of different reasons why that 32.9% shouldn't be thrown about, but the 1 reason why it should (make the president look bad) is why it's going to be out there.

I'll go with 100% why I have no clue why it's factually wrong, and I have no idea why

Without making your brain explode, I'll try to keep some of it simple, but some stuff can only be said 1 way...

"GDP lost 32.9%" would mean exactly what it says. We had X, we now have X-(X*32.9%). There's 2 problems here... #1 - GDP is stated as an annual metric. You don't get a quarterly contribution, it's more of an extrapolated run rate. #2 - The 32.9% is a quarterly variance, applied as a further run rate to the already annualized GDP and carried out for 3 more quarters.

The correct statement that the media "SHOULD" be running with is the "GDP lost an annualized 32.9%." While that's the typical terminology when referring to it, it's still misleading in most cases.

So here's some truth for you and you can make your own decision on what it really means:
- Q4 '19 GDP: $21.75 (trillions) (this means at the Q4 pace, we'd produce this annually)
- Q1 '20 GDP: $21.56 (this includes the month of March. We were trending up in Jan/Feb.)
- Q2 '20 GDP: $19.41 (Apr was devastating, May improved slight, then June up a little more)
- Final '16 GDP: $18.7
- From Q1 '20 to Q2 '20, which is what Coug's statement is saying "GDP lost 10.0%."
- So how do you get 32.9%? You have to take that 10% reduction out for 3 more quarters, to annualize. You'll notice that they aren't talking about a 2020 Final projection.
- What does that mean? Q2 '20's $19.4 goes to $17.5, then to $15.7, then to $14.2. Your $14.2 is then compared back to the previous quarter.

So now that you know HOW you get to 32.9%... let's think about a few things logically...
- From Q1 '20 to Q2 '20, we dropped ~$2.2 trillion.
- $1.1 of the $2.2 was services. (Duh, we shut down everything in Mar/Apr)
- $0.6 was private domestic investment... mostly construction. (of course)
- $0.2 came from Goods... Gas and other energy leading the way. (we had stay at home orders!)

All of this makes sense so far... no ask yourself this VERY important question... Do you REALLY think that we're going to see this kind of reduction again, taking another $2 trillion off the already down Q2 number? Do you REALLY think we'd do it again in Q4? Can you even remotely fathom that we'd do it 1 more time at the start of 2020? I'm not asking if you think we'd be level from Q2 '20 to Q3 '20... I'm asking if you think we'll rip another $2 trillion from that poor Q2. That's what your 32.9% is telling us is going to happen.

[GeorgesGoons]

Form your truth paragraph down it actually made sense, surprisingly

[ReignOnU]

Form your truth paragraph down it actually made sense, surprisingly

Yeah, that first paragraph was a mess... glad you can understand it though.

[cougnix]

GDP lost 32.9%. I was told I am not good at math so can someone tell me if that means the economy is soaring?

You weren't told you're not good at math, you proved it.

I'll go with a 99% chance that 1.) you have no idea why what you posted is factually wrong and 2.) you have no idea why.

While this isn't as absurd as your previous work, it's highly misleading. It looks incredibly bad to run it as a headline, so of course that's what we're going to see right now. There are tons of different reasons why that 32.9% shouldn't be thrown about, but the 1 reason why it should (make the president look bad) is why it's going to be out there.

I didn’t prove anything either way. I admitted I had it wrong but you didn’t read that. I also told you I was distracted and didn’t move decimals so there’s that too. But again you are so full of yourself and self important that you will always be a prick

[shel311]

Solid, quick thread. Thanks media and those who fall for it.

https://twitter.com/jfcarpio/status/128 ... 60259?s=19