Nitrox

From my limited experience, your mom.

I used the public school spelling so you'd felt more comfortable while you masturbated.

[video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ci0pPDtZj8U

You care.

I have some boots listed for sale if you run out of your own to putting them in your mouth.

This thread took a turn for the awesome.

Funny, I was thinking she sounded more like j_b Not enough hail damage on her ass to be j_b.

I'm out for the evening, have a nice night fellas.

Your own link supports what I said. Arggghh...this is like talking, err, typing, to a brick wall. "In addition to these sources, the department aggressively pursues other sources of funding revenue" does not mean it is the primary means of funding. It means exactly what it says: that they also pursue other forms of funding in addition to being financed by our tax dollars. How can you possibly NOT understand that? I never said they didn't also use those means, but you flat out said most departments are primarily internally funded, and they are not. You have yet to provide anything that contradicts what I said. Your own sources support my position. Here is what you originally latched onto because you can't seam to wrap your head around exactly how much money PD's generate (and contribute to the General Fund which intern pays their budget in addition to other sources). The context of the conversation is essential services verses nonessential services (like lottery, liquor, and IMO ferries). PD's were brought up but as I said they largely (read: most) support themselves. I even showed that some departments are used to help cure state deficits (VSP) which sure would indicate the department was creating a large revenue.

Funny, you lecture reading comprehension but then turn around fail yourself. I never said they generated 2.2B with written tickets, just that they were "digging the state out of a 2.2b deficit with written tickets". It emphasizes the revenue generating potential of large departments that the state would call on the department in such a manner. Obviously its a single example (which you seam to like) but still the norm in states like OR and WA. Touche, you got me, "digging out" indeed...the same way one could dig our new highway 99 under-city tunnel with a little kid's beach sand shovel and some day complete it. The point is you were completely and totally incorrect with your assertion, and despite both common sense and evidence to the contrary you keep going. This came right out of the link you provided, however, you edited out most of the paragraph. Your own link supports what I said.

Nope, police is an essential service. No one besides you has advocated privatizing it. so is medicine So, essential services can be entrusted to be run properly by the government, the same government you claim can't run anything as effectively as private industry? Quote where I said that.

Funny, you lecture reading comprehension but then turn around fail yourself. I never said they generated 2.2B with written tickets, just that they were "digging the state out of a 2.2b deficit with written tickets". It emphasizes the revenue generating potential of large departments that the state would call on the department in such a manner. Obviously its a single example (which you seam to like) but still the norm in states like OR and WA.

Nope, police is an essential service. No one besides you has advocated privatizing it.

You don't really understand how much revenue is generated from Police Departments do you? Here is the VSP digging the state out of a 2.2B deficit with written tickets. http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/virginia-state-police-help-with-budget-crunch/

Wrong. You flat out made this up... "The Police Department budget is funded, primarily, by two funding elements; the City’s General Fund, and the Public Safety Sales Tax Initiative (Proposition 400) which was created from a voter approved initiative in 2003. In addition to these two funding elements, the department pursues other funding sources including State and Federal grants applicable to the mission of the police department." -Avondale, AZ police dept, http://www.avondale.org/index.aspx?NID=503 "The police department is primarily funded by two sources: a permanent police mill levy and the city general fund" -Pickerington, OH police dept, http://www.ci.pickerington.oh.us/sections/government/pdfs/2003/3%2030%20Police.pdf Those were the first two PDs I could find an easy answer to with less than 30 second of work. Clearly this will differ across the thousands of PDs around the country, but considering the first two came across directly contradict your B.S. assertion, either put up some sort of evidence or stop making shit up to support an already invalid argument. Department revenue goes into the general fund before getting given to the department. Primary funding will always ledger as "General Fund" regardless of the percentage that the department creates. Sure it does, and you know this because...you make things up on the spot? This is pretty dumbed down so you should understand it. Feel free to call your city, county, or state for more answers. http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Police_department_funding Where do you think the revenue from PD's goes? You know, the forfeited assets, the ticket revenue, the dept contracting, etc? Do you think it just vanishes? On second thought, don't hurt yourself...the departments use it to fund their operations via the general fund. Without their own funding the general fund would allocate to other programs because there would be a larger deficit. Some municipalities even (gasp) borrow those funds which in turn causes PD's to run short of funds and lay off officers. Of course they get outside funding (which I said) but its not their primary source.

Wrong. You flat out made this up... "The Police Department budget is funded, primarily, by two funding elements; the City’s General Fund, and the Public Safety Sales Tax Initiative (Proposition 400) which was created from a voter approved initiative in 2003. In addition to these two funding elements, the department pursues other funding sources including State and Federal grants applicable to the mission of the police department." -Avondale, AZ police dept, http://www.avondale.org/index.aspx?NID=503 "The police department is primarily funded by two sources: a permanent police mill levy and the city general fund" -Pickerington, OH police dept, http://www.ci.pickerington.oh.us/sections/government/pdfs/2003/3%2030%20Police.pdf Those were the first two PDs I could find an easy answer to with less than 30 second of work. Clearly this will differ across the thousands of PDs around the country, but considering the first two came across directly contradict your B.S. assertion, either put up some sort of evidence or stop making shit up to support an already invalid argument. Department revenue goes into the general fund before getting given to the department. Primary funding will always ledger as "General Fund" regardless of the percentage that the department creates.

Sorry but I don't see it as being essential for the government. The people of Washington shouldn't have to support a select few who choose to live in a place they can not travel to and from on their own. If the service can not sustain itself based on what passengers are charged (or island residents are taxed) then it shouldn't exist as a government program. Well, thankfully "the people of washington", myself included, disagree with you. I think you mean the people who live on the islands are thankful, I doubt many residents on the east side of the state agree with it.

Sorry but I don't see it as being essential for the government. The people of Washington shouldn't have to support a select few who choose to live in a place they can not travel to and from on their own. If the service can not sustain itself based on what passengers are charged (or island residents are taxed) then it shouldn't exist as a government program.

Not true, every so often the state of Oregon runs at a surplus and then issues a refund. The goal isn't a profit, just not a loss. I'm surprised you don't understand that, explains why having so much debt is acceptable.

Most PD's are primarily internally funded. While they do get external funding it is not their primary source. If they need more funding they make a push to increase revenue based programs, like speeding tickets. Several state police agencies recently made headlines eliminating their budget deficits by writing more speeding tickets. Virginia and Maryland come to mind. So no, they don't generally run at a loss (most run at a surplus). Also, there is a difference between running at a deficit, running neutral, and running at a profit. The post office is used by private citizens and businesses alike, there is no reason it should take a loss. That isn't advocating the post office should get privatized but clearly the PO management isn't doing as well as UPS or Fedex who do better than just breaking even (which is all that anyone really cares about).

Just for clarity - I not arguing that those unfortunate steps were not necessary, just that they illustrate that private enterprises can be as screwed up, if not more, than public run entities. 80% of all businesses fail within 2 years. As anyone who's worked in the private sector for any length of time can tell you, most private companies are managed poorly and therefore execute poorly. Public entities can be just as or more efficient and effective than private and vice versa. The type of organization is not the issue. Management is the issue. Shitty management will run any organization into the ground. The fundamental problems with hiring for profit private entities to support the public good are: Conflict of interest. Private entities cater to their stockholders first, at the expense of their clients if need be. This problem is greatly worsened with no bid contracts and the general lack of accountability and oversight. Private entities tend to cut services that are too expensive on a case by case basis, which is often not an appropriate type of triage when providing critical services. Given equal management, private entities inherently cost more than their public counterparts because they need to distribute profits to their shareholders to remain viable. They also need to grow. Public entities can remain effective and viable without doing either. I think its largely dependent on the service being discussed. There is no reason why the government should operate a ferry service at a loss (or even at all). Same goes for public gambling (Oregon slot machines known as "lottery") or liquor.

Actually, only two car companies were bailed out, none others needed or wanted the US government's help. In the process the government violated existing bankruptcy laws by wiping out bond obligations. Of all your other examples only a few would have gone under, but that is the nature of business as a whole. We wouldn't be in any worse shape economically had the government not stepped in, probably better shape really. I agree with you on the farm subsidies.

Your problems are self correcting, no need to discuss.

The core of the problem, no doubt. So why don't American libtards seem at all concerned about the sole source of population increase here? You must be referring to the Mormons, the Duggars and "john and kate + eight", right? Yeah, I'd wager that large family size correlates pretty much exactly with conservatism/religiosity. You Rfucks simply need to get your fucking tubes tied at birth...thus solving two problems at once. This is why I support your gayness, in a single generation you and yours would vanish from the earth.

I'm just relieved to know that a single news article is enough to formulate an informed opinion. The nice thing about it is the courts can just read the article and convict the officer without wasting any time or money on needless investigations or a lengthy trial.