Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Chattanooga Times Free Press)   GOP governors for the last few years: lets slash taxes on businesses and the wealthy to show how "business friendly" we are" GOP governors now: We're broke and businesses are complaining our roads are crap-so let's double the gas tax   (timesfreepress.com) divider line 287
    More: Asinine, GOP, gasoline taxes, Republican governors, Michigan, third rail, Rick Snyder, vehicle registrations, sales taxes  
•       •       •

2848 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Mar 2013 at 12:57 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



287 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-21 04:07:57 PM  

skullkrusher: Vlad_the_Inaner: skullkrusher: TheGogmagog: jake_lex: Wait, what, you're telling me that a decent infrastructure and functional government services might be a factor in getting business to locate in your state, not just tax breaks? What kind of voodoo economics is this?

I was told private industry would pay for the roads.  They don't need government help for anything.

who told you that?

[i.imgur.com image 640x360]

hours too late


Yeah.  but Nate Grey kept me from being tail end charlie, :)
 
2013-03-21 04:08:02 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: Vlad_the_Inaner: skullkrusher: TheGogmagog: jake_lex: Wait, what, you're telling me that a decent infrastructure and functional government services might be a factor in getting business to locate in your state, not just tax breaks? What kind of voodoo economics is this?

I was told private industry would pay for the roads.  They don't need government help for anything.

who told you that?

[i.imgur.com image 640x360]

hours too late

Facts no longer count after a certain period of time now?


Do they double count if they are posted twice?
 
2013-03-21 04:08:41 PM  

Gulper Eel: The tax was always on them. Taxes are simply another cost business passes along - either through paying their employees less or not hiring as many, through lower returns on investment, or through higher prices. The biggest businesses hear that leftist gibberish about "making corporations pay their fare share" and chuckle all the way to the bank because they bought breaks not available to their competition.


That old chestnut again!  How cute.

Prices for goods and services are not based on cost but what the market will bear.  How many employees got raises after taxes were cut?  How much did prices decrease?   Employees are hired based on demand, unless the person who makes that decision is stupid or has an agenda.  Anyone who says anything else is lying or does not understand.
 
2013-03-21 04:09:29 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: As I've said, I believe the rational assumption is to not think he believes that tax money should only be spent on roads. Do you have a reason to think that he thinks that the only worthwhile expenditure of tax money is on money earmarked for infrastructure?

Because that is actually the statement he actually made.

You are making up things he never said because you believe he is not as stupid as the remarks he is making but that's you white knighting for him.

skullkrusher: I don't think he's opposed to "general spending" in general.

Fine then give me a citation where he says he supports general spending. I gave you one where he is implying he is against it.


so you think that he believes that the only tax spending that we should engage in is tax dollars earmarked for roads?

it's really not a white-knight to exercise assumptions which are pretty common to human interactions. I don't think it is terribly likely that he thinks that spending on roads is the only spending that should be done. I don't think you think it is terribly likely either. However, you want to be quite literal with what he said for some reason. OK.

Corvus: Fine then give me a citation where he says he supports general spending. I gave you one where he is implying he is against it.


I can't believe you're serious, but ok: this is from the Michigan Chamber of Commerce, of which he is President, under their policies tab:

"Support efforts to have experts at the Michigan Department of Agriculture, Michigan State University, and agriculture industry leaders help establish best scientific and economic practices for the proper care of animals. "

That sounds like it would cost money out of "general spending"
 
2013-03-21 04:09:49 PM  
This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.
 
2013-03-21 04:11:01 PM  

skullkrusher: TheGogmagog: jake_lex: Wait, what, you're telling me that a decent infrastructure and functional government services might be a factor in getting business to locate in your state, not just tax breaks? What kind of voodoo economics is this?

I was told private industry would pay for the roads.  They don't need government help for anything.

who told you that?


Oops mine was already posted, edit --> redo

i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-03-21 04:11:40 PM  

CPennypacker: Corvus: skullkrusher: Vlad_the_Inaner: skullkrusher: TheGogmagog: jake_lex: Wait, what, you're telling me that a decent infrastructure and functional government services might be a factor in getting business to locate in your state, not just tax breaks? What kind of voodoo economics is this?

I was told private industry would pay for the roads.  They don't need government help for anything.

who told you that?

[i.imgur.com image 640x360]

hours too late

Facts no longer count after a certain period of time now?

Do they double count if they are posted twice?


I do think people shown wrong should be shown wrong multiple times because people always believe the lie and usually miss the correction.
 
