Politics > Politics-USA > posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak.....
| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"abelard" |
| Date: |
29 Aug 2006 09:58:50 PM |
| Object: |
posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
best source of general data on irak of which i am aware....
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
http://www.portaliraq.com/news/Iraqi+economy+to+grow+10+percent+in+2006%2C+official+predicts__1111805.html?PHPSESSID=b973bc66702a68a97bef2a8f29777ba9
Iraqi economy to grow 10 percent in 2006, official predicts
http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=782
"Ordinary Iraqis are financially better off now than they were at any time
in the past two decades. According to World Bank and International
Monetary Fund estimates, per capita income has doubled since 2003. Iraq’s
per capita gross domestic product is today almost twice that of Yemen and
nearing that of Egypt and Syria, hardly a sign of failure in a country in
which, just three years ago, antiwar groups insisted children were
starving en masse. Statistics aside, the Iraqi economic boom is apparent
to anyone who visits an Iraqi market. Not only are appliances and luxuries
in the stores, but customers are actually purchasing them.
Iraqis today employ technologies that were nonexistent or off-limits to
all but the Baathist elite just three years ago. As of September 2005,
there were more than 3.5 million cell-phone subscribers in Iraq, for
example. Under the Baath party, there was no cell-phone service, and
possession of satellite phones was a capital offense. Internet cafés dot
not only Baghdad thoroughfares, but also dusty back streets in provincial
towns."
http://allthingsconservative.typepad.com/all_things_conservative/2006/07/iraq_index.html
The progress made in the electrical sector is impressive, and most often
ignored by the mainstream media. Pre-war production was 3,958 megawatts,
and daily electrical supply was 4-8 hours nationwide. In July of 2006,
total production was 4,400 megawatts and daily supply was 11.8 hours.
The unemployment rate in Iraq is still staggering, at 25-40%, but that is
a decrease from the 50-60% rate of July 2003. No improvement has been
seen since November of 2005.
Iraq's GDP increased to $29.3 billion in 2005, and per capita GDP has
grown by $249 since 2002.
yak note
cut down version for news with any addenda by tas....
regards
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
| User: "hummingbird" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 07:49:23 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 04:58:50 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
best source of general data on irak of which i am aware....
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
[snip]
The report shows a very mixed picture of Iraq and focuses on
statistics from questionable data and opinion polls, but makes no
mention of the dire warnings given by senior experts in Iraq
- like that fully blown civil war is a serious risk.
Also in the report:
-Iraqis who believe attacks against British and American troops are
justified = 45% (65% in Maysan province)
-Iraqis “strongly opposed†to presence of Coalition troops = 82%
-Iraqis who believe coalition forces are responsible for any
improvement in security = <1%
-Iraqis who feel less secure because of the occupation = 67%
-Iraqis who believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened
= 43%
-Iraqis who do not have confidence in multi-national forces = 72%
-Iraqis who rarely have safe, clean water = 71%
-Iraqis who never have enough electricity = 47%
-Iraqis whose sewage system rarely works = 70%
-Southern Iraqis unemployed = 40%
And:
-Iraqi Physicians Registered Before the 2003 Invasion = 34,000
-Iraqi Physicians Who Have Left Iraq Since the 2003 Invasion = 12,000
(estimate)
-Iraqi Physicians Murdered Since 2003 Invasion = 2,000
-Iraqi Physicians Kidnapped = 250
--
the fossil media has poured out very little but tripe on irak from day one
the process is moving forward very well.....
....abelard ukpm 18-Jan-05.
.
|
|
|
| User: "abelard" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 08:30:47 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 13:49:23 +0100, hummingbird
<RHBIYDTNPPAX@spammotel.com>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 04:58:50 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
best source of general data on irak of which i am aware....
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
[snip]
The report shows a very mixed picture of Iraq
amazing....you said sommat sane....go lie down and recover!
and focuses on
statistics from questionable data and opinion polls, but makes no
mention of the dire warnings given by senior experts in Iraq
- like that fully blown civil war is a serious risk.
'serious' is not a number.....
neither are unnamed 'senior experts' convincing support for you
lack of numbers and also names....
any fool can go before the lights and throw around empty rhetoric...
i saw (a moving picture) of wesley clarke do just that a few hours
ago...
i take his empty rhetoric little more seriously than your own....
like you he has an axe to grind....not analysis to present....
you really should drop your eternal woffle(sic!) and try to make a
useful reality based case....
yes, i know, you don't do reason....
Also in the report:
-Iraqis who believe attacks against British and American troops are
justified = 45% (65% in Maysan province)
-Iraqis “strongly opposed” to presence of Coalition troops = 82%
-Iraqis who believe coalition forces are responsible for any
improvement in security = <1%
-Iraqis who feel less secure because of the occupation = 67%
-Iraqis who believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened
= 43%
-Iraqis who do not have confidence in multi-national forces = 72%
-Iraqis who rarely have safe, clean water = 71%
-Iraqis who never have enough electricity = 47%
-Iraqis whose sewage system rarely works = 70%
-Southern Iraqis unemployed = 40%
And:
-Iraqi Physicians Registered Before the 2003 Invasion = 34,000
-Iraqi Physicians Who Have Left Iraq Since the 2003 Invasion = 12,000
(estimate)
-Iraqi Physicians Murdered Since 2003 Invasion = 2,000
-Iraqi Physicians Kidnapped = 250
and why are you copying out a small highly selected part of the source
i gave you
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "hummingbird" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 09:57:51 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:30:47 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 13:49:23 +0100, hummingbird
<RHBIYDTNPPAX@spammotel.com>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 04:58:50 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
best source of general data on irak of which i am aware....
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
[snip]
The report shows a very mixed picture of Iraq
amazing....you said sommat sane....go lie down and recover!
Even at the height of WWII I'm sure there were 'good-news' stories
to be had in the Jewish ghettos. There are always such snippets avail
for those who want to search them out. In Iraq, one has to stand back
and look at the complete picture which is clearly a huge mess.
and focuses on
statistics from questionable data and opinion polls, but makes no
mention of the dire warnings given by senior experts in Iraq
- like that fully blown civil war is a serious risk.
'serious' is not a number.....
That's because it's not intended to be. 'Serious risk' speaks for
itself.
neither are unnamed 'senior experts' convincing support for you
lack of numbers and also names....
