{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/9/2016 2:03:27 PM
30
Ok Mad Max I'm not going to debate with you whether or not you should support Bernie Sanders or not because that's your business. But using an article off of a liberal media outlet like CNN is not really an unbiased POV. Also there is no guarantee on any of these predictions for all we know everything he does could literally destroyed our economy and country or on the other hand could be the greatest thing thats ever happened to the United States of America, but using some kind of prediction article isn't really a sound foundation for debate.
English
-
CNN is neutral. They referenced economists. [spoiler]You're the bias one here.[/spoiler]
-
Wrong just simply wrong
-
Strong argument.
-
Strong enough to be right too. You think CNN, FOX, MSNBC and the like are neutral? If that's the case I've got some magic beans I'll sell ya.
-
Wow you sure are inferring a lot. Did you see my comment and just reply right away? I never said anything about any agency other than CNN which is the only one that premises itself on attempting to be neutral. They are the closest to it. Doesn't mean they're actually close.
-
[quote]CNN is neutral[/quote] Lolno
-
lol yes. Neutrality doesn't exist in a literal form. It's a media outlet made up of people. People are bias. CNN employs people of left leaning and right leaning biases and attempts to present their news without spin. They are a neutral media outlet. (As close as a media outlet realistically gets). Stop arguing for arguments sake.
-
[quote]CNN is neutral.[/quote] You're a sheep if you believe there's a single major American news outlet that isn't biased one way or another.
-
Neutrality doesn't exist in a literal form. It's a media outlet made up of people. People are bias. CNN employs people of left leaning and right leaning biases and attempts to present their news without spin. They are a neutral media outlet. (As close as a media outlet realistically gets). Stop arguing for arguments sake.
-
Damn you really are a sheep.
-
If I were a sheep wouldn't I believe that CNN is genuinely neutral? I think you just didn't read my response because you didn't want to engage. You formed an opinion of me and acted on it before you had good reason to. You are the sheep.
-
No I say you are a sheep not because of a preconceived notion but because you demonstrated to me that you were either unwilling or unable to identify an obvious bias.
-
Sheep are herded through lack of thought. You are demonstrating exactly that.
-
You're pulling that out of your ass. I removed any bias by conceding any real neutrality CNN could hold and elaborated on my claim.
-
You're right all people are inherently biased and under the method you mentioned a news outlet can attempt to be unbiased or objective but the fact of the matter is CNN doesn't even remotely try to be unbiased or present all sides equally. Anyone capable and willing to identify a bias reading through there news or editorials would see an overwhelming bias to the left much the same way anyone looking at Fox would see a overwhelming bias for the right.
-
I'd also like to add that I never said they engaged in neutrality well. They're just one of the few that claim to try. Trust me CNN is not my preferred news source.
-
I think you're revealing your own bias. CNN definitely releases heavy left leaning content. You're right on that, but you see that and stop there. They also release right leaning content comparable to Fox News. They approach their news differently as they try to stick to data, but clearly give out biased interpretations of that data. But, they do this on both sides. Their editorials I'll admit are overwhelmingly left, but that's not a fair standard to measure the entire agency. They've released plenty of articles that attempt to demonize Obama or push for boots on the ground against ISIS when that was exclusively a conservative talking point.
-
[quote]CNN is neutral. They referenced economists. [spoiler]You're the bias one here.[/spoiler][/quote] [spoiler]a few Economists can't tell the future. Our economy is proof of that.[/spoiler] Hope this helps!
-
But you do? What puts you in a better position?
-
[quote]But you do? What puts you in a better position?[/quote] Actually my point was that nobody does, so the article is irrelevant. Please refer to my OP it should clear up your misunderstanding.
-
It's not a prediction article. It's a professional analysis of an economic plan. One that 170 economists echo. You're just in denial.
-
Yes it is, it is by definition a prediction. Did you know that in early/mid 2013 there was a large group of economists who predicted that the US currency would collapse in late 2013-to early 2014 which would send us(and the rest of the world) into a depression lasting the better part of 2 decades? Did you know those same exact economists predicted the recession of 2008, the only flaw in that prediction was they thought it would happen a little later? Economists do not know everything that will happen with our economy. They can tell you how the budget may play out but couldn't tell you economic struggles in which sector, nor unemployment rate in what year, nor can they tell you what the average income for American households will be with much confidence. You are deeply misguided and I wouldn't take every single article to the bank like you appear to be doing.
-
I'm not taking this article to the bank. I'm using it as a logical addition to my available information that leads me to the conclusion I'm on. That Sanders policies will work. It's not a prediction article. A prediction article states that something will happen in the future. This is an evaluative article. He is stating that IF these policies are implemented as planned, they will work. Granted in his opinion. But a professional and agreed upon opinion within his field. Economic results are determined by a great many things that nobody could possibly predict. Meaning there isn't a definitive right answer. Never has been. However, we do know that Sanders policies address the issues that cause the greatest problems for us (money in politics, get out of taxes cards for the rich, barriers on climbing the income ladder, no universal healthcare, etc).
-
If your talking about Sanders policies or his addressing of issues I'll commend him for that but let's stay on topic here. You just said in your own reply that this IS in fact a prediction you just worded it differently. However professional it may be, there is no denying it. When a meteorologist predicts rain the next day using his high tech equipment and professional evaluation of data, it is still a prediction. Weather men/women are wrong every single day predicting weather 1-7 days out. You think a few (yes 170 economists are not a majority) economists can predict the state of an economy accurately a year(s) in advance. You [i]are[/i] misguided, I'm pretty much done here buddy.
-
You can use as many analogies as you like. It's not a prediction. You say analysis and prediction mean the same thing? You sir, are misguided.
