Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
In New Jersey full-services gas stations are thriving!
Wow, must be a market for them. Is this weather driven?
Hmmm.... uh, not exactly...
I think I'm not getting the joke.....
Simple exerciseWhich brings us back to....Kaz,
You have no intention of addressing the perfectly reasonable question about Labor Supply Elasticity, do you?
Why?
Reading isn't your thing, is it? If you want to discuss it, do it without the ad hominem. Obviously if you can't ask a question without ad hominem, your desire to actually discuss it is not genuine.
How do you possibly not grasp that?
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Once again I ask "where is the ad hominem"?(entirely certain that you will persist in your Sniveling).
Um ... the first two sentences answer the question in the third, idiot.
I don't give a shit. The choice is yours. Discussion or insults. Pick. Either way is fine, gay boy, but stop crying
Simple exerciseWhich brings us back to....Kaz,
You have no intention of addressing the perfectly reasonable question about Labor Supply Elasticity, do you?
Why?
Reading isn't your thing, is it? If you want to discuss it, do it without the ad hominem. Obviously if you can't ask a question without ad hominem, your desire to actually discuss it is not genuine.
How do you possibly not grasp that?
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Once again I ask "where is the ad hominem"?(entirely certain that you will persist in your Sniveling).
Um ... the first two sentences answer the question in the third, idiot.
I don't give a shit. The choice is yours. Discussion or insults. Pick. Either way is fine, gay boy, but stop crying
Define "ad hominem"
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
I guess I will need to specify that DEMONSTRATING involves much more than "repeatedly re-bleating"......you would want to identify the PARTICULAR WORD OR PHRASE which fits the definition.....
Savvy?
And here I thought you were starting to see the light. Not so much.Of course, because it's cheaper to put a dozen self-serve pumps out than to hire somebody to do it for you. Congratulations, you've figured it out. Like I said, it sells itself.Apparently not so much.....I've been washing my own windshields for 35 years.Don't have to, it sells itself.Fabulous...now get out there and really sell it!Rein it in, Speedy. Remember, we're not talking about making a career out of pumping someone's gas. We're talking about a teenager looking to make a little money and get some valuable job skills as well as a work history. If he can do that, he'll be ahead of his classmates when it comes time to get that career started, whatever that may be.
Was there something ambiguous about my sarcasm?
You need to get to work, because judging by the available evidence, your notion is not being embraced.........
Define "ad hominem"Simple exerciseWhich brings us back to....Kaz,
You have no intention of addressing the perfectly reasonable question about Labor Supply Elasticity, do you?
Why?
Reading isn't your thing, is it? If you want to discuss it, do it without the ad hominem. Obviously if you can't ask a question without ad hominem, your desire to actually discuss it is not genuine.
How do you possibly not grasp that?
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Once again I ask "where is the ad hominem"?(entirely certain that you will persist in your Sniveling).
Um ... the first two sentences answer the question in the third, idiot.
I don't give a shit. The choice is yours. Discussion or insults. Pick. Either way is fine, gay boy, but stop crying
Define "ad hominem"
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
I guess I will need to specify that DEMONSTRATING involves much more than "repeatedly re-bleating"......you would want to identify the PARTICULAR WORD OR PHRASE which fits the definition.....
Savvy?
I'm not the one who doesn't know what an ad hominem argument is, you are. You just presented two ad hominem sentences and then asked where you went ad hominem. I'm not doing your work for you. Obviously you have no interest in a genuine discussion.
I offered you the choice. Discuss or insult. That you keep whining you want both isn't of interest to me. It never happens, anyway, the insults always dominate. It also shows you're disingenuous about wanting a discussion in the first place.
How many times do I need to explain the same thing to you? How stupid are you?
If you want to discuss the elasticity of labor, put aside the ad hominem and do it. Or don't. It's your choice. If you pick serious discussion, I won't insult you directly or indirectly and I will continue to not insult you until we finish or you start insulting me.
What about this do you fail to understand?
And here I thought you were starting to see the light. Not so much.Of course, because it's cheaper to put a dozen self-serve pumps out than to hire somebody to do it for you. Congratulations, you've figured it out. Like I said, it sells itself.Apparently not so much.....I've been washing my own windshields for 35 years.Don't have to, it sells itself.Fabulous...now get out there and really sell it!
Was there something ambiguous about my sarcasm?
You need to get to work, because judging by the available evidence, your notion is not being embraced.........
And here I thought you were starting to see the light. Not so much.Of course, because it's cheaper to put a dozen self-serve pumps out than to hire somebody to do it for you. Congratulations, you've figured it out. Like I said, it sells itself.Apparently not so much.....I've been washing my own windshields for 35 years.Don't have to, it sells itself.Fabulous...now get out there and really sell it!
