@Vamp

If trying to solve the problem can't solve the problem, as DPS said, trying to solve it is stupid.

I think you screwed up the title slightly...

Sorry, been insanely busy... maybe I should have held off on mentioning that. 

> Gamer wrote:

> @Sir SupAll

what i ment was: u have to look at the % the US spends in military, not the actual amount, coz that doesnt mean anything, well ofc they make the comparison with Health, but imo a better question, would b:
The US spends x% of their budget in Health, how much do you think the US spends in defense?, cuz then u can compare it to other countries, and u can actually make a point

and i dont rele get ur 2nd comment, erm here i got a prob, i keep saying 'look at % not at numbers', but here u should look at the numbers and not the % lets just skip that

That representation of health care isn't even good, because you forget about private sector spending.  If, in theory, a nation had its entire health care run and funded by NGOs, operating solely through donations, such statistics would say that said nation spends no money on health care, which would be crap.

Same goes for military, actually, as non-government organizations can serve as defensive tools, i.e. legalized weapons, contract military organizations within the US, and other potential defensive weapons.

In other words, money spent is a crappy frame of reference anyway.

That may look really cool right now, but relative to what China has been working on, it's a child's toy.

I'll post some articles in a little bit...

Has anyone ever told you that reading your posts is physically painful?

1: Why the hell are you claiming a poll in late June to decide the result of an election in November?
2: Does that factor the popular vote or the electoral vote?

> Freelancer wrote:

> When i arrive home i will do a better post, but doesn't 70% of your electricity came from coal? And doesn't this process makes alot of CO2? Also i have read somewhere that the coal will run out in 150 years (will try to find a link).

I'm not going to address CO2 (I avoid global warming debates), but wouldn't 150 years be more than enough time to transition to a renewable energy source?

Nope!

Fudged?

Yes or no about what?  Could you clearly state the question which we're answering?

Black_Wing, just one question.  I'm just interested in the reply on this one.

In today's modern age of advanced military hardware and sophisticated surveillance techniques, can an armed rebellion in the US succeed anymore, assuming the military remained loyal to the state?  And if so, what size of a civilian force would be necessary?  (Remember that each person rising up with a gun is also a person refusing to contribute to the economy that would fuel a corrupt military regime, slightly weakening its power).

If a revolution can't take place using the weapons that are allowed by the citizens, would that not mean that you can't claim checks against the government as an advantage of gun control?

Happy birthday!  I had 127 million gc for you as a birthday present, but I sent it to an inactive.  Sorry!