copperhead

there is a GIANT difference between a balanced budget, which Clinton pulled off what, once in his 8 years? and being out of debt. Don't quote me on this, but I doubt that the US has been out of debt since WWII.

No list because I'm not yet sure what I want to do. That and I don't have the money right now, I was just wanting to know if something like that exists around here. But here's a hint: bucket seats from a Denali or Escalade

Gator Chomp, more like Gaytor Chomp amirite?

I did some thinking today (while in the middle of buying a Savage .17 HMR) and decided that I'm going to sell some other stuff too. I've got a Ruger 10/22. It's not pretty, but it runs well. I've put several thousand rounds through it, and no idea how much went through it before I got it. Comes with a 25 round mag and if I can find it, a factory 10 rounder. $75 Mossberg 500 12 guage. I think it's called the persuader, not sure though. It's got black synthetic stock, 18.5" smoothbore barrel. If I can find it, it will come with a factory pistol grip. I think i've put under a thousand rounds through this, but I never really kept track. $200 Prices on both are firm.

I was really hoping to get to see OSU play WV

To the threadstarter: For a starter gun, especially for a lady, there are some things to keep in mind. First off, if she is completely inaccurate, she can be easily discouraged. This means you want to get something that doesn't have much recoil. Heavier guns minimize felt recoil, as the gun itself takes some of the shock. Small and/or lightweight guns (such as polymer and compacts) are harder on the hands and make it more likely to be off target. Larger calibers also add to the recoil. I would recommend nothing larger than a 9mm to start, .22LR would be ideal. This also makes it cheaper to shoot. There are .22 revolvers out there, you can't get much more reliable than that. For a semi-auto, there's the Walther p22 (the older ones weren't so reliable, new ones are great). The Rugers are also suppose to be pretty good, but I don't have any experiance with them. There are some .380's out there that are good, not super common though. Try out the Bersa Thunder for that caliber. As for 9mm, there are a million semi-auto's out there. So long as you don't get something cheap like a hi-point you will probably be fine. Now, there are a million different opinions on what is good. Mine is that the best gun is the one that is the most comfortable for YOU (or in this case your wife). Go to Blackwing and rent rent rent until she finds out what she likes best, and stick with it. Just try to stick with fullsize, she will do better with that than a compact.

See, I have no family to worry about. I don't feel the need to start shit, I'm very level headed and have always been able to reason my way out of problems. It's because of this that I've never been in a fight in my life. There have been some close calls, but its just never come down to that for me. My belief on fighting is that it's only neccesary to defend your life. If I can't reason my way out of a fight and the person isn't intimidated by my size, then I have to assume they are trying to kill me, and I feel that I won't stop until the other person is unable to fight back, or I'm dead.

At least i was honest. If I were actually aware of what was going on, I would probably hold the attacker back (I'm a pretty big guy). If I can difuse it, sweet, if not I pull the cell phone out of my pocket and call the po-po. If the attacker has a weapon, then who knows, it's really not possible to say what I would do, as every situation is different. Loaded guns are strewn throughout the house, but I don't have CCL so I don't carry, even on my own property. Being outside means they are worthless unless I can make my way in.

I would stand there confused until it's too late. I'm kinda slow like that.

<3 you Clark You coming out to J-town this weekend?

Possibly even junkyards that specialize in fullsize trucks/SUV's? I'm looking for some stuff out of newer trucks for my '91 Silverado.

Servers?

Sorry, I misunderstood the point of this post. Opened back up.

microcenter wal mart target any small computer shop around columbus anywhere online

And to build off that comment - Paying on a mortgage costs less in the long run. The longer you are paying on it, the more inflation goes up, which means that once you adjust for it you are actually spending less and less to buy the house, while the value is going up. While it would be nice to have my house paid off in 15 years, I'm happy on a 30 year plan. I'll have sold the house long before then, for a nice profit, without first having to pay it off in full. A house can be the easiest investment you make, so long as you buy smart. I plan on making $50k over top of what I paid for this place in roughly 10 years. I'll also walk out with a good bit of what I've paid into it monthly, after having paid off the loan. Sounds like a good deal, when the payments for this place aren't much higher than a zero return apartment rental. Oh, and my tax returns are going to kick ass until I get the interest paid down. WIN WIN WIN.

So long as we have the federal reserve, basing our currency on hopes and dreams, there isn't a finite amount of money either.

People hide money in Swiss and Cayman accounts when they are trying to hide it. Investing does help others. Dumping money into a bank account means the bank in turn has the money to lend to people like you and me to buy stuff like cars and houses. Without that money infused into the system by the rich people you hate so much, I wouldn't have a house right now because nobody would lend it to me. Investing in stocks means that companies have the money to grow. If companies didn't offer shares, they would have to rely solely on single investors, bank loans or investment firms. Guess what, these are the "rich people" you don't like. Without this money, companies can't afford to start, and can't afford to grow, which means NO JOBS. No jobs means your 160 people won't be making squat, because they will be sitting on their ass. Now then, stop inventing statistics. If you want to make an argument at least make it a valid one. The reason you think no one is grasping your viewpoint is because your argument is flawed.

Education is being able to rely on yourself to accomplish things, not ask for CR to do your shit for you. /thread

Eric, shouldn't you be working?

