Random thoughts that are pointless and too dumb to say anywhere else thread: 2013

[Thurston Fluff]

I am forming a mime football league. Anyone want to join?

[support]

[pre]` .-'||'-.

.' || '.

/ __||__ \

| /`- -`\ |

| | 6 6 | |

\/\____7___/\/

.--------:\:I:II:I:/;--------.

/ \`:I::I:`/ \

| `------' |

| \____/ |

| , __ ___ , |

|======| / | / _ \ |======|

|======| ^| | | | | | |======|

|~~~~~| | | | |_| | |~~~~~|

| |\ [___] \___/ /| |

\ \| |/ /

`\ \ _ _.-=""=-._ _ / /'

`\ '`_)\\-++++-//(_`' /'

; (__|| ||__) ;

; ___\ /___ ;

'. ---/-=..=-\--- .'

`""` `""`[/pre]

[Thurston Fluff]

A guy and girl walked into the shop a few minutes ago. He said his wife told him the balloons he got at the party shop wouldn't last overnight. They didn't so they came to us. He says "Boy I was wrong." I said at least you are man enough to admit you were wrong. She replied "too bad he wasn't woman enough to be right all along." Game, set, match.

[Blancofan1]

That's funny right there Thurston. Poor guy didn't have a leg to stand on either. Sometimes you just have to take the ribbing and listen to the wife.

[FVBrewerFan]

There is small article in the journal/sentinel today about U.S. income gaps. I'm not trying to start a political or economic debate here. I'm just curious as to why whenever they do research regarding various income levels of Americans they use household income as the basis. Seems to me that not all households are created equal. One household may have 1 person another 8, 9, 10 or more. Also, some households have one wage earner and some have multiple wage earners. Lastly, a household in NY City with the same income level as a household in OK City does not have an equal standard of living.

 

Just seems to me that measuring everything by household income is like comparing apples and oranges. Maybe average income of each household divided by the number of individuals in a household would be a better starting point and then use some sort of cost of living factor depending on what region each house is in.

 

Again, this is statistical question/comment, not any type of political or economic question/comment.

 

 

No math whiz here, but I think that's why it's called an average. Yes, there are diferent size households, geography, lots of things that vary. That's why the number is an AVERAGE which takes into account all these factors.

 

As with all stats, it's always about what you do with the number that gets tricky. In this case, I think the proper way to look at this number is how it compares historically, whether it's up or down, etc. Anything more than that will give you misleading connections. As you said, whatever the number is it will sound too low for a family of 15 in Manhatten, yet sound pretty good to a single person in TN.

[Patrick425]

There is small article in the journal/sentinel today about U.S. income gaps. I'm not trying to start a political or economic debate here. I'm just curious as to why whenever they do research regarding various income levels of Americans they use household income as the basis. Seems to me that not all households are created equal. One household may have 1 person another 8, 9, 10 or more. Also, some households have one wage earner and some have multiple wage earners. Lastly, a household in NY City with the same income level as a household in OK City does not have an equal standard of living.

 

Just seems to me that measuring everything by household income is like comparing apples and oranges. Maybe average income of each household divided by the number of individuals in a household would be a better starting point and then use some sort of cost of living factor depending on what region each house is in.

 

Again, this is statistical question/comment, not any type of political or economic question/comment.

 

 

No math whiz here, but I think that's why it's called an average. Yes, there are diferent size households, geography, lots of things that vary. That's why the number is an AVERAGE which takes into account all these factors.

 

As with all stats, it's always about what you do with the number that gets tricky. In this case, I think the proper way to look at this number is how it compares historically, whether it's up or down, etc. Anything more than that will give you misleading connections. As you said, whatever the number is it will sound too low for a family of 15 in Manhatten, yet sound pretty good to a single person in TN.

 

 

Uh..yeah...I understand what the word AVERAGE means. However, it's meaningless if you take the average of completely different sets of objects. This stat seems to have about as much meaning to me as taking the combined average speed of all horses, sloths, and humans.

[whizkid]

I think it's a limitation on the data available. The only reliable data on income I can see is from the IRS. Taxes are generally but not always filed by household, whether it's a single person or a family with 10 kids. The household income is probably the best indicator of how well the person(s) in the household can live.

 

You can't tell from a married filing jointly return what income each spouse had. You can if W-2 info is available, yet there is joint or individual interest/dividend income, individual pension/IRA-401k distribution income etc. Some people are self-employed, have rental properties, own a business. I don't think you can get reliable individual income in these situations.

 

The wife of the guy who owns the house behind us died a year ago. His sister moved in as well as her adult son. So you probably have 2 single returns and 1 head of household return(he has a disabled adult son) coming from 1 address. I'm thinking this is considered 3 "households" even though it's one address. I think it's just a limitation of the data.

 

You would need address info to adjust for cost of living for each household and I don't know if that's available. You do the best you can with the available data. People can draw their own conclusions about whether the info given is meaningful or not.

[Patrick425]

I think it's a limitation on the data available. The only reliable data on income I can see is from the IRS. Taxes are generally but not always filed by household, whether it's a single person or a family with 10 kids. The household income is probably the best indicator of how well the person(s) in the household can live.

 

You can't tell from a married filing jointly return what income each spouse had. You can if W-2 info is available, yet there is joint or individual interest/dividend income, individual pension/IRA-401k distribution income etc. Some people are self-employed, have rental properties, own a business. I don't think you can get reliable individual income in these situations.

