you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 2 months ago (6 children)

Hahahahha "there are 5% more boys than girls therefore suddenly we go from ~200 million military male deaths to surpass your rough conservative estimate of 2-4 billion mothers who died in childbirth."

Its getting harder and harder to find people capable of making coherent arguments online. At least you know how to read and write (must have a water proof keyboard to survive the drooling) but it seems doing the bare minimum like math and Fermi estimating are a lost art.

I hope you dont work anywhere important or do anything that could affect peoples lives beyond greeting them at Walmart. I really pity you...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (5 children)

    Holy shit. You're so dense, scientists need to study what you're made of.

    Personally I hold a masters in economy. But even a fifth-grader should be able to inform you that 105 boys being born for every 100 girls (in peace time) isn't 5% more boys. It's 1.2% more boys. What was that you said about bare minimum math being a lost art? You know what. For once, you and I agree on something.

    That 1.2% is just from babies being born. Once you factor in female infanticide you'll get an even larger gap.

    Not to mention. You don't even remember that the 200m figure you came up with is a halfbaked estimate extrapolated from battles in the 1400's, applied to the past 5000 years, rather than the past 300000. psst, that's a 295000 year difference.

    And before you try to do that yourself. Since we both know bare minimum math isn't your strong suit. It's gonna be a very annoying integral to solve due to lack of reliable census data.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (4 children)

    With how braindead you are its no surprise you work in economics. And by "a masters in economics" i assume H&R block piloting turbotax? I think they sometimes hire masters in econ of your caliber there. Its a hard job clicking on brigjtly colored arrows and filling in boxes. Was there no online calculator to lead you to the right conclusion? If there was it would tell you you're flat our wrong hahahaha!

    200m figure you came up with is a halfbaked estimate extrapolated from battles in the 1400's, applied to the past 5000 years, rather than the past 300000. psst, that's a 295000 year difference.

    If you look at the world population past 3000 BCE it wasnt very much...

    I bet most "wars" back then were a warlord and has 20 best buds going for campaign while some of their wives die in labour.

    How is a master in economics unable to do math? You havent given me a detailed breakdown of your position at all besides shouting out percentages like they mean something.

    BTW im more than happy to keep coming back to dunk on you any time you respond. I love being right hahaha!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    Those are a lot of big words from someone that thinks 105 boys per 100 girls is a 55/45 split.

    I'll stop "shouting percentages" at you. You can't comprehend them to begin with. probably get a heart attack trying to understand what statistical probability is. Good thing we never wasted time on that.

    Good luck. I'm sure you'll get far in life

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah i bet you regret doing econ. Turned out well for you didn't it? Arent economists supposed to be masters of exactly this kind of problem? Did you get straight Cs and Ds and suck the dean off to get your degree? You've done a horrible job explaining your position. You never were able to extrapolate your points into exactly how more military men were supposed to have died than women through childbirth. You were—and still are—off by at least one order of magnitude on your best case argument.

    Your most convincing argument could be boiled down to "nuh uh!" Without anything substantial to back it up unlike me. The numerical janitor can't do math or convincingly make an argument with his prodigious econ skills!

    Go back to doing peoples taxes...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    Why would I regret getting a degree? I'm paid well with 6 weeks of paid vacation. Not that it's relevant so why you want to try and bring that up is beyond me.

    And what is this about doing other peoples taxes? No one does that here. The government tells you what you owe, how much your employer paid on your behalf. And if you don't have any deductions and it looks good, you simply press "submit". Takes like 5 minutes.

    Economists generally do not excavate corpses in the fossil layers to count the number of dead bodies. So i would not say we're experts at that.

    We mostly deal with finances or various categories. Like investment funds or long term budgets for governments and banks. that kinda of stuff. So, now you know i guess.

    Your inability to comprehend the basics is not something I can help you with.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment