By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 said:
theprof00 said:
Kasz216 said:
Except you know... it clearly isn't correct.

The key word there is "Way things are normally estimated".

In general the "way things are normally estimated" are done so at face value without any actual digging into effects.

It's like how the GAO reports that by the way it's traditionally reported the New Healthcare law will save money, though they admit it's really unlikely most if any of those savings will actually reach fruition.

Oh, right, the conspiracy angle. How could I forget?

Let's not forget that the "researchers" themselves note limitations in their own conclusions and that very small discrepancies could result in major differences in their numbers.

Or how it isn't peer reviewed. Or..wait, do I need to continue?

I would note that the Spanish Socialist government who implemented the changes are blaming the green jobs for their economic problems.  It's literally nobody but the far left who is supporting what you say.  Looking for a better link because while this was a big story, the biggest google results are probably unsurprisingly from more rightwing leaning sources... and honestly it's hard to find since Spain had all kinds of green job initatives, and well... they've all failed pretty hard.

 

ah conspiracy angle again. So easy to fall back to...and yet no other studies back it up. But that's just coincidental isn't it...or maybe more conspiracy?

OK, that angle isn't working, source the other things you're saying, show me "they've all failed pretty hard". Go.