The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > The BBQ Pit

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-10-2004, 12:23 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 26,750
Cheney and eBay (stupid but funny)

Cheney says the economy's not as bad as the numbers say, because economic indicators miss everybody who makes money selling on eBay.
Quote:
"Thatís a source that didnít even exist 10 years ago," Cheney told an audience in Cincinnati on Thursday. "Four hundred thousand people make some money trading on eBay."
John Edwards' response:
Quote:
"If we only included bake sales and how much money kids make at lemonade stands, this economy would really be cooking."
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 09-10-2004, 12:40 PM
World Eater World Eater is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Edwards gets the comback of the week award.

Cheney is a fucking idiot. Don't forget to factor in those couple of coins under the bed either.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-10-2004, 12:57 PM
Chefguy Chefguy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Portlandia
Posts: 28,283
Let's not forget the garage sale cartel, that shadowy group of savvy investors who arrive in their 20-year old rolling tetanus epidemics, bags of loose change in hand to shrewdly increase their portfolios by purchasing deflated basketballs and toasters that don't heat.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-10-2004, 01:01 PM
JKilez JKilez is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
That is too funny.

And what about the plasma donors:
Quote:
Not many people get paid to bleed, but I do. I count myself among a small class of people, about 400,000 nationwide, who earn cash selling their blood plasma at the more than 400 plasma centers nationwide. It's not a pleasant experience, but it helps me get by.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-10-2004, 02:23 PM
Skywatcher Skywatcher is offline
Uncharted
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 26,408
Cheney does have a point, albeit a small one. There are a few business whose primary income is from selling new items on eBay.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-10-2004, 02:37 PM
Marley23 Marley23 is offline
I Am the One Who Bans
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 77,047
That's very funny. Next time somebody asks if Edwards is qualified to be Vice President, I think we can just point to his skill with one-liners.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-10-2004, 02:38 PM
Liberal Liberal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Actually, we don't even know whether that was Cheney's point. The tiny AP snippet, quoted by the OP, gives exactly zero context. Where is the rest of the speech?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-10-2004, 02:43 PM
World Eater World Eater is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberal
Actually, we don't even know whether that was Cheney's point. The tiny AP snippet, quoted by the OP, gives exactly zero context. Where is the rest of the speech?
Taken out of context? It's pretty cut and dry. Feel free to provide alternate interpretations.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-10-2004, 05:24 PM
samclem samclem is offline
graphite is a great moderator
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 21,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberal
Actually, we don't even know whether that was Cheney's point. The tiny AP snippet, quoted by the OP, gives exactly zero context. Where is the rest of the speech?
Why, it's right.........er, uh, ...........it should be available at............

If you go to the Bush/Cheney website , they have transcripts available of their speeches. Except that this one hasn't made it to the list as of the time of my posting. Will it? If no one else posts back here tomorrow, I will.

I notice on that website that you can already read a transcript of a speech by Bush today and three that were made yesterday.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-10-2004, 05:45 PM
buttonjockey308 buttonjockey308 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Now THAT statement wins the booby prize. Sure, there are over 400,000 people making money on eBay, Dick. Know why?


Because they're SELLING THEIR BELONGINGS TO EAT AND PAY THE RENT!

Know why?

Because they DON'T HAVE A FUCKING JOB.

Know why?

Because the ECONOMY SUCKS.

Know why?

Because we're SPENDING BILLIONS ON AN ILL-CONCEIVED WAR

Know why?

