Darkling

quote:Originally posted by Takvah: You do understand Jaguar that in everything you said there is not one fact. This is the same line of fear that has been spewed since 9/11. I think that any President would be capable of defending this nation against terror. I think that ANY President with the resources of this nation, its people and our WILL could repell ANY threat and would.Oh you mean like how Clinton REFUSED to take Bin Laden into custody because he didn't want to derail the Peace process with Israel & the Palestinians? He was more concerned with leaving his Mark in history, than bringing a known terrorist to justice. Yes, ANY president indeed. quote:Originally posted by Takvah: You act like there is some divinity that has a hand over Bush making him more capable than anyone to defend this nation. Wrong. If anything he has ignited the hatred that is harbored not just in the Middle East but GLOBALLY against this nation. Oh yes, you're completely right, Before Bush everyone LOVED the U.S., and now they All Hate us!! Please WAKE UP, The entire world has hated us since the 70's, why? Because we have the BEST economy, the Lowest unemployment, the most disposable income, the most of EVERYTHING and everyone is Jealous of us. quote:Originally posted by Takvah: A guy in a cave has better health care than the average American You OBVIOUSLY have never been to any other country, or at least a hospitol in another country. Let's see: 1a. In the U.S. if you need a bypass, they schedule you for Outpatient Surgury and get it done the same day. 1b. In Canada you go on a waiting list and suffer for approximately 3-6 Months depending on your age (the older the longer) and they literally hope you die before it's your turn to get the procedure done. 2a. In the U.S. if you get hit by a car, you go to a Trauma center to get stabalized. 2b. In the rest of the world, most countries don't even HAVE trauma centers! 3a. In the U.S. if you have AIDS, and no insurance, you qualify for assistance with medication to the point to where your life is DRAMATICALLY extended. 3b. In Africa, you simply die. 4a. In the U.S. If healthcare cost rise, hospitols increase their fees because it's legal to do so. 4b. In England, if healthcare costs rise, hospitols simply shut down and REFUSE to take more patients because it's legal to do so. 5a. In the U.S. you can get healthcare even if you can't afford it because you're unemployed (or other reasons). 5b. In South America, if you're unemployed, You're screwed. (which between 20-40% are "Officially" Unemployed. 6a. In Columbia, They divert money from the Military, Police and National Security to pay for National Healthcare. That's good because since there's practically no LAW ENFORCEMENT, Smugglers, Drug dealers, Militants and the Lawless, run with impunity putting plenty in the hospitols. 6b. In the U.S. we feel safe.

quote:Originally posted by Takvah: You do understand Jaguar that in everything you said there is not one fact. This is the same line of fear that has been spewed since 9/11. I think that any President would be capable of defending this nation against terror. I think that ANY President with the resources of this nation, its people and our WILL could repell ANY threat and would.Oh you mean like how Clinton REFUSED to take Bin Laden into custody because he didn't want to derail the Peace process with Israel & the Palestinians? He was more concerned with leaving his Mark in history, than bringing a known terrorist to justice. Yes, ANY president indeed. quote:Originally posted by Takvah: You act like there is some divinity that has a hand over Bush making him more capable than anyone to defend this nation. Wrong. If anything he has ignited the hatred that is harbored not just in the Middle East but GLOBALLY against this nation. Oh yes, you're completely right, Before Bush everyone LOVED the U.S., and now they All Hate us!! Please WAKE UP, The entire world has hated us since the 70's, why? Because we have the BEST economy, the Lowest unemployment, the most disposable income, the most of EVERYTHING and everyone is Jealous of us. quote:Originally posted by Takvah: A guy in a cave has better health care than the average American You OBVIOUSLY have never been to any other country, or at least a hospitol in another country. Let's see: 1a. In the U.S. if you need a bypass, they schedule you for Outpatient Surgury and get it done the same day. 1b. In Canada you go on a waiting list and suffer for approximately 3-6 Months depending on your age (the older the longer) and they literally hope you die before it's your turn to get the procedure done. 2a. In the U.S. if you get hit by a car, you go to a Trauma center to get stabalized. 2b. In the rest of the world, most countries don't even HAVE trauma centers! 3a. In the U.S. if you have AIDS, and no insurance, you qualify for assistance with medication to the point to where your life is DRAMATICALLY extended. 3b. In Africa, you simply die. 4a. In the U.S. If healthcare cost rise, hospitols increase their fees because it's legal to do so. 4b. In England, if healthcare costs rise, hospitols simply shut down and REFUSE to take more patients because it's legal to do so. 5a. In the U.S. you can get healthcare even if you can't afford it because you're unemployed (or other reasons). 5b. In South America, if you're unemployed, You're screwed. (which between 20-40% are "Officially" Unemployed. 6a. In Columbia, They divert money from the Military, Police and National Security to pay for National Healthcare. That's good because since there's practically no LAW ENFORCEMENT, Smugglers, Drug dealers, Militants and the Lawless, run with impunity putting plenty in the hospitols. 6b. In the U.S. we feel safe.