Was there something ambiguous about my sarcasm?
You need to get to work, because judging by the available evidence, your notion is not being embraced.........
Define "ad hominem"Simple exerciseWhich brings us back to....
Reading isn't your thing, is it? If you want to discuss it, do it without the ad hominem. Obviously if you can't ask a question without ad hominem, your desire to actually discuss it is not genuine.
How do you possibly not grasp that?
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Once again I ask "where is the ad hominem"?(entirely certain that you will persist in your Sniveling).
Um ... the first two sentences answer the question in the third, idiot.
I don't give a shit. The choice is yours. Discussion or insults. Pick. Either way is fine, gay boy, but stop crying
Define "ad hominem"
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
I guess I will need to specify that DEMONSTRATING involves much more than "repeatedly re-bleating"......you would want to identify the PARTICULAR WORD OR PHRASE which fits the definition.....
Savvy?
I'm not the one who doesn't know what an ad hominem argument is, you are. You just presented two ad hominem sentences and then asked where you went ad hominem. I'm not doing your work for you. Obviously you have no interest in a genuine discussion.
I offered you the choice. Discuss or insult. That you keep whining you want both isn't of interest to me. It never happens, anyway, the insults always dominate. It also shows you're disingenuous about wanting a discussion in the first place.
How many times do I need to explain the same thing to you? How stupid are you?
If you want to discuss the elasticity of labor, put aside the ad hominem and do it. Or don't. It's your choice. If you pick serious discussion, I won't insult you directly or indirectly and I will continue to not insult you until we finish or you start insulting me.
What about this do you fail to understand?
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Man up, you whinging pussy!
No, you are trivializing as well as generalizing.No, the private sector did not contract between Feb 2001, and Feb 2009.Can't figure out what 1) has to do with the availability of jobs
2) Between Feb 2001 and Feb 2009 private sector CONTRACTED by more than 1 million, while the labor force expanded by more than 8
3) Pretty much the story since 2011.....accelerating in 2014...
Why are you Communists so fucking dishonest?
No, the private sector did not contract between Feb 2001, and Feb 2009.
In fact, between Feb 2001, and Feb 2007, it vastly EXPANDED.
But you seek to paint this as if there was a recession all along. Sigh, the next time a Communist tells the truth will be the first time.
In fact, between Feb 2001, and Feb 2007, it vastly EXPANDED.
The context was private sector employment....
All Employees: Total Private Industries
Post the numbers for Feb. 2001 and Feb 2009...
Just the numbers..... Leave the math to the Numerate.
Again, you're being dishonest. That the 2008 recession wiped out the employment growth from earlier is well known. Sadly, the housing collapse created a panic, which drove the economy FAR lower than it should have gone.
Normally I would have expected a rebound in 2009, from such a panic induced drop, But we had Obama, so it went on until 2014.....
Larry?And here I thought you were starting to see the light. Not so much.Of course, because it's cheaper to put a dozen self-serve pumps out than to hire somebody to do it for you. Congratulations, you've figured it out. Like I said, it sells itself.Apparently not so much.....I've been washing my own windshields for 35 years.Don't have to, it sells itself.
Was there something ambiguous about my sarcasm?
You need to get to work, because judging by the available evidence, your notion is not being embraced.........
Larry always imagines hundreds, maybe thousands of posters are hanging on his every word cheering with every insult and laughing with every joke. We're just tackling dummies for him. It's him they adore. We're like the team that plays the Harlem Globe Trotters ... in his mind ...
You're so fragile your vapors are aggravated by IMAGINED ad hom...Define "ad hominem"Simple exerciseWhich brings us back to....
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Once again I ask "where is the ad hominem"?(entirely certain that you will persist in your Sniveling).
Um ... the first two sentences answer the question in the third, idiot.
I don't give a shit. The choice is yours. Discussion or insults. Pick. Either way is fine, gay boy, but stop crying
Define "ad hominem"
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
I guess I will need to specify that DEMONSTRATING involves much more than "repeatedly re-bleating"......you would want to identify the PARTICULAR WORD OR PHRASE which fits the definition.....
Savvy?
I'm not the one who doesn't know what an ad hominem argument is, you are. You just presented two ad hominem sentences and then asked where you went ad hominem. I'm not doing your work for you. Obviously you have no interest in a genuine discussion.
I offered you the choice. Discuss or insult. That you keep whining you want both isn't of interest to me. It never happens, anyway, the insults always dominate. It also shows you're disingenuous about wanting a discussion in the first place.
How many times do I need to explain the same thing to you? How stupid are you?
If you want to discuss the elasticity of labor, put aside the ad hominem and do it. Or don't. It's your choice. If you pick serious discussion, I won't insult you directly or indirectly and I will continue to not insult you until we finish or you start insulting me.
What about this do you fail to understand?
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Man up, you whinging pussy!
You're the one passing on having a conversation without insults. The pussy being you is pretty damned clear
Larry?And here I thought you were starting to see the light. Not so much.Of course, because it's cheaper to put a dozen self-serve pumps out than to hire somebody to do it for you. Congratulations, you've figured it out. Like I said, it sells itself.Apparently not so much.....I've been washing my own windshields for 35 years.
Was there something ambiguous about my sarcasm?
You need to get to work, because judging by the available evidence, your notion is not being embraced.........
Larry always imagines hundreds, maybe thousands of posters are hanging on his every word cheering with every insult and laughing with every joke. We're just tackling dummies for him. It's him they adore. We're like the team that plays the Harlem Globe Trotters ... in his mind ...
You're so fragile your vapors are aggravated by IMAGINED ad hom...Define "ad hominem"Simple exerciseUm ... the first two sentences answer the question in the third, idiot.
I don't give a shit. The choice is yours. Discussion or insults. Pick. Either way is fine, gay boy, but stop crying
Define "ad hominem"
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
I guess I will need to specify that DEMONSTRATING involves much more than "repeatedly re-bleating"......you would want to identify the PARTICULAR WORD OR PHRASE which fits the definition.....
Savvy?
I'm not the one who doesn't know what an ad hominem argument is, you are. You just presented two ad hominem sentences and then asked where you went ad hominem. I'm not doing your work for you. Obviously you have no interest in a genuine discussion.
I offered you the choice. Discuss or insult. That you keep whining you want both isn't of interest to me. It never happens, anyway, the insults always dominate. It also shows you're disingenuous about wanting a discussion in the first place.
How many times do I need to explain the same thing to you? How stupid are you?
If you want to discuss the elasticity of labor, put aside the ad hominem and do it. Or don't. It's your choice. If you pick serious discussion, I won't insult you directly or indirectly and I will continue to not insult you until we finish or you start insulting me.
What about this do you fail to understand?
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Man up, you whinging pussy!
You're the one passing on having a conversation without insults. The pussy being you is pretty damned clear
here:
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Just UNDERLINE the words which hurt you so.....
Oh, it's so much better than that....No, you are trivializing as well as generalizing.No, the private sector did not contract between Feb 2001, and Feb 2009.Can't figure out what 1) has to do with the availability of jobs
2) Between Feb 2001 and Feb 2009 private sector CONTRACTED by more than 1 million, while the labor force expanded by more than 8
3) Pretty much the story since 2011.....accelerating in 2014...
Why are you Communists so fucking dishonest?
No, the private sector did not contract between Feb 2001, and Feb 2009.
In fact, between Feb 2001, and Feb 2007, it vastly EXPANDED.
But you seek to paint this as if there was a recession all along. Sigh, the next time a Communist tells the truth will be the first time.
In fact, between Feb 2001, and Feb 2007, it vastly EXPANDED.
The context was private sector employment....
All Employees: Total Private Industries
Post the numbers for Feb. 2001 and Feb 2009...
Just the numbers..... Leave the math to the Numerate.
Again, you're being dishonest. That the 2008 recession wiped out the employment growth from earlier is well known. Sadly, the housing collapse created a panic, which drove the economy FAR lower than it should have gone.
Normally I would have expected a rebound in 2009, from such a panic induced drop, But we had Obama, so it went on until 2014.....
The crash made some permanent changes by wiping out life savings, giving people a different view on how they save, how they spend, etc.
Also, corporations were squeezed in a way that caused them to figure out how to be productive without hiring employees.
So, for example, manufacturing output recovered quite rapidly - a steep upward curve showing near total recovery by 2013 or so. On the other hand, manufacturing employment didn't even bottom out until 2010 or 2011, and it has shown weak growth in that same period of industry success.
The point is that the crash, possibly along with other changes within the same years, made changes in our habits of spending and saving and has left us with significantly less employment in some sectors.
Larry?And here I thought you were starting to see the light. Not so much.Of course, because it's cheaper to put a dozen self-serve pumps out than to hire somebody to do it for you. Congratulations, you've figured it out. Like I said, it sells itself.
Was there something ambiguous about my sarcasm?
You need to get to work, because judging by the available evidence, your notion is not being embraced.........
Larry always imagines hundreds, maybe thousands of posters are hanging on his every word cheering with every insult and laughing with every joke. We're just tackling dummies for him. It's him they adore. We're like the team that plays the Harlem Globe Trotters ... in his mind ...