Me neither.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-10-2004, 07:45 PM
NurseCarmen NurseCarmen is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Zen Arcade
Posts: 8,268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Olsen
Cheney does have a point, albeit a small one. There are a few business whose primary income is from selling new items on eBay.
Well, if they are a business, they are required to report that income. They then would be included in economic indicators.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-10-2004, 09:16 PM
Skywatcher Skywatcher is offline
Uncharted
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 26,408
Quote:
Originally Posted by NurseCarmen
Well, if they are a business, they are required to report that income. They then would be included in economic indicators.
Yeah, but does Cheney know this?
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-10-2004, 09:22 PM
SteveG1 SteveG1 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
EBay is a drop in the bucket. You have a shitload of people selling small lots of items usually. Those who do it as a business are usually small businesses (very small). If there are 400,000 people trading, then let's assume half are buying what the other half is selling. We are down to 200,000 sellers now. Now, let's asume half are not in the USA. Down to 100,000. Now, assume half the people buying are not in the USA. Down to 50,000. All the numbers were probably pulled out of the air anyway, so why not have fun with them. Since most sellers are just getting rid of things they don't use anymore, cut the numbers down a few more times for good measure.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-10-2004, 10:36 PM
lissener lissener is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberal
Actually, we don't even know whether that was Cheney's point. The tiny AP snippet, quoted by the OP, gives exactly zero context. Where is the rest of the speech?
What an idiot. The point of that sentence is pretty crystal clear. Are you suggesting he was using it as a metphor for something? Or perhaps he was making fun of a rightwing point of view? Please suggest an alternate theory--make up some context, as an experiment--to show how any context could possibly alter the meaning of that statement. One rule: it has to sound like something Cheney would say.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-10-2004, 11:15 PM
RickJay RickJay is offline
Charter Jays Fan
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Burlington, Ontario
Posts: 31,711
Hey hey now, let's give some credit to the value of the invisible economy. Think of all the economic activity created by homeless people squeegeeing cars for loose change. Or teeenaged prostitutes, enslaved to abusive pimps, giving blowjobs for $20 a pop. And the wives of Halliburton executives gotta have their $3/hour illegal domestics. It's the New Economy!
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-11-2004, 12:38 AM
JKilez JKilez is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveG1
EBay is a drop in the bucket. You have a shitload of people selling small lots of items usually.
To be fair, eBay actual does push a great deal of product.

From eBay's 2003 10-K:
Quote:
Total transaction net revenues [2003 in thousands] $2,112,242
Quote:
eBay transaction net revenues as a percentage of gross merchandise sales was 7.1% in 2003
If I am doing my math right, that is just shy of $30 billion per year in merchandise that flows through that site. More than Best Buy, but less than Target.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-11-2004, 12:43 AM
lissener lissener is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Yeah, but Ebay is a '"store" with what, 6 million outlets? I seem to remember, a couple years ago, determining that was about how many items they had up at a particular time. That's like $5000 a year, average. Subtract out the top say 1%, who DO make a business out of it, and I doubt if the median income from eBay is anything but negligible.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-11-2004, 01:05 AM
JKilez JKilez is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
I am just saying... You can mock Cheney, just do not knock eBay!
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-11-2004, 02:33 AM
rjung rjung is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Unlike Dick Cheney, eBay has measures to prevent fraud.
__________________
--R.J.
Electric Escape -- Information superhighway rest area #10,186
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-11-2004, 03:06 AM
Nonsuch Nonsuch is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Portland, OR, USA
Posts: 2,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by lissener
Please suggest an alternate theory--make up some context, as an experiment--to show how any context could possibly alter the meaning of that statement. One rule: it has to sound like something Cheney would say.
I thought I'd give it a shot, but I couldn't figure out how to combine eBay with a warning/veiled threat about another terrorist attack.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-11-2004, 03:40 AM
VarlosZ VarlosZ is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 5,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by lissener
Quote:
Actually, we don't even know whether that was Cheney's point. The tiny AP snippet, quoted by the OP, gives exactly zero context. Where is the rest of the speech?
What an idiot. The point of that sentence is pretty crystal clear. Are you suggesting he was using it as a metphor for something? Or perhaps he was making fun of a rightwing point of view? Please suggest an alternate theory--make up some context, as an experiment--to show how any context could possibly alter the meaning of that statement. One rule: it has to sound like something Cheney would say.
No, Lib was correct. The OP says: "Cheney says the economy's not as bad as the numbers say, because economic indicators miss everybody who makes money selling on eBay."

We do not know whether Cheney's point was that Ebay alone has a very large positive (but unmeasured) effect on the economy.

An alternative that seems to me at least as likely is something like: "Economic indicators don't tell the whole story. The marketplace is constantly changing and expanding in ways that these indicators don't measure. Take, for example, Ebay. That's a source [of income] that didn't even exist 10 years ago. . ."

This would be a fair point, by the way. I think that ebay is a large, very efficient market, and we're all better off for it. Besides, it's a pleasantly progressive market, as well, as money is for the most part being transferred from those who have the ability to pay to those who could use the money a little bit more. Compare it to, say, McDonald's, at which the money is transferred directly to a behemoth money-making organiztion. buttonjockey's post above is, at best, gross hyperbole in the overwhelming majority of cases.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-11-2004, 07:42 PM
samclem samclem is offline
graphite is a great moderator
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Akron, Ohio
Posts: 21,632
Well, it looks more and more like a coverup.

