1. #130631
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    6,628

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="JPizzack"]


    no i know exactly how it works...
    but like daven said...i consider that money lost..but if i could keep what is taken from here on out, and maintain retirement myself....i totally could/ would</P>[/quote]

    the problem is, because the government spent the surplus (which they weren't supposed to do) there is nothing there besides what we put in pizz, If we stop paying now...Byron won't collect...

    it's a ****ty situation...it was never supposed to get to that point.
    [/quote] thats right.... they need to fix it, make it work...it will keep thousands working at good paying jobs and everybody will have some SS love in the end .....

  2. #130632
    Hall of Famer MattMeyerBud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    60,564

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    never get involved with money and family
    Fear the name, appreciate the game

  3. #130633
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    15,586

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="byron"][quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="JPizzack"]


    no i know exactly how it works...
    but like daven said...i consider that money lost..but if i could keep what is taken from here on out, and maintain retirement myself....i totally could/ would</p>[/quote]

    the problem is, because the government spent the surplus (which they weren't supposed to do) there is nothing there besides what we put in pizz, If we stop paying now...Byron won't collect...

    it's a ****ty situation...it was never supposed to get to that point.
    [/quote] thats right.... they need to fix it, make it work...it will keep thousands working at good paying jobs and everybody will have some SS love in the end .....[/quote]

    It's kinda too late I think Byron...It needed to be fixed like 30 years ago.

    when it started 17 workers payed for 1 retiree, it's like 4 workers per retiree now and estimated to be 2 to 1 by 2030.

    it's pretty much unfixable at this point...I want to opt out, I'm sorry the government stole your money byron...but I'm not ok with letting them steal mine too

  4. #130634
    All-Pro JPizzack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Poughkeepsie, NY
    Posts
    26,462

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD



    ugh...it's the worst...
    As good intentioned as it may have been at it's start(well, besdies the whole IOU free $ for the gov't part), social security cant really go away without totally screwing over someone currently collecting. At this point youd wish you could jsut scrap the whole thing, but there's just not enoug left to leave people.....because well...i dont know how to put this lightly....you dont know when theyre goign to die &gt;.&lt;</P>
    Oderint Dum Metuant

  5. #130635
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    15,586

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    This seems like a cool site that details the pro's/con's to privatizing SS.

    http://socialsecurity.procon.org/

  6. #130636
    All-Pro Morehead State's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Westfield, MA
    Posts
    43,878

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD



    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]never get involved with money and family
    [/quote]</P>


    Sorry Matt.</P>


    You try to do right and **** happens. Its the old expression."no good deed goes unpunished".</P>


    Anyway, whats important is that you continue to do the right thing, regardless of the consequences.</P>
    "Phil Simms is the greatest QB in Giants history" ........Mahatma Gandhi

  7. #130637
    All-Pro JPizzack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Poughkeepsie, NY
    Posts
    26,462

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD



    Daven, did you see Reddit thread about Election Fraud?
    Statistical probability was never really my thing, but this was kind of insane.

    The thread presents the evidence, and all the statistical proof, and asks the readers to disprove it, as nobody wants to believe such a thing could be pulled off. But I must say, after doing my best to decipher it, it's a reality.</P>


    http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/co...e_people_with/</P>


    it says "voter fraud" but it's not voter fraud, it's election fraud as it has nothing to do with the actual voters. Just the handling/reporting of voting results</P>
    Oderint Dum Metuant

  8. #130638
    All-Pro JPizzack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Poughkeepsie, NY
    Posts
    26,462

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="Morehead State"]


    [quote user="MattMeyerBud"]never get involved with money and family
    [/quote]</P>


    Sorry Matt.</P>


    You try to do right and **** happens. Its the old expression."no good deed goes unpunished".</P>


    Anyway, whats important is that you continue to do the right thing, regardless of the consequences.</P>


    [/quote]</P>


    yea, I hope everything is good with him. Family problems always get more dicey than problems with co-workers and friends.
    Good luck with everything man</P>
    Oderint Dum Metuant

  9. #130639
    All-Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    15,586

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="JPizzack"]

    Daven, did you see Reddit thread about Election Fraud?
    Statistical probability was never really my thing, but this was kind of insane.

    The thread presents the evidence, and all the statistical proof, and asks the readers to disprove it, as nobody wants to believe such a thing could be pulled off. But I must say, after doing my best to decipher it, it's a reality.</p>


    http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/co...e_people_with/</p>


    it says "voter fraud" but it's not voter fraud, it's election fraud as it has nothing to do with the actual voters. Just the handling/reporting of voting results</p>[/quote]

    he seems to be putting A LOT of faith into this "Hyper-geometry" ....he knows a lot about it, more then me...but who says "Hyper-geometry" can translate into humans going in to a voting booth...

    here's a point, most Ron Paul supporters are more enthusiastic then Romney supporters...they get to the poles first...so yeah Paul always starts high ends lower...the opposite can be said of Romney...since he's the "establishment" candidate he gets the "base" the people who just go out to vote when they get out of work...they aren't amped up and waiting on line...so he starts slow and finishes strong.

    IF you assume this "hyper-geometry" is applicable then yes, it looks like Paul's votes are getting siphoned over to Romney in many cases, but I don't think you can base an entire conspiracy theory behind one mathematical formula that you can't even prove is applicable.


    Boosh! someone already answered him...it's way more complex and informative then what I said...but it's pretty much the same thing..no one said hyper-geometry is applicable to votes.

