Lucky...

Librarians deal with more than just textbooks. Don't be so fast to pigeon-hole. LOL, I almost missed it! Yes, they have novels, technical books and oh, those pesky talkers to hush up

http://i750.photobucket.com/albums/xx141/Br549x123/TopMargTaxBrktanddetails.jpg I pasted this graph on photobucket from the Wikipedia site. It describes top margian tax brkts - historcal. Anyway, I lined the begining and end of Harding Coolidge and Reagan to show the repetition of history and subsequent disasters. The disasters were different and how we dealt with disasters such as this have changed too, but I think we can see the brilliant economy in-between these 2 runs in spite of WWII, Korea and VN. Amazing how peacetime is economically worse than wartime, the difference are the tax cuts, which have yet to show beneficial.

please don't label me. I'm conservative on the high-noise topics that get discussed here the most (guns, taxes), but should we come to talk about laws that affect people's behavior, you'll find me to be rather liberal. So you're a textbook Libertarian; fiscal conservative and moral liberal. As I've said and you just illustrated, Libertarians and Republicans aren't that different. No slam intended - just the fatcs...

WOW, you're a family values guy like McTurd: http://crooksandliars.com/2008/02/09/john-mccains-crude-chelsea-clinton-joke Maybe McCain has more in common with Limbaugh than Rush thinks. And maybe you do too.

Unbelievable, you say Oct 81 to Oct 88 = 8 years as the data is and always has been structured on an anniversary. You can't transpose Jan 1, 1981 to Dec 31, 1988 into that data set. If you're able to find a debt data set that gives us Dec 31, 1988 then we can merge that with the data I've provided that lists the debt as of Jan 1, 1981 and we can rely on that if you need to be difficult. Only a retarded person cannot see that referencing a set of years that have the same anniversary requires the starting year to be year zero, you even said it yourself with mile markers. I don't believe you're retarded, it's obvious you're being a good little neo-con and coming to your commrade's rescue. Irony is he already backed off and admitted he was wrong and we all moved on. Everyone else, incl conservatives like rhaig are simply shaking their heads at how inane this is to argue that Oct 81 to Oct 88 = 8 years. This forum boasts some very educated and intelligent people yet we find ourselves arguing grade school mathematics. You might find this helpful: http://www.mathsyear2000.co.uk/

If you had a student so obstinate that they failed to believe that with the same anniversary you do not count the first year as a year, but the zero starting point, what would you do? Suggest they change major to political science. LOL and then join the young Republicans club.

If you had a student so obstinant that they failed to believe that with the same anniversary you do not count the first year as a year, but the zero starting point, what would you do?

But no one can help you, Scarecrow. Haha, or perhaps you're that lion character. We know you're the Tinman, come on, if you're Republican / Libertarian that must apply.

Correct, but that's how the young man gets over the turmoil in his mind, because it was the INTRUDER'S actions that forced the young man to do it. It's not like the young man shot someone without a valid reason, or as a criminal act, or out of hatred. He's got nothing to be ashamed of. Yea, I don;t get Rush on this one. Now if you shoot an innocent bystander in this process I get the guilt, here I don't see a reason to feel bad at all.

Off on a tangent a bit but, I would find it hard to cope if I had to do what this young man did regardless of his age. His age would seem to me to make it even harder to live with even though the man is still alive. Why? I doubt he feels anything but "pride" in protecting his family...Plus he must either be lucky, or a good shot, to only wound someone with an assualt rifle! keep in mnd, this is the son of a cop, he deals with the pocibilty pf death eveyrr day...I seriously doubt it bothered him at all! As for pride; absolutley. As for the assault rifle, most are smaller caliber than hunting rifles, so I'm not surprised. Same with assault pistols, most are small. Now come the Desert Eagle comments. I did say most.

Says the guy who made the last 6 posts. Next thing they'll be teaching you how to read (now that you can count)

How DARE that peasant allude to you being mistaken! Of course, the ONLY reason you can say you're right is due to inauguration being 3 weeks after New Year's. Doesn't matter when it is as long as it's the same date every year. November 17 1981 to November 17 1989 is still 8 years. June 9 1981 to June 9 1989 is still 8 years. The umpteenth of Octember 1981 to the umpteenth of Octember 1989 is still 8 years. Did you and timmy have the same math teacher? Mine realized that the only way you can talk about 1989 in regard to Reagan is due to those 3 weeks - funny how you don't mention that anymore. Amazing how the debt chart I posted goes from Jan 1 1981 to Jan 1 1989, so now you and your semantic games can just stop.

