Liberal Math

\\OFF-TOPIC// conversations about everything that has nothing to do with Conquer Club.

Moderator: Community Team

Forum rules
Please read the Community Guidelines before posting.
bedub1
Posts: 1005
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:41 am
Gender: Male

Liberal Math

Post by bedub1 »

I don't have specific numbers for this, but I heard that Washington State "cut it's budget" by some large amount. Yet the budget grew. So how does this work? Lets look at the way Liberals do math. I'll give some basic examples.

2005 - 1 billion
2006 - 1.5 billion
2007 - 2.0 billion
2008 - 2.5 billion
2009 - 3.0 billion
2010 - 3.25 billion

Now, they claim that they cut the budget for the 2010 year, but if you look at the numbers, they didn't do that at all. It still INCREASED by .25 billion. It's just that they WANTED to spend 3.5 billion, but cut it to 3.25billion. So even though they spend more and more money each year, they claim they keep cutting it. Let me show you how REAL math works.

2005 - 1 billion
2006 - 1.5 billion
2007 - 2.0 billion
2008 - 2.5 billion
2009 - 3.0 billion
2010 - 2.5 billion

Now in the example above you can clearly see that the budget was cut from 2009 to 2010. It DECREASED by .5 billion. This is an actual CUT. The other example is NOT A CUT. It's NOT a decrease. It's in fact an increase. They instead are actually INCREASING SPENDING. So next time you hear some democrat talk about how they are cutting the budget, just realize they are lying to you.

FYI, I'm sure republicans do this too. I hate politicians.
User avatar
pimpdave
Posts: 1083
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:15 am
Gender: Male
Location: Anti Tea Party Death Squad Task Force Headquarters
Contact:

Re: Liberal Math

Post by pimpdave »

THE DEBATE IS OVER
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
User avatar
Timminz
Posts: 5579
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:05 pm
Gender: Male
Location: At the store

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Timminz »

Snorri1234 wrote:god you're dumb.
User avatar
Phatscotty
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Phatscotty »

your "numbers" and "facts" and "statistics" make my head hurt. I'll probably make a comment that has nothing to do with the issue at hand and then call you a name.
User avatar
Phatscotty
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Phatscotty »

Timminz wrote:
Snorri1234 wrote:god you're dumb.



are you afraid to say he is dumb yourself? smoking beaners is bad for those baby nuts
Last edited by Phatscotty on Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:08 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
john9blue
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:18 pm
Gender: Male
Location: FlutterChi-town

Re: Liberal Math

Post by john9blue »

original post with facts and a valid point

one sentence retort/insult by a liberal

one sentence retort/insult by another liberal

sarcastic parody of retorts by another conservative

pwning of previous liberals by same conservative

...yep this thread is par for the course
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)
tzor
Posts: 4076
Joined: Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:43 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Long Island, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Liberal Math

Post by tzor »

If you think that's fun, you should see math at the Federal level.

When you borrow from yourself, it's not really borrowing, even though you do have to pay it back eventually.
And it's not debt either, even though ... it is.
Image
User avatar
beezer
Posts: 285
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 4:41 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Re: Liberal Math

Post by beezer »

One thing I remember from the budget battles of the 1990s is that whenever Congress didn't raise spending by as much as they originally projected, they would call that a cut. Yes, a cut in the rate of increase was actually viewed as a real cut. Perhaps that's what Washington state is trying to claim. I don't really know because bedub said he didn't have the specific numbers.
User avatar
hecter
Posts: 14632
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:27 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Tying somebody up on the third floor
Contact:

Re: Liberal Math

Post by hecter »

bedub1 wrote:FYI, I'm sure republicans do this too. I hate politicians.

So, why the "liberal" comment, why make such a distinction? It serves no purpose other than to try to insult and belittle your point. I mean, don't get me wrong, the total budget is increasing, but why make such a distinction?
Phatscotty wrote:your "numbers" and "facts" and "statistics" make my head hurt. I'll probably make a comment that has nothing to do with the issue at hand and then call you a name.