I had in mind the US Ambassador in Iraq's telegram which got leaked
a month or two ago and also testimony given to Congress by the US's
most senior military man in Iraq (A...zaid?) more recently. They all
say that Iraq is on the brink of civil war, although in reality civil
war is already happening at low level. PC rools.
any fool can go before the lights and throw around empty rhetoric...
i saw (a moving picture) of wesley clarke do just that a few hours
ago...
i take his empty rhetoric little more seriously than your own....
like you he has an axe to grind....not analysis to present....
The only one around these parts with an axe to grind is you fraudy.
You spend your time scratching around for the gems of 'good-news'
I mentioned above but carefully ignoring the overall picture.
you really should drop your eternal woffle(sic!) and try to make a
useful reality based case....
I'm not required to make a "case" about anything.
Facts speak for themselves whether you ignore them or not.
yes, i know, you don't do reason....
That's your problem - *I do reason* all the time. You don't.
Cognitive dissonance methinks.
Also in the report:
-Iraqis who believe attacks against British and American troops are
justified = 45% (65% in Maysan province)
-Iraqis “strongly opposed†to presence of Coalition troops = 82%
-Iraqis who believe coalition forces are responsible for any
improvement in security = <1%
-Iraqis who feel less secure because of the occupation = 67%
-Iraqis who believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened
= 43%
-Iraqis who do not have confidence in multi-national forces = 72%
-Iraqis who rarely have safe, clean water = 71%
-Iraqis who never have enough electricity = 47%
-Iraqis whose sewage system rarely works = 70%
-Southern Iraqis unemployed = 40%
And:
-Iraqi Physicians Registered Before the 2003 Invasion = 34,000
-Iraqi Physicians Who Have Left Iraq Since the 2003 Invasion = 12,000
(estimate)
-Iraqi Physicians Murdered Since 2003 Invasion = 2,000
-Iraqi Physicians Kidnapped = 250
and why are you copying out a small highly selected part of the source
i gave you
Because that's exactly what you do, and I wanted to highlight the
simple fact that Iraq is in a huge mess thanks to your neo-co icons.
Too bad the report didn't also mention the numbers of educational
professionals who have suffered similar fates to the medical
professionals. Intellectuals are being purged by those put in power
by Bush & Co as religious dogma takes hold.
There are always unintended consequences.
--
"I prefer liberty with danger than peace with slavery"
"We may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost"
"Man is born free, and everywhere he is in shackles"
....Jean-Jacques Rousseau 1712-1778
.
|
|
|
| User: "abelard" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 10:25:44 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:57:51 +0100, hummingbird
<RHBIYDTNPPAX@spammotel.com>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:30:47 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 13:49:23 +0100, hummingbird
<RHBIYDTNPPAX@spammotel.com>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 04:58:50 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
best source of general data on irak of which i am aware....
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
[snip]
The report shows a very mixed picture of Iraq
amazing....you said sommat sane....go lie down and recover!
Even at the height of WWII I'm sure there were 'good-news' stories
to be had in the Jewish ghettos. There are always such snippets avail
for those who want to search them out. In Iraq, one has to stand back
and look at the complete picture which is clearly a huge mess.
you're blathering again buzzy
and focuses on
statistics from questionable data and opinion polls, but makes no
mention of the dire warnings given by senior experts in Iraq
- like that fully blown civil war is a serious risk.
'serious' is not a number.....
That's because it's not intended to be. 'Serious risk' speaks for
itself.
no it doesn't 'speak for itself....it is just your habitual evasion
neither are unnamed 'senior experts' convincing support for you
lack of numbers and also names....
I had in mind the US Ambassador in Iraq's telegram which got leaked
a month or two ago and also testimony given to Congress by the US's
most senior military man in Iraq (A...zaid?) more recently. They all
say that Iraq is on the brink of civil war, although in reality civil
war is already happening at low level. PC rools.
i doubt abizaid said 'brink'...abizaid has credibility unlike various
retired 'generals' or psedo-academic diplomatic staff....
you can always try quoting actual words in context rather than
the gummy morass that exudes from fingers after 'reading' the
fossil media
you seem to have no idea how a modern democracy works....
elected politicians make decisions....not diplomatic staff
or even 'generals'...
there are excellent reasons for that arrangements.....
diplomatic staff and 'generals'...ex or otherwise, are *servants* and
*advisors* not executives or rulers....
any fool can go before the lights and throw around empty rhetoric...
i saw (a moving picture) of wesley clarke do just that a few hours
ago...
i take his empty rhetoric little more seriously than your own....
like you he has an axe to grind....not analysis to present....
The only one around these parts with an axe to grind is you fraudy.
rest binned unread...
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Possum Comitatus" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 12:52:31 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 04:58:50 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
best source of general data on irak of which i am aware....
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
And let us look at the economic contents of this "best
source of general data on irak".
Page 31 - Fuel
Pre war output (billion barrels per day):2.5
Current: 2.2
page 33- Power output (megawatts)
Pre war:3958
Current:4400
Power demand:8500 -9000.
Page 34 - Unemployment
Pre war: They dont say (handy that)
Current: 25-40%
Yet, in a little note down the bottom they say:
"Considering the increase in entrepreneurial activity after
the end of the war, we have for the purposes of this
database assumed that there has been an improvement in
unemployment levels, and hence weighted information
supporting such a conclusion heavier than contradictory data
reports."
i.e. they've plucked it out of their arse and dont give the
methodology for the econometric estimates - if they actually
have one.
Page 35 - Nominal GDP and Inflation:
2002 20.5 (USD billion)
2005 27.9(USD billion)
And heres the catcher:
Inflation 2002:19%
2003:34%
2004:32%
2005:20%
And the rest of the economic side of the Brookings report is
on twaddle like mobile phone connections, judge numbers and
whatnot.
Those figures are terrible.
http://www.portaliraq.com/news/Iraqi+economy+to+grow+10+percent+in+2006%2C+official+predicts__1111805.html?PHPSESSID=b973bc66702a68a97bef2a8f29777ba9
Iraqi economy to grow 10 percent in 2006, official predicts
I thought you didnt like GDP as a measure?
http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=782
"Ordinary Iraqis are financially better off now than they were at any time
in the past two decades. According to World Bank and International
Monetary Fund estimates, per capita income has doubled since 2003.
I thought you didnt like GDP as a measure..... etc etc
Iraq’s
per capita gross domestic product is today almost twice that of Yemen and
nearing that of Egypt and Syria, hardly a sign of failure in a country in
which, just three years ago, antiwar groups insisted children were
starving en masse. Statistics aside, the Iraqi economic boom is apparent
to anyone who visits an Iraqi market. Not only are appliances and luxuries
in the stores, but customers are actually purchasing them.
Iraqis today employ technologies that were nonexistent or off-limits to
all but the Baathist elite just three years ago. As of September 2005,
there were more than 3.5 million cell-phone subscribers in Iraq, for
example. Under the Baath party, there was no cell-phone service, and
possession of satellite phones was a capital offense. Internet cafés dot
not only Baghdad thoroughfares, but also dusty back streets in provincial
towns."
http://allthingsconservative.typepad.com/all_things_conservative/2006/07/iraq_index.html
The progress made in the electrical sector is impressive, and most often
ignored by the mainstream media. Pre-war production was 3,958 megawatts,
and daily electrical supply was 4-8 hours nationwide. In July of 2006,
total production was 4,400 megawatts and daily supply was 11.8 hours.
The unemployment rate in Iraq is still staggering, at 25-40%, but that is
a decrease from the 50-60% rate of July 2003. No improvement has been
seen since November of 2005.
Iraq's GDP increased to $29.3 billion in 2005, and per capita GDP has
grown by $249 since 2002.
And again.
I love the way they use nominal GDP.I suppose its paints a
far more rosy picture than making the adjustment to real GDP
with the 25% odd average inflation rate.
.
|
|
|
| User: "abelard" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 07:50:06 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:52:31 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 04:58:50 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
best source of general data on irak of which i am aware....
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
And let us look at the economic contents of this "best
source of general data on irak".
Page 31 - Fuel
Pre war output (billion barrels per day):2.5
Current: 2.2
page 33- Power output (megawatts)
Pre war:3958
Current:4400
Power demand:8500 -9000.
Page 34 - Unemployment
Pre war: They dont say (handy that)
Current: 25-40%
Yet, in a little note down the bottom they say:
"Considering the increase in entrepreneurial activity after
the end of the war, we have for the purposes of this
database assumed that there has been an improvement in
unemployment levels, and hence weighted information
supporting such a conclusion heavier than contradictory data
reports."
i.e. they've plucked it out of their arse and dont give the
methodology for the econometric estimates - if they actually
have one.
Page 35 - Nominal GDP and Inflation:
2002 20.5 (USD billion)
2005 27.9(USD billion)
And heres the catcher:
Inflation 2002:19%
2003:34%
2004:32%
2005:20%
And the rest of the economic side of the Brookings report is
on twaddle like mobile phone connections, judge numbers and
whatnot.
Those figures are terrible.
http://www.portaliraq.com/news/Iraqi+economy+to+grow+10+percent+in+2006%2C+official+predicts__1111805.html?PHPSESSID=b973bc66702a68a97bef2a8f29777ba9
Iraqi economy to grow 10 percent in 2006, official predicts
I thought you didnt like GDP as a measure?
you really should stop 'thinking'...you'll hurt yourself....
such measure should be taken with serious caution....
http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=782
"Ordinary Iraqis are financially better off now than they were at any time
in the past two decades. According to World Bank and International
Monetary Fund estimates, per capita income has doubled since 2003.
I thought you didnt like GDP as a measure..... etc etc
you really should stop 'thinking'...you'll hurt yourself....
such measure should be taken with serious caution....
Iraq’s
per capita gross domestic product is today almost twice that of Yemen and
nearing that of Egypt and Syria, hardly a sign of failure in a country in
which, just three years ago, antiwar groups insisted children were
starving en masse. Statistics aside, the Iraqi economic boom is apparent
to anyone who visits an Iraqi market. Not only are appliances and luxuries
in the stores, but customers are actually purchasing them.
Iraqis today employ technologies that were nonexistent or off-limits to
all but the Baathist elite just three years ago. As of September 2005,
there were more than 3.5 million cell-phone subscribers in Iraq, for
example. Under the Baath party, there was no cell-phone service, and
possession of satellite phones was a capital offense. Internet cafés dot
not only Baghdad thoroughfares, but also dusty back streets in provincial
towns."
http://allthingsconservative.typepad.com/all_things_conservative/2006/07/iraq_index.html
The progress made in the electrical sector is impressive, and most often
ignored by the mainstream media. Pre-war production was 3,958 megawatts,
and daily electrical supply was 4-8 hours nationwide. In July of 2006,
total production was 4,400 megawatts and daily supply was 11.8 hours.
The unemployment rate in Iraq is still staggering, at 25-40%, but that is
a decrease from the 50-60% rate of July 2003. No improvement has been
seen since November of 2005.
Iraq's GDP increased to $29.3 billion in 2005, and per capita GDP has
grown by $249 since 2002.
And again.
and again....
I love the way they use nominal GDP.I suppose its paints a
far more rosy picture than making the adjustment to real GDP
with the 25% odd average inflation rate.
your are a dipstik....
*if* the figures are being accounted as 'normal'....the gdp will
be adjusted for some form of cpi....
then come issues with the usefulness of the cpi....
repeat...it is foolish to trust such figures....
it is even more foolish to take possums seriously.
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "hummingbird" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 08:12:08 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:50:06 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
repeat...it is foolish to trust such figures....
Translation: you are clutching at straws. Nothing new there.
--
the fossil media has poured out very little but tripe on irak from day one
the process is moving forward very well.....
....abelard ukpm 18-Jan-05.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Possum Comitatus" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 05:34:21 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:50:06 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:52:31 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 04:58:50 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
best source of general data on irak of which i am aware....
http://www.brookings.edu/fp/saban/iraq/index.pdf
And let us look at the economic contents of this "best
source of general data on irak".
Page 31 - Fuel
Pre war output (billion barrels per day):2.5
Current: 2.2
page 33- Power output (megawatts)
Pre war:3958
Current:4400
Power demand:8500 -9000.
Page 34 - Unemployment
Pre war: They dont say (handy that)
Current: 25-40%
Yet, in a little note down the bottom they say:
"Considering the increase in entrepreneurial activity after
the end of the war, we have for the purposes of this
database assumed that there has been an improvement in
unemployment levels, and hence weighted information
supporting such a conclusion heavier than contradictory data
reports."
i.e. they've plucked it out of their arse and dont give the
methodology for the econometric estimates - if they actually
have one.
Page 35 - Nominal GDP and Inflation:
2002 20.5 (USD billion)
2005 27.9(USD billion)
And heres the catcher:
Inflation 2002:19%
2003:34%
2004:32%
2005:20%
And the rest of the economic side of the Brookings report is
on twaddle like mobile phone connections, judge numbers and
whatnot.