 

The wife of the guy who owns the house behind us died a year ago. His sister moved in as well as her adult son. So you probably have 2 single returns and 1 head of household return(he has a disabled adult son) coming from 1 address. I'm thinking this is considered 3 "households" even though it's one address. I think it's just a limitation of the data.

 

You would need address info to adjust for cost of living for each household and I don't know if that's available. You do the best you can with the available data. People can draw their own conclusions about whether the info given is meaningful or not.

 

They do studies all the time that are not based on any government data base (average calorie intake of individuals in the U.S, average amount of beer consumed, etc). There are employment agencies that do average salaries of different jobs in different regions of the county. I would like to see a comprehensive study of average income of individuals that does not rely on the limited parameters of IRS data.

[FVBrewerFan]

There is small article in the journal/sentinel today about U.S. income gaps. I'm not trying to start a political or economic debate here. I'm just curious as to why whenever they do research regarding various income levels of Americans they use household income as the basis. Seems to me that not all households are created equal. One household may have 1 person another 8, 9, 10 or more. Also, some households have one wage earner and some have multiple wage earners. Lastly, a household in NY City with the same income level as a household in OK City does not have an equal standard of living.

 

Just seems to me that measuring everything by household income is like comparing apples and oranges. Maybe average income of each household divided by the number of individuals in a household would be a better starting point and then use some sort of cost of living factor depending on what region each house is in.

 

Again, this is statistical question/comment, not any type of political or economic question/comment.

 

 

No math whiz here, but I think that's why it's called an average. Yes, there are diferent size households, geography, lots of things that vary. That's why the number is an AVERAGE which takes into account all these factors.

 

As with all stats, it's always about what you do with the number that gets tricky. In this case, I think the proper way to look at this number is how it compares historically, whether it's up or down, etc. Anything more than that will give you misleading connections. As you said, whatever the number is it will sound too low for a family of 15 in Manhatten, yet sound pretty good to a single person in TN.

 

 

Uh..yeah...I understand what the word AVERAGE means. However, it's meaningless if you take the average of completely different sets of objects. This stat seems to have about as much meaning to me as taking the combined average speed of all horses, sloths, and humans.

 

 

Yes, I'll grant you the amount is pretty meaningless, but I don't think this how this stat should be used. The important thing is the trend, comparison to the past, etc. Because all those other factors have always been true throughout the years, that is a constant. Point being, don't get too hung up on the number itself, rather how it compares to recent months and historically over the years. Even at that, it's not the "be all end all" but it does show us something.

[whizkid]

 

They do studies all the time that are not based on any government data base (average calorie intake of individuals in the U.S, average amount of beer consumed, etc). There are employment agencies that do average salaries of different jobs in different regions of the county. I would like to see a comprehensive study of average income of individuals that does not rely on the limited parameters of IRS data.

 

And how reliable do you think those studies are? Some of the employment agency studies are from self-reported salary surveys, not randomly generated. Beer is taxed so there is probably data on how much is sold in a state and you could divided by the adult population. The calorie study must be some kind of survey. How reliable is that?

 

How do you propose someone get the individual income for a study? I would think if it were that easy, you would see more studies using individual income.

[1992casey]

Keep in mind that the media are constantly looking to create stories, and if they find something that more or less fits their reporting storytelling interests, they'll use it. The concepts of reliability and validity aren't all that interesting, so they're not likely to bother with those.

[1992casey]

A single piece of ravioli is called a raviolo.

[adamb100]

I started lost a few months ago and finished it today. Wish I would have caught the show during its prime on tv (for some reason I always though of Lost as some stupid reality show called "I'm a celebrity, get me out of here" that also aired on ABC).

[RobDeer 45]

Man I missed thi site. Between having my first kid, to the brewers sucking, and moving to the east coast, i lost touch. Looking forward to some normalcy, including visiting the site on a more regular basis again!

[RightFieldCoder]

I'm going to be selfish. I am kind of glad the Brewers tanked in May. I've seen too much death in the past month to deal with the emotions of a playoff chase or actual playoff games.

[hawing]

I think that silver lining is warranted for you, RFC. Games like OAK-DET are entertaining for a neutral observer, but had I been emotionally invested in either team, it would have been kind of stressful.

[1992casey]

I wonder how old Ernie von Schledorn is.

[JimH5]

I bought a 1986 Pontiac Sunbird from his dealership. . .in 1986. And he seemed to be in his 60s then.

[1992casey]

That fits in with what I think. My best guess is that he's just under 90. Something tells me that if he had hit 90 already, we'd have heard about it, probably with his dealers having an "Ernie's 90th birthday" sale.

[rondoman]

He's 87 years old.

[logan82]

I hope Disney will fix episode IV.

[RightFieldCoder]

[sarcasm]You mean by including some CGI Jar-Jar?[/sarcasm]

[Invader3K]

[sarcasm]You mean by including some CGI Jar-Jar?[/sarcasm]

 

They're going to re-edit it so Jar-Jar is the one who kills Darth Maul.

[logan82]

[sarcasm]You mean by including some CGI Jar-Jar?[/sarcasm]

 

They're going to re-edit it so Jar-Jar is the one who kills Darth Maul.

In episode IV?

[Invader3K]

[sarcasm]You mean by including some CGI Jar-Jar?[/sarcasm]

 

They're going to re-edit it so Jar-Jar is the one who kills Darth Maul.

In episode IV?

 

LOL...my bad. I thought you guys were talking about Episode I.