There is no transcript available on http://www.georgewbush.com/News/NewsList.aspx?ID=6, although there are transcripts of later Wisconsin speeches.

Cheney stepped on his Dick, and the pubbies don't need any further stupid statements to defend.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-11-2004, 09:20 PM
capacitor capacitor is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Oh Cheney, many physical stores are selling items on eBay as well, such as electronic stores. Why they can't afford their own commercial websites? Hmm??
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-12-2004, 12:30 AM
dropzone dropzone is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Cloud Cuckoo Land
Posts: 22,927
Cheney better be careful or Pierre Omidyar, eBay founder, rich dude, and pinko-hippy, might take a distaste to him. Wait, I think he has already.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-12-2004, 03:37 AM
Desmostylus Desmostylus is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 5,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by VarlosZ
No, Lib was correct. The OP says: "Cheney says the economy's not as bad as the numbers say, because economic indicators miss everybody who makes money selling on eBay."

We do not know whether Cheney's point was that Ebay alone has a very large positive (but unmeasured) effect on the economy.

An alternative that seems to me at least as likely is something like: "Economic indicators don't tell the whole story. The marketplace is constantly changing and expanding in ways that these indicators don't measure. Take, for example, Ebay. That's a source [of income] that didn't even exist 10 years ago. . ."

This would be a fair point, by the way.
It might be a fair point, if it was true. But it isn't true.
Quote:
Cheney needs a staff who will tell him that the $2.0 billion or so in eBay's domestic revenues are already included in the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis's estimates of GDP.
Shouldn't come as any surprise, Cheney is a habitual liar.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-12-2004, 04:23 AM
Quartz Quartz is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Home of the haggis
Posts: 19,926
Never mind the context of the original comment; Edwards riposte was top class!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-12-2004, 05:14 AM
VarlosZ VarlosZ is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 5,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desmostylus
It might be a fair point, if it was true. But it isn't true.

Quote:
Cheney needs a staff who will tell him that the $2.0 billion or so in eBay's domestic revenues are already included in the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis's estimates of GDP.
Cheney wasn't talking about Ebay.com's revenues. He was talking about the people who make money by auctioning things online. Whoever wrote the quoted portion of your link misinterpreted Cheney's statement.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-12-2004, 07:06 AM
Desmostylus Desmostylus is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 5,539
Quote:
Originally Posted by VarlosZ
Cheney wasn't talking about Ebay.com's revenues. He was talking about the people who make money by auctioning things online. Whoever wrote the quoted portion of your link misinterpreted Cheney's statement.
Who knows what the fuck Cheney was talking about. You chose to interpret his statements as being reasonable ones about economic indicators.

The "whoever" I quoted was Brad DeLong, Professor of Economics at UC Berkeley. In an argument over economic indicators, there's no way I'd take Cheney's word over DeLong's, and certainly no way I'd take any notice of you.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-12-2004, 10:51 AM
manhattan manhattan is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 9,132
Quote:
Originally Posted by Desmostylus
Who knows what the fuck Cheney was talking about.
Ooh, ooh, Mister Kotter! Ooh, ooh! I know!

He was talking about the difference between the Household and Establishment Surveys for measuring employment. Specifically he was opining that the Establishment Survey tends to undercount employment during recoveries because it has a more rigid definition of "employment" and fails to account for self-employed persons and because it fails to take full account of changes in the economy. He went on to cite ebay as an example of such a change, careful to opine that one couldn't measure it reliably because some make a good living and some only sell a little stuff. Finally, he stated that BLS updates their statistics from time to time to account for these changes and that they eventually catch up.

Most of his points are things that reasonable people might debate (some, like the fact that the Establishment Survey does not count the self-employed, are hard facts and not subject to debate). I happen to agree that the Establishment Survey tends to undercount employment during periods of growth, but I think that the difference is tiny and works itself out over periods of months as opposed to being chronic, for example. But none of his points was unreasonable.