Those figures are terrible.
http://www.portaliraq.com/news/Iraqi+economy+to+grow+10+percent+in+2006%2C+official+predicts__1111805.html?PHPSESSID=b973bc66702a68a97bef2a8f29777ba9
Iraqi economy to grow 10 percent in 2006, official predicts
I thought you didnt like GDP as a measure?
you really should stop 'thinking'...you'll hurt yourself....
such measure should be taken with serious caution....
http://www.bizzyblog.com/?p=782
"Ordinary Iraqis are financially better off now than they were at any time
in the past two decades. According to World Bank and International
Monetary Fund estimates, per capita income has doubled since 2003.
I thought you didnt like GDP as a measure..... etc etc
you really should stop 'thinking'...you'll hurt yourself....
such measure should be taken with serious caution....
Iraq’s
per capita gross domestic product is today almost twice that of Yemen and
nearing that of Egypt and Syria, hardly a sign of failure in a country in
which, just three years ago, antiwar groups insisted children were
starving en masse. Statistics aside, the Iraqi economic boom is apparent
to anyone who visits an Iraqi market. Not only are appliances and luxuries
in the stores, but customers are actually purchasing them.
Iraqis today employ technologies that were nonexistent or off-limits to
all but the Baathist elite just three years ago. As of September 2005,
there were more than 3.5 million cell-phone subscribers in Iraq, for
example. Under the Baath party, there was no cell-phone service, and
possession of satellite phones was a capital offense. Internet cafés dot
not only Baghdad thoroughfares, but also dusty back streets in provincial
towns."
http://allthingsconservative.typepad.com/all_things_conservative/2006/07/iraq_index.html
The progress made in the electrical sector is impressive, and most often
ignored by the mainstream media. Pre-war production was 3,958 megawatts,
and daily electrical supply was 4-8 hours nationwide. In July of 2006,
total production was 4,400 megawatts and daily supply was 11.8 hours.
The unemployment rate in Iraq is still staggering, at 25-40%, but that is
a decrease from the 50-60% rate of July 2003. No improvement has been
seen since November of 2005.
Iraq's GDP increased to $29.3 billion in 2005, and per capita GDP has
grown by $249 since 2002.
And again.
and again....
In one breath you say regarding GDP that "do you expect to
be able to trust such figures coming out of irak yet?" and,
"stop trusting figures you can't even trust well in the
west" when they dont support your case, but then in the next
breath you post as supporting evidence Brookings data BASED
ON GDP.
You're just being silly.
I love the way they use nominal GDP.I suppose its paints a
far more rosy picture than making the adjustment to real GDP
with the 25% odd average inflation rate.
your are a dipstik....
*if* the figures are being accounted as 'normal'....
They arent being accounted (whatever the ***** that means) as
"normal" (again, whatever the ***** that means as well), they
are from page 35 of the Brookings report:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GDP ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS, 2002-2005
Nominal GDP (in USD billion) 20.5 13.6 25.5 29.3
Of which non-oil GDP (%) 32 32 33 37
Real GDP Growth Rate (%) -7.8 -41.4 46.5 3.7
Per Capita GDP (USD) 802 518 942 1,051
Consumer Price Inflation (annual average) 19 34 32 20
Footnote 85- Data derived from "Measuring Stability and
Security in Iraq October 2005, Report to Congress In
Accordance with Conference Report 109-72, Emergency
Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2005, page 11. Information from World
Bank and IMF."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal GDP.
Not adjusted for inflation.
Have a few definitions:
http://www.investorwords.com/5927/nominal_GDP.html
http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Nominal+GDP
http://www.investordictionary.com/definition/real+vs.+nominal+in+economics.aspx
There's a reason people use nominal GDP data to talk up the
success of reconstruction efforts.To see why, lets adjust
the nominal figures for the rampant inflation using 2001 as
the base year zero for a CPI index and apply it to the
nominal GDP (using Brookings inflation and GDP data)
(all figures in USD Billions)
Year NomGDP CPI Index Real GDP
2001 - 100 -
2002 20.5 119 17.2
2003 13.6 159.5 8.5
2004 25.5 210.5 12.1
2005 29.3 252.6 11.6
In real terms the Iraqi economy has CONTRACTED by 30% since
the pre-war 2002 levels.
And that's the difference.50% growth in nominal terms since
the pre-war level, a 30% contraction in real terms since the
pre-war level
If you post ***** as evidence to support your view, the least
you could do is understand it first - that way you wont look
like such an idiot.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Possum Comitatus" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
31 Aug 2006 07:45:01 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:56:11 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:34:21 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:50:06 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:52:31 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
Iraq's GDP increased to $29.3 billion in 2005, and per capita GDP has
grown by $249 since 2002.
And again.
and again....
In one breath you say regarding GDP that "do you expect to
be able to trust such figures coming out of irak yet?" and,
"stop trusting figures you can't even trust well in the
west" when they dont support your case, but then in the next
breath you post as supporting evidence Brookings data BASED
ON GDP.
You're just being silly.
your response lacks adequate complexity....
1)i don't trust figures out of irak at this point of development....
2)in terms of gov't figures there is not much better available at this
moment....
No amount of complexity will overcome that hypocrisy.
You wailed when someone else used GDP figures, calling them
untrustworthy - then you turned around and produced a new
set of GDP figures to support your argument, a set of
figures you didnt even understand.
but there is other data, eg growing consumable
consumption.....
Consumption does not provide data on economic development,
consumption is a function, literally and technically, of
other things.
Just what those "other things" are in the case of Iraq has
yet to be determined.As a baseline we know that consumption
of goods that previously werent available because of
sanctions would now be more available.What we dont know is,
as I explained elsewhere, whether that increase in durable
goods consumption is because of broad increases in national
income, or changes in the distribution and patterns of
consumption, or changes in the distribution of income.
The only data that you have provided, YOU have provided,
suggests it is the latter, not the former.
i remind you that you quoted an outdated figure....
YOU provided an outdated figure.The Broookings data are
YOUR FIGURES.
YOU supplied them.
I just pointed out the ***** contained within them.
3)i have also told you that the method of calculation is relevant...
i don't have that to hand and neither am i interested enuf to
chase it down...
Even if you had it "to hand", you wouldnt understand a bar
of it anyway.You didnt even grasp the nominal nature of the
Brookings data you posted.The idea of you getting your head
around the basic detail of chain weighted volume measures of
GDP is frankly laughable.
4)i have told you that i don't even trust western figures...
"trust them" to do what?
and
again methods of calculation are relevant....
there is nothing 'silly in any of this....
as already stated to you...you are 'thinking' in blacks and whites...
you'll never get anywhere like that....esp with sommat as complex
as 'economics'....
