fusion

I remember reading that too. Can you cite the source?

Yeah it was talked about quite a bit when the changes were made. I'll see if I can't dig it up later if I have time.

His promise, not mine.

I'm comparing Apples to Apples. 8 years of Bush, including Iraq and Afghanistan. I'm not omitting anything. Obama is worse than Bush.

The debt figures didn't include the things I mentioned like Iraq and Afghanistan prior to Obama, it's one of the changes they made.

Iraq and Afghanistan are Obama's impregnated prom dates. He swore he'd pull out.

Seriously though, he had the opportunity to fix that problem. He instead stayed on course.

For the record, since I think you all are getting something wrong here, I'm not a Bush supporter.

You know nothing about the military if you think that Obama could have pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan or even shut down Guantanamo already. Going in is easy pulling out is hard...just ask your Dad.

I never said you're a Bush supporter, but you compared two unalike numbers claiming Obama is causing even larger debt growth already in his term compared to Bush without taking into account the increased accountability of spending in some big areas.

Here are some more percentages for you. When Bush came into office, the debt to GDP ratio was at 57.7%. When he left office, it was at 74.1%, the worst in history. It took him eight years to raise it 16.4%. Obama has raised it to 95.1%, an incredible 21%, in just two years. You really think this is progress?

That take into account the changes that the Obama administration is accounting for like Iraq and Afghanistan, whole costs of Medicare reimbursements, and others?

Amazing what it does to the figure when you suddenly have to account for billions more that wasn't included previously.

You went to Phenix online didn't you.

Oh yeah?

I've witnessed that before with about 9 bikers around the 150mph range in the middle of nowhere once on US42 between South Charleston and Cedarville. A cop was sitting on side of road and didn't do anything. You can see the road fade into the blue sky it's soo long, flat, and straight. MILES of straight.

So, I heard this happened.

What kind of douchebags would do something like that?

The Fed's ban you from owning a gun if you are guilty of certain crimes unless you apply for and are granted relief by the State that convicted you. There is a problem with the way Ohio cleans up these offenses. So the Feds do not recognize the relief. This legislation is designed to clear up that problem. This relates to minor drug offenses.

That one I can see. I must have skimmed over something and missed it then. I assumed (wrongly it seems) the comment was about carrying in establishments that serve alcohol.

how come everyone talks about taking your gun to the bar, but no one talks about the restoration of rights?

Restoration of what right?

yea... I definitely solved this in my head and got 288. I just included the calculator links to help people see why it is right. It is 288. BTW you are using Wolfram Alpha wrong because it gives the correct answer for the proof you provided. I'm sorry if this new fangled technology is too tough for ya

Wolfram Alpha makes an incorrect assumption about a ambiguous problem and ends up providing the wrong answer.

I don't mind Katy Perry, but Kanye just sucks. His flow is horrible, his voice sucks. Back in the day you had to have the voice and flow for hip hop or rap. Today it's just whoever get's marketed the best no matter the genre really.

My reasoning behind posting that was because a lot of people are arguing that because of PEMDAS, it is multiplied and then divided which is not the case. That is what people can't get through their head that PEMDAS is the same as PEDMSA

Ah gotcha.

Once you add 9 and 3 (very first step to simplify this problem), there is no distribution. So no, it isn't a distributive property problem.

Wrong.

The problem isn't an order of operations one, it's a distributive property or multiplication by juxtaposition issue.

The order of operations is nice, but things aren't always that simple.

48÷2*(9+3) = 288

48÷2(9+3) = 2

The guy next to me asked how many of these people that are saying 288 have math degrees?

Multiplication by juxtaposition takes presedence, clear the parentheses completely first before moving on.

Why can't these idiots just stick with the Busa's

Because the Busa is too much bike for them.

So I asked a coworker this morning that has a degree in mathematics and participates in algorithm challenges; he said it was 2 as well.

It's alright if you are doing basic things.

Sometimes I solve really complicated equations on the chalkboards in the classrooms at night after everybody leaves

Jeremi I just got your email and the answer is 288

You notice someone forgot to lock their computer while emptying their trash tonight?

They couldn't have emailed a professor at a real school?

hyuck hyuck hyuck

Meh I just emailed the math department at MIT.

you better get started telling every math teacher your new math rules.

Not my rules. My math teacher was good enough to explain these situations, sorry yours wasn't.

If you go into that other thread linked to the physics forum they mention purplemath.com, another site and a reference to an engineering math book or something that have these and there are plenty of others. It's too ambiguous.

TI Implied Math

http://www.purplemath.com/modules/orderops2.htm

Nick isn't necessarily wrong. It depends on what the original author intended. I've seen it plenty of times where brackets here would be implied:

48÷[2(9+3)] or 48÷((2*9)+(2*3))

Writing it like 48/2(9+3) also can cause problems, because it often gets interpreted as:

48

-------- as in anything to the right of the divisor is a part of the denominator.

2(9+3)

What's missing is context.

Durrrrrrrrr

i'm going to piss a lot of people off here, but who cares. My freedom is not being protected by setting up a haphazard infrastructure in a land where the camel reigns supreme. This did not win me the right to think, write, or say anything. I understand the sacrifice, and respect each soldier... But it's time we stop trying the blanket statement that this is the reason there is freedom. We don't have the money to make mosul up in our own image, and freedom is not created by building a waterpark in baghdad (us taxpayer funded, mind you...).

The bravery of our soldiers is being sold out, and we're given the bill for a parochial mission. I support our soldiers, and by saying that i mean i want them all home with those that they love. Cut military spending by refining the usage of our troops. Have them ready to do what is really in our interest, which might mean showing some mexican crimelords the business. Protect us interests....

this