|
|
Hey, I am just going by stats compiled by thousands of professional people who do this for a living in your country, thats all.. and that being the only source of information I have on this is fact enough for me until proven wrong or they say something different.
But, if you want to make this about me, then yes... I am right and you are wrong, because those people who know more about this than anyone on this forum have said it is so and I am going by that.
I won't remember, but at the next U.S election when Obama finishes his term as president, I really hope I remember this conversation.
@ tchocky
" OH! JFGI.
Now I get it. Nice. Very hip of you. An adult man speaking in internet memes.
Is everything I'm likely to find via Google a true fact then?"
Yeah I know, I like to stay current. "Hip" however hasn't been used for a long time.
Why don't you try putting "Is everything I'm likely to find via Google a true fact then?" into Google and see what it says.
In fact, why don't I try it for you.
You got some nerve, coming here.
I hate to agree with Barnaby, but the fact is, hes right.
|
|
|
You will remember because Ron Paul will be nowhere to be found. You know he'll be 77 years old by the time of the next election?
The US promptly lost its shit and declared war on the very notion of terrorism, entering into an armed conflict against an abstract concept like only America can.
And after we beat Terrorism, were gonna beat Drugs! Then were going to take on Sadness!
|
|
|
Quote
tchocky :
You will remember because Ron Paul will be nowhere to be found. You know he'll be 77 years old by the time of the next election?
Just out of interest, who did you vote for in the 2008 election?
|
|
|
Quote
no-name :
Quote
tchocky :
You will remember because Ron Paul will be nowhere to be found. You know he'll be 77 years old by the time of the next election?
Just out of interest, who did you vote for in the 2008 election?
He voted for Mccain. Duh.
MUSE: March 12th, 2010 United Center, Chicago
PSN name : Str1ker22
|
|
|
I did vote for McCain but was not heartbroken when Obama won. Sarah Palin is a dangerous twit.
The US promptly lost its shit and declared war on the very notion of terrorism, entering into an armed conflict against an abstract concept like only America can.
And after we beat Terrorism, were gonna beat Drugs! Then were going to take on Sadness!
|
|
|
The point I was trying to make was that McCain was 72 at the time of the election, Ron Paul will be 77 come 2012. What's five years when they're both at the age where they could kick the bucket at any time?
|
|
|
I concur with James, see it can be done. He makes perfect sense today!
You got some nerve, coming here.
I hate to agree with Barnaby, but the fact is, hes right.
|
|
|
I think general disbelief at the constant farce America puts itself in is the only thing we'll agree on, Barnaby :P
|
|
|
I have no idea who I would side with right now. Obama is in a bit of a pickle and has on several occasions messed up. However, even under Republican rule, I have my doubts that it would have been a much better, if better at all, situation. Obama was dropped into a terrible environment with war and a screwed up economy.
I remember when I watched his victory speech, he mentioned that the work wouldn't take one year and maybe not even one term. We thought at the time he was just setting himself up for then, but he was right whether he meant it at the time or not. No one could have fixed a whole lot over the last two years, and I don't think that will change before the next election.
The highest profile Republican opposition have such unbearable people. I think the world dreads Sarah Palin, who seems to be thicker than George Bush. Whether she will run hasn't be confirmed, but I'm convinced that she will. Christine O Donnell wasn't much better.
Seriously, how does she plan to stop masturbation?
(I could put something really funny and intelligent here, but that would just be showing off.)
My blog: http://www.npollard.com/
|
|
|
Quote
Nogli :
Seriously, how does she plan to stop masturbation?
Dunno.
|
|
|
I'm pretty much indifferent about the elections. To me, the Republicans are just as dangerous as the Democrats. Both offer more government as the solutions to the problems that government created.
Ron Paul is planning on running in 2012, as far as I know. If he did, I would fight tooth-and-nail to get him to win. His son, Rand, on the other hand, doesn't excited me as much. He's been influenced way to much by the Tea Party, which, by the way, is not a libertarian institution in the least. It was libertarian in its origins, but has been co-opted by the Republican Party and the neo-conservatives within the party.
Romney, Clinton, Huckabee, Palin, Obama: they all sound like abysmal presidents in my mind.
|
|
|
Quote
Nebelwerfer :
I'm pretty much indifferent about the elections. To me, the Republicans are just as dangerous as the Democrats. Both offer more imaginary cash as the solutions to the problems that government deregulation and the financial system - hand in hand - created.
Corrected!
|
|
|
Quote
paztopia :
Quote
Nogli :
Seriously, how does she plan to stop masturbation?
Dunno.
Is she at it herself on that pic? She claims that it ranks alongside adultery, so she's being very naughty.
(I could put something really funny and intelligent here, but that would just be showing off.)
My blog: http://www.npollard.com/
|
|
|
Quote
Nebelwerfer :
Ron Paul is planning on running in 2012, as far as I know. If he did, I would fight tooth-and-nail to get him to win.
Oh, so I was right!
You got some nerve, coming here.