2013-03-21 04:11:41 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: Vlad_the_Inaner: skullkrusher: TheGogmagog: jake_lex: Wait, what, you're telling me that a decent infrastructure and functional government services might be a factor in getting business to locate in your state, not just tax breaks? What kind of voodoo economics is this?

I was told private industry would pay for the roads.  They don't need government help for anything.

who told you that?

[i.imgur.com image 640x360]

hours too late

Facts no longer count after a certain period of time now?


forgive me, I wasn't literal enough for you. CPennypacker already responded that way. That is what you are hours too late for. The response. Of course, as I said to him, we all know they were purposefully taking BO's comments out of context with that "We built it" thing. The point wasn't that private industry would build roads.
 
2013-03-21 04:12:04 PM  

Corvus: This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.


Aw cmon, he's not a white knight. He's a nit picking bastard who likes to get in e-arguments
 
2013-03-21 04:13:41 PM  

Corvus: This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.


Didn't we agree you were going to remain calm? Allow me to remind you that you think this guy only supports taxes specifically earmarked for roads. So convinced, in fact, that you're gonna spew the above sort of crap, smugly content that you've "won" when, as usual, no. Not even close.
 
2013-03-21 04:15:00 PM  

CPennypacker: Corvus: This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

Aw cmon, he's not a white knight. He's a nit picking bastard who likes to get in e-arguments


in this case, it's not even a nit. I really don't think the head of the MI Chamber of Commerce thinks the only legitimate expenditure of tax money is tax money specifically earmarked for roads. I don't think anyone does. Not even Corvie.
 
2013-03-21 04:15:28 PM  

skullkrusher: "Support efforts to have experts at the Michigan Department of Agriculture, Michigan State University, and agriculture industry leaders help establish best scientific and economic practices for the proper care of animals. "

That sounds like it would cost money out of "general spending"


And he supports taxes for those? Also that doesn't mention any of the jobs you or I mentioned.

Show me where he says he supports taxes for the priorities we both mentioned. If you can't then you just made it up.

skullkrusher: so you think that he believes that the only tax spending that we should engage in is tax dollars earmarked for roads?


No I think he is making up a BS argument that "general spending" is evil, even though it supports things that businesses depend on.

You are pretending people can't possible make statements that are inconsistent, dishonest or stupid. People can and he did exactly that.
 
2013-03-21 04:16:20 PM  

skullkrusher: Corvus: skullkrusher: Vlad_the_Inaner: skullkrusher: TheGogmagog: jake_lex: Wait, what, you're telling me that a decent infrastructure and functional government services might be a factor in getting business to locate in your state, not just tax breaks? What kind of voodoo economics is this?

I was told private industry would pay for the roads.  They don't need government help for anything.

who told you that?

[i.imgur.com image 640x360]

hours too late

Facts no longer count after a certain period of time now?

forgive me, I wasn't literal enough for you. CPennypacker already responded that way. That is what you are hours too late for. The response. Of course, as I said to him, we all know they were purposefully taking BO's comments out of context with that "We built it" thing. The point wasn't that private industry would build roads.


OK please only respond to any other people's post that no one else responds to. Right?

Or is this one of those rules that only apply to others not you?
 
2013-03-21 04:17:14 PM  

Corvus: OK please only respond to any other people's post that no one else responds to. Right?


huh?
 
2013-03-21 04:17:56 PM  

skullkrusher: Corvus: This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

Didn't we agree you were going to remain calm? Allow me to remind you that you think this guy only supports taxes specifically earmarked for roads. So convinced, in fact, that you're gonna spew the above sort of crap, smugly content that you've "won" when, as usual, no. Not even close.


Sorry how did I not remain calm?

I never said that. I said he made the statement he is against "general spending " which is the statement he made and you still have not proved otherwise but you made that statement.
 
2013-03-21 04:18:42 PM  

skullkrusher: Corvus: OK please only respond to any other people's post that no one else responds to. Right?

huh?


You said people are only allowed to respond when no one else has to that post. So I am sure your are going to follow the same rule you have for everyone else?
 
2013-03-21 04:19:25 PM  
What the hell is happening in this thread
 
2013-03-21 04:19:55 PM  

Corvus: And he supports taxes for those? Also that doesn't mention any of the jobs you or I mentioned.


oddly, he didn't mention any of the jobs you mentioned either. Though he is the head of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce and one of their initiatives is to have the Dept of Ag to work with farmers. The Dept of Ag is funded by tax dollars so...

