SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Scumbria who wrote (145623)5/15/2001 2:29:05 PM
From: Johannes Pilch  Respond to of 769670
 
Hehe, but you weren't talking about compounding nuthin' over no dang 30 years. You were talking about a first year increase comparison between two different budgets.

It is a dang mind that is brainwashed into ever skyrocketing budgets that assumes the dang 3.2% difference really will compound over the next dang thirty years. Perhaps it will compound. But perhaps not. We may well get leaders who aim to do things right, which is one of the points on which I initially commented.

My otha point was that the dang 3.2% difference to which you referred don't be showing nuthin' about HOW the dang money is spent. And it don't be showing the circumstances under which the increases ocurred. All it shows is some dang blanket difference of 3.2%. Well then, in that dang case we should savage Lincoln's budget of say, 1862 compared with a budget say a year or two earlier.

The fact is, dang Clinton cut a whole lot of money out of the budget by gutting our dang military. And now America's military is in a sad shape, but hopefully not for long.

You ought to stop all these dang Democrat tricks. Every dang body knows Dems waste a heck of a lot more money than Reps. But, Dem or Rep, they ALL waste buckets of money. But I'd rather my money be wasted by Reps than Dems. At least under the Reps I wouldn't have to worry about funding homoerotic trash and other socially deviant garbage. (grin)