|
|
Originally Posted by viperormiata
(Post 999768)
Okay, I need some answers. When did the liberals start pushing people towards the idea that meat=heart attack and vegan=live forever?
I'm just stunned that people still think eating meat is going to kill you or is harmful in your diet. I just can't fucking grasp it that people preach a high carb/low protein diet as "heathly". I'm actually worried that there will start to be bans on shit like steak and bacon because being vegetarian/vegan is the new trend and people STILL argue that a high fat/high protein diet is BAD. Fuck. |
Fast n' Furious, Kuwaiti-style
20,000 U.S. M-16s stolen from unguarded warehouse in Kuwait | World Tribune
Fast n' Furious, Kuwaiti-style |
Originally Posted by cordycord
(Post 999776)
Know how you can tell a regular person from a "vegan"? ...they'll tell you.
:rofl: |
Sustainable?
Completely Predictable | Sumner Books
"In fiscal 2010, according to numbers published by the Census Bureau and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), net spending by all levels of government in the United States was $5,942,988,401,000. That equaled $50,074 for each one of the 118,682,000 households in the country. In that same year, according to the Census Bureau, the median household income was $49,445... ...Government in the United States, of course, has not always spent more per year than the median household earns. As recently as 2000, the relationship between government spending and household income was dramatically different. Data from the Census Bureau and the OMB show that in that year net spending by all levels of government was $3,239,913,876,000. That equaled $29,941 for each of the nation’s then 108,209,000 households. In 2000, the median household income was $41,990." Instead of using charts and graphs, I'll describe using the "Black Knight Theory" of economics. :) |
"Good afternoon, Senator. My name is Keenan Glover, I’m an administration of justice major from Rochester, New York. A freshman, as well. You say you want to provide a government that leaves us alone. Quite frankly, I don’t want that. I want a government that is going to help me. I want a government that is going to help me fund my college education. I want a government that won’t define me by my FAFSA or by my family’s income. I’m a dollar sign with a heartbeat in this nation. This society is a mirror image of Capitol Hill. Do you, Senator Rand Paul, have a solution to come up with new American values so that the citizens of this nation have a worth of more than dead presidents and Ben Franklin?" |
Full speech:
The history of African-American repression in this country rose from government-sanctioned racism. Jim Crow laws were a product of bigoted state and local governments. ...Big and oppressive government has long been the enemy of freedom, something black Americans know all too well. We must always embrace individual liberty and enforce the constitutional rights of all Americans-rich and poor, immigrant and native, black and white. ...How did the party that elected the first black US senator, the party that elected the first 20 black congressmen, how did that party become the party that now loses 95 per cent of the African-American vote? |
Originally Posted by Rand Paul
...How did the party that elected the first black US senator, the party that elected the first 20 black congressmen, how did that party become the party that now loses 95 per cent of the African-American vote?
|
Kerry in
The fuck-wads in the White House were sick enough to cancel the missile shield pact with Poland on the anniversary of the Poland's invasion by Russia. Now it seems we need the shield for North Korea, or at least its deterrent effect. And Obama and Kerry are exposed (again) for what they are. And the MSM is nowhere to be found... |
Sebelius Tries To Blame GOP For Coming ObamaCare Failures - Investors.com
"Maybe it's because even Sebelius now admits that ObamaCare will force insurance claims up 32%." |
Anyone heard that the deficit has dropped almost in half since the worst of the last recession? That's all over Fox News and CNBC, right?
Originally Posted by Jan Hatzius
The federal budget deficit is shrinking rapidly. ...[I]n the 12 months through March 2013, the deficit totaled $911 billion, or 5.7% of GDP. In the first three months of calendar 2013 - that is, since the increase in payroll and income tax rates took effect on January 1 - we estimate that the deficit has averaged just 4.5% of GDP on a seasonally adjusted basis. This is less than half the peak annual deficit of 10.1% of GDP in fiscal 2009.