    <div class="usertext-body"><div class="md">

    <font color="#0000FF">I am hijacking this comment so that people will see the rough-and-ready explanation I just spent an hour working on.</font></p>



    <font color="#0000FF">Okay, here is my attempt at an explanation for why your premise (and
    therefore conclusion) is basically flawed. If you care, I have a BS in
    Finance, and I am currently in my second semester of an MS Finance
    program. At this level, finance is at least 75% statistics and
    calculus.</font></p>



    <font color="#0000FF">Hypergeometric distribution information</font></p>



    <font color="#0000FF">Problem 1 - Nonrandom Variables First of all, note
    that for the hypergeometric distribution to be applicable, the value of
    the variables must be random. In the red/blue ball example, the
    variables are truly random: we are equally likely to pull a red as a
    blue, and the chance of pulling a red ball does not influence what the
    next ball will be. This is a stark contrast to this voting data. The
    most obvious reason why the votes are not random is that we know in advance
    that certain candidates are going to receive the majority of votes. If
    Romney won 35%, Santorum won 35%, and Gingrich and Paul each got 15%,
    then we know the probability of a vote going to a certain candidate, and
    it is not random. </font></p>



    <font color="#0000FF">Further, I would argue that when a particular vote goes to a
    candidate, that candidate is more likely to receive the next vote.
    Consider that Paul campaigns almost exclusively in certain districts
    where he has the best chances of winning (districts that often include
    college campuses). In these areas, we expect him to perform much better
    than average, and in areas where he has not campaigned we would expect
    him to do more poorly. Once again, the variables are not random, so a hypergeometric function cannot be used. </font></p>



    <font color="#0000FF">Problem 2 - There is a simple, logical explanation for the data This is actually related to the first problem, because the heart of the issue still that the variables are not random and so a hypergeometric function cannot be used
    The explanation is this - you chose to organize your data roughly from
    least-to-most urban, and Romney tends to perform better in more urban
    areas. This explains why he always "benefits" in the largest districts.</font></p>



    <font color="#0000FF">Please also note that these issues are why Ron Paul seems to be the
    "victim" of "fraud". Your model is assuming that the votes are random,
    and that each candidate should receive an even % of the vote. However,
    we know in advance (from polling) that Romney will win about 35% of the
    vote and Paul will win about 15% (or whatever, please stay with me
    here). So it should not surprise us that the model gives Romney a very
    remote chance of getting to 35% because the model thinks that, if the
    election were conducted 100 times, he would receive an average of 25%.
    This flawed model also overestimates Paul's chances of performing well,
    because it thinks he deserves an equal share of a random vote, instead
    of a smaller share of a nonrandom vote.</font></p>



    <font color="#0000FF">TL;DR The variables (votes) are not random,
    and so a Hypergeometric function cannot be used to analyze the data.
    The premise is flawed, so the conclusion is useless.
    </font></p>



    <font color="#0000FF">Also, think for a moment what you are suggesting - huge election
    fraud that has been going on for years. This data has been analyzed and
    analyzed again from Berkeley to MIT to Cambridge - if there was fraud
    that statistical analysis could reveal, then some academic would have
    published a paper years ago.</font></p>



    <font color="#0000FF">edit: Several people have pointed out that the Hypergeometric model
    could be tailored to fit data where each data point has a known percent
    of the total data. (That is, 70 blue balls and 30 red balls, instead of
    50/50.) Simply put, you guys are right, but I believe that this model
    was clearly set up for even probabilities. However, even if that
    problem were resolved, the votes are still not independent of each
    other, so the model cannot be used. I look forward to
    Drunken_Economist's write up.</font></p>


    </p>

    <font color="#0000FF"><font color="#000000">Pretty much it's like using algebra to solve a problem with someones grammar you might be able to find some sort of coincidence if you look hard enough...but algebra and grammar have nothing to do with each other so it doesn't really prove anything. </font>
    </font></p>
    </div>
    </div>

  10. #130640
    All-Pro JPizzack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Poughkeepsie, NY
    Posts
    26,462

    Re: THEE NYG SWAG THREAD

    [quote user="DavenIII"][quote user="JPizzack"]


    Daven, did you see Reddit thread about Election Fraud?
    Statistical probability was never really my thing, but this was kind of insane.

    The thread presents the evidence, and all the statistical proof, and asks the readers to disprove it, as nobody wants to believe such a thing could be pulled off. But I must say, after doing my best to decipher it, it's a reality.</P>


    http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/co...e_people_with/</P>


    it says "voter fraud" but it's not voter fraud, it's election fraud as it has nothing to do with the actual voters. Just the handling/reporting of voting results</P>


    [/quote]

    he seems to be putting A LOT of faith into this "Hypergeometry" ....he knows a lot about it, more then me...but who says "Hypergeometry" can translate into humans going in to a voting booth...

    here's a point, most Ron Paul supporters are more enthusiastic then Romney supporters...they get to the poles first...so yeah Paul always starts high ends lower...the opposite can be said of Romney...since he's the "establishment" candidate he gets the "base" the people who just go out to vote when they get out of work...they aren't amped up and waiting on line...so he starts slow and finishes strong.

    IF you assume this "hypergeometry" is applicable then yes, it looks like Paul's votes are getting siphoned over to Romney in many cases, but I don't think you can base an entire conspiracy theory behind one mathematical formula that you can't even prove is applicable.
    [/quote]</P>


    well that all may be the case, but I think the most interesting point of it all was the whole end result numbers. Where, for some reason, as they get toward the end counting, Romney's reported numbers increase at a rate that defies percentages and probability.
    oh well...just thought it was interesting.</P>
    Oderint Dum Metuant

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts