:rofl:
Blackvegetable » 17 Jan 2026, 7:54 am » wrote: ↑![]()
Why do you believe your incoherent screeching "kicks ***"?
I don't even read it...
ROFLMAO!!Blackvegetable » 17 Jan 2026, 7:54 am » wrote: ↑![]()
Why do you believe your incoherent screeching "kicks ***"?
I don't even read it...
Cannonpointer » 17 Jan 2026, 12:07 am » wrote: ↑He positioned himself - instead of his vehicle - to block her car. He became an eager speed bump for a chance to do homicide.Huey » 16 Jan 2026, 1:25 pm » wrote: ↑ Since you went there it is clear she hit him. No argument whatsoever.
now, acknowledge that and I will discuss his actions.
She CLEARLY turned her wheel to avoid him.
I have togive you this, at least. You ARE consistent. You always side with government goons. You did the same with the Ashli Babbit murder.
The homo you are arguing with DEFENDED the Babbit murder.
Hey Mr. I don't edit posts, did you get over 100 posts again yesterday?
Blackvegetable » 17 Jan 2026, 8:00 am » wrote: ↑ now that Grafty deported all your skilled labor, you can learn to pick onions.
A perfect example...
No....
Many are your narratives...Huey » 17 Jan 2026, 7:54 am » wrote: ↑ I understand. It is part of your mental issues to never admit you are wrong. You retarded.
Are you sure you want to go there?
Bil and Hillary's Most Excellent Adventure will not be in a private room behind closed doors.Jantje_Smit » 17 Jan 2026, 8:21 am » wrote: ↑ Are you sure you want to go there?
![]()
youtu.be/POUOozzIiKo
Blackvegetable » 16 Jan 2026, 12:59 pm » wrote: ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/15/vide ... ideos.html
MY LAWHD! THE CARNAGE!
**** idiots.
Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?Deal: Veghead claimed he already answered this question. LOL. If Veghead proves that he did indeed answer the survivorship multiple choice question below, as the question is written and asked, along with his defense of his answer, then I will agree to never come back. I am permabanned. Gone. Like a fart in the wind. If he cannot, then he is out of here for a month. Additionally, his defense cannot be "Because it fits my definition." That is a claim, not a defense. He is to defend why. His evidence must precede the timestamp upon when this challenge has been agreed upon by both parties. Moreover, he must answer immediately when the mods say "go," That next post. Not the next 600 posts. Either Cannon or Deezer mods.
Exception: I will allow for an exception. If he loses, then I will allow him to stay if he answers it the way it is asked, along with his defense. However, he must do it immediately after the deal has been decided. Not 100 posts later. The very next post of his must be his answer/defense.
It shows in your responses.Blackvegetable » 17 Jan 2026, 7:54 am » wrote: ↑ :rofl:
Why do you believe your incoherent screeching "kicks ***"?
I don't even read it...
Sole, I gotta say, and I hope it doesn't hurt.
To calculate the GDP growth rate, use the formula: [(Current Period GDP - Previous Period GDP) / Previous Period GDP] × 100, which shows the percentage increase or decrease, often using real GDPBeekeeper » 17 Jan 2026, 3:42 pm » wrote: ↑ To calculate the GDP growth rate, use the formula: [(Current Period GDP - Previous Period GDP) / Previous Period GDP] × 100, which shows the percentage increase or decrease, often using real GDP to account for inflation for a true measure of economic expansion. This formula determines if the economy is expanding or contracting by comparing economic output over time, providing insights for governments and businesses.
So lets do the MATH!!
4.3% - 2.4% divide that by 2.4% x 100 equals....TADA!! 79% growth rate!!
The dollar sign looks like this4.3%