Corvus: No I think he is making up a BS argument that "general spending" is evil, even though it supports things that businesses depend on.

You are pretending people can't possible make statements that are inconsistent, dishonest or stupid. People can and he did exactly that.


no, I just don't believe that was the point. Luckily, my position doesn't require strained leaps of overly pedantic logical parsing. Go me.
 
2013-03-21 04:20:30 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: Corvus: OK please only respond to any other people's post that no one else responds to. Right?

huh?

You said people are only allowed to respond when no one else has to that post. So I am sure your are going to follow the same rule you have for everyone else?


no I didn't.
 
2013-03-21 04:20:45 PM  

skullkrusher: Corvus: skullkrusher: Vlad_the_Inaner: skullkrusher: TheGogmagog: jake_lex: Wait, what, you're telling me that a decent infrastructure and functional government services might be a factor in getting business to locate in your state, not just tax breaks? What kind of voodoo economics is this?

I was told private industry would pay for the roads.  They don't need government help for anything.

who told you that?

[i.imgur.com image 640x360]

hours too late

Facts no longer count after a certain period of time now?

forgive me, I wasn't literal enough for you. CPennypacker already responded that way. That is what you are hours too late for. The response. Of course, as I said to him, we all know they were purposefully taking BO's comments out of context with that "We built it" thing. The point wasn't that private industry would build roads.


OK.  Just to make you happier.

I was told private industry would pay for the roads.  They don't need government help for anything.

who told you that?


i.imgur.com
 
2013-03-21 04:20:50 PM  

skullkrusher: Corvus: This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

Didn't we agree you were going to remain calm? Allow me to remind you that you think this guy only supports taxes specifically earmarked for roads. So convinced, in fact, that you're gonna spew the above sort of crap, smugly content that you've "won" when, as usual, no. Not even close.


CPennypacker had already responded to this post of mine.

So, sorry but you are too late to respond.
 
2013-03-21 04:21:53 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: Corvus: This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

Didn't we agree you were going to remain calm? Allow me to remind you that you think this guy only supports taxes specifically earmarked for roads. So convinced, in fact, that you're gonna spew the above sort of crap, smugly content that you've "won" when, as usual, no. Not even close.

Sorry how did I not remain calm?

I never said that. I said he made the statement he is against "general spending " which is the statement he made and you still have not proved otherwise but you made that statement.


so if you're NOT saying that he only supports spending specifically earmarked for roads then you ARE saying he supports "general spending" on things like roads.
 
2013-03-21 04:22:28 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: Corvus: This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

Didn't we agree you were going to remain calm? Allow me to remind you that you think this guy only supports taxes specifically earmarked for roads. So convinced, in fact, that you're gonna spew the above sort of crap, smugly content that you've "won" when, as usual, no. Not even close.

CPennypacker had already responded to this post of mine.

So, sorry but you are too late to respond.


go for a walk, Corvie.
 
2013-03-21 04:23:21 PM  

skullkrusher: Corvus: And he supports taxes for those? Also that doesn't mention any of the jobs you or I mentioned.

oddly, he didn't mention any of the jobs you mentioned either. Though he is the head of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce and one of their initiatives is to have the Dept of Ag to work with farmers. The Dept of Ag is funded by tax dollars so...


So you don't think teachers, police or firefighters are paid by  "general spending"?

You said he supports taxes for general spending. Now show me a citation where he says this or admit your statement was wrong.
 
2013-03-21 04:23:24 PM  

Corvus: CPennypacker had already responded to this post of mine.

So, sorry but you are too late to respond.


But was it HOURs late?   I'm sure3 that's crucial.
 
2013-03-21 04:24:27 PM  

skullkrusher: so if you're NOT saying that he only supports spending specifically earmarked for roads then you ARE saying he supports "general spending" on things like roads.


Nope I am saying he is being dishonest with his statement which I have already explained to you multiple times.

Please stop repeating the same incorrect statement over and over again.
 
2013-03-21 04:25:20 PM  

skullkrusher: go for a walk, Corvie.


I thought we weren't getting upset?

we are in stage 4

Corvus: 4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

 
2013-03-21 04:25:55 PM  

Vodka Zombie: skullkrusher: Vodka Zombie: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: skullkrusher: TheGogmagog: jake_lex: Wait, what, you're telling me that a decent infrastructure and functional government services might be a factor in getting business to locate in your state, not just tax breaks? What kind of voodoo economics is this?

I was told private industry would pay for the roads.  They don't need government help for anything.

who told you that?

