Value in Romney +300, right?

[BuddyBear]

The people with the money and education in this country are all democrats.

It is actually funny, one of the most robust phenomenons in all of social science research is the relationship between education and liberalism. The more education, the more liberal you become. Coincidence?

The other day, I friended a girl from elementary school who I had not seen in maybe 22 years. I use to go to an elementary school in a trailer trash city. Well needless to say, she never went to past high school and being a single mother of two boys you would of course think she is supporting Obama. Nope. Romney of course. And the vulgarity of her posts too. I just dropped her as a friend. This country really needs to place more emphasis on education.

[DwightShrute]

Romney +300 has value the same way that a +50,000 Browns Super Bowl future has value (i.e., theoretical value and not actual value).

you must have spent a lot of time in summer school

[BiffTFinancial]

you must have spent a lot of time in summer school

i did teach summer school one summer between undergrad and grad school. the most important part of intelligence is recognizing that which you do not know (e.g., why would Pinnacle have +300 odds on Romney when useless political polls laughingly call for a dead heat). in this instance, i'll just copy my answer from the paper of the smartest kid in class, which is perfectly legal in gambling but not in school.

if you're smarter than Pinnacle, then it's a real pleasure to meet you. given your inability to comprehend the internal revenue code, though, i wonder if that's truly the case...

[ChalkyDog]

It is actually funny, one of the most robust phenomenons in all of social science research is the relationship between education and liberalism. The more education, the more liberal you become. Coincidence?

The other day, I friended a girl from elementary school who I had not seen in maybe 22 years. I use to go to an elementary school in a trailer trash city. Well needless to say, she never went to past high school and being a single mother of two boys you would of course think she is supporting Obama. Nope. Romney of course. And the vulgarity of her posts too. I just dropped her as a friend. This country really needs to place more emphasis on education.

The All Spin Zone:

Left: Shows the smarter you are, the less likely you are to be deceived by the stupidity of the right.

Right: Well, education has been infiltrated by liberals, and have destroyed our education system by allowing teachers to "brain wash" our youth. So, the more time you spend around the liberal education - the more indoctrination, thus it follows more indoctrination in a liberal agenda the more liberal a person becomes.

[BuddyBear]

The All Spin Zone:

Left: Shows the smarter you are, the less likely you are to be deceived by the stupidity of the right.

Right: Well, education has been infiltrated by liberals, and have destroyed our education system by allowing teachers to "brain wash" our youth. So, the more time you spend around the liberal education - the more indoctrination, thus it follows more indoctrination in a liberal agenda the more liberal a person becomes.

Umm okay.

[DwightShrute]

i did teach summer school one summer between undergrad and grad school. the most important part of intelligence is recognizing that which you do not know (e.g., why would Pinnacle have +300 odds on Romney when useless political polls laughingly call for a dead heat). in this instance, i'll just copy my answer from the paper of the smartest kid in class, which is perfectly legal in gambling but not in school.

if you're smarter than Pinnacle, then it's a real pleasure to meet you. given your inability to comprehend the internal revenue code, though, i wonder if that's truly the case...

dude relax, it was a joke. don't take it personal.

Btw I think I am smarter than Pinnacle and the Cyber-dyne Systems Model 10. Also known as Cyborg T-101.

oh and almost forgot. The tax revenue thing. I know a lot of accountants. I used to have to deal with dozens in the financial planning sector. Most would agree with simplifying it. Doesn't mean I am right. Just my opinion. There is no reason it can't be one page long. We are all just used to it being complicated and who knows how many pages long.

[RogueScholar]

Do you always take the bets your bookie is begging you to take, Eric?

[BiffTFinancial]

dude relax, it was a joke. don't take it personal.

Btw I think I am smarter than Pinnacle and the Cyberdyne Systems Model 10. Also known as Cyborg T-101.

hey, thanks man. i really appreciate that. now i can stop taking "personal" a pretty lame attempted insult from someone i'll never meet who thinks that the internal revenue code is 2.5 million pages long. today really is gonna be a good day.

[DwightShrute]

hey, thanks man. i really appreciate that. now i can stop taking "personal" a pretty lame attempted insult from someone i'll never meet who thinks that the internal revenue code is 2.5 million pages long. today really is gonna be a good day.

only you would take that as an insult and going to pretend that I really meant it was 2.5 million pages long. Sarcasm meet BiffTFinancial..... BiffTFinancial say hi to sarcasm.