What percentage would you say would be online all at once?

Well their subscriber base must have grown tremendously for having 10K users on all at once, it has to be at least 4 to 10X the number of users online simultaniously I think. Plus now that it's back to being in the hands of a small independant house, the overhead isn't as high and they don't need as many subscribers to make it profitable. One other thing, I initially subscribed with the free 7 day offer they had, during peak hours I had trouble signing on because they limited free accounts to no more than 800 users at a time, so the 10K simultanious users isn't thousands of free accounts going on at the same time as the paying accounts.

Well I was playing eve a little earlier and there the servers hit 10,000 simultanius users, so much for them going down. BTW, eve may have been losing money due to low exchange rates between US dollars and Icelandic cash, but the recent increase to 14.95 from 12.95 probably took care of that. Also, one last thing, the Gamestop that I bought Eve from, had it listed at the 5th best selling title out of all the PC games, though the low $15.00 price tag may have had something to do with that.

quote:Originally posted by Cmdr. WeeGee: I disagree, I just turned my account back on a couple of weeks ago, and I've got to say I'm impressed. In January I do remember that it was really unbalanced however. They've fixed most of those issues.I've been thinking of turning my account back on, now that they've announced the Space expansion, but is it really any better now?

quote:Originally posted by Kalshion: Not surprising either, seeing how France was one of those who supported Saddam (buying stuff from him and also giving him money) The reason the French didn't want to get involved was (follow the money) because they bought BILLIONS of dollars worth of Oil from Iraq, and more importantly, sold BILLIONS of dollars worth of overpriced food to them in the "Food for Oil" program. Of course Saddam got all sorts of kickbacks on these deals, which is how he was able to build his Mile long palace with the huge underground bunker.

quote:Originally posted by Grizzle: $ilk, do some research on Clintons response to all the terrorist activities. He WAS active and not only that, the republican congress stonewalled his first Anti-Terrorism bill. You also fail to account for the fact that a lot of governments failed to cooperate when Clinton asked for extradition of known terrorists. The Sudanese wanted us to lift sanctions we imposed on them for harboring terrorists so they offered us Bin Laden in exchange for lifting them. Should we have taken the offer? Probably, but hindsight is 20-20 and who knows what would have happened had Osama been captured/killed at that time.Do the research huh, maybe you should take your own advice. Here's just a little research for you. quote:Politicized intelligence . . . By Mansoor Ijaz: [QB] Sudan's president, Omar Hasan El Bashir, made an unconditional offer of counterterrorism assistance to the vice chairman of the September 11 Commission, then Rep. Lee Hamilton, Indiana Democrat, through my hands on April 19, 1997. Five months later on Sept. 28, 1997, after an exhaustive interagency review at the entrenched bureaucracy level of the U.S. government, Mrs. Albright announced the U.S. would send a high-level diplomatic team back to Khartoum to pressure its Islamic government to stop harboring Arab terrorists and to review Sudan data on terrorist groups operating from there. As the re-engagement policy took shape, Susan E. Rice, incoming assistant secretary of state for East Africa, went to Mr. Clarke, made her anti-Sudan case and asked him to jointly approach Mr. Berger about the wisdom of Mrs. Albright's decision. Together, they recommended its reversal.The decision was overturned on Oct. 1, 1997. [QB]That's right an UNCONDITIONAL offer to hand over Bin-Laden. Why didn't they take it, read my post above and you will understand.

quote:Originally posted by $iLk: You neglect to account that Bin Laden was offered to the U.S. on a silver platter and Clinton said "No". The problem was created by Clinton, ignored by Clinton, and festered and grew bigger under Clinton. He could have stopped it when it was a weed... as opposed to what we have today. This is what REALLY get's me, why didn't Clarke right a book right after the bombing on how Clinton refused to take Bin Laden into custody, even though he knew that he had something to do with the Cole's bombing? If you're wondering, "Hmmm, why didn't Clinton take Bin Laden into custody?" well, I'll tell you why, because he was afraid of how the UN would respond along with the Palestinians, he wanted to be known as the President who brought peace to the middle east and didn't want anything to deter from that ambition, not even arresting a known criminal who was implicated in the bombing and murder of U.S. Servicemen.