[progressivemetrowestsouth.files.wordpress.com image 450x435]

heh good one. Still, I haven't heard of many people talking about the privatization of roads except the more ideologically driven right libertarians

You should look into who owns the I-90 toll road here in Indiana.  I'll give you a hint: It's not even an American operation.

but it's basically run as a utility, isn't it? Under lease from the state with restrictions on fees and requirements for condition?

Sure, they do need to use some of the money for upkeep and operational costs, but it is still privately owned and operating to make a personal profit for the company that owns it.

It's also operated horribly with, oftentimes, no toll attendants on duty and really shoddy maintenance.


Oh hell, I've driven on that thing. What's the deal with no exits or rest stops?
/Had to poop on the side of the road
 
2013-03-21 04:27:36 PM  

skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Corvus: This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

Aw cmon, he's not a white knight. He's a nit picking bastard who likes to get in e-arguments

in this case, it's not even a nit. I really don't think the head of the MI Chamber of Commerce thinks the only legitimate expenditure of tax money is tax money specifically earmarked for roads. I don't think anyone does. Not even Corvie.


It is a nit.  In the quote, Dick Studley was being purposely obtuse.

"We understand the difference between investing in an asset that has value and adds value to economic activity as opposed to general spending," said Rich Studley, president of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce.

Spending is bad, except for when he determines it is good.  That is why he understands the difference between investing in an asset as opposed to general spending but cannot share it with you.
 
2013-03-21 04:29:06 PM  
"We understand the difference between investing in an asset that has value and adds value to economic activity as opposed to general spending," said Rich Studley, president of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce.


He is making a dishonest statement. He is implying "General spending" does NOT support anything that "adds value to economic activity ".

His statement is dishonest. Does it make logical sense for him to make that statement? NO.

Does that mean that because it is illogical he didn't say it? NO.

People can and do make dishonest statements all the time.
 
2013-03-21 04:29:09 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: go for a walk, Corvie.

I thought we weren't getting upset?

we are in stage 4

Corvus: 4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.


Exactly. You seem upset. That's why you should go for a walk
 
2013-03-21 04:31:33 PM  

lennavan: skullkrusher: CPennypacker: Corvus: This is the Skullkrusher formula to white Knighting:

1) Right Winger says something stupid.
2) People point out the stupid statement he made,
3) Skullkrusher  uses the circular logic of "Hey that statement is stupid therefor he must of meant something else"
4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

Aw cmon, he's not a white knight. He's a nit picking bastard who likes to get in e-arguments

in this case, it's not even a nit. I really don't think the head of the MI Chamber of Commerce thinks the only legitimate expenditure of tax money is tax money specifically earmarked for roads. I don't think anyone does. Not even Corvie.

It is a nit.  In the quote, Dick Studley was being purposely obtuse.

"We understand the difference between investing in an asset that has value and adds value to economic activity as opposed to general spending," said Rich Studley, president of the Michigan Chamber of Commerce.

Spending is bad, except for when he determines it is good.  That is why he understands the difference between investing in an asset as opposed to general spending but cannot share it with you.


there's nothing obtuse about it. Government spending on assets which add value to economic activity is different than just spending in general (i.e. spending which does not invest in an asset of value). It's common sense, actually.

Building a bridge is investing in an asset of value which adds value to economic activity. Beautifying city hall does not have such an impact on economic activity as the beauty of city hall really isn't related to economic activity in a tangible sense.
 
2013-03-21 04:31:49 PM  
Right wing White Knight circular logic:
"Right wingers are not dishonest, therefore if they make a dishonest statement it's not actually what they meant to say because that would mean they are being dishonest".
 
2013-03-21 04:32:22 PM  
Skully and Lenny have entered the ring. Sorry Nate and Corvus, you need to tap out.

Hunker down everyone
 
2013-03-21 04:32:50 PM  

skullkrusher: Corvus: skullkrusher: go for a walk, Corvie.

I thought we weren't getting upset?

we are in stage 4

Corvus: 4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

Exactly. You seem upset. That's why you should go for a walk


You are name calling, which means I am upset.

Did I make you call me a name again. You told me last time the reason why you do things like that is I force you.
 
2013-03-21 04:33:55 PM  

CPennypacker: Skully and Lenny have entered the ring. Sorry Nate and Corvus, you need to tap out.

Hunker down everyone


Hahhaha sounds good. Like I posted earlier I know his MO and his is proving it to a T.
 
