Government Shutdown

[78X]

Pathetic and deeper down the rabbit hole we go

[talisman]

This...

Since when is someone's fucking herpes my problem? Why do I need to pay for the treatment, or a girl's birth control, etc. Defund that mother fucker.

I can think of several scenarios where someone elses herpes could become my problem, but I'm not going to spell it out for you...

and I'm on the lol bandwagon at 150%. Jeeesus.

[Forever_frost]

Someone doesn't understand how budgets and discretionary spending works.

Right, so show me, in our Constitution (which is our founding document and the only thing that matters) where the federal government can do anything with 'discretionary spending' that isn't counted in the 18 enumerated powers. I'll wait. Article and Section

[78X]

Damn I was hoping for a gubment shut down

[Denny]

Damn I was hoping for a gubment shut down

Eh... we're screwed either way.

[Cannonball996]

Right, so show me, in our Constitution (which is our founding document and the only thing that matters) where the federal government can do anything with 'discretionary spending' that isn't counted in the 18 enumerated powers. I'll wait. Article and Section

correct, how ever the constitution and the framers of our government never intended to become an empire. in order to maintain and empire you have to have the strongest military and the very best society backing it, and that takes a lot of money. if you want to go back to a government that was based on the constitution, then you better be ready to give up the empire.

[Denny]

correct, how ever the constitution and the framers of our government never intended to become an empire. in order to maintain and empire you have to have the strongest military and the very best society backing it, and that takes a lot of money. if you want to go back to a government that was based on the constitution, then you better be ready to give up the empire.

I've got nothing against pulling all of us back within our borders. Let's do it.

[Forever_frost]

correct, how ever the constitution and the framers of our government never intended to become an empire. in order to maintain and empire you have to have the strongest military and the very best society backing it, and that takes a lot of money. if you want to go back to a government that was based on the constitution, then you better be ready to give up the empire.

We don't have an empire. We have a country with multiple bases that provide us the ability to strike anywhere at anytime. I have no problem with returning to our constitutional guidelines. What is your issue with it?

[Denny]

We don't have an empire. We have a country with multiple bases that provide us the ability to strike anywhere at anytime. I have no problem with returning to our constitutional guidelines. What is your issue with it?

Bro, it's an Empire any way you look at it. Our planted puppets are leaders of several countries. We force our policies everywhere.

[SMEGMA STENCH]

Damn I was hoping for a gubment shut down

Me too. If nothing else it would be funny to watch those scum squirm.

I've got nothing against pulling all of us back within our borders. Let's do it.

And totally securing those borders. Which cannonfodder would be against of course.

[Forever_frost]

Secure our borders and use those nifty UAV's that Obama is hell bend on using to kill Pakistani civilians with to destroy anything crossing the border. I like that

[GSRGuy94]

I'm not even gonna weigh in on the OP discussion, I'll just say one thing; Saying something is "150% below" something else makes perfect sense. Many times when people (scientists, for example) want to measure growth or decline, they will use percentages greater than 100%. Often WAY bigger than 150%.

[sc281]

I'm not even gonna weigh in on the OP discussion, I'll just say one thing; Saying something is "150% below" something else makes perfect sense. Many times when people (scientists, for example) want to measure growth or decline, they will use percentages greater than 100%. Often WAY bigger than 150%.

Show me on a graph how you would chart the poverty line ($19,000 or whatever the fuck it is) and then chart what 150% below that would be.


I'll wait. Genuinely interested in seeing this.

[Vertnut]

I'm not even gonna weigh in on the OP discussion, I'll just say one thing; Saying something is "150% below" something else makes perfect sense. Many times when people (scientists, for example) want to measure growth or decline, they will use percentages greater than 100%. Often WAY bigger than 150%.

Measuring growth, yes. Decline, no. You only have 100% of something. Therefore, you can't go less than 100%. If the poverty line is $20k a year (for the sake of argument), how would you subtract 150%? I think he meant to say "50% below the poverty line", which would be $10k a year, and makes perfect sense.

[slow99]

I'm not even gonna weigh in on the OP discussion, I'll just say one thing; Saying something is "150% below" something else makes perfect sense. Many times when people (scientists, for example) want to measure growth or decline, they will use percentages greater than 100%. Often WAY bigger than 150%.

I bow to this guy's intellect.