I'm an econometrician, you arent fooling anybody with this
twaddle.
none of this has anything to do with 'my case'....
i don't measure the action in irak in merely 'economic' terms.....
repeat....i was correcting your simplistic comments...including
your narrow and outdated claim based on gdp
The GDP claim was yours son, it was data YOU provided to
support YOUR claims, data that you didnt comprehend and
which ended up as evidence for the opposing position.
I love the way they use nominal GDP.I suppose its paints a
far more rosy picture than making the adjustment to real GDP
with the 25% odd average inflation rate.
your are a dipstik....
*if* the figures are being accounted as 'normal'....
They arent being accounted (whatever the ***** that means) as
"normal" (again, whatever the ***** that means as well), they
are from page 35 of the Brookings report:
repeat again....it depends on how cpi or inflation is being applied
to the gdp figures...
Listen you idiot, Nominal GDP does not have GDP deflators
applied to it.Its raw, unadjusted data where aggregates are
measured in prices prevailing in the year they were actually
measured in.
Before you start trying to lecture people that actually know
what they're talking about, I suggest you gain at least a
basic education in the topic first.
I'll tell you EXACTLY "how cpi or inflation is being applied
to the gdp figures...". Its not.
Its why they're called "Nominal".
again i said more than that....
there is a limit to how much i am prepared to repeat myself for you
If you had anything worthwhile to say, maybe I'd be
concerned.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GDP ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS, 2002-2005
Nominal GDP (in USD billion) 20.5 13.6 25.5 29.3
Of which non-oil GDP (%) 32 32 33 37
Real GDP Growth Rate (%) -7.8 -41.4 46.5 3.7
Per Capita GDP (USD) 802 518 942 1,051
Consumer Price Inflation (annual average) 19 34 32 20
Footnote 85- Data derived from "Measuring Stability and
Security in Iraq October 2005, Report to Congress In
Accordance with Conference Report 109-72, Emergency
Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2005, page 11. Information from World
Bank and IMF."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal GDP.
Not adjusted for inflation.
seems reasonable....
"seems reasonable".
Its what "nominal" means you twit.
can't be bothered to dig out all the details....
Dig out the details of what - page 35 of your own evidence.
You could "dig" that out with a teaspoon.
you have in 'your' figures for gdp -41.4%
They are the Brookings figures.They are the figures YOU
provided as evidence.
immediately followed by
+46%...and then by 3.5% do you really expect such wild swings
to be taken seriously?
The swings - Yes, 2003 is the big drop because that's when
the country was smashed to pieces because of the invasion
(halting output), and 2004 is the big increase because
that's when the rebuilding phase effectively began -
ushering in the Bastiat type broken windows fallacy of using
GDP figures as appropriate measures of economic development.
do you really expect to trust such swings?
I would expect swings of that magnitude because of the the
events of the years the swings occurred in.
Elsewhere you said "no-one worth two cents a week
will approach such figures without looking at the
*realities* behind them...".
You cant even do that properly.
Its a pretty pathetic site when you cant even live up to the
cliches you hide your ignorance behind.
i remind you yet again that you picked out a single and different figure..
I just pointed out that the data which YOU provided as
evidence was a load of horseshit, and why.
Have a few definitions:
http://www.investorwords.com/5927/nominal_GDP.html
http://financial-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Nominal+GDP
http://www.investordictionary.com/definition/real+vs.+nominal+in+economics.aspx
not of interest....
Pity, you could do with the education.
only the actual calculations in a given context are
of any possible interest....and no-one worth two cents a week
will approach such figures without looking at the *realities* behind
them...
i.e. you havent a fucking clue what you're talking about,
but if you try to sound cryptically aloof enough, you think
you might be able to pull it off.
Let me tell you, you'll pull something off, and it wont be
credibility.
<>
I'm only interested in your economic claims.
There's a reason people use nominal GDP data to talk up the
success of reconstruction efforts.To see why, lets adjust
the nominal figures for the rampant inflation using 2001 as
the base year zero for a CPI index and apply it to the
nominal GDP (using Brookings inflation and GDP data)
(all figures in USD Billions)
Year NomGDP CPI Index Real GDP
2001 - 100 -
2002 20.5 119 17.2
2003 13.6 159.5 8.5
2004 25.5 210.5 12.1
2005 29.3 252.6 11.6
In real terms the Iraqi economy has CONTRACTED by 30% since
the pre-war 2002 levels.
that is not born out by the increased market activity....
Increased market activity doesnt amount to a hill of
beans.Germany had increased market activity when they had
hyperinflation, Indonesia had increased market activity
immediately after the 1997/8 Asian financial
crisis.Increased market activity, paticularly of the small
enterprise type is often little more than an attempt by
people to provide themselves with an income source because
of a powerful lack of economic alternatives.
"increased market activity" just means more people are
trying to flog ***** off.Ever been to the backblocks of a
large city in a developing nation?
Plenty of "increased economic activity" there.And a sweet
***** all lot of good that does them for their economic
development.
as stated....i don't trust the figures...
Well stop providing them as evidence then.
It aint rocket science.
you can i f you wish.....
yet again i repeat....you raised a highly selective and
outdated figure....not me....
They are YOUR FIGURES you dill.
neither do i even regard gdp as a wonderful measure of an economy
But regarded it well enough to post it as evidence with the
Brookings data.
as far as i am concerned irak is now much better off....
esp if you ignore the whining of the jihadis who want the taliban
and the ba'ath socialists who want madsam and sunni (15%)
dominance back....
as you behave like a fairly typical socialist
You wouldnt know a socialist from a hole in the ground.
(with perhaps a smattering
of proto-numeracy, i would imagine a few years back you were whining
about apartheid...what do you suppose the situation in irak was
before the mad socialist was taken out?
Generally as ***** as it is now.
of course as a socialist perhaps you preferred that situation....but then
socialism is a mental disease....
And that's the difference.50% growth in nominal terms since
the pre-war level, a 30% contraction in real terms since the
pre-war level
sorry....your fiddling with some dodgy numbers
Fiddling!
The "dodgy numbers" are ones you supplied.The only
"fiddling" done was applying the inflation rate of the
Brookings data to the Nominal GDP of the Brookings data.
The fact that you think that is "fiddling" with some numbers
shows just how far out of your depth you are on basic
economic issues.
is not much more impressive
that examining the entrails of a newly sacrificed cockerel....
there is far more to irak than your 'figures'...
repeat, to understand figures you must first attend to reality....
not treat the figures as magical....