quote:Originally posted by Grizzle: Clinton did take steps to fight Al Qaeda only you all were too busy trying to impeach the man to notice. .... Here's a thought, lets blame the congress, Ken Starr and anyone else that wasted 8 years of our governments time trying to impeach the President rather than let him deal with the real issues.You're absolutely right, I mean between Jennifer Flowers, Monica Lewinsky and all the other bimbo's in his life, He didn't have a lot of extra time, so we should be ashamed of ourselves for getting in his way. Who kmows, Clinton may have had enough time to Capture Bin-Laden, Destroy Al Qaeda AND get another Bimbo or two's dresses soiled. If only we had let him do his job

quote:Originally posted by echo: Darkling True.. Also, another interesting note. The procedure involved in "Partial Birth Abortions" requires that the doctor take deliver the baby up to the neck, where many times the baby will draw a breath, while the doctor sticking a needle in the back of his head to suck out his brains. I wonder what this "Pastor's" take on this is. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This I have to say brought tears to my eyesBelieve me when I tell you that the first time I found out this procedure was legal, It brought tears to my eyes as well. The sad part about it is that the reasons that people use for this late term procedure are many times utterly rediculous. I remember once instance that I had read about where a woman had this procedure done because the baby had a birth defect where the baby's intestines where outside of his stomach. Surprisingly, the old Attorney General, that served Under Bush Senior, I can't remember his name now, but he had delivered a baby YEARS ago, with the same defect, but he performed surgury on her while she was still in her mothers womb to repair the damage. Later in life when he was having surgery, SHE ASSISTED another doctor in operating on him, poetic justice that he save her life, and she in turn his. My point is that if he had performed this life saving procedure so long ago, why couldn't the same be done with our so called "Modern" medicine?

quote:Originally posted by Wolferz: gee it's amazing how elected officials cowtow to religious conservatives. Why? Cuz they have lots of money and influence. Schools across the country do not teach the basic knowledge that kids need to succeed. I'm talking free thought here boys and girls. The basic math, english, and spelling skills that one needs to learn, to accomplish free thought. Instead they create standards and curricullums to be pounded into your head for the sole purpose of having you parrot the information by rote.You mean how the Teachers Unions want the government to stay in control of who goes to what school, by blocking vouchers at every turn? How they take away our freedom of choices for our kids? It's not just the "religious conservatives" that these guys pander to, it's everyone who has any power or influence. The reason the U.S. has the best college system in the world is because it's not controlled by the government, there is plenty of competition and students by and large can pick the college that they go to. Sure there will always be schools like Harvard that have 100 applicants for every one that gets in, but there are plenty of great colleges out there that are begging for more students. Until our Elementary, Middle and High schools operate in the same manner, we will always end up with an inferior schools system for our kids to go to. If communism has taught us anything, it is that Government controlled enterprises are inefficient and can't deliver the same level of service that private enterprises do, and until we RE-LEARN that lesson, we are doomed to failure in our public school system.

quote:Originally posted by Kartoffel: It's a fact of life that politicians will lie. Clinton lied. Bush has lied. People on both sides have lied.Clinton admitted to a lie, Kerry was obviously caught in a lie, exactly what was it that Bush lied about? Your whole "Conspiracy to attack Iraq" deal? That may be debated but it's not a fact, just because someone writes some words in a book that have not been coroborated by any witnesses, doesn't mean that it's a fact.

