Re: Who is Happier?
"I know exactly what you mean! In fact, did you know that John D. Rockefeller (that Democratic feller) was one of the biggest US oil magnates? Hence, by focusing on oil, you have actually proven more that "it is the DEMS who own everything" more than you have proven the Repubs own everything. In fact, it is probably a 50/50 split (or close it it) between the two."
so you really think its a 50/50 split? btw, it should be known that that good ol bait n switch you used was no good since i know nothing about any of these people.
and this rockefeller guy sounds more like a capitalist than anything to me. seriously though, i would rather not get into a political debate since my experience in that is summed up to several fox news watchings. i would say this though, because i know alot more about this subject than you, to low income families, people like the president are not looked at kindly at all. as a matter of fact, if he was to be dropped off in my neighborhood with or without protection, he would never be seen again. alot of the poor blame alot of their problems on this government and its policies. alot of low income people look at it 180 degrees differently than the upper class. when you live paycheck to paycheck and you expect your "leader" to help the poor to also live the american dream, and expectations are not met, resentment for that "leader" occurs.
you may say the president is not to blame, but i, along with more than half of the country belive he is a complete idiot. more than half the country hates him more than they hate their worst enemy.
i do not believe in capitalist ways. if it were my country, big buisness would be no more. redistribution of wealth is a great idea to the poor, and just plain stupid to the rich. you and i both know why each thinks that way, but maybe, just maybe one sides not seeing the bigger picture.
"Well, I wouldn't think it racist, but I would be intrigued to see the stats if that was reported by a survey."
it is easy to say that, but in reality, it would let you down bigtime. you see, its racist because the color of a persons skin does not determine their happiness. its even bigger proof that this survey sytem does not work as intended. it shouldve said: out of 1500 whites called, 83% were happy. out of 1500 blacks called, 82% were happy. that way it does not put off whites in a superior light, nor do they challenge each other. the article was not factual. it was propaganda, and it was racist. ask a black man if he feels white people are better than him. i bet i can guess his answer: "white people really think they are all that dont they? those loons expect me to take this?" where is equality in this viscious world? theres 3,000 people that live in one town, and they all act the same way. too bad they didnt randomly call all of them, it wouldve blown the peoples minds to get the same answer everytime i bet.
"Again, this is scientifically based. Sampling theory shows us why RANDOM samples of an entire population can give us a relatively good idea of the feeling of the whole population. It is in use in all industries and is based on rigorous statistical theory."
i believe this may be true, but the sampling audience for this test was extremely small. there are more than 3000 different types of personalities in this world, and they didnt even scratch the surface on that test. i understand if you disagree. this is just my opinion. i give the test around a 70% correctness. im sure you will want to know how i came to that conclusion. no, it didnt come from math. it came from listening to several different types of people and realizing who the majority and minorities were in every category.
"Because as soon as you say the people should come from Mississippi, you make the term "random" useles. It is no longer a random survey of the entire US, but rather only a random survey of Mississipians. Different sample group, and so you would expect varying results from a nationalized random survey."
why? you could say it is a random survey of mississippians and americans. mississippi is a state in the us nonetheless(although looked at as a state full of inbreds.) and your survey did not say it was a random survey of all states in the us, it said it randomly called 3000 people. more than half of those hung up upon hearing another telemarketing call, so that leaves us with about 1000 people. thats 20 people a state called. impressive survey indeed. you can really get a feel for things with that eh?
"Interestingly enough, ruthless, this discussion (which is based in statistics) is intimately linked to the other one we are having in the Conspiracy forum on "perfection". These are great things to learn about, and give us some real "ah ha" moments when we realized that scientific reality is not what we would expect it to be from "common sense"."
you have given me quite aplenty "ah ha" moments and you have shown without a shadow of a doubt that common sense and science do not always go hand in hand. but the problem is that we are defining words differently, and we look at things differently, so it is an unwinnable argument for either side. i believe we agree on most of these things, we just look at them in different lights, wich should be expected. we came from two totally different scenarios, hence the misunderstandings.
even when i do learn about these things you are showing me, i will not look at it in the same light as you. i will always strive for perfection, and i will never give up the hope that i can work so hard at something until i perfect it.