But then, none of this would be a surprise to anyone who did a scintilla of research.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-12-2004, 11:29 AM
Liberal Liberal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Thanks for doing that research and reporting it, Manny. Your SDSAB title is well earned.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-12-2004, 12:15 PM
pantom pantom is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Well, manhattan, to that small subset of people who care, it has become a political football, since the Republican side is now fond of citing the Household Survey on the basis that Cheney gave.
It should be noted that Greenspan uses the establishment survey, ("Additionally, Greenspan said that he thinks the establishment survey produced by the Bureau of Labor provides a better gauge of the employment situation than the household survey."), the CBO agrees with caveats that somewhat tally with the point Cheney was making, ("Although CBO considers the establishment survey's data to be more reliable than the household survey's through early 2003, it is less clear which survey provides a more accurate picture of labor-market conditions in the second half of 2003. Over the past six months, startups of new businesses and expansion among small firms that are not directly measured in the establishment survey may have occurred more frequently than the official data assume. Moreover, recent data on tax withholding, though by no means definitive, are consistent with the view that employment growth may have been somewhat stronger during the second half of 2003 than is reflected in the current establishment survey data."), and, going to the source, the Council of Economic Advisers notes that the BLS, which actually puts out these statistics, considers the establishment survey more reliable ("As discussed in Box 1-2, however, the BLS views the establishment survey as a more accurate indicator of labor market conditions.").

In the less reliable category, we have this guy, co-director of something called the Center for Economic and Policy Research, who makes this interesting note:

Quote:
It is worth noting that the Social Security Administration's data on the growth in the number of covered workers is closer to the establishment survey's figures, showing an increase of 18.1 million covered workers from 1990 to 1999, the most recent year for which data is available. This compares to 19.4 million new jobs reported in the establishment survey over this period and 16.1 million additional workers shown in the
household survey.
I don't know who this guy is or what his bias is, and I haven't been able to independently verify the SSA numbers, so it's both last and least.

Anyway, point being that Cheney and the rest have to come up with some pretty strong reasons why the BLS, Greenspan, and even the CBO consider the establishment survey more reliable. And if he states that this expansion is different, he has to come up with something more than ebay, which for most people is only a more convenient way of selling either a) what they would previously have sold through a storefront, or b) what they would have sold out of a garage sale before. Is ebay and self-employment in general making this expansion so much different that it makes a survey with a greater margin of error more reliable than a more comprehensive one with a smaller margin of error? That's a pretty difficult case to make, to anyone not at a political rally.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-12-2004, 02:56 PM
manhattan manhattan is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 9,132
Everything you say has merit, pantom. (well, except the coding ) And every bit can also be rebutted with some merit, too (though, as I say, I tend to agree with most followers of the data that the houshold survey is inferior to the establishment one, Cheney's apparent belief notwithstanding).

But that doesn't make this thread and the various "gotcha" articles in the press any less stupid. They failed entirely to capture what Cheney was saying, leading to poor Brad DeLong looking like an idiot or an asshole all because he made the minor error of actually trusting an Associated Press dispatch. And, of course, it (charitably) resulted in Senator Edwards making the same idiotic or assholeish mistake.

Compare:

'Of course the Republicans are now basing their numbers on a less reliable survey, because their ruinous tax cut program failed to create the jobs...' (I made this one up)

"If we only included bake sales and how much money kids make at lemonade stands, this economy would really be cooking."

One addresses the issues and can be debated, the other is just stupid snark.

Compare further:

'Whilst the recent divergence between the household and establishment surveys is troubling, most mainstream economists believe it is explained by... Cheney's belief that it is a superior measure is not supported by the long-term data, even as his point about the changing economy has merit.' (I made this one up, too)

"Cheney needs a staff who will tell him that the $2.0 billion or so in eBay's domestic revenues are already included in the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis's estimates of GDP."

One is a professional refutation of a contentious point. The other is a guy who is a professor of economics but who apparently can't be arsed to check his data -- in this case, the "data" being what Cheney was actually talking about. His error is particularly grievious because one of the things that has frustrated economists about this recovery is the apparent mismatch between GDP and job growth. Is it all productivity? Is something else going on? This is good, meaty economic stuff which Vice President Cheney tried to partially address and which deserves better than a snarky remark.