I hate to agree with Barnaby, but the fact is, hes right.
|
|
|
Quote
barnabyfox :
Quote
Nebelwerfer :
Ron Paul is planning on running in 2012, as far as I know. If he did, I would fight tooth-and-nail to get him to win.
Oh, so I was right!
No one was saying you were wrong, we are just saying he WON'T win. Nebelwerfer is on the extreme right with Ron Paul, so of course he would fight for him to win.
|
|
|
Yes everyone expects him to run, just not on the Republican ticket or to receive any votes.
The US promptly lost its shit and declared war on the very notion of terrorism, entering into an armed conflict against an abstract concept like only America can.
And after we beat Terrorism, were gonna beat Drugs! Then were going to take on Sadness!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lol, sounds like BS to me... no such thing as "free" and the U.K debt is more than 76 Billion.
You got some nerve, coming here.
I hate to agree with Barnaby, but the fact is, hes right.
|
|
|
Sounds like BS to me as well, supposedly the full 76 billion would be paid off with no interest.
But really if the offer was actually made who would be behind it. That is what I would like to know.
Strange.
Could be the old coot is off his meds but still it would be worth investigating.
|
|
|
Well, the Rothschild family (world's most powerful banking family - owns the bank of England/Scotland various European banks and the Federal Reserve in the U.S) who have been headquartered in London for centuries, did something similar once, during WW1 - 2 they funded out of their own fortune much of the British effort in order to keep the free markets (their main source of business - the Germans would have changed this) going...
But..
This just sounds like BS, and like I said the U.K's debt is way more than 76 Billion, even if that were to be given to Britain it would be a mere drop in the debt ocean... and an even smaller drop in the debt ocean of America whose debt is the worst in the world with like some hundred trillion.
You got some nerve, coming here.
I hate to agree with Barnaby, but the fact is, hes right.
|
|
|
I concur with the bullshit calling. That has to be an elaborate hoax.
The Suburbs >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Some Radiohead tribute band
|
|
|
Quote
barnabyfox :
Well, the Rothschild family (world's most powerful banking family - owns the bank of England/Scotland various European banks and the Federal Reserve in the U.S) who have been headquartered in London for centuries, did something similar once, during WW1 - 2 they funded out of their own fortune much of the British effort in order to keep the free markets (their main source of business - the Germans would have changed this) going...
But..
This just sounds like BS, and like I said the U.K's debt is way more than 76 Billion, even if that were to be given to Britain it would be a mere drop in the debt ocean... and an even smaller drop in the debt ocean of America whose debt is the worst in the world with like some hundred trillion.
A very, very small drop indeed. 76 billion would do pretty much nothing...
Countries by external debt
I always thought the debt of the US was atrocious, but some European countries have debt over 400% of their GDP. It's just shocking!
Facebook|Twitter
James Lewis wants to say he isnt racist. Racism is a crime, and crime is for black people. - Nick Pollard
|
|
|
Yeah, its pretty bad.
Although the U.K debt would actually almost half if the U.S were to pay off all of the debt it owes us (we could then pay off our creditors in one go), of all the places the U.S owes money to Britain is the third largest creditor.
And we aren't the only ones America owes huge debt to, Japan, China, are ahead of us and the Caribbean (they are a huge overseas banking hub used by the U.K and U.S) also the oil nations in the middle east.
But, I think this is how it all works anyway, the most financially powerful world nations essentially live out of each others pockets, paying off their own debt with investment money given to them by another and then having to do more work to plug that debt.
It seems a rather crap way of doing it but....
Its actually a bit annoying because there were many countries that owed Britain huge amounts of money by the end of the 2nd WW, but it was all wiped clean by the end of it and the only nation that actually made any money was the U.S.
You got some nerve, coming here.
I hate to agree with Barnaby, but the fact is, hes right.
|
|
|
Quote
barnabyfox :
Yeah, its pretty bad.
Although the U.K debt would actually almost half if the U.S were to pay off all of the debt it owes us (we could then pay off our creditors in one go), of all the places the U.S owes money to Britain is the third largest creditor.
And we aren't the only ones America owes huge debt to, Japan, China, are ahead of us and the Caribbean (they are a huge overseas banking hub used by the U.K and U.S) also the oil nations in the middle east.
But, I think this is how it all works anyway, the most financially powerful world nations essentially live out of each others pockets, paying off their own debt with investment money given to them by another and then having to do more work to plug that debt.
It seems a rather crap way of doing it but....
Its actually a bit annoying because there were many countries that owed Britain huge amounts of money by the end of the 2nd WW, but it was all wiped clean by the end of it and the only nation that actually made any money was the U.S.
It's a terrible way of doing it, really. However, I don't expect the UK to suddenly demand the $300 billion back from the US. Just as the US never randomly demanded any WW2 debt back from the UK.
The most unsettling part is now the US, UK, and many other nations are not just living out of friends pockets. The US owes China around $800 billion. Any policy change in Beijing can drastically effect the US dollar and the US economy. Just gives me the creeps thinking about it.
Facebook|Twitter
James Lewis wants to say he isnt racist. Racism is a crime, and crime is for black people. - Nick Pollard
|
|
|
|
