Comments on: New Math 2.0 http://bearingdrift.com/2009/11/27/new-math-20/ Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:07:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Brian Kirwin http://bearingdrift.com/2009/11/27/new-math-20/#comment-23238 Brian Kirwin Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:51:16 +0000 http://bearingdrift.com/?p=10158#comment-23238 It's worse. If the "stimulus" money went to your state, that state can claim they didn't lay off a number of workers that they otherwise may have. They may not have, but padding the numbers by saying they would have makes it look like jobs were saved. Notice the creative use of words. It was supposed to be "jobs created." But that makes the numbers look pitiful, so they changed to "jobs created or saved." That way, if you still have a job, Obama saved your job. Presto! Obama gets credit for making sure nothing happened. It's the first time the definition of "stimulus" was "nothing happened." It’s worse. If the “stimulus” money went to your state, that state can claim they didn’t lay off a number of workers that they otherwise may have. They may not have, but padding the numbers by saying they would have makes it look like jobs were saved.

Notice the creative use of words. It was supposed to be “jobs created.” But that makes the numbers look pitiful, so they changed to “jobs created or saved.” That way, if you still have a job, Obama saved your job. Presto! Obama gets credit for making sure nothing happened.

It’s the first time the definition of “stimulus” was “nothing happened.”

]]> By: Amit http://bearingdrift.com/2009/11/27/new-math-20/#comment-23166 Amit Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:07:59 +0000 http://bearingdrift.com/?p=10158#comment-23166 lol. pretty funny Darrell. I'll have to use that one in the future lol. pretty funny Darrell. I’ll have to use that one in the future

]]> By: Darrell -- Chesapeake http://bearingdrift.com/2009/11/27/new-math-20/#comment-23164 Darrell -- Chesapeake Fri, 27 Nov 2009 15:43:20 +0000 http://bearingdrift.com/?p=10158#comment-23164 New Math? Nah, it's the same math the government always uses when it comes to taxpayer money. Nothing ever goes down, only up. Heck, the formula was so good even real estate and Wall Street used it. And scientists gave up actually doing research for their grant money, preferring to rely on New Math computer models or the preconceived wishes of their benefactors. Who could have known the key to future prosperity and scientific advancement was merely removing the symbol - from any mathematical result. See, that's the whole problem with Republicans. You guys are too negative. ;) New Math? Nah, it’s the same math the government always uses when it comes to taxpayer money. Nothing ever goes down, only up. Heck, the formula was so good even real estate and Wall Street used it. And scientists gave up actually doing research for their grant money, preferring to rely on New Math computer models or the preconceived wishes of their benefactors. Who could have known the key to future prosperity and scientific advancement was merely removing the symbol – from any mathematical result.

See, that’s the whole problem with Republicans. You guys are too negative. ;)

]]>