How DARE that peasant allude to you being mistaken! Of course, the ONLY reason you can say you're right is due to inauguration being 3 weeks after New Year's. Jesus, Mike, you fucked up, admiitted it and we let it go. Now you feel the need to defend your cronie and pull yourself back into the mix? Bizzare.

Glad to see your handlers are letting you out, perhaps the vitamin D will help.

How many years were there in the decade of the 80's? It is 1980 to 1989. 10 years. If you take out 1980 and 1989 what you have left is 1981 to 1988. Eight years. My math is fine. Irrelevant to the problem at hand. See rhaig's explanation if you don't like mine. Try again, and do it properly. We're talking length of presidential terms in this thread, something you seem to have a really hard time grasping. Reagan was inaugurated Jan 1981 and left office Jan 1989. 1989 - 1981 = 8. 8 years is the length of 2 presidential terms. QED You are simply WRONG. (The process is called SUBTRACTION. Most people learn it in grade school) With an exact day/month, not like you taking Jan 1 to Dec 31. Context is everything. A series of years that consist of 1981 to 1988 is 8 years. We did, that was pages ago in the fiscal data. If you didn't jump in on page 5 or 6 yopu would have seen that; don't you feel as silly as you look now? Yep, but if you we discussing birthdays, fiscal years, etc you would consider anniversaries and entirely relevant. Next time do yourself a favor and actually read the thread and context.

How many years were there in the decade of the 80's? It is 1980 to 1989. 10 years. If you take out 1980 and 1989 what you have left is 1981 to 1988. Eight years. My math is fine. From Jan 1, 1980 to Dec 30, 1989 that quantifies 10 years. When discussing timelines with recurring dates, birthdays, fiscal years, holidays, etc then the day/month must be referenced. Your abstraction is boring. Merely ignoring what I state about exact dates doesn;t make it go away. The issue you jumped in late upon requires an OCT 1 or thereabouts reference, not a floating date. Now if you can find debt referecne for Jan 1 or Jan 20 1981 and then find debt ref for Dec 31, 1988 that would be close enough, but the data we referenced in this thread is either for Oct 1-ish OR Jan 1, so your attempt is void.

Perhaps this would be more fitting for his sig line: http://www.threadbombing.com/data/media/27/arguing.jpg

It doesn't matter since I'm not counting from the state border, I'm just starting at MM 81 and ending at MM 88. It could be MM 127 to MM 134; I was using teh MM to match the year for clarity. Either way, it's 7 miles from MM 81 to MM 88, 7 miles from MM 127 to MM 134, the border reference is irrelevant. I'm calling the MM post sign, just as the year. You're the one with the 8-day week logic, we all see it but you. It depends upon how you spin it. From Jan 1, 1980 to Jan 1, 1990 there are 10 years, if you leave the day and month open it's up to your abstraction and spin. Dude, everyone sees your silliness as either deperation or actual inability to understand, let it go.

Worth noting that we say one is in the 6th grade on the first day of class, not after the year is completed. We are not consistent on these measures without context, making this entire discussion one of the lamer of the week (and this was a pretty lousy week for engaging threads). We have no problem getting data by the day for both the debt and inflation. We could have saved ourselves all this crap by just adding those dates. But you don't say that child has completed the 6th grade on his first day. I did include the date several times. Also, when you come in in the middle of a conversation, it is your duty to understand the context and once it has been explaoned to you, your duty to not defend ridiculousness. Hell, even Mike admitted he fucked up and we all moved on, then Timmyfitz carried the extinguished torch.

there are 8 years listed there, but the time span between a date in the first year, and a date in the last year, is only 7 years. OK, I could have scrolled down. Thank you. Hard to argue issues when we get stuck on litterally 5th grade elements. He's being abstract, he came in late and tried to argue an element that doesn't work with fiscal years.

I'm confused... did you typo? in the first sentence you imply 81-88 is not 7 years, then in the second, you imply that it's obvious that it's 7 years. because it is indeed 7 years. No, I fucked up, I meant: If you really think Oct 81 to )ct 88 is 8 years then I honestly feel for you. I could ask grade school kids that and they could tell me it's 7 years. After beating this 5th grade dead horse it's getting tiresome. Please PM Timmyfitz and tell him that this retarded misdirection is taking from the issue.