Hiding your ignorance behind a facade of third-rate cliches
doesnt cut it.
fortunately you have an administration and a president available to do
that job and keep you safe until you learn a bit about the real
world...
He aint my President, I'm Australian.
.
|
|
|
| User: "abelard" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
01 Sep 2006 11:32:26 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 10:45:01 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
typed:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:56:11 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:34:21 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:50:06 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:52:31 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
Iraq's GDP increased to $29.3 billion in 2005, and per capita GDP has
grown by $249 since 2002.
And again.
and again....
In one breath you say regarding GDP that "do you expect to
be able to trust such figures coming out of irak yet?" and,
"stop trusting figures you can't even trust well in the
west" when they dont support your case, but then in the next
breath you post as supporting evidence Brookings data BASED
ON GDP.
You're just being silly.
your response lacks adequate complexity....
1)i don't trust figures out of irak at this point of development....
2)in terms of gov't figures there is not much better available at this
moment....
No amount of complexity will overcome that hypocrisy.
You wailed when someone else used GDP figures, calling them
untrustworthy - then you turned around and produced a new
set of GDP figures to support your argument, a set of
figures you didnt even understand.
you're blathering...one assumes you have no argument
but there is other data, eg growing consumable
consumption.....
Consumption does not provide data on economic development,
consumption is a function, literally and technically, of
other things.
more blather...
Just what those "other things" are in the case of Iraq has
yet to be determined.As a baseline we know that consumption
of goods that previously werent available because of
sanctions would now be more available.What we dont know is,
as I explained elsewhere, whether that increase in durable
goods consumption is because of broad increases in national
income, or changes in the distribution and patterns of
consumption, or changes in the distribution of income.
don't be daft....if they can't afford food they won't buy
consumer goods or even be able to run them...
again you're blathering.....
The only data that you have provided, YOU have provided,
suggests it is the latter, not the former.
more blather...you're not attempting to test a situation...
you're trying to sell a mess of pottage because it's what
you wish to believe
veijo looks to make an argument...learn from him...
repeat...i don't suffer fools....and you are going fine to convince me you
are a fool....
you could always go bleat with abdul and buzzy....
but thus far you are merely wasting my time
i remind you that you quoted an outdated figure....
YOU provided an outdated figure.The Broookings data are
YOUR FIGURES.
YOU supplied them.
I just pointed out the ***** contained within them.
no you didn't..i pointed out the problems when it became appropriate
my first step was merely to correct you as you'd posted outdated figures
there is no point trying to get you to step 2 if you can't cope with
step 1....
there is also no point communicating with you while you have
your head stuffed with left wing nonsense and slogans
3)i have also told you that the method of calculation is relevant...
i don't have that to hand and neither am i interested enuf to
chase it down...
Even if you had it "to hand", you wouldnt understand a bar
of it anyway.
rest binned unread...
as stated...i don't suffer fools...you are a fool
either grow up or get ignored or mocked
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "Possum Comitatus" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
01 Sep 2006 05:57:35 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 18:32:26 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 10:45:01 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
typed:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:56:11 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:34:21 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:50:06 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:52:31 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
<>
rest binned unread...
as stated...i don't suffer fools...you are a fool
either grow up or get ignored or mocked
Roflol. Oh please - who do you think you're fooling.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "hummingbird" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
31 Aug 2006 03:25:12 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 14:27:34 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
On 31 Aug 2006 05:14:34 -0700,
Are you sure? There were less than half that number of deaths *from
any cause* in ngland and Wales on an average day in 2004. Total deaths
= 514,250; average deaths from all causes per day = 1,409. In 2005
there were 512,993 deaths registered in England and Wales, giving a
daily average of just over 1,405. Even 300 a day looks like an
over-estimate.
you are correct....a decimalisation valve seems to have blown....
300 is better
Priceless. Rotfl x 10,000.
I've lost count how many times you've slammed others for erm...erm
....not being able to count.
--
"I prefer liberty with danger than peace with slavery"
"We may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost"
"Man is born free, and everywhere he is in shackles"
....Jean-Jacques Rousseau 1712-1778
.
|
|
|
| User: "abelard" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
01 Sep 2006 11:05:40 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 21:25:12 +0100, hummingbird
<RHBIYDTNPPAX@spammotel.com>
typed:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 14:27:34 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
On 31 Aug 2006 05:14:34 -0700,
Are you sure? There were less than half that number of deaths *from
any cause* in ngland and Wales on an average day in 2004. Total deaths
= 514,250; average deaths from all causes per day = 1,409. In 2005
there were 512,993 deaths registered in England and Wales, giving a
daily average of just over 1,405. Even 300 a day looks like an
over-estimate.
you are correct....a decimalisation valve seems to have blown....
300 is better
Priceless. Rotfl x 10,000.
I've lost count how many times you've slammed others for erm...erm
...not being able to count.
you can't count buzzy
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "hummingbird" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
01 Sep 2006 12:16:27 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 01 Sep 2006 18:05:40 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 21:25:12 +0100, hummingbird
<RHBIYDTNPPAX@spammotel.com>
typed:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 14:27:34 +0200 'abelard'
posted this onto uk.politics.misc:
On 31 Aug 2006 05:14:34 -0700,
Are you sure? There were less than half that number of deaths *from
any cause* in ngland and Wales on an average day in 2004. Total deaths
= 514,250; average deaths from all causes per day = 1,409. In 2005
there were 512,993 deaths registered in England and Wales, giving a
daily average of just over 1,405. Even 300 a day looks like an
over-estimate.
you are correct....a decimalisation valve seems to have blown....
300 is better
Priceless. Rotfl x 10,000.
I've lost count how many times you've slammed others for erm...erm
...not being able to count.
you can't count buzzy
Apparently better than you fraudy. H^H^H^H^H^H^H^.
--
"I prefer liberty with danger than peace with slavery"
"We may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost"
"Man is born free, and everywhere he is in shackles"
....Jean-Jacques Rousseau 1712-1778
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Viejo Vizcacha" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
31 Aug 2006 09:12:55 PM |
|
|
abelard ha escrito:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:34:21 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:50:06 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:52:31 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
Iraq's GDP increased to $29.3 billion in 2005, and per capita GDP has
grown by $249 since 2002.
And again.
and again....
In one breath you say regarding GDP that "do you expect to
be able to trust such figures coming out of irak yet?" and,
"stop trusting figures you can't even trust well in the
west" when they dont support your case, but then in the next
breath you post as supporting evidence Brookings data BASED
ON GDP.
