People fleeing San Francisco in droves, 3.3 million Californians face blackouts this week

[Atticus Finch]

3 minutes ago, Newbie said:

You claiming victory is fairly stupid. 

I claimed victory because @Bormio's claim was 100% false.

I demonstrated that.

He ran away for a bit and came back with an attempt to change what he had said.

Then @Blueliner posted a whopper lie and did the same thing. Ran away.

What else should I conclude?

[Newbie]

Just now, Atticus Finch said:

I claimed victory because @Bormio's claim was 100% false.

I demonstrated that.

He ran away for a bit and came back with an attempt to change what he had said.

Then @Blueliner posted a whopper lie and did the same thing. Ran away.

What else should I conclude?

You didn’t demonstrate anything.  You posted old stats and claim victory like a fool claims. 

[Atticus Finch]

22 minutes ago, imaGoodBoyNow said:

That’s just icing on cake, why live in a box  with no property, when you can pay half the price, get 2 acres of property and not have to deal with the city bullshit

Because the place with the cheap property has cheap property for a reason: it sucks and nobody wants to live there.

These people have been quoted as saying that they love NYC but that it doesn't make sense to stay there during COVID because all of the best things about the city are shutdown or closed.

[concha]

Just now, Atticus Finch said:

The residents of California, on average, have a higher quality of life than the US as a whole. Undeniable.

 

If you say so, Andy.

Noted that you got your ass kicked trying to argue poverty rates and you're now changing the subject.

 

[concha]

12 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

My desire to hold people accountable for the things they say, you mean.

@Bormio was wrong. Nobody forced him to be wrong. He just was.

But we know that you have bullshit measures waiting to be deployed at any moment. I remember your Labor Force Participation Rate whopper.

 

What he said was accurate.

You are sticking with an antiquated, less realistic measure. Not him.

🤡

 

[Atticus Finch]

4 minutes ago, Newbie said:

You didn’t demonstrate anything.

You'll fit in very well here.

🤡

[Newbie]

2 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

You'll fit in very well here.

🤡

Yes and apparently you don’t. 

[Atticus Finch]

1 minute ago, concha said:

If you say so, Andy.

It has nothing to do with what I say. This is what someone says when they're grasping.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/quality-of-life-by-state

[Atticus Finch]

Just now, Newbie said:

Yes and apparently you don’t. 

Oh, no.

How will I ever cope?

[concha]

 

Andy is hilarious.

In Andy World, cost-of-living is meaningless and living on $75k a year is the same no matter what state you live in. 🤡

 

[RedZone]

17 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

 

I'm sure cryin' concha will find a bullshit measure that claims that they are the healthiest and most educated people on Earth.

..crying chuck has NEVER been to Mississippi.....so, that's that.

If Mississippi was for sale you could buy it pretty cheap.....

There's poverty and then there is extreme poverty

 

"50 out of 82 counties in Mississippi are considered to be living in extreme poverty, which means they have a poverty rate of 20% or more which they have maintained for over 30 years."

 

[Atticus Finch]

3 minutes ago, concha said:

What he said was accurate.

😄

14 hours ago, Bormio said:

It also has the highest poverty rate in America

This is considered accurate to concha.

No wonder he's such a craven liar.

💩

[concha]

2 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

It has nothing to do with what I say. This is what someone says when they're grasping.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/quality-of-life-by-state

 

Again, you're changing the subject because you got your ass kicked, Andy.

I have no interest in chasing you around while you "frantically" and "desperately" change the subject because you're getting your ass kicked.

🤣

[Atticus Finch]

1 minute ago, concha said:

In Andy World, cost-of-living is meaningless and living on $75k a year is the same no matter what state you live in. 🤡

Something that I never said.

The state's with higher costs-of-living also have higher paying jobs.

The quality of life index, poverty rates, etc. prove that what @Bormio and the rest of the clowns say is untrue.

A single fact has yet to be uttered by him or anyone else to the right of Mussolini.

[RedZone]

There's money in Mississippi, but 20-25 families have it all. 😀

Whew.......

[Atticus Finch]

4 minutes ago, RedZone said:

..crying chuck has NEVER been to Mississippi.....so, that's that.

His performances in these threads get more comical with each passing day.

He has defended more falsehoods and lies than probably anybody this side of Trump's Press Secretary.

[imaGoodBoyNow]

Just now, RedZone said:

There's money in Mississippi, but 20-25 families have it all. 😀

Whew.......

About 15 more families than Louisiana has

[Atticus Finch]

Just now, RedZone said:

There's money in Mississippi, but 20-25 families have it all. 😀

 

This simple concept eludes concha.

It only requires $40k to "live comfortably" but there aren't many of those jobs in Mississippi and the residents aren't educated enough to get them.

That's why California's quality of life is far superior.

They keep lying about poverty and whining about cost-of-living while ignoring what you get by paying that cost: a better life.

[concha]

 

Here is what the measure Andy thinks is best uses to determine poverty: 

"Three times the cost of a minimum food diet in 1963"

 

Here is the more modern and common sense measure that Andy is "frantically" and "desperately" trying to attack in such a "breathtaking" manner:

"Based on expenditures of food, clothing, shelter, and utilities (FCSU)"

 

So Andy thinks you shouldn't include clothing, shelter or utilities costs in figuring out a poverty threshold.  Who needs clothes, a roof over their head, water, gas or electricity, right?  🤡

 

🤣

 

[Atticus Finch]

concha desperate and unhinged trying to defend a claim that is 100% false.

This is what was claimed.

14 hours ago, Bormio said:

It also has the highest poverty rate in America

It's not true.

concha frantically running around like a cokehead trying to make this come right is very entertaining.

[concha]

5 minutes ago, Atticus Finch said:

Something that I never said.

The state's with higher costs-of-living also have higher paying jobs.

The quality of life index, poverty rates, etc. prove that what @Bormio and the rest of the clowns say is untrue.

A single fact has yet to be uttered by him or anyone else to the right of Mussolini.

 

Sure you have.  We are talking poverty and you are defending a measure that EXCLUDES housing, clothing, food and utilities. 🤡

When you take into account the costs of food, housing, clothing and utilities and incomes in these states,  the more accurate rate for California increases. 🤡

I love it when Andy advertises in neon lights what a dumbass he is.

🤣

 

 

[Atticus Finch]

1 minute ago, concha said:

Sure you have.  We are talking poverty and you are defending a measure that EXCLUDES housing, clothing, food and utilities. 🤡

@Bormio said poverty rate and I linked the poverty rate.

So, again, 100% on subject and accurate.

On subject accuracy pisses concha off.

🤡

[concha]

1 minute ago, Atticus Finch said:

concha desperate and unhinged trying to defend a claim that is 100% false.

This is what was claimed.

It's not true.

concha frantically running around like a cokehead trying to make this come right is very entertaining.

 

Per the most modern Census measure it is absolutely true.  

Now Andy is trying to make it sound like I'M desperate and unhinged?  I'm LMAO at him.

 

Andy is arguing that you shouldn't consider housing or clothing or utilities costs when assessing poverty.   🤡

[Atticus Finch]

1 minute ago, concha said:

Per the most modern Census measure it is absolutely true. 

I always have to repeat this because concha is fundamentally dishonest:

That is not what @Bormio said.

He was wrong.

You then swooped in to change the subject and mislead everybody.

Rinse, repeat.

[concha]

Here is the very legitimate and far more common sense poverty measure that Andy is so "unhinged" about:

 

https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/random-samplings/2018/09/what_is_the_suppleme.html

Since the publication of the first official U.S. poverty statistics, there has been a continuing debate about the best way to measure income and poverty in the United States.

In 2010, an interagency technical working group asked the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics to develop a new measure that would improve our understanding of the economic well-being of American families and enhance our ability to measure the effect of federal policies on those living in poverty. The technical design of the supplemental poverty measure draws on the recommendations of a 1995 National Academy of Sciences report and the extensive research on poverty measurement conducted over the past 20 years. See the history of poverty measures in the United States infographic.

President Johnson’s 1964 declaration of his “War on Poverty” generated a new interest in measuring just how many people were in poverty and how that changed over time.

Next week, the Census Bureau will release the latest report on the supplemental poverty measure. The report presents estimates for the official and supplemental poverty measures and discusses differences between the two measures. A comparison of the major concepts is detailed in the table below and in this infographic.

We measure poverty two ways every year. The official poverty measure is based on cash resources. The supplemental poverty measure uses cash resources and also includes noncash benefits and subtracts necessary expenses (such as taxes and medical expenses).

 

Poverty Measure Concepts: Official and Supplemental
	Official Poverty Measure	Supplemental Poverty Measure
Measurement Units	Families (individuals related by birth, marriage or adoption) or unrelated individuals	Resource units (official family definition plus any co-resident unrelated children, foster children, and unmarried partners and their relatives) or unrelated  individuals (who are not otherwise included in the family definition)
Poverty Threshold	Three times the cost of a minimum food diet in 1963	Based on expenditures of food, clothing, shelter and utilities—FCSU
Threshold Adjustments	Vary by family size, composition and age of householder	Vary by family size and composition, as well as geographic adjustments for differences in housing costs by tenure
Updating  Thresholds	Consumer Price Index: all items	Five-year moving average of expenditures on FCSU
Resource Measure	Gross before-tax cash income	Sum of cash income, plus noncash benefits that resource units can use to meet their FCSU needs, minus taxes (or plus tax credits), minus work expenses, medical expenses, and child support paid to another household

 

 

The official poverty measure compares an individual’s or family’s pretax cash income to a set of thresholds that vary by the size of the family and the ages of the family members. These official poverty calculations do not take into account the value of in-kind benefits, such as those provided by nutrition assistance or housing and energy programs. Nor do they take into account regional differences in living costs or expenses, such as housing.

The supplemental poverty measure takes into account family resources and expenses not included in the official measure as well as geographic variation. First, it adds the value of in-kind benefits that are available to buy basic goods to cash income. In-kind benefits include nutritional assistance, subsidized housing and home energy assistance. Then it subtracts necessary expenses for critical goods and services not included in the thresholds from resources. Necessary expenses that are subtracted include income taxes, Social Security payroll taxes, child care and other work-related expenses, child support payments to another household, and contributions toward the cost of medical care and health insurance premiums.

Thresholds used in the supplemental poverty measure are produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics Division of Price and Index Number Research using Consumer Expenditure Survey data that show how much people spend on basic necessities (food, clothing, shelter and utilities) and are adjusted for geographic differences in the cost of housing. The supplemental poverty measure thresholds are not intended to assess eligibility for government assistance.

Next week’s report will compare supplemental poverty estimates with official poverty estimates for numerous demographic groups. It will also provide state-level supplemental poverty statistics using three years of Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement data and compare last year’s supplemental poverty estimates with the latest estimates. In addition, the report will examine the effect on supplemental poverty rates of excluding specific resource or expenditure elements, such as noncash benefits, tax credits and medical expenses.