Just to clear the air then, the cyborg thing was a joke also. I have never tested myself against the Cyborg T-101. Not that I know of.


My statement about the ridiculousness of the tax code stands. One page is all that is needed.
.

The federal tax code, which was 400 pages long in 1913, has swollen to about 70,000. Americans now spend 7.6 billion hours a year grappling with an incomprehensible tangle of deductions, loopholes and arcane reporting requirements.

That is the equivalent of 3.8 million skilled workers toiling full-time, year-round, just to handle the paperwork. By this measure, the tax-compliance industry is six times larger than car-making.


An incredible 82 percent of taxpayers are so flummoxed that they pay for help. Some 60 percent hire an accountant or tax preparer, while another 22 percent use tax software.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/mary-kate-cary/2010/04/21/how-confusing-is-the-tax-code-even-the-irs-chief-gets-help

[RyanLeafOfBets]

Do you always take the bets your bookie is begging you to take, Eric?

Yes!!! I was baited!!! Plus, I kinda just wanted a little action on the election.

[BiffTFinancial]

only you would take that as an insult and going to pretend that I really meant it was 2.5 million pages long. Sarcasm meet BiffTFinancial..... BiffTFinancial say hi to sarcasm.

Just to clear the air then, the cyborg thing was a joke. I have never tested myself against the Cyborg T-101. Not that I know of.


My statement about the ridiculousness of the tax code stands. One page is all that is needed.

The federal tax code, which was 400 pages long in 1913, has swollen to about 70,000. Americans now spend 7.6 billion hours a year grappling with an incomprehensible tangle of deductions, loopholes and arcane reporting requirements.

That is the equivalent of 3.8 million skilled workers toiling full-time, year-round, just to handle the paperwork. By this measure, the tax-compliance industry is six times larger than car-making.


An incredible 82 percent of taxpayers are so flummoxed that they pay for help. Some 60 percent hire an accountant or tax preparer, while another 22 percent use tax software.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/mary-kate-cary/2010/04/21/how-confusing-is-the-tax-code-even-the-irs-chief-gets-help

few things:

1. okay as to sarcasm. i'm sure that you can appreciate how difficult it can be to differentiate between all of the outrageous nonsense posted on this board that's fully intended vs that that's sarcasm. if you post outrageous statements in close proximity to some of the morons on this board, don't be surprised if you are (unintentionally) taken seriously. perhaps the more ideal solution is not to take anyone here seriously when it comes to discussing anything beyond sports. actually, that's definitely the answer.

2. didn't think much about the cyborg thing, just assumed it to be a joke because of proximity to Pinnacle. no one is smarter than Pinnacle, and anyone who thinks that he is is truly stupid. i am certain that you are not stupid (in case it's necessary to mention, no sarcasm intended here, i'm sure that you are not stupid).

3. agreed, 80% of Americans are functionally retarded. tell me something that i don't know. banking and real estate documentation also require a ton of paper pushing and man hours. should we stop documenting property and financial transactions too?

[DwightShrute]

few things:

1. okay as to sarcasm. i'm sure that you can appreciate how difficult it can be to differentiate between all of the outrageous nonsense posted on this board that's fully intended vs that that's sarcasm. if you post outrageous statements in close proximity to some of the morons on this board, don't be surprised if you are (unintentionally) taken seriously. perhaps the more ideal solution is not to take anyone here seriously when it comes to discussing anything beyond sports. actually, that's definitely the answer.

2. didn't think much about the cyborg thing, just assumed it to be a joke because of proximity to Pinnacle. no one is smarter than Pinnacle, and anyone who thinks that he is is truly stupid. i am certain that you are not stupid (in case it's necessary to mention, no sarcasm intended here, i'm sure that you are not stupid).

3. agreed, 80% of Americans are functionally retarded. tell me something that i don't know. banking and real estate documentation also require a ton of paper pushing and man hours. should we stop documenting property and financial transactions too?

fair enough to #1. Good points.

as far as number 3 goes. Perhaps you are in the accounting field, so if you are then we won't agree much obviously. It's definitely not an attack at you or your profession. I just think if you make it one bloody page long for everyone, 10% of what you earned that year along with a fair goods-and-services tax, then it would be better. The tax cheats couldn't anymore. Not nearly as much anyways. Lastly, just because I like the simplicity of a flat tax system doesn't have anything to do with "banking and real estate documentation"or any thing else. There is no reason it has to be an either or thing.

