Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
PN's theory of growth and economics (Read 5266 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #30 - Jun 29th, 2010 at 6:27pm
 
Quote:
But are you asking for someone to  come up with 'definitive proof'  on theories?.


How about we start with the theory?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #31 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 9:07pm
 
PN, you referred me somewhere to this thread for an explanation of your theory:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1276844918

The closest I could find was you repeating it here:

Quote:
But, in back of everything over the last 200 years particularly, has been the steady and un-relenting growth in population that has always been the major Driver or the engine of economic growth, at national and global levels.


You haven't presented any evidence for this. You seem confused about whether you even have evidence to back it up. You even claimed that the real world evidence I presented which contradicts your theory is of as little value as your uniformed opinion.

Can you explain the situation with the evidence? Did you just make it up?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #32 - Jul 25th, 2010 at 11:54pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 25th, 2010 at 9:07pm:
PN, you referred me somewhere to this thread for an explanation of your theory:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1276844918

The closest I could find was you repeating it here:

Quote:
But, in back of everything over the last 200 years particularly, has been the steady and un-relenting growth in population that has always been the major Driver or the engine of economic growth, at national and global levels.


You haven't presented any evidence for this. You seem confused about whether you even have evidence to back it up. You even claimed that the real world evidence I presented which contradicts your theory is of as little value as your uniformed opinion.

Can you explain the situation with the evidence? Did you just make it up?


Just wondering FD, have you thought about going onto Australian Idol?

I'm thinking, given your above comment, you could do well as a stand up comedian?

As I have said, a number of times, repeating the same comment still won't make it valid or correct!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #33 - Jul 27th, 2010 at 7:58pm
 
It is a question I am repeating, not a comment. Is my question invalid?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #34 - Jul 28th, 2010 at 11:15am
 
Quote:
FD
It is a question I am repeating, not a comment. Is my question invalid?


As I have said before, you say neither, I say niether!

It seems apparent, to me, that you really have little to no interest in what I am talking about and you are certainly not going to agree with much that I say.

Given the information & views that I have posted on here, in terms of personal statements, general information & articles, it seems apparent that if you don't already understand what I am saying and where I am comming from, then you never will.

Whether you agree with it or not, is a separate question, as is my understanding of your views, versus whether I agree with them and just to re-iterate, I have said quite often that I do agree with you in a number of areas, but not in some others?

So, whether you call it a question or a comment, yes it is invalid & No, I have no interest in playing games, by your rules!  
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #35 - Jul 28th, 2010 at 9:20pm
 
Quote:
As I have said before, you say neither, I say niether!


We are not saying the same thing. I am saying the opposite to what you claim.

Quote:
It seems apparent, to me, that you really have little to no interest in what I am talking about and you are certainly not going to agree with much that I say.


On the contrary. I have a great interest in some of your comments. Here is one of them:

Quote:
But, in back of everything over the last 200 years particularly, has been the steady and un-relenting growth in population that has always been the major Driver or the engine of economic growth, at national and global levels.


Quote:
Given the information & views that I have posted on here, in terms of personal statements, general information & articles, it seems apparent that if you don't already understand what I am saying and where I am comming from, then you never will.


I think I understand it, though I admit it is a very vague statement and you have been rather reluctant to get specific about it. What I have no idea at all about is why you think that - where is the evidence? Did someone just tell you one day and you believed them?

Quote:
So, whether you call it a question or a comment, yes it is invalid


I don't get why you think the fact that we agree on some things and disagree on others makes my question invalid. Can you explain?

All I am asking for is evidence to back up your claim. Even if you could explain why you think that, that would be a massive improvement on declaring my question invalid.

Quote:
& No, I have no interest in playing games, by your rules!


What rules would they be? Do you have a problem with the concept of providing evidence to back up your claims?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #36 - Jul 28th, 2010 at 10:03pm
 
Quote:
perceptions_now
As I have said before, you say neither, I say niether!


Quote:
FD
We are not saying the same thing. I am saying the opposite to what you claim.

===========
Well, that's partly correct, but partly not!

On most ocassions, you do seem to disagree, perhaps to get your ratings up?

However, as I have said, there are issues on which WE have agreed, so you DO NOT ALWAYS SAY THE OPPOSITE.

And, as the following shows, we aparently DO AGREE (at least partially) on what is & will be one of the greatest issue of our times, Over-Population.

Where we may differ is the related issues of Population in general, the aging of our Population and all that goes with it, including the great enabler of Energy (Oil & others) - BUT, HEY, YOU GET THAT, 7 BILLION PEOPLE, 7 BILLION IDEAS OF WHAT IS RIGHT!
===========
Quote:
freediver
We are overcoming the biggest problem threatening our way of life


Quote:
perceptions_now
And, what problem would that be?


Quote:
freediver wrote on Jun 23rd, 2010, 7:15pm:
Overpopulation.


Quote:
perceptions_now
I agree, that is the absolute centre of many of our problems and that it is slowing before finally going into reverse in 20-30 years!


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #37 - Jul 29th, 2010 at 9:05pm
 
So basically you are refusing to answer my question because you agree with me?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
perceptions_now
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 11694
Perth  WA
Gender: male
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #38 - Jul 29th, 2010 at 9:49pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 29th, 2010 at 9:05pm:
So basically you are refusing to answer my question because you agree with me?


No, just pointing out that you were incorrect, when you said, "We are not saying the same thing. I am saying the opposite to what you claim."

And, am I refusing to provide information, no!

Most of what you may want to know about my ideas, of what factors are influencing of lives & will continue to do so, are substantially already here, in this & other threads of mine, if you can not find the, that's your problem, your probably not looking hard enough, perhaps you need to put your glasses on.

...

As I said, I have no interest in playing games!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: PN's theory of growth and economics
Reply #39 - Jul 31st, 2010 at 7:23pm
 
perceptions_now wrote on Jul 25th, 2010 at 1:43pm:
We know that soaring Population Growth will engender Economic Growth


Have we really? Do you have the evidence that the population growth 'engendered' the economics growth? Is this the elusive evidence that you can't make up your mind whether you have?

Also, don't you think it is strange to keep repeating this assertion, without evidence, while trying to keep it as vague as possible by avoiding direct and meaningful words like 'cause'? We have seen 'engendered', 'in back of' etc. Are you trying to say it but give yourself an out in case anyone accuses you of saying it?

Quote:
No, just pointing out that you were incorrect, when you said, "We are not saying the same thing. I am saying the opposite to what you claim."


It is hard to believe how stupid this conversion is becoming. Think context PN. I obviously did not mean to say that every point you make, I say the exact opposite. It seems you are trying to discuss anything at all except the simple question I am asking, no matter how absurd it gets.

Quote:
And, am I refusing to provide information, no!


I guess not. That would require you to actually make a stand. You seem to prefer repeating the same unsubstantiated claim and simply ignoring requests for the evidence.

Quote:
if you can not find the, that's your problem, your probably not looking hard enough, perhaps you need to put your glasses on.


So you can't back yourself up, and it is my fault?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print