Rich people are bad for the economy, and trickle down doesn’t work. You've all heard me say this before, but here's some fodder: This is an example that trucked through my head a few minutes ago, so I thought I’d write it down. To illustrate, I’ll use the example of Richard Wagoner and some laid off GM line workers. Lets establish annual pay, first: Wagoner; $8,200,000 (2005) Line worker: $50,000 (there abouts. Fair wage for a bolt installer, shut up UAW) For the comparison, we’ll hypothetically knock Wagoner down to $200,000 a year (Poor guy must be starving) With that free’d up $8mil, we can employ 160 line workers (insurance etc not included). Now, ignoring the fact that poorer people tend to have more kids, we’ll just focus on individuals here, in a periodic consumption kinda way, starting with daily. The worth to the economy is measured by how much they spend and put back in. I’ve giving Wagoner a big benefit of the doubt, making him out to be a much better consumer than he probably is. To summarize, we’re comparing an $8.2mil Wagoner vs 160 $50k workers. Daily: -Meals *Wagner, 3 meals x $50 (he don’t eat white castle). $150 into the local economy. *160 workers, 3 meals x $10 (we eat crap, but can afford Arbys because we have jobs) $4800 into the local economy. Workers > Rich Weekly: -Fuel *Wagners jet is thirsty, he burns 300 gallons a week @$3; $900 into the economy. *160 workers. In 2005 the average yearly consumption per capita was about 540 gallons, divided by 52 is 10.4 gallons a week, times 3, times 160. $4992. (You and I know that commuters use much more, and the non-drivers swayed that survey. But I needed data) Workers > Rich Monthly: -Housing *Wagner, lets round way up and say he spends $10,000/mo on his domestic properties. *Workers: You’re not affording more that $1000/mo, so $160,000 a month. Also keep in mind, houses are consumers too, 160 homes will require more plumbers, electricians, masons, etc. -Water: *Wagner: round up to $1000/mo, lets say he had fountains and pools. *Workers: About $50? x160 is $8000 -Energy (Consuming allot of this is bad, but for Republicans sake, we’re only focusing on money) *Wagner, lots of gas and electric for his big place, $2000/mo *Workers: Who pays less than $200avg/mo for a small house? No one. $200x160 is $32,000 -Media *Wagner gets the illest shit, pays $1500 a month on cable, satellite, phone, internet, and movie rentals. *160 workers just want cable and internet, average it at $80/mo (wish mine was that cheap), $12,800 Stuff: -Audio *Wagner gets the top of the line, best you can buy. $0 into the national economy. He damn sure didn’t buy an American stereo/TV. But, lets say that the store/salesman made $2000 off the sale. *Workers, same deal. Our crap is cheaper, but we buy allot more of it. The stores just have to make $13/head off of us to beat out Wagner. Believe me, they make more. Walmart – Sanyo profit margins are much higher than B and O. -Cars *Wagner has an impressive stable….it’s probably all German and Italian. But, giving him the benefit of the doubt, he buys a top’o’the line GM vehicle from every class: $90k XLR, $60k Escalade, and a $200,000k RV. So, $350,000 *Workers: We have our jobs, we can afford a new base G6 for our family: $18k each, $2,880,000. Vacations I give up here, this wont be counted. This will again be a huge skew because Wagners will spend $3000 on airfare to go someplace outside the US, but 160 trips to “the lake” will probably average $500-$1000 each. I’ve spent enough time, but this is enough to get the point. Rich people are bad for the economy because they are poor consumers. “Oh but they invest”...Working capital is not earned income, so it’s not here. Furthermore, they invest some beyond our borders (if they’re smart), so not all of it trickles down. In point of fact, very little is trickling down. Any econ folk want to tell us what our dollar would be worth in the following comparison: Lots of people making a little money A few people making allot of money So, that’s my hair brained idea, and may well be flawed. I leave it to you all to go at it. Something that you cannot argue against: $160 people making $50,000 a year will put ALLOT more money back into the local/national economy than one guy making $2,000,000 In the very limited example above, Workers spend almost twice on annual food consumption than Wagoner spends on everything, all year (1,752,000 vs 627,558). All told, the 160 workers made $8,000,000 and put $7,397,184 of it BACK into the local economy. The $602,816 remaining, divided over 160, means that the workers have $3767 each to spend on clothes, soap, vacations, etc. It all comes back. (Not even mentioning credit debt) Wagoner, on the other hand, made $8,200,000 and only spent $627 558. That is $7,372,442 that does not go back into the economy. “Oh, but he invests it!” Not all of it, but lets go with you guys, lets say he invests it…for how long? It will eventually be cashed out, his $8.2mil is his money. Chances are, he has good enough brokers that he will pull out quite a bit more than he put in. In the end, the economy still loses. I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: Reagan was a charlatain, and “trickle down” only trickles up.

Don't forget I'm in for a server or two. PM me specs on all the options, 1u 2u whatever

DC is in the courts right now. But yeah, handguns were a no-no since the 70's. Long guns were kind of ok. Britain and Oz have both outlawed the private ownership of firearms. I'm not sure exactly how they are set up, but I think that in order to shoot a gun in either country you have to have a special permit, and I believe (again, not sure) that you have to keep your firearms locked up at the range, you can't take them home with you. Ammo can't leave either. Hell, cops in England don't even get guns unless they jump through 11ty billion hoops to be able to. The rest just get dull sticks.

If it's military it will probably be on here: http://www.surplusrifle.com/ Sorry I can't be of any more help. If it's a Mauser, I don't think it's a K98. I've got two M48's which only differ from the K98's in length, and it doesn't look like that at all. That design looks pre-1900, even the Russian Mosins look more modern than that.

Check out the BMW forum, there are a number of issues that you will want to check for, especially with that kind of mileage. On the flip side though, most things have probably already been fixed.

I could be wrong on this, but what I've read leads me to believe that my '91 Chevy truck's lug pattern is 5x5. Is there anything else that uses this pattern? I want some different wheels for it, and I am trying to figure out what I could take wheels off of to swap on.