I see numbers, but few facts and no statistics. I bet Bedub would be absolutely THRILLED if the budget was only 3.25 billion.
In heaven... Everything is fine, in heaven... Everything is fine, in heaven... Everything is fine... You got your things, and I've got mine.
Image
User avatar
Timminz
Posts: 5579
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:05 pm
Gender: Male
Location: At the store

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Timminz »

Phatscotty wrote:smoking beaners is bad for those baby nuts

sig'd
User avatar
Phatscotty
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Phatscotty »

hecter wrote:
bedub1 wrote:FYI, I'm sure republicans do this too. I hate politicians.

So, why the "liberal" comment, why make such a distinction? It serves no purpose other than to try to insult and belittle your point. I mean, don't get me wrong, the total budget is increasing, but why make such a distinction?
Phatscotty wrote:your "numbers" and "facts" and "statistics" make my head hurt. I'll probably make a comment that has nothing to do with the issue at hand and then call you a name.

I see numbers, but few facts and no statistics. I bet Bedub would be absolutely THRILLED if the budget was only 3.25 billion.

it doesn't matter. I lump facts, numbers, and statistics all into the same category, and then they are immediately dismissed equally
User avatar
Phatscotty
Posts: 3714
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2007 5:50 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Phatscotty »

Timminz wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:smoking beaners is bad for those baby nuts

sig'd

and...as for being afraid?

aw f it sig'd
bedub1
Posts: 1005
Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 4:41 am
Gender: Male

Re: Liberal Math

Post by bedub1 »

hecter wrote:
bedub1 wrote:FYI, I'm sure republicans do this too. I hate politicians.

So, why the "liberal" comment, why make such a distinction? It serves no purpose other than to try to insult and belittle your point. I mean, don't get me wrong, the total budget is increasing, but why make such a distinction?
Phatscotty wrote:your "numbers" and "facts" and "statistics" make my head hurt. I'll probably make a comment that has nothing to do with the issue at hand and then call you a name.

I see numbers, but few facts and no statistics. I bet Bedub would be absolutely THRILLED if the budget was only 3.25 billion.
I made the liberal comment because it's the current Democrats that are doing this. I don't know of any Republicans doing it, but I'm sure they do. I also would be thrilled if it was only 3.25 billion. I think it's more like 20 and we have a 3.5 billion shortfall.

tzor wrote:If you think that's fun, you should see math at the Federal level.

When you borrow from yourself, it's not really borrowing, even though you do have to pay it back eventually.
And it's not debt either, even though ... it is.
Stop scaring me.

beezer wrote:One thing I remember from the budget battles of the 1990s is that whenever Congress didn't raise spending by as much as they originally projected, they would call that a cut. Yes, a cut in the rate of increase was actually viewed as a real cut. Perhaps that's what Washington state is trying to claim. I don't really know because bedub said he didn't have the specific numbers.
Exactly! they are cutting the INCREASE so they are still increasing it...just not as much. But then they claim they are actually reducing their spending...which is a lie.
User avatar
Timminz
Posts: 5579
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 1:05 pm
Gender: Male
Location: At the store

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Timminz »

Oh dear me. Whatever would happen if someone were to think I were echoing a statement in order to show my agreement with said statement? It offends my sensibilities, just thinking about it, I tell you.
User avatar
hecter
Posts: 14632
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 6:27 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Tying somebody up on the third floor
Contact:

Re: Liberal Math

Post by hecter »

Phatscotty wrote:it doesn't matter. I lump facts, numbers, and statistics all into the same category, and then they are immediately dismissed equally

Right... You realize those are all very different things, don't you?
bedub1 wrote: I also would be thrilled if it was only 3.25 billion. I think it's more like 20 and we have a 3.5 billion shortfall.

I'm pretty sure it's actually closer to 3.5 trillion...
In heaven... Everything is fine, in heaven... Everything is fine, in heaven... Everything is fine... You got your things, and I've got mine.
Image
User avatar
DirtyDishSoap
Posts: 9356
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:42 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Liberal Math

Post by DirtyDishSoap »

2+2=fish.

:roll:

Get it right, either hop on the gravy train or get off, but don't ruin it with your "logic."
Dukasaur wrote:
saxitoxin wrote:taking medical advice from this creature; a morbidly obese man who is 100% convinced he willed himself into becoming a woman.

Your obsession with mrswdk is really sad.