|
That's a good deal on part because we arent passing obama's budget. But right now we are slowly recovering economically, so tax receipts are collecting more revenue, which is what increased our defect so considerably in the first place. The huge jump in deficit in 2009 was due mostly to the loss of jobs, coupled with hug spending bills and therefore the huge drop in revenue from taxes.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-productio...jpg?1362093007 so really, the deficit hasn't "dropped in half" due to some great policy of the Obama admin, it's just that we are slowly collecting more taxes, since we are still spending at levels equal to that of 2009, because it would be disastrous to pass any leftist budget at this time, and without any crazy stimulus packages. which is one of the reasons we are finally recovering, since the fed'l gov't isn't going as hog wild.... http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-productio...png?1357937365 so naturally, if you cut out crazy spending, and happen at the same time get extra revenue stream incoming, the deficit is naturally going to reduce: http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-productio...jpg?1362093007 that's like renting out your basement and quitting cigarettes/drugs/alcohol and wondering why you're bringing in a little more at the end of the month... |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1000350)
[...]so really, the deficit hasn't "dropped in half" due to some great policy of the Obama admin[...]
So you are saying that the economy has recovered and the deficit has dropped even though we have a bunch of socialist/statist/austerian/sociopaths in Washington? That the deficit was not on a permanent trajectory to grow exponentially forever, even though it did temporarily in the past? And that, if I had confused my politics with my investments, I would be much worse off today than if I had been more data-driven and had a better understanding of the realities of different modern monetary systems? Mind blown. |
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack
(Post 1000427)
Wait, wait, wait.
So you are saying that the economy has recovered and the deficit has dropped even though we have a bunch of socialist/statist/austerian/sociopaths in Washington? That the deficit was not on a permanent trajectory to grow exponentially forever, even though it did temporarily in the past? And that, if I had confused my politics with my investments, I would be much worse off today than if I had been more data-driven and had a better understanding of the realities of different modern monetary systems? Mind blown. |
Originally Posted by Scrappy Jack
(Post 1000427)
Wait, wait, wait.
So you are saying that the economy has recovered and the deficit has dropped even though we have a bunch of socialist/statist/austerian/sociopaths in Washington? That the deficit was not on a permanent trajectory to grow exponentially forever, even though it did temporarily in the past? And that, if I had confused my politics with my investments, I would be much worse off today than if I had been more data-driven and had a better understanding of the realities of different modern monetary systems? |
|
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 999498)
Im not sure what's scarrier, this guy having a national news outlet, or people actually watching this and believing/agreeing with him:
We have never invested as much in public education as we should have because we’ve always had kind of a private notion of children: your kid is yours and totally your responsibility. We haven’t had a very collective notion of these are our children. So part of it is we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities. Once it’s everybody’s responsibility and not just the household’s, then we start making better investments. “This isn’t about me wanting to take your kids, and this isn’t even about whether children are property. This is about whether we as a society, expressing our collective will through our public institutions, including our government, have a right to |
http://bosguydotcom.files.wordpress....ng?w=500&h=336
Senator Warren grilling some regulators on how they came up with the recent foreclosure fraud and malpractice settlement in which the most heinous victims (e.g. servicemen and women overseas getting foreclosed on) could receive six-figure settlements but most will receive $300 - $600. What I take it to mean, since you used it in your press release and since it’s relevant to how much money the people who’ve been injured are going to get, that the number is critical. It tells us how much illegal activity there was and how much the banks should pay. The problem is that the 6.5 per cent is not accurate. Your staff admitted to us in a meeting earlier this week that the number is not based on a random sample, not on a review of these cases, it was determined based on whatever files had been reviewed by the time you shut down this process. And then it gets worse on the numbers. A week after announcing… a few weeks after announcing the settlement, your agency revised the 6.5 per cent number down to 4.2 per cent. The Wall Street Journal reported that the error rate — that is, the rate of breaking the law — was uhh, or making mistakes, was 11 per cent at Wells Fargo, 9 per cent at Bank of America, and there are reports that the error rate at JPMorgan Chase was only six tenths of one per cent. In other words, the 6.5 per cent number was just a made up number. So Congressman Cummings and I have asked for information about how you came up with the number. We still don’t have enough facts to check it, but the question I have is: what is the right number? Is it six tenths of one per cent? Is it 6.5 per cent? 9 per cent? 11 per cent? 20 per cent? 50 per cent? 90 per cent? If you can’t correctly tell how many people were the victims of illegal bank actions, how can you possibly decide how much money is an appropriate amount for settlement? |
1 Attachment(s)
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1366203674
MSNBC caption: "President Obama elevates ball by sheer will and determination" Fox News caption: "Obama playing games while economy suffers" 700 Club caption: "God punishes Obama by dropping things on his head" |
|
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:30 AM. |
|
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands