All I need to know about Conservatism and Liberalism, I learned from statistics.
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Thread: All I need to know about Conservatism and Liberalism, I learned from statistics.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    993

    All I need to know about Conservatism and Liberalism, I learned from statistics.

    Everything I need to know about Conservatism and Liberalism in the aggregate, I learned from statistics.

    http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/statesman/...081205libs.pdf

    Income and Economic Status
    According to the 2000 Census Data, the top twenty-five most conservative cities in this analysis have an average median household income of $45,695, which is slightly higher than the United States average of $41,994. However, the United States average is 25% higher than the average median household income for the top twenty-five liberal states of $33,637. The same type of data emerges from the percent of individuals below the poverty line. The most conservative cities possess a mean of 12.08%, slightly lower than that of the American average of 12.40%. Yet the most liberal cities reveal an opposite trend, with the most impoverished individuals representing 23% of the population, significantly higher than that of American average.
    When they "Nudge. Shove. Shoot.",
    Don't retreat. Just reload.

  2.   
  3. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by CathyInBlue View Post
    Everything I need to know about Conservatism and Liberalism in the aggregate, I learned from statistics.

    http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/statesman/...081205libs.pdf
    Hard to argue with hard, cold facts...but I'm sure someone will try!
    Prov. 27:3 - "Stone is heavy and sand a burden, but provocation by a fool is heavier than both"

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    The High Country
    Posts
    1,029
    Statistics aren't facts, they're numbers.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    169
    Statistics don't lie, statisticians do. Numbers are easily manipulated and that is why reputable statisticians give all the background about their studies.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    993
    Which, if you read the fullness of that PDF file, it's in there.
    When they "Nudge. Shove. Shoot.",
    Don't retreat. Just reload.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by JJFlash View Post
    Hard to argue with hard, cold facts...but I'm sure someone will try!
    Facts do not mean much to some.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  8. #7
    It's so predictable and tiring. "Statistics aren't facts, they're numbers".

    I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

    Look, the sky is blue. No, it's not, you twit, it's azure.

    Some people on this site ought to get a real life.
    Prov. 27:3 - "Stone is heavy and sand a burden, but provocation by a fool is heavier than both"

  9. #8
    wolfhunter Guest
    JJ, this time he's right. Since statistics are highly manipulated numbers (watch how the data is shaped by the premise and questions) they aren't facts.

    Statistics can present pretty good guides and indicate possible trends, not facts.

  10. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by JJFlash View Post
    It's so predictable and tiring. "Statistics aren't facts, they're numbers".

    I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.

    Look, the sky is blue. No, it's not, you twit, it's azure.

    Some people on this site ought to get a real life.

    All from the Bill Clinton dictionary of double speak?
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  11. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by wolfhunter View Post
    JJ, this time he's right. Since statistics are highly manipulated numbers (watch how the data is shaped by the premise and questions) they aren't facts.

    Statistics can present pretty good guides and indicate possible trends, not facts.
    There are no trends to be extrapolated, here, WH. The mean, median, and mode are termed "descriptive" statistics and are pretty elementary. They simply describe "what is". They are not used to indicate possible trends. Statisticians and others do not argue over these stats since there is nothing to argue about. They are easily calculated and so cannot be fudged if people use the same dataset.

    It is only in the more advanced analyses, say, multiple regression, that interpretation plays a much larger role in discerning the meaning of the model. Even here, there is rarely argument over the numbers themselves, only in what is being projected, that is, the accompanying explanation.

    If I say the average weight of all conservatives in this room is x, and the average weight of all socialists is y, assuming that the study participants identified their political persuasion, what is there to argue about? Same thing the OP presented, here.
    Prov. 27:3 - "Stone is heavy and sand a burden, but provocation by a fool is heavier than both"

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast