SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (31494)1/14/2009 5:24:00 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) of 71588
 
Re: "As I have now clearly established...the ORIGINAL ARTICLE was very unclear/vague"

The statement in the post you replied to wasn't about the original article.

And --- that one link you keep trying to shove back at me, wasn't even for the original post, or it's follow-up, where the points were made... but was just some quickie late-night reply to a question you asked me

Re: "quickie late night reply" - I think all of us SI addicts have been there, but then why not just acknowledge it as an error, or at least just drop the topic?

Re: not "for the original posts" - So what?

Re: " to a question you asked me"

Technically it was a response to a statement not a question, but in this context I don't care about that distinction too much.

The more important point is that the statement was not about the article. My statement was "But part time workers where never recorded as unemployed". Logically your "I thought it was", in reply to that statement would mean that you thought that part time workers where counted as unemployed (not that the article said they where so counted, but that they really where counted that way).

Am I correct that what you meant was something more like "I though the article said that part time people where counted as unemployed"?

If so that's a much more reasonable and understandable statement.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News