You're just being silly.
your response lacks adequate complexity....
1)i don't trust figures out of irak at this point of development....
2)in terms of gov't figures there is not much better available at this
moment....but there is other data, eg growing consumable
consumption.....
i remind you that you quoted an outdated figure....
3)i have also told you that the method of calculation is relevant...
i don't have that to hand and neither am i interested enuf to
chase it down...
4)i have told you that i don't even trust western figures...and
again methods of calculation are relevant....
there is nothing 'silly in any of this....
as already stated to you...you are 'thinking' in blacks and whites...
you'll never get anywhere like that....esp with sommat as complex
as 'economics'....
none of this has anything to do with 'my case'....
i don't measure the action in irak in merely 'economic' terms.....
repeat....i was correcting your simplistic comments...including
your narrow and outdated claim based on gdp
I love the way they use nominal GDP.I suppose its paints a
far more rosy picture than making the adjustment to real GDP
with the 25% odd average inflation rate.
your are a dipstik....
*if* the figures are being accounted as 'normal'....
They arent being accounted (whatever the ***** that means) as
"normal" (again, whatever the ***** that means as well), they
are from page 35 of the Brookings report:
repeat again....it depends on how cpi or inflation is being applied
to the gdp figures...
again i said more than that....
there is a limit to how much i am prepared to repeat myself for you
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GDP ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS, 2002-2005
Nominal GDP (in USD billion) 20.5 13.6 25.5 29.3
Of which non-oil GDP (%) 32 32 33 37
Real GDP Growth Rate (%) -7.8 -41.4 46.5 3.7
Per Capita GDP (USD) 802 518 942 1,051
Consumer Price Inflation (annual average) 19 34 32 20
Footnote 85- Data derived from "Measuring Stability and
Security in Iraq October 2005, Report to Congress In
Accordance with Conference Report 109-72, Emergency
Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2005, page 11. Information from World
Bank and IMF."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal GDP.
Not adjusted for inflation.
seems reasonable....can't be bothered to dig out all the details....
you have in 'your' figures for gdp -41.4% immediately followed by
+46%...and then by 3.5% do you really expect such wild swings
to be taken seriously? do you really expect to trust such swings?
Why not? You have trouble understanding that Iraq was TOTALLY
destroyed. BTW, if you one year lose 50% and the following year gain
50%, you do NOT end up in the same place; you are still off 25% from
where you started.
And, the increase in consumption is meaningless in an occupied country.
And even more meaningless when it comes to energy. People form the US
are real hogs when it comes to energy consumption. 200 thousand troops,
support personnel, and security guards who move around on Humvees will
certainly increase energy consumption. Americans who use air
conditioned tents, and leave the lights on with high consumption lamps
for security reasons, will certainly boost electricity consumption in
Iraq. Unfortunately, Iraqis do not benefit from this.
VV
.
|
|
|
| User: "abelard" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
01 Sep 2006 11:24:17 AM |
|
|
On 31 Aug 2006 19:12:55 -0700, "Viejo Vizcacha" <nats_uglyman@yahoo.com>
typed:
abelard ha escrito:
On Thu, 31 Aug 2006 08:34:21 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
typed:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 14:50:06 +0200, abelard
<abelard3@abelard.org> wrote:
On Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:52:31 +1000, Possum Comitatus
<crouching_nun@yahoo.com.au>
Iraq's GDP increased to $29.3 billion in 2005, and per capita GDP has
grown by $249 since 2002.
And again.
and again....
In one breath you say regarding GDP that "do you expect to
be able to trust such figures coming out of irak yet?" and,
"stop trusting figures you can't even trust well in the
west" when they dont support your case, but then in the next
breath you post as supporting evidence Brookings data BASED
ON GDP.
You're just being silly.
your response lacks adequate complexity....
1)i don't trust figures out of irak at this point of development....
2)in terms of gov't figures there is not much better available at this
moment....but there is other data, eg growing consumable
consumption.....
i remind you that you quoted an outdated figure....
3)i have also told you that the method of calculation is relevant...
i don't have that to hand and neither am i interested enuf to
chase it down...
4)i have told you that i don't even trust western figures...and
again methods of calculation are relevant....
there is nothing 'silly in any of this....
as already stated to you...you are 'thinking' in blacks and whites...
you'll never get anywhere like that....esp with sommat as complex
as 'economics'....
none of this has anything to do with 'my case'....
i don't measure the action in irak in merely 'economic' terms.....
repeat....i was correcting your simplistic comments...including
your narrow and outdated claim based on gdp
I love the way they use nominal GDP.I suppose its paints a
far more rosy picture than making the adjustment to real GDP
with the 25% odd average inflation rate.
your are a dipstik....
*if* the figures are being accounted as 'normal'....
They arent being accounted (whatever the ***** that means) as
"normal" (again, whatever the ***** that means as well), they
are from page 35 of the Brookings report:
repeat again....it depends on how cpi or inflation is being applied
to the gdp figures...
again i said more than that....
there is a limit to how much i am prepared to repeat myself for you
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GDP ESTIMATES AND PROJECTIONS, 2002-2005
Nominal GDP (in USD billion) 20.5 13.6 25.5 29.3
Of which non-oil GDP (%) 32 32 33 37
Real GDP Growth Rate (%) -7.8 -41.4 46.5 3.7
Per Capita GDP (USD) 802 518 942 1,051
Consumer Price Inflation (annual average) 19 34 32 20
Footnote 85- Data derived from "Measuring Stability and
Security in Iraq October 2005, Report to Congress In
Accordance with Conference Report 109-72, Emergency
Supplemental
Appropriations Act, 2005, page 11. Information from World
Bank and IMF."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nominal GDP.
Not adjusted for inflation.
seems reasonable....can't be bothered to dig out all the details....
you have in 'your' figures for gdp -41.4% immediately followed by
+46%...and then by 3.5% do you really expect such wild swings
to be taken seriously? do you really expect to trust such swings?
Why not? You have trouble understanding that Iraq was TOTALLY
destroyed. BTW, if you one year lose 50% and the following year gain
50%, you do NOT end up in the same place; you are still off 25% from
where you started.
it's a possible claim....i'm not very convinced because i hear no
tales of starvation during the year and the serious disruption was
only in a very small area...
i regard any figures founded on prior to the police action as dodgy
in the extreme as i don't trust any mad dictatorship to produce
even part reliable figures....
my own view would be no figures will be close to reliable for another
3 or 4 years....
And, the increase in consumption is meaningless in an occupied country.
why?
they sell more phones (millions of them)
they local traders sell very many more tvs....