So if it's monday, it won't be monday again for 8 days. Mon (1) - Tues (2) - Wed (3) - Thurs (4) - Fri (5) - Sat (6) - Sun (7) - Mon (8). Wow, an 8 day week; must be a corporate thing to get more productivity; those pesky Republicans and their fuzzy math. I'mnot saying it is, I'm saying it's stupid to count the first day as an entire day. And yet you make that same moron mistake I'm illustrating by saying this: 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88=8 years (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) You can't count the first year, esp when we are talking fiscal years, birthdays, etc. that have the same starting date. Now if you are talking Jan 1, 1981 to Dec 31, 1988 that is essentially 8 years, but this context is of fiscal years that start on the same date and you knew that. OK, so now include a day and month with each year. Of course you won't do this as you're being abstract. Remember the context? To bring this home, you're at mile marker 81, you drive until mile marker 88; HOW MANY MILES HAVE YOU DRIVEN? Of course you will ignore this question. What you're doing is saying you're 1 foot beyond mile marker 80 and you drive until 1 foot before mile marker 89 and you call that 8 miles. But I will be intersted to watch you answer: To bring this home, you're at mile marker 81, you drive until mile marker 88; HOW MANY MILES HAVE YOU DRIVEN? Yea, you're not smarter than a 5th grader let alone a PhD. And I know how you get there, you count ALL of 1981 and ALL of 1988, but in this context we are starting and stopping at the same day and month, so your fantasy is irrelevant. The fact that your abstraction tells otherwise is irrelevant, the topic and context is here, you're the only one supporting this inanity; even Mike agreed he fucked up yet you feel you need to revive the month-dead cat.

RAW DEBT - UNADJUSTED: 09/30/1981 * 997,855,000,000.00 09/29/1989 2,857,430,960,187.32 Difference: 1.86T Here's a chart of raw debt numbers that goes from the 1st of every year for more precision: http://www.marktaw.com/culture_and_media/TheNationalDebtImages/TheNationalDebt.htm 1/1/1981 $1,028,729,000,000.00 1/1/1989 $2,857,430,960,187.32 Difference: $1.83T ...... So you see the data is about the same regardless of where you get it. Clinton's last 4 years showed a surplus, Right before LBJ left office there was a surplus, supposedly from VN financing comming in. Other than that you have to go to Eisenhower who had 3 years of supluses. Imagine that, tax increasers/maintainers leave supluses, tax cutters leave deficits. As for debt adjusted for inflation, here's a graph that adjusts it for 1950 dollars and the next graph for 2000 dollars. http://www.marktaw.com/culture_and_media/TheNationalDebt.html A little more than 1/2 way down. Here's the same graphical data morte easily found: http://chuckelaw.blogspot.com/2008_10_01_archive.html#6986263392072533032 I like the editorial: I downloaded it this morning after listening to a radio show which traced the country's debt orgy back to Reagan. While I am happy to believe that Reagan started it all, I thought I ought to check it out. Sure enough, adjusted for inflation our national debt remained fairly constant, even through the Johnson administration and the Vietnam war. The spiral upwards begin shortly after 1980 and continues unabated until the Clinton administration when it abates and retreats. It then skyrockets over the last eight years. You don't have to like the editorial to see the graph illustrates that at the end of WWII until Reagan the debt stayed flat, got a reprieve under Clinton and slammed even worse under GWB.

81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88.........Looks like 8 years to me. (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) So according to timmy math the distance from milepost 81 to milepost 82 on the highway is 2 miles. 81, 82 (1) (2) In fact, milepost 81 is 1 mile from itself: 81 (1) No wonder Reagan and Bush ran up huge deficits. Right and if you were there when Jebus died, that would be zero, 1 year later it would be 1 A.D., another year would be 2 A.D. So the point is: - October 1981 is the zero mark, - October 1982 is the 1st anniversary, - October 1983 is the 2nd anniversary, - October 1984 is the 3rd anniversary, - October 1985 is the 4th anniversary, - October 1986 is the 5th anniversary, - October 1987 is the 6th anniversary, - October 1988 is the 7th anniversary. If you are just covering for a fuck up; cool. If you can't understand simple chronological indexing then you really have a poor math IQ, perhaps < 6th grade. BTW, "

So if it's monday, it won't be monday again for 8 days. Mon (1) - Tues (2) - Wed (3) - Thurs (4) - Fri (5) - Sat (6) - Sun (7) - Mon (8). Wow, an 8 day week; must be a corporate thing to get more productivity; those pesky Republicans and their fuzzy math.