Liberal Forum

*Beekeeper » 12 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

12 minutes ago

FJB » Today, 7:25 am » wrote: ↑

Today, 7:25 am

Where's that definition?

USUALLY it means the difference is futures trading prices minus the spot price.

HOWEVER it can also carry different meanings as well meaning from the PRICE YOU BUY at less the price YOU SELL AT!!

OR it could mean 1/100th of a percent meaning ONE basis point in finance.

So you are a **** IDIOT and have NO DAMN CLUE what the **** you are talking about.

NOW, ANSWER THE **** QUESTION-

DOES OPEC INCREASING CRUDE PRODUCTION LOWER THE PRICE OF OIL?

YES OR NO!!

@ROG62  

 
 

 

 

Blackvegetable » 10 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

10 minutes ago

*Beekeeper » 16 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

16 minutes ago

With you, WHO THE **** KNOWS what you mean!!

And even with OIL, it can mean different things as well, so you need to DEFINE MORE PRECISELY what you mean by "basis"!!

Otherwise, you get NO ANSWER since none can be definitively given in the CONTEXT you will demand.

I'm satisfied I've made my point.

Again.
 

 

NOW ******, RUN!!

 

*Beekeeper » 40 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

40 minutes ago

 
THE ONLY **** POINT YOU MADE IS THAT YOU HAVE ONE ON YOUR GODDAMN HEAD!!

NOW ANSWER THE QUESTION!! I ANSWERED YOURS!!

******!!

MEET ME ASSHOLE AND LET'S GET THIS SETTLED!!

WATCH HOW THIS COWARD PIECE OF **** RUNS!!

It's over...

 

Blackvegetable » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

6 minutes ago

It's over...

Does OPEC increasing production cause OIL PRICES TO FALL??

GO!!!

Answer the QUESTION so I can EDUCATE YOU AS TO WHY THIS IS HAPPENING, including the DROP IN OIL PRICES!!

Sucks for you, huh??

*Beekeeper » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

6 minutes ago

Does OPEC increasing production cause OIL PRICES TO FALL??

GO!!!

Answer the QUESTION so I can EDUCATE YOU AS TO WHY THIS IS HAPPENING, including the DROP IN OIL PRICES!!

Sucks for you, huh??

"Dollar cost averaging"


:rofl:  

Blackvegetable » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

9 minutes ago

"Dollar cost averaging"

Yeah, that's about right from a "Series 21" license holder.

Sucks you KICK YOUR OWN ***, huh, CUCKYBOY!!

RUN NOW, like you ALWAYS DO!!

@ROG62  

*Beekeeper » 7 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

7 minutes ago

Yeah, that's about right from a "Series 21" license holder.

Sucks you KICK YOUR OWN ***, huh, CUCKYBOY!!

RUN NOW, like you ALWAYS DO!!

@ROG62

"Series 21"?


Negro, please...

Stop.
 

Blackvegetable » 8 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

8 minutes ago

"Series 21"?

Negro, please...

Stop.

Still haven't answered my questions. 

This will be easy:
1. You will now desperately leach yourself to that one answered question that you dodged 50 times before answering. Thereby, hoping that I would forget about the other questions. 
2. Still pretend that you are owed answers while refusing to answer my questions. 
 

Vegas » 14 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

14 minutes ago

Still haven't answered my questions. 

This will be easy:
1. You will now desperately leach yourself to that one answered question that you dodged 50 times before answering. Thereby, hoping that I would forget about the other questions. 
2. Still pretend that you are owed answers while refusing to answer my questions.

I only answer questions from those subject to the same rules as I am.

Are you?

Blackvegetable » 17 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

17 minutes ago

I only answer questions from those subject to the same rules as I am.

Are you?

   LOL—classic Veghead gymnastics. He takes the rule, flips it, mangles it, and pretends he just invented fairness while still dodging the question like it’s his full-time job.

Oh, I’m subject to the same rule—you just haven’t followed it once. So until you stop running a masterclass in evasion and actually answer your own OPs, I’ll be dodging just as freely. That’s the rule you’re “subject to,” remember?Now be honest: are you? Or are you just allergic to your own standards?
 
 

Vegas » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

5 minutes ago

   LOL—classic Veghead gymnastics. He takes the rule, flips it, mangles it, and pretends he just invented fairness while still dodging the question like it’s his full-time job.

Oh, I’m subject to the same rule—you just haven’t followed it once. So until you stop running a masterclass in evasion and actually answer your own OPs, I’ll be dodging just as freely. That’s the rule you’re “subject to,” remember?Now be honest: are you? Or are you just allergic to your own standards?

Oh, I’m subject to the same rule

I show that you're lying, and you leave for 7 years.


Deal?

Blackvegetable » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

6 minutes ago

I show that you're lying, and you leave for 7 years.

Deal?

Oh, so now we’re offering imaginary timelines to dodge real questions? Cute. You still haven’t answered mine from your own thread—which came first. Until you do, no deals, no dances, just dodges. Keep spinning, Veghead—every circle you make adds another to the count. You're up to #53 now. Legendary.

1. He will continue to prove that no rule applies to him. Narcissism in full swing. 
 

Vegas » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

9 minutes ago

Oh, so now we’re offering imaginary timelines to dodge real questions? Cute. You still haven’t answered mine from your own thread—which came first. Until you do, no deals, no dances, just dodges. Keep spinning, Veghead—every circle you make adds another to the count. You're up to #53 now. Legendary.

1. He will continue to prove that no rule applies to him. Narcissism in full swing.

We know you're lying. 

Blackvegetable » 3 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

3 minutes ago

We know you're lying.

Let’s settle this once and for all, Veghead. I’ll post the timestamp of the first unanswered question I asked on your thread—plain and simple.If I prove that I asked first, and you still haven’t answered it (which we both know is true), then you take a year off.

 You talk a big game about “rules” and “honor,” right? Well, here’s your moment to prove you’re not just a walking contradiction in strike-through font.Unless, of course, you're already drafting your next dodge in Comic Sans.

1. Strike through , of course. Any time he gets cornered, he does his strike though, as if that gets him out of trouble. 
 

Vegas » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

6 minutes ago

Let’s settle this once and for all, Veghead. I’ll post the timestamp of the first unanswered question I asked on your thread—plain and simple.If I prove that I asked first, and you still haven’t answered it (which we both know is true), then you take a year off.

 You talk a big game about “rules” and “honor,” right? Well, here’s your moment to prove you’re not just a walking contradiction in strike-through font.Unless, of course, you're already drafting your next dodge in Comic Sans.

1. Strike through , of course. Any time he gets cornered, he does his strike though, as if that gets him out of trouble.

There's no "this"...

Only your pathological narcissism and ignorance.

Blackvegetable » 3 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

3 minutes ago

There's no "this"...

Only your pathological narcissism and ignorance.

Just as I predicted. Strike through because he is corned. 100% accuracy. 

QED. 

Now how about you shut the **** up and just answer a God damn question for once? 

1. Another strike through
2. Falsely accuse me of the rule not applying to me while he proves the rule doesn't apply to him. 

Vegas » 15 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

15 minutes ago

Just as I predicted. Strike through because he is corned. 100% accuracy. 

QED. 

Now how about you shut the **** up and just answer a God damn question for once? 

1. Another strike through
2. Falsely accuse me of the rule not applying to me while he proves the rule doesn't apply to him.

No...because your crap isn't worth reading...

You won't even read it.
 

Blackvegetable » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

5 minutes ago

No...because your crap isn't worth reading...

You won't even read it.

The same ****. Once again, you prove that you say the same **** day after day. 

100% accuracy. 

Vegas » 26 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

26 minutes ago

Let’s settle this once and for all, Veghead. I’ll post the timestamp of the first unanswered question I asked on your thread—plain and simple.If I prove that I asked first, and you still haven’t answered it (which we both know is true), then you take a year off.

 You talk a big game about “rules” and “honor,” right? Well, here’s your moment to prove you’re not just a walking contradiction in strike-through font.Unless, of course, you're already drafting your next dodge in Comic Sans.

1. Strike through , of course. Any time he gets cornered, he does his strike though, as if that gets him out of trouble.

@Blackvegetable  How about this? If I lose, then I am out of here for good. Permanently. banned. You can leave for only a week. 

And yes, we know, you think Cannon has syphilis. He judges. You aren't fit. 

Vegas » 55 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

55 minutes ago

@Blackvegetable  How about this? If I lose, then I am out of here for good. Permanently. banned. You can leave for only a week. 

And yes, we know, you think Cannon has syphilis. He judges. You aren't fit.

The same ****. Once again, you prove that you say the same **** day after day

Blackvegetable » 5 minutes ago » wrote: ↑

5 minutes ago

The same ****. Once again, you prove that you say the same **** day after day

    And he copies me again. Like always. No thoughts of his own. Says/does the same ****. 

God you are one dumb mother ****. 

1. He will copy/paste what I just said ^^^. Thus, QED. Again.