[Snowball]

Romney is the sharp play

[GUMMO77]

Plus, I kinda just wanted a little action on the election.

[mynameismud]

i dont know shit about politics, but this could be one of those "winner of the popular vote" doesnt win the election.

[wikkidinsane]

Leafs bro, even though Romney is up in florida in polling atm its not a lock for him. A lot of hispanics and african americans live down here in south florida and jews and our population is growing and we are uniting and the turnout has been incredible. I expect Romney to lose Ohio Pennsylvania IOWA NEW HAMPSHIRE MICHIGAN WISCONSIN MINISOTA COLORADO. ROMNEY SHOULD TAKE NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA

[tblues2005]

I don't think there is any value in betting for Romney. Don't throw away your money.

[BiffTFinancial]

fair enough to #1. Good points.

as far as number 3 goes. Perhaps you are in the accounting field, so if you are then we won't agree much obviously. It's definitely not an attack at you or your profession. I just think if you make it one bloody page long for everyone, 10% of what you earned that year along with a fair goods-and-services tax, then it would be better. The tax cheats couldn't anymore. Not nearly as much anyways. Lastly, just because I like the simplicity of a flat tax system doesn't have anything to do with "banking and real estate documentation"or any thing else. There is no reason it has to be an either or thing.

first of all, while the internal revenue code is voluminous, much of it does not pertain to the average person. there are immense sections on tax-exempts, trusts, estates, employee benefit plans, etc., that are of little to no concern to the average person. frankly, i believe the argument that the tax code is too complex and overly burdensome for the average person to be a specious and laughably populist one (often made by those who simply would like a lower marginal tax rate for themselves, knowing that the average person gravitates to this sort of populist argument even though it logically may not even be in their economic self-interest).

second, if the concern is tax cheats, then the concern is people engaging in behavior that we've determined to be undesirable. if that is the case, then i believe that we should increase our emphasis on enforcement, not weaken our legal standard to enable undesirable economic behavior.

third, my point in comparing tax to banking and real estate was to compare it to issues of analogous complexity and financial gravity. that is, some issues by their nature require some complexity in thought, structure and documentation. complexity is not implicitly bad, and when the dollars are bigger, better to have the rules spelled out in advance.

[SBR_John]

I would not bet Romney at this point. If he had a 50-50 chance of winning the market would have closed instead of expanding. Sometimes the market is square and a favorite increases and then gets beat. But my better sense says this is not one of those times. Romney can't get the job done in Ohio by all indications.

[GamblerSpirit]

romney needs 1000-1 to have value

Best post in this thread. Romney voters lmao

[Snowball]

I would not bet Romney at this point. If he had a 50-50 chance of winning the market would have closed instead of expanding. Sometimes the market is square and a favorite increases and then gets beat. But my better sense says this is not one of those times. Romney can't get the job done in Ohio by all indications.

Walker its part of the plan, if they told the truth (the polls are skewed to 2008 Democrat turnout)
Romney would be up by 5 pts, that would motivate the Obama voters to all show up.
This way, more Obama voters will stay home thinking "we got this"...
plus you have to realize that most of the betting action on this election is coming from around the world, not in the US.
Be confident - have faith in America.

[GunShard]

Why Obama will win:
1. Gay rights to marriage.
2. Women rights to an abortion.
3. Black voters will vote Obama simply for being black. America's negative history of segregation and slavery.
4. Tax the rich. Cut taxes on the middle class.
5. Finally ending the 10 years of 2 wars which has been financially draining to America.
6.
Obama's 21 million Twitter followers. https://twitter.com/BarackObama
Obama's 31 million likes on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/barackobama
Romney's 1.4 million Twitter followers. https://twitter.com/MittRomney
Romney's 10 million likes on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/mittromney
Clicking Like and Follow is similar to pushing Vote at the polls.

[bleedtoledo]

The polls are skewed, you have to read into them. Romney wont even need Ohio to win, even so, he'll probably squeak Ohio out.

Regardless, if barack wins i'm going sovereign. i'm done paying for these gutter rats

[SBR_John]

Why Obama will win:
1. Gay rights to marriage.
2. Women rights to an abortion.
3. Black voters will vote Obama simply for being black. America's negative history of segregation and slavery.

You could of just stopped there.

[BuddyBear]

The polls are skewed, you have to read into them. Romney wont even need Ohio to win, even so, he'll probably squeak Ohio out.