ConfederateSS wrote:Just because people are idiots... Doesn't make them wrong.
User avatar
Baron Von PWN
Posts: 203
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:05 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Capital region ,Canada

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Baron Von PWN »

hecter wrote:
Phatscotty wrote:it doesn't matter. I lump facts, numbers, and statistics all into the same category, and then they are immediately dismissed equally

Right... You realize those are all very different things, don't you?
bedub1 wrote: I also would be thrilled if it was only 3.25 billion. I think it's more like 20 and we have a 3.5 billion shortfall.

I'm pretty sure it's actually closer to 3.5 trillion...



Yeah 3.5 billion would be considered a fairly modest deficit considering the size of the US economy/ government.
User avatar
Woodruff
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Woodruff »

bedub1 wrote:FYI, I'm sure republicans do this too.


And yet, you titled the thread "Liberal Math", you dishonest f*ck.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
jbrettlip
Posts: 1183
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:30 pm
Location: Ft. Worth, TX

Re: Liberal Math

Post by jbrettlip »

Wow, I have never seen Woodruff get so disjointed. That made me laugh, so I reported his post. Usually you are much wittier, Woody!

Government is corrupt and spending money we don't have. ALL of them. Every government on the planet. The beauty is the US govt owns acres of land, natural resources and military weaponary. We owe meaningless pieces of paper. Eventually our ICBM's will pay off our debts (by vaporizing our creditors.)
Image
nothing wrong with a little bit of man on dog love.
User avatar
Woodruff
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Woodruff »

jbrettlip wrote:Wow, I have never seen Woodruff get so disjointed.


Really? I find that odd.

jbrettlip wrote:Usually you are much wittier, Woody!


I am?
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
jbrettlip
Posts: 1183
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:30 pm
Location: Ft. Worth, TX

Re: Liberal Math

Post by jbrettlip »

Woodruff wrote:
jbrettlip wrote:Wow, I have never seen Woodruff get so disjointed.


Really? I find that odd.

jbrettlip wrote:Usually you are much wittier, Woody!


I am?


yes, you usually seem to have smart ass comments (which I like) as opposed to name calling. Also with your Spock avatar, it makes name calling that much funnier.
Image
nothing wrong with a little bit of man on dog love.
User avatar
Woodruff
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Woodruff »

jbrettlip wrote:
Woodruff wrote:
jbrettlip wrote:Wow, I have never seen Woodruff get so disjointed.


Really? I find that odd.

jbrettlip wrote:Usually you are much wittier, Woody!


I am?


yes, you usually seem to have smart ass comments (which I like) as opposed to name calling. Also with your Spock avatar, it makes name calling that much funnier.


Sometimes, the blunt truth is the only way to make a point.
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
john9blue
Posts: 1268
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2007 6:18 pm
Gender: Male
Location: FlutterChi-town

Re: Liberal Math

Post by john9blue »

Woodruff wrote:Sometimes, the blunt truth is the only way to make a point.


LOL that was actually a good one.
natty_dread wrote:Do ponies have sex?
Army of GOD wrote:the term heterosexual is offensive. I prefer to be called "normal"
(proud member of the Occasionally Wrongly Banned)
User avatar
Woodruff
Posts: 5093
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 9:15 am

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Woodruff »

john9blue wrote:
Woodruff wrote:Sometimes, the blunt truth is the only way to make a point.


LOL that was actually a good one.


Arrowheads galore!
...I prefer a man who will burn the flag and then wrap himself in the Constitution to a man who will burn the Constitution and then wrap himself in the flag.
User avatar
Titanic
Posts: 1558
Joined: Wed Jan 24, 2007 12:58 pm
Location: Northampton, UK

Re: Liberal Math

Post by Titanic »

jbrettlip wrote:Wow, I have never seen Woodruff get so disjointed. That made me laugh, so I reported his post. Usually you are much wittier, Woody!

Government is corrupt and spending money we don't have. ALL of them. Every government on the planet. The beauty is the US govt owns acres of land, natural resources and military weaponary. We owe meaningless pieces of paper. Eventually our ICBM's will pay off our debts (by vaporizing our creditors.)


Including the ones who are running huge surpluses?
Post Reply

Return to “Acceptable Content”