And even more meaningless when it comes to energy.
again why? i don't see it very difficult to get some idea of pre action
hours of supply a day or areas of supply.....
this is also against a background of idiots who will do anything possible
to disrupt the government
People form the US
are real hogs when it comes to energy consumption. 200 thousand troops,
support personnel, and security guards who move around on Humvees will
certainly increase energy consumption.
reasonable suggestion....
but most of them will surely be generating their own current for bases....
it would need data if you suggest the local power supply is being cut off
to feed coalition forces
Americans who use air
conditioned tents, and leave the lights on with high consumption lamps
for security reasons, will certainly boost electricity consumption in
Iraq. Unfortunately, Iraqis do not benefit from this.
but the claim is that irakis are benefiting from greater up time and
greater grid capacity.....
you must surely be aware that considerable resources are going
into irak from america and much other of the west...
regards...
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 07:55:41 AM |
|
|
abelard wrote:
Iraqis today employ technologies that were nonexistent or off-limits to
all but the Baathist elite just three years ago. As of September 2005,
there were more than 3.5 million cell-phone subscribers in Iraq, for
example.
Well, yes: how else are they supposed to remotely detonate their IEDs?
You really are grasping at straws, abby. I expect the Iraquis are just
so happy they can buy cell-phones now that they'll ignore the fact that
they're likely to be shot or blown up any time they leave their house,
can't get petrol in one of the most oil-rich countries in the world,
and are about to face an open civil war.
Mark
.
|
|
|
| User: "abelard" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 08:33:10 AM |
|
|
On 30 Aug 2006 05:55:41 -0700, "mmaker@my-deja.com" <mmaker@my-deja.com>
typed:
abelard wrote:
Iraqis today employ technologies that were nonexistent or off-limits to
all but the Baathist elite just three years ago. As of September 2005,
there were more than 3.5 million cell-phone subscribers in Iraq, for
example.
Well, yes: how else are they supposed to remotely detonate their IEDs?
what...all those millions of cell phones.....
seems to be a great imbalance between available idiotic exploding
dopes and cell phones....
You really are grasping at straws, abby. I expect the Iraquis are just
so happy they can buy cell-phones now that they'll ignore the fact that
they're likely to be shot or blown up any time they leave their house,
can't get petrol in one of the most oil-rich countries in the world,
and are about to face an open civil war.
i suggest you read further into the documents....
there are plentiful tables and charts of what 'irakis' think
about the situation...
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "joeh" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 08:54:03 AM |
|
|
abelard wrote:
On 30 Aug 2006 05:55:41 -0700, "mmaker@my-deja.com" <mmaker@my-deja.com>
typed:
abelard wrote:
Iraqis today employ technologies that were nonexistent or off-limits to
all but the Baathist elite just three years ago. As of September 2005,
there were more than 3.5 million cell-phone subscribers in Iraq, for
example.
Well, yes: how else are they supposed to remotely detonate their IEDs?
what...all those millions of cell phones.....
seems to be a great imbalance between available idiotic exploding
dopes and cell phones....
You really are grasping at straws, abby. I expect the Iraquis are just
so happy they can buy cell-phones now that they'll ignore the fact that
they're likely to be shot or blown up any time they leave their house,
can't get petrol in one of the most oil-rich countries in the world,
and are about to face an open civil war.
i suggest you read further into the documents....
there are plentiful tables and charts of what 'irakis' think
about the situation...
Of the three sources you cite the first, from Brookings, states that
the majority of its data is from American sources, with only a 'very
modest amount' (their words) from Iraqi sources. The second, dated
February 2006, is based solely on information provided by a single US
official, and the third, dated September 2005, is from an anonymous
blogger who refers to reports in the mainstream media, then complains
that the mainstream media isn't interested in, or is suppressing, such
reports!. So the second two sources are out of date and unverifiable,
and the first is mostly based on US government information, so is not a
first-hand report on conditions in Iraq.
.
|
|
|
| User: "abelard" |
|
| Title: Re: posted to assist those incautiously reposting fossil media tripe re irak..... |
30 Aug 2006 09:54:14 AM |
|
|
On 30 Aug 2006 06:54:03 -0700, "joeh" <j.hutcheon@jisc.ac.uk>
typed:
abelard wrote:
On 30 Aug 2006 05:55:41 -0700, "mmaker@my-deja.com" <mmaker@my-deja.com>
typed:
abelard wrote:
Iraqis today employ technologies that were nonexistent or off-limits to
all but the Baathist elite just three years ago. As of September 2005,
there were more than 3.5 million cell-phone subscribers in Iraq, for
example.
Well, yes: how else are they supposed to remotely detonate their IEDs?
what...all those millions of cell phones.....
seems to be a great imbalance between available idiotic exploding
dopes and cell phones....
You really are grasping at straws, abby. I expect the Iraquis are just
so happy they can buy cell-phones now that they'll ignore the fact that
they're likely to be shot or blown up any time they leave their house,
can't get petrol in one of the most oil-rich countries in the world,
and are about to face an open civil war.
i suggest you read further into the documents....
there are plentiful tables and charts of what 'irakis' think
about the situation...
Of the three sources you cite the first, from Brookings, states that
the majority of its data is from American sources, with only a 'very
modest amount' (their words) from Iraqi sources. The second, dated
February 2006, is based solely on information provided by a single US
official, and the third, dated September 2005, is from an anonymous
blogger who refers to reports in the mainstream media, then complains
that the mainstream media isn't interested in, or is suppressing, such
reports!. So the second two sources are out of date and unverifiable,
and the first is mostly based on US government information, so is not a
first-hand report on conditions in Iraq.
naturally many sources are american...
they are heavily committed and working in irak....the brookings
sources include several 'opinion polls'....the respondents to those
polls are unlikely to be american....
american sources are among the best in the world...they are in general
far more reliable and wide ranging than uk sources....
there are many other sources ranging from local blogs, some out and
about reports, and government ministers statements....
there are three major competing factions putting out their own views/
propaganda....
if you are interested enuf i'm sure you can do what i do....read widely...
i also track most major 'news' services....
you are not making any case whatsoever...merely attempting to
rubbish the sources i have given....
your lack of data fails to my various data....
you cannot undermine a source with.....nothing....
--
web site at www.abelard.org - news comment service, logic, economics
energy, education, politics, etc 1,552,396 document calls in year past
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
all that is necessary for [] walk quietly and carry
the triumph of evil is that [] a big stick.
good people do nothing [] trust actions not words
only when it's funny -- roger rabbit
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
