No offence to anyone intended...

Really

State Median Income

American Community Survey



Annual Social and Economic Supplement

Current:

Historical (1984 to 2009):


I guess I'll find the pony in there somewhere...
 
you are so far off target, I wonder if you are even at the range?

The OP said that the data was there. You asked where. I provided the link.

Why is this such a difficult concept for you?
 
That's the screen

when you open the link. Why do I care what average salaries are in the 50 states? I can't read your mind, guy. Is there a specific post that this is supposed to be in reference to?
 
You could always look at the post tree at the bottom to see which post responds to which post.

Buuuuuuuuuttttt, I'll save you the effort. Those were the avg state gov't salarys...

You know, relevance...
 
You could always look at the post tree at the bottom to see which post responds to which post.

Buuuuuuuuuttttt, I'll save you the effort. Those were the avg state gov't salarys...

You know, relevance...

Except in linear mode that tree is gone. Not in linear mode the forum is a confusing mess. I find myself switching back and forth to see who responding to who. I find it kind of annoying which is why I almost always quote the person I'm responding to.
 
Is there anyone on this forum who will not apply for and cash checks from SS?

You are of course implying that someone who does not favor SS is a hypocrite for collecting when the time comes.

If that's your implication, IMHO it's BS.

I look at it this way: I have been systematically mugged for 15.whatever % of my earnings for the last 35+ years. When an opportunity arrises for me to get some of that back, I will take it. No hypocracy there.
 
You seem to take a childish position on much of this.

If anyone presents a point, you jump un them for supporting data, and then turn around and present unsupported data yourself.

If someone gives an opposing viewpoint, you point them to being unrealistic, unconstitutional, or whatever, but seem to lack basic "civil discussion" skills.

Lets try to behave how you expect to be treated, mkay.
 
On the contrary

I provide links to data and you and your buds claim bias and that you have no interest in said data. You've provided outdated, oft-times cherry-picked stuff, or, at best, a link to something that might as well be Encyclopedia Brittanica. When asked for a little help with understanding where the important data can be found, as what you provided is a confusing amalgam of data (as pointed out by others), you choose childish snark.

The issue of the federal government's role in healthcare (read: ObamaCare) will be decided by SCOTUS and it will be found to have a constitutional basis, or not.

Let's hope for better exchanges ahead!
 
cherry picking? I provided the top "x" number of links in order from a google search. no cherry picking. but one must look at their sources. I did read all the information you provided, and then researched the sources.

"better" exchanges occur when you treat others in the exchange the same as you would like to be treated. If you will demand cites for every post not in agreement of yours, then please provide cites supporting your reported data.

This may be a "if you can't stand the heat, stay outta the kitchen" type situation.

I look forward to meaningful and fruitful echanges, but a level playing field is a level playing field.

Best regards,
Kevin
 
Okay, my brother...

I extend my hand to you in friendship, with full knowledge of our differences and a love of the kitchen.

We all need to open our minds.
 
Back
Top