quote:Originally posted by Jaguar: This may have been posted somewhere already, but I think this is a good spot to post it again. quote: Subject: Re: Fw: Gen. Hawley's pol. incorrect MUST READ! Well Here's the actual quote found here: quote:The Real Words of General Richard Hawley from TruthOrFiction.com: 1) Goodness, Evil and Relativity: There are some really good people in this world. They volunteer to help those who need it, and ask nothing in return. There are also some really bad people in this world. They exploit those who need help, or who have less wit or "charisma", and motivate them to join in committing unspeakable acts of cruelty against people they don't even know. Then there are the rest of us. Average people who try each day to do no harm, to provide for their families, to do an occasional act of kindness. The evil that was perpetrated against our land on 9/11 was the product of Mullahs who see our prosperity and power as a threat to their control over the uneducated Muslim masses on whose shoulders they ride through life. And so they preach hate. They are evil. 2) Violence begets violence: It's true. Violence does beget violence. But sometimes there is no alternative but to confront those who would perpetrate evil acts against us. This is one of those times. We are blessed to have courageous men and women willing to put their lives on the line to track down and annihilate those who have been so imbued with evil as to be beyond redemption. But violence is not a strategy. It is a necessary and fully justified reaction to an unimaginable threat. But it is not a strategy. If we are to win this war, we must defeat the Mullahs. And to defeat the Mullahs, we must find ways to separate them from their uneducated flocks. We cannot kill all those who have been taught to hate us, nor should we wish to. Far better to change their minds than to change their state of being. 3) The intelligence community let us down: Well, maybe just a little. Lots of senior and not so senior intelligence people became just as enamored of high tech gadgets as their political masters. The protests over our evisceration of the human intelligence component of the agency were not very loud or forceful. Keeping spies on the ground is a high risk and often dirty business, and it wasn't just liberal politicians who didn't have much stomach for it. 4) Poverty is the breeding ground for terrorists: No, it isn't; but religious extremism is. The Mullahs fear our wealth and power because it shows that a secular society with democratic institutions and a free market economy can do a better job of taking care of its peoples' needs, both spiritual and physical, than the oppressive Islamic regimes that they aspire to lead. The Mullahs are the problem, not poverty, but poverty does make it easier for the Mullahs to spread their evil - as do governments that tolerate and even reinforce their hateful message. 5) Profiling: We are at war here! We are not talking about traffic stops. If we were at war with Iceland, I would expect those charged with our defense to pay very close attention to any Icelander who ventured near our shores. In this war I expect them to pay very close attention to Muslims with ties to the places that spew hatred against us. Random checks when there are no such obvious targets available are a good way to keep the evil ones guessing, but let's not make small children and grandmothers take their shoes off while we watch far more likely candidates walk aboard unchecked. 6) Resolutions: A. Never forget that what happened on September the 11th of 2001 was an act of war. B. Never sit silently by while someone tries to justify what happened on that day as an understandable reaction to U.S. policies in the Middle East or elsewhere. C. Fly our nation's flag proudly - it represents this world's greatest hope to move beyond the pain and suffering that inflict so many across the globe. Richard E. Hawley General, USAF, Retired Former Commander, Air Combat Command

quote:Originally posted by Onikaze: Darkling , that is incorrect, the 9200 is a DX8.1 chip only. The 9600 on the other hand is DX9 compliant. I was sure of this , but I double checked on ati's product page before posting. Looks like you are correct, I had originally checked on CompUSA's Website and it said that the 9000 was DX8.1, but the 9200 was DX9 but after checking ATI's website, I saw that information was mistaken. Apparently, the 9000 is even better than the 9200 SE, since it has higher bandwidth and a higher clock rating, but the 9200 is a direct replacement for the 9000. Confusing to say the least.

There are a couple of open source projects going on in space shooters now, here's a few of them: http://openparsec.sourceforge.net/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/xpilotgame/ http://sourceforge.net/projects/vegastrike/ Vegastrike in particular looks like it has a lot o potential, it's something of a Privateer knock off and they're currently working on a MP version.

quote:Originally posted by Sorren: Silk, how do you know that these people weren't born that way? You seem convinced otherwise! So what you are saying is that sexual attraction is something that is built into us when we are born? Does that mean that a pedofile is that way "Natuarally"? Does that mean that a person into Beastiality is that way "Naturally"? How about someone who cheats on his wife, or her husband? Is that person just "Natuarally" attracted to someone outside their marriage? I've been with my wife now for almost 6 years, sure I've seen other women that I've found attractive, but it doesn't mean that I'm going to sleep with them, because all of a sudden I have this sexual desire to do something. God gave us free will, he allows us to experience temptation, but that doesn't mean that we are supposed to give in to it. My sister used to date this guy Joe, she was with him for 4 years and didn't like where the relationship was going so she broke up with him. He was so broken up over it that he vowed never to date another woman again. A few years ago I saw him with a man that looked like he was going through a sex change. Was this guy born "Gay". I don't buy it. What I see is a guy that was hurt, and decided to choose an alternative lifestyle. The human mind is an amazing thing, and it can "create" for you almost anything you desire, and it can desire even the most preverse and dispicable things, but just because some minds desire something, doesn't mean that we should condone or legalize them.

quote:Originally posted by Grizzle: Can we stop with the straw man arguments about pedophilia and incest etc...? Last I heard those things were illegal, and being a homosexual is NOT.So what if they are illegal, what makes the above example that I said illegal? It's the fact that everyone "Knows" that it's wrong for a father to marry his daughter, even if she is 30 and a "consenting adult" quote:Originally posted by Grizzle: When one of you can come up with a sound legal argument as to why two consenting adults in a long term, committed relationship shouldn't benefit in the same ways other members of society do then have at it.There used to be "sound legal arguments" for the legality of slavery, did it make it right? I don't think so. Just because there is a "sound legal argument" for something doesn't make it right or wrong, morality trancends those types of arguments and just as Slavery was wrong years ago, when it was legal, 2 men getting married is just as wrong as the 30yr old woman who married her dad. quote:Originally posted by Grizzle: Since I have no personal stake in the issue it really doesn't matter how it turns out. I just think it's sad that so many are comfortable relegating a group of individuals to second class citizen status simply because they fear what they don't understand.I don't have to understand something to know that it's wrong. quote:Originally posted by Grizzle: As I said in my first post, it's inevitable and the sooner we all get used to the idea the smoother it will go.I've pretty much said all I care to say on the matter. You guys can continue on and have fun with all your negative "what-if" scenarios. Maybe you're right, there is so much apathy in the US, that even though the vast majority of Americans feel as I do, the left could win on this one, simply for making so much noise with it.

quote:Originally posted by street: Dont know about some of you guys, but in the 70's I spent less than 1/4 of my income on living, as opposed to the 3/4 I spend today...Funny, but though my skills have increased throughout the years, the pay scale verses cost of living has had little increase, due to "REAGAN-OMICS".I don't see how that is possible. quote:Originally posted by street: People may be able to afford more, than in the 80's(only if they were out of work then, with the government induced recession), but the 60's to 70,s is where you should place your comparrison chart. That was the up(boom times). We have YET to fully recover from the RECESSION of the 80'sYou've got to be kidding me, back in the 60's the average family lived in a 1100 sq. ft. home, vs today's 1800 Sq. Ft. average, average family back then had 1 car vs. today 2,.. these days we have cell phones, cable, all sorts of safety features just tons of things that we didn't have back then. We may be paying more for what we have, but it's because we have more than ever. quote:Originally posted by street: And if you take the state of affairs from 60 to 70 and do a base by base comparison, throughout the years up to present, you will see that the RECESSIVE points to lie within, and in response to the Republican agendas. Sorry, you would have to exceed several hundred thousand dollars a year, to be affected by the democratic taxations, And then your income would be such, it would be of no consequence to your livelyhood. You mean how today we have more disposable income than EVER before? quote:Originally posted by street: You see here a small example: The mortgage rates shot up from 1980-1988 to very extreme highs(more than double those of the previous 20 years);HOWEVER, in 1979, the same home you could purchase for about 5000 will cost you around 50000 today(10x). The new car, you could buy for 2 to 3000 Dollars will cost you 20-30000(10x) today.Let's say that the prices would have gone up half as much to only 25K, but the Interest rates had stayed the same as back then, your payment at 18% would be at $376 mo. But at 50k at todays interst rates of 6% your payments are only $299 Mo. So even though the prices have gone up, the lower interst rates have MORE than made up for the difference. quote:Originally posted by street: And minimum wage only increased approximately 100%(2x) since those time periods. Minimum wage is the guage by which all income increase is guaged.What are you a teenager, I haven't earned minimum wage since I was 15, over 20 Yrs ago. Average income is the guage by which all income increases are gauged, most people today that earn minimum wage are not heads of household and the VAST majority of them are teenagers earning extra money for the movies. quote:Originally posted by street: By the way, High Prime interest rates are not necessarily a BAD thing. One can MAKE money with those rates(cd,MMC,Savings etc.). Only those who spend money, which they do not have, get hurt by those high rates(Loans). Spending money which you HAVE, is the only way to make legitimate progress in financial stability within the economy.You MUST be joking, high prime rates kills off investment into capitol outlays which is responsible for nearly all new jobs that are created. Low cost of capitol=jobs creation, high costs=jobs destruction. You've obviously never taken an economics course. quote:Originally posted by street: And this is NOT done by creating thousands of minimum wage jobs, but Jobs which pay comparable to the cost of living.And who would create these jobs with your high cost of capitol? If you can get a great rate of return at the bank, what's your incentive for investing a risky stock that will open more factory doors? quote:Originally posted by street: Creation of those REAL jobs is Defeated through open boarders to Illegal immigrants, and Trade agreements which move our business over seas, for lower wage benefits to large coorporate entities.First of all, we are at practially full employment, so there are many jobs, such as dishwashers, garbage collection, bus boys and many other jobs that would go completely unfilled. I know that you think it would be a good thing for these people to simply pay much more to fill the positions, but the only thing that would happen is that prices would end up going way up and inflation will again be destroying wealth ala Carter years. quote:Originally posted by street: oh well, guess I'm in the wrong field of employment. Too late to change my long term goals. AGAIN it will be to late, for me to start a new strategy for my later years(when the present administration takes all my social security away) I might just have to blame myself for my dilimma. I should have known 35 years ago, they were lying to me about my future.(sarcasim at its best)but of course, I was just a young kid, who believed what they taught in STATE controlled schools. Do what you love and I'm sure you could find a way to make it profitable.

quote:Originally posted by Sorren: Incest had to be the "norm" back in the day when there was only Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel...and?... You took my words out of context leaving out the part where pedephiles are predatorial people, that prey on the innocence of others...how does that compare (logicaly) to homosexuality and incest? Besides it being a non-heterosexual reality? Pedephiles are more comparitable to rapists as far as I can tell. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a homosexual advocate--nor am I a condemner, I just think that denying harmless people equal rights isn't a good idea. That may be outside of the "normal" opinion, but that's what's great about this country...I can have any opinion I want! hehe Anyway, thx for your reply as this is a touchy topic, and both sides have valid arguments. How is taking this out of context? Here's a case where a 30yr old woman and her 53 yr. old father got married. They were arrested, but hey, they're "consenting" adults, according to your logic, that should be OK. I mean who are they hurting right? Problem is, these days no one wants to admit that something is simply wrong.

quote:Originally posted by Cruis.In: well not a collector or anything, but just a glock 17. 17 rounds...18 if you chamber one then put another in the 17 round mag. its 9mm.Same here. I used to have a boatload of weapons in the house, until one of my kids got into my locker and shot one of the tiles in the kitchen (by accident of course) so after that I sold everything except the Glock. I keep it in a place that I know they can't get into, but is fairly easy for me to access if someone were to break in.

quote:Originally posted by Sorren: Its hard for me to understand the comparison between homosexuality and pedophile/beastiality. There is one dramatic difference: Homosexuals are consentual...OK, then here's another one for you, I've seen on some of those Jerry Springer shows where Mom & Son get together, Dad & Daughter, Brother & Sister, those are consenting adults, why not give them "special" Status too? I can see it now, Incest lovers unite, we shall overcome!

quote:Originally posted by $iLk: So on a legal basis why should homosexuality be recognized as opposed to other deviant special interests?Let's not forget the Adulterers, and the ones interested in Beastiality, don't they deserve special treatment for their fetishes too?

quote:Originally posted by Cmdr Chavik: As far as housing goes lots of people think it is the new bublle and will come crashing down sooner or later. I don't think I beleive that. Well considering the fact that in the 80's the average family spent almost 30% of their income on a Mortgage, the 90's went to 20% and now it's down to 16%, I seriously doubt that the trend will be for lower prices when people can afford so much more than ever. As an expample, even with our new home, we will be spending less than 10% of our incomes on the Mortgage and less than 14% when the taxes, insurance and HOA fees are included. And we make less money than most of our friends and family!

quote:Originally posted by Jaguar: The Federal deficit is estimated to be $477 billion in 2004 but then drop to $362 billion for 2005. The current 2004 deficit is 4.2% of the GDP which makes it smaller, compared to the GDP, than what it was in the late '80s and early '90s. This is something that a lot of people just simply don't comprehend. They think OMG a $400B deficit, we're in such trouble, when in fact they don't realize we have a GDP of 11.3 Trillion dollars. To put it in terms that people can understand, it's like a family that earns 40K a year (fairly average) and has $1720.00 in credit card debt. Is that family in trouble? Maybe if they only earned 20K a year, and their debt was over 8% of their income, but at 40K a year, it's fairly normal and no big deal.