2013-03-21 04:34:30 PM  

Corvus: So you don't think teachers, police or firefighters are paid by "general spending"?


sure they are. Do you think he is opposed to all general spending? As I said, do you honestly think he doesn't think general spending on things such as police and firefighters is necessary or good? Perhaps he even considers them assets that add value to the economy. Does he even say he is opposed to general spending? No, he doesn't. He recognizes a difference between spending that grows the economy such as infrastructure and spending on things which do not (again, outside of the stimulative impact of the spending itself)
 
2013-03-21 04:35:08 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: Corvus: skullkrusher: go for a walk, Corvie.

I thought we weren't getting upset?

we are in stage 4

Corvus: 4) When asked for proof of that position skullkrusher attacks semantics or uses ad hominem attacks.

Exactly. You seem upset. That's why you should go for a walk

You are name calling, which means I am upset.

Did I make you call me a name again. You told me last time the reason why you do things like that is I force you.


I didn't call you a name.
 
2013-03-21 04:36:57 PM  

skullkrusher: I didn't call you a name.


I prefer not to be called "corvie". So please don't call me that ever again then.
 
2013-03-21 04:37:24 PM  

Corvus: Right wing White Knight circular logic:
"Right wingers are not dishonest, therefore if they make a dishonest statement it's not actually what they meant to say because that would mean they are being dishonest".


except this wasn't a dishonest statement. The difference between spending on assets which help grow the economy and spending on things which do not is readily apparent.
 
2013-03-21 04:37:45 PM  

Corvus: He is making a dishonest statement. He is implying "General spending" does NOT support anything that "adds value to economic activity ".


He's not just implying, he actually said it.

Corvus: What the fark do they think general spending is? It goes to teachers, firemen, police and infrastructure. It's not just thrown into a farking ditch.


They think general spending is spending that spending on anything that not an asset with value and does not add value to economic activity.

Corvus: But that is part of "general spending" which he says he is against. So which is it?


He never said the police were a part of "general spending."  While skullkrusher is picking a nit, you're just plain wrong.
 
2013-03-21 04:38:11 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: I didn't call you a name.

I prefer not to be called "corvie". So please don't call me that ever again then.


hehe, ok. I didn't know you were so sensitive about the diminutive of your Fark screen handle.

That walk is a real good idea, I think.
 
2013-03-21 04:38:56 PM  

skullkrusher: except this wasn't a dishonest statement. The difference between spending on assets which help grow the economy and spending on things which do not is readily apparent.


General Spending does grow the economy. You have already admitted it does.
 
2013-03-21 04:40:16 PM  

lennavan: They think general spending is spending that spending on anything that not an asset with value and does not add value to economic activity.


that is what his quote says, yes. He also doesn't say that "general spending" should not happen. He just says that there is a difference between the two types of spending as he defined them. And there is. Quite clearly.
 
2013-03-21 04:41:03 PM  

lennavan: He never said the police were a part of "general spending." While skullkrusher is picking a nit, you're just plain wrong.


Police, teaches, firefighters are not paid in the general budget?
 
2013-03-21 04:42:06 PM  

skullkrusher: He just says that there is a difference between the two types of spending as he defined them.


Which is what? What is the difference. What makes general spending different according to him?
 
2013-03-21 04:42:29 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: except this wasn't a dishonest statement. The difference between spending on assets which help grow the economy and spending on things which do not is readily apparent.

General Spending does grow the economy. You have already admitted it does.


maybe he doesn't believe that it does. He'd be wrong but that's possible. However, there is no way to tell from this single sentence and it doesn't matter to what we're talking about. He just says that there is a difference between spending on assets which add value to the economy and spending on other things.

It doesn't seem to me that he is referring to the impact of stimulative spending one way or the other.
 
2013-03-21 04:42:36 PM  

CPennypacker: Skully and Lenny have entered the ring. Sorry Nate and Corvus, you need to tap out.

Hunker down everyone


loll Sounds good.
 
2013-03-21 04:43:12 PM  

Corvus: skullkrusher: He just says that there is a difference between the two types of spending as he defined them.

Which is what? What is the difference. What makes general spending different according to him?


good Lord
 
2013-03-21 04:44:40 PM  

skullkrusher: maybe he doesn't believe that it does. He'd be wrong but that's possible.


Based on his statement that is what he said. That is what my point is all along.

skullkrusher: However, there is no way to tell from this single sentence and it doesn't matter to what we're talking about.


Well one sentence is sure lots more proof than your 0 sentences that says otherwise.
 
Displayed 50 of 287 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report