I already explained that one to you
You might have a point if I was a national socialist but im not so. Its no surprise its obvious righties and lefties depend on the stupid and the weak to buy into your bullshit
So the ad hom is manifest, but you cannot speak its name?You're so fragile your vapors are aggravated by IMAGINED ad hom...Define "ad hominem"Simple exercise
Define "ad hominem"
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
I guess I will need to specify that DEMONSTRATING involves much more than "repeatedly re-bleating"......you would want to identify the PARTICULAR WORD OR PHRASE which fits the definition.....
Savvy?
I'm not the one who doesn't know what an ad hominem argument is, you are. You just presented two ad hominem sentences and then asked where you went ad hominem. I'm not doing your work for you. Obviously you have no interest in a genuine discussion.
I offered you the choice. Discuss or insult. That you keep whining you want both isn't of interest to me. It never happens, anyway, the insults always dominate. It also shows you're disingenuous about wanting a discussion in the first place.
How many times do I need to explain the same thing to you? How stupid are you?
If you want to discuss the elasticity of labor, put aside the ad hominem and do it. Or don't. It's your choice. If you pick serious discussion, I won't insult you directly or indirectly and I will continue to not insult you until we finish or you start insulting me.
What about this do you fail to understand?
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Man up, you whinging pussy!
You're the one passing on having a conversation without insults. The pussy being you is pretty damned clear
here:
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Just UNDERLINE the words which hurt you so.....
Ah, I see you came back in from banging your dick on trees to demonstrate your virility. Personally I think it makes you look like a moron banking your dick on a tree. But whatever
No, the private sector did not contract between Feb 2001, and Feb 2009.Can't figure out what 1) has to do with the availability of jobs
2) Between Feb 2001 and Feb 2009 private sector CONTRACTED by more than 1 million, while the labor force expanded by more than 8
3) Pretty much the story since 2011.....accelerating in 2014...
Why are you Communists so fucking dishonest?
No, the private sector did not contract between Feb 2001, and Feb 2009.
In fact, between Feb 2001, and Feb 2007, it vastly EXPANDED.
But you seek to paint this as if there was a recession all along. Sigh, the next time a Communist tells the truth will be the first time.
In fact, between Feb 2001, and Feb 2007, it vastly EXPANDED.
The context was private sector employment....
All Employees: Total Private Industries
Post the numbers for Feb. 2001 and Feb 2009...
Just the numbers..... Leave the math to the Numerate.
Again, you're being dishonest. That the 2008 recession wiped out the employment growth from earlier is well known. Sadly, the housing collapse created a panic, which drove the economy FAR lower than it should have gone.
Normally I would have expected a rebound in 2009, from such a panic induced drop, But we had Obama, so it went on until 2014.....
Some of us have got enough to swing........You're so fragile your vapors are aggravated by IMAGINED ad hom...Define "ad hominem"Simple exercise
Define "ad hominem"
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
I guess I will need to specify that DEMONSTRATING involves much more than "repeatedly re-bleating"......you would want to identify the PARTICULAR WORD OR PHRASE which fits the definition.....
Savvy?
I'm not the one who doesn't know what an ad hominem argument is, you are. You just presented two ad hominem sentences and then asked where you went ad hominem. I'm not doing your work for you. Obviously you have no interest in a genuine discussion.
I offered you the choice. Discuss or insult. That you keep whining you want both isn't of interest to me. It never happens, anyway, the insults always dominate. It also shows you're disingenuous about wanting a discussion in the first place.
How many times do I need to explain the same thing to you? How stupid are you?
If you want to discuss the elasticity of labor, put aside the ad hominem and do it. Or don't. It's your choice. If you pick serious discussion, I won't insult you directly or indirectly and I will continue to not insult you until we finish or you start insulting me.
What about this do you fail to understand?
DEMONSTRATE same in the following sentences...
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Man up, you whinging pussy!
You're the one passing on having a conversation without insults. The pussy being you is pretty damned clear
here:
Have you asked Odorum if it shares your passion for the gold standard?
Any chance you might take a minute from your filibuster to address that Elasticity of Labor Supply question?
Just UNDERLINE the words which hurt you so.....
Ah, I see you came back in from banging your dick on trees to demonstrate your virility. Personally I think it makes you look like a moron banking your dick on a tree. But whatever
Larry?And here I thought you were starting to see the light. Not so much.Was there something ambiguous about my sarcasm?
You need to get to work, because judging by the available evidence, your notion is not being embraced.........
Larry always imagines hundreds, maybe thousands of posters are hanging on his every word cheering with every insult and laughing with every joke. We're just tackling dummies for him. It's him they adore. We're like the team that plays the Harlem Globe Trotters ... in his mind ...
I already explained that one to you
Give me the short version again...