Regardless, if barack wins i'm going sovereign. i'm done paying for these gutter rats

No they are not. Only people who do not understand statistics and random sampling and statistical bias think they are skewed. The polls are very reliable and are the most efficient they have ever been in this election as of right now.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

[thechaoz]

There is no value in a sure loss

[ChalkyDog]

I would not bet Romney at this point. If he had a 50-50 chance of winning the market would have closed instead of expanding. Sometimes the market is square and a favorite increases and then gets beat. But my better sense says this is not one of those times. Romney can't get the job done in Ohio by all indications.

This is the finest showing of clarity by the SBR staff since I have been here.

[ChalkyDog]

No they are not. Only people who do not understand statistics and random sampling and statistical bias think they are skewed. The polls are very reliable and are the most efficient they have ever been in this election as of right now.

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

Polls are skewed and manipulated. Some are inherently skewed, some are purposefully manipulated.

However, I will agree that a neutral honest poll with proper surveying is the best it has been since inception. Those are out there. I would trust a .edu site over damn near anything else, FWIW.

[DwightShrute]

perfect example of that old saying "stats don't mean shit"

I suspect you posted it with your fingers crossed

[Shafted69]

I would not bet Romney at this point. If he had a 50-50 chance of winning the market would have closed instead of expanding. Sometimes the market is square and a favorite increases and then gets beat. But my better sense says this is not one of those times. Romney can't get the job done in Ohio by all indications.

• • 
    
  
  
  
  
  

[BuddyBear]

Polls are skewed and manipulated. Some are inherently skewed, some are purposefully manipulated.

However, I will agree that a neutral honest poll with proper surveying is the best it has been since inception. Those are out there. I would trust a .edu site over damn near anything else, FWIW.

not sure about that. If the organization is neutral then that is fine. Since political polling is a scientific enterprise, it should always remain neutral and never ideological. If it publicly affiliated with some political cause or ideology than the poll is not worth the paper the results it is printed on. Most of the reputable polls (e.g. Gallup, Zogby, Pew, etc...) are all legit. As of this point, unless the political polls are statistically biased, Obama is going to win. And I have a feeling it gets called rather quickly too.

[KingJD31]

Yeah now obamas going to cut middle class tax lmao, dont worry about last 4 yeara

Why Obama will win:
1. Gay rights to marriage.
2. Women rights to an abortion.
3. Black voters will vote Obama simply for being black. America's negative history of segregation and slavery.
4. Tax the rich. Cut taxes on the middle class.
5. Finally ending the 10 years of 2 wars which has been financially draining to America.
6.
Obama's 21 million Twitter followers. https://twitter.com/BarackObama
Obama's 31 million likes on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/barackobama
Romney's 1.4 million Twitter followers. https://twitter.com/MittRomney
Romney's 10 million likes on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/mittromney
Clicking Like and Follow is similar to pushing Vote at the polls.

[Snowball]

None of that jobs data is real.
As welfare rolls explode, the work force is reduced,
those people are no longer in the equation.

[ChalkyDog]

not sure about that. If the organization is neutral then that is fine. Since political polling is a scientific enterprise, it should always remain neutral and never ideological. If it publicly affiliated with some political cause or ideology than the poll is not worth the paper the results it is printed on. Most of the reputable polls (e.g. Gallup, Zogby, Pew, etc...) are all legit. As of this point, unless the political polls are statistically biased, Obama is going to win. And I have a feeling it gets called rather quickly too.

Here is an off topic run through problem with a very cliche statistic that is based in polling/surveying.

- 80% of crashes and 65% of near crashes happen "close to home"

- More than half of all Americans live within 50 miles of their birthplace.

The first poll numbers is inherently skewed due to the second fact. This type of problem is an issue for most predictive polling. They all use a sample size to poll, and are confident in the fact that it is a representative pool they drew their data from.

Smart people have worked greatly on perfecting the sample size, but not all things can be taken into account.

Honest, neutral polls are miles ahead of where they were in 2006 when it became a slight obsession of mine, as I was very much into political polling. Back then, cell phones fukked the numbers up, I am sure something similar exists today.

[tblues2005]

That jobs data is real because we are not losing jobs now since Obama is in office. It hasn't gone as well as it could be but it is better than it was when he got in office. It was a complete disaster when this man got in. He has done the job of getting the stock market to being in much better shape now and it's more stable now. I haven't been totally happy with Obama but Romney would be far worse.