If fairness, a quick check indicates that Dr. DeLong is a pretty reasonable guy -- again, he just didn't check the accuracy of what the AP told him (and everyone else). I'm pretty confident that if one of his readers were to let him know the truth behind the AP story he'd modify his comment. FWIIW, the town hall meeting which contained the relevant remarks is available here, though persons wishing to see it will have to load the odious RealPlayer to do so. The remarks about the surveys and ebay begin at 37:30 of the stream.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-12-2004, 03:06 PM
manhattan manhattan is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 9,132
Oh, crap. I forgot the area where I disagree with your post. I don't think the Republicans are following Cheney's lead on the household v. establishment thing. Rather I think it's more of an evolving political thing -- I've seen references to it for a few months now out of various sources, "economic" and political, on the Republican side. Politics as usual, as far as I'm concerned. I will give them that the recent upward revisions to prior months' jobs data indicates that they weren't smoking crack entirely, but that doesn't mean that those upward revisions mean the establishment survey is suddenly less reliable over the longer term.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-12-2004, 04:33 PM
lissener lissener is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Well, I agree with Cheney. Just think, we might never have had a Great Depression if they had taken into account the furniture and sticks and dirt the "Okies" sold on their way west in order to eat.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-12-2004, 07:13 PM
VarlosZ VarlosZ is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 5,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by lissener
Well, I agree with Cheney. Just think, we might never have had a Great Depression if they had taken into account the furniture and sticks and dirt the "Okies" sold on their way west in order to eat.
Wow, lissener just won the argument!
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-13-2004, 02:13 AM
Liberal Liberal is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
He would have won it on sMaRtPeOpLeSuXoRs dot com. But at Straight Dope, we do not win arguments with straw men.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-13-2004, 02:02 PM
spinky spinky is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
As someone whose lack of research allowed me to think "gee, that was a dumb thing for Cheney to say" along with all these other folks, I now understand. Thanks, manhattan.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-13-2004, 06:50 PM
capacitor capacitor is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
If more people sell their pencils and their matchboxes through eBay, we wouldn't have a recession.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-13-2004, 08:26 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 26,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by manhattan
Ooh, ooh, Mister Kotter! Ooh, ooh! I know!

He was talking about the difference between the Household and Establishment Surveys for measuring employment. Specifically he was opining that the Establishment Survey tends to undercount employment during recoveries because it has a more rigid definition of "employment" and fails to account for self-employed persons and because it fails to take full account of changes in the economy. He went on to cite ebay as an example of such a change, careful to opine that one couldn't measure it reliably because some make a good living and some only sell a little stuff. Finally, he stated that BLS updates their statistics from time to time to account for these changes and that they eventually catch up.
Unless you've got a link to the rest of the speech in your back pocket, Manny (and I'm kinda perturbed by its absence from www.whitehouse.gov/news, which generally records every last sneeze made by either Bush or Cheney in anything approaching a public setting), that seems like a stretch to me.

To be giving sales on eBay as an example of unmeasured economic activity, sure - but even Cheney and his speechwriters can't possibly believe that enough people are making a living buying and selling on eBay and similar places to make a dent in the employment numbers, even if they have other reasons for regarding the household survey as more accurate. (And that's taking into account other things that Cheney has believed, and still does.)

At any rate, the people who are selling on eBay aren't feeling rich enough to buy new cars, as GM and Ford cut back by 7%, nor are they even feeling rich enough to buy more stuff at WallyWorld, which is up by only 0.5% in same-store sales over last year. Yeah, there's always economic activity, and even full-time employment, that doesn't show up in the numbers, but the bottom line is the fact that people aren't buying stuff, eBay or no eBay, and no quantity of makeup can make that pig look anything but a pig.

FWIW, I've got to disagree with DeLong on this one: Cheney had to be talking about all the buying and selling that takes place on eBay, and not on what eBay's cut is. DeLong isn't wrong very often, but he was this time.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-14-2004, 12:52 AM
rjung rjung is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly
...but even Cheney and his speechwriters can't possibly believe that enough people are making a living buying and selling on eBay and similar places to make a dent in the employment numbers
You never know -- the Bush White House is so far out f touch with reality, I wouldn't be surprised if they really do believe there are millions of Americans making a full-time income just peddling stuff on eBay.

Remember when George H. W. Bush Sr. was fascinated by the new-fangled technological leaps of the supermarket bar-code scanner? Same thing.
__________________
--R.J.
Electric Escape -- Information superhighway rest area #10,186
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 09-14-2004, 01:40 AM
DrDeth DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 22,419
Quote:
Originally Posted by NurseCarmen
Well, if they are a business, they are required to report that income. They then would be included in economic indicators.
By and large, they don't. Nor do they pay any taxes on it. Trust me on this.

Note that dudes selling off their personal belongings at a loss- don't have anything to report. That takes care of a lot of the selelrs, but not much of the gross. And, a few of the largest are legit businesses, and they report everything. It's what's in between that's the problem. I admit most don't really make enough to replace the job they lost- but if it is all tax free, it ain't bad.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-14-2004, 02:37 AM
Largo62 Largo62 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
More money is made by the importers, sellers and domestic manufacturers and growers of illegal drugs than everything on eBay combined. Unless I am very much mistaken (and no doubt someone will point it out if I am) California's largest cash crop is still marijuana. Cheney et al should factor that in. Then they could claim the economy was booming.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-14-2004, 06:06 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 26,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesertGeezer
More money is made by the importers, sellers and domestic manufacturers and growers of illegal drugs than everything on eBay combined. Unless I am very much mistaken (and no doubt someone will point it out if I am) California's largest cash crop is still marijuana. Cheney et al should factor that in. Then they could claim the economy was booming.
Hey, I know!

Maybe we could annex Afghanistan. The opium crop over there is doing absolutely terrifically, apparently providing 75% of the world's supply these days.

Just think of how that would boost our economic numbers. Just say 'yes' to heroin as a cash crop!
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-14-2004, 07:43 PM
manhattan manhattan is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 9,132
Oh, the pain, the pain!

Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly
Unless you've got a link to the rest of the speech in your back pocket...
Quote:
Originally Posted by manhattan, like, a full day before Firefly asked for it. I mean geez, what's a guy gotta do around here to fight ignornace?
FWIIW, the town hall meeting which contained the relevant remarks is available here, though persons wishing to see it will have to load the odious RealPlayer to do so. The remarks about the surveys and ebay begin at 37:30 of the stream.
In other news, here are at least two characters, as requested by the hamster. All hail the hamster: we must appease it or be destroyed.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 09-14-2004, 08:28 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 26,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by manhattan
Originally Posted by manhattan, like, a full day before Firefly asked for it. I mean geez, what's a guy gotta do around here to fight ignornace?
Maybe make one's links easier to find?

There's no tool that I know of to search a thread for links, which is a pity, because I'd use it all the frickin' time. Failing that, I search for links to cited material near the cite or discussion of said material. Failing that, in turn, I scan the thread as best I can. Sometimes, those little here links aren't easy to spot amidst paragraphs of seemingly unrelated text, and my eyes just plain miss that tiny bit of blue amidst all the black and white. At any rate, not having a broadband connection at home (or at work until I get back to my usual desk on Thursday), I'll have to forego the dubious pleasure of listening to Cheney's voice to find out what he was talking about.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 09-14-2004, 09:53 PM
jshore jshore is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 6,460
Quote:
Originally Posted by manhattan
In other news, here are at least two characters, as requested by the hamster. All hail the hamster: we must appease it or be destroyed.
Boy, Manny, are you on my shitlist now! You just made me listen to 1/2 hour of Dick Cheney. Now I see how psychological torture can be just as bad as physical torture.

At any rate, it is correct that the context in which Cheney mentioned the e-Bay stuff was in terms of discussing the measurement of employment and the payroll vs. household surveys.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 09-15-2004, 01:10 AM
VarlosZ VarlosZ is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 5,691
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly
Quote:
Originally Posted by manhattan, like, a full day before Firefly asked for it. I mean geez, what's a guy gotta do around here to fight ignornace?
Maybe make one's links easier to find?

There's no tool that I know of to search a thread for links, which is a pity, because I'd use it all the frickin' time. Failing that, I search for links to cited material near the cite or discussion of said material. Failing that, in turn, I scan the thread as best I can. Sometimes, those little here links aren't easy to spot amidst paragraphs of seemingly unrelated text, and my eyes just plain miss that tiny bit of blue amidst all the black and white. At any rate, not having a broadband connection at home (or at work until I get back to my usual desk on Thursday), I'll have to forego the dubious pleasure of listening to Cheney's voice to find out what he was talking about.
Hey, you misspelled, "Oops, my bad."
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 09-15-2004, 08:09 PM
RTFirefly RTFirefly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 26,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by VarlosZ
Hey, you misspelled, "Oops, my bad."
And he misspelled, "I posted the link to that speech in post #____, you must've overlooked it."

People misspell shit all the time; let's not make a big deal about it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.