Democrats want to give school kids 3 meals a day YEAR ROUND!!!

[Asclepias]

Now, now, calling me names does nothing but show you to be ignorant. & enough about the welfare? What about those children that ARE BORN THOUGH 'eh? As much as you don't like abortion & seem to always mention & blame the 'woman'... the fact that a lot of little ones do come out of the uterus' of those women, REGARDLESS of how they were conceived. That is why you & those like *you* are NOT pro life. You are pro birth, because to you the fertilized egg is more important than the post born child.

Period.

What a crock of shit!

The welfare system we have doesn't help the children. it helps the parents to remain lazy. What will help the children is for their parents to have JOBS. Welfare destroys a childs self esteem, it makes them become bitter and resentful.

And while their parents are being the welfare leeches you so lovingly think that all are... those kids are hungry, but DAMN IT! you'll teach those lazy bums a lesson by golly!

Children in this country are not and would not starve to death. So you can stop with the hyperbole.

When did hungry turn into starve? Then he claims hyperbole.

Hell to listen to your moron friends you'd think that kids were starving to death.

Actually to watch you and your moron friends one would think you were retarded and uneducated. No one said starving for a reason. its different than hungry. I would say its weird that your homie Meathead thinks fat people dont get hungry but you too are running neck and neck for idiot of the year.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

My five children did.

Yours are the rare ones & that's a good thing they did. But all you have to do is look at the stats. THAT'S reality. Good Christian (or Jewish, or Muslim) homes can preach until they are convinced it won't happen in their family... find out it has. Look at the Palins. Look at the Duggars... I'm waiting to hear that good ol' nasty Josh knocked some young thing.

The problem is that everyone is too worried about what others are doing and they're not taking care of their own.

Actually, I've taken care of my own. And I still care about others. It doesn't have to be one or the other. But, hey as long as that zygote lives on.

I doubt you care about anyone but yourself.

LOL. Hardly true, texas dude. But if you need to think that to justify your own inadequate heartstrings, you go for it.

I make that call for the simple reason that you do not care for the most vulnerable of life. You would just as soon have a child aborted than allow it to be born with a hardship. Being born into poverty doesn't mean you'll end up poor the rest of your life. But you wouldn't give a child that chance.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

What a crock of shit!

The welfare system we have doesn't help the children. it helps the parents to remain lazy. What will help the children is for their parents to have JOBS. Welfare destroys a childs self esteem, it makes them become bitter and resentful.

And while their parents are being the welfare leeches you so lovingly think that all are... those kids are hungry, but DAMN IT! you'll teach those lazy bums a lesson by golly!

Children in this country are not and would not starve to death. So you can stop with the hyperbole.

When did hungry turn into starve? Then he claims hyperbole.

Hell to listen to your moron friends you'd think that kids were starving to death.

Actually to watch you and your moron friends one would think you were retarded and uneducated. No one said starving for a reason. its different than hungry. I would say its weird that your homie Meathead thinks fat people dont get hungry but you too are running neck and neck for idiot of the year.

Try to be more original and not the sheep you obviously are.

 

[playtime]

Yours are the rare ones & that's a good thing they did. But all you have to do is look at the stats. THAT'S reality. Good Christian (or Jewish, or Muslim) homes can preach until they are convinced it won't happen in their family... find out it has. Look at the Palins. Look at the Duggars... I'm waiting to hear that good ol' nasty Josh knocked some young thing.

The problem is that everyone is too worried about what others are doing and they're not taking care of their own.

Actually, I've taken care of my own. And I still care about others. It doesn't have to be one or the other. But, hey as long as that zygote lives on.

I doubt you care about anyone but yourself.

LOL. Hardly true, texas dude. But if you need to think that to justify your own inadequate heartstrings, you go for it.

I make that call for the simple reason that you do not care for the most vulnerable of life. You would just as soon have a child aborted than allow it to be born with a hardship. Being born into poverty doesn't mean you'll end up poor the rest of your life. But you wouldn't give a child that chance.

Once they are born- you'll turn your back.

 

[Asclepias]

And while their parents are being the welfare leeches you so lovingly think that all are... those kids are hungry, but DAMN IT! you'll teach those lazy bums a lesson by golly!

Children in this country are not and would not starve to death. So you can stop with the hyperbole.

When did hungry turn into starve? Then he claims hyperbole.

Hell to listen to your moron friends you'd think that kids were starving to death.

Actually to watch you and your moron friends one would think you were retarded and uneducated. No one said starving for a reason. its different than hungry. I would say its weird that your homie Meathead thinks fat people dont get hungry but you too are running neck and neck for idiot of the year.

Try to be more original and not the sheep you obviously are.

Try to use a dictionary so you dont get confused with simple words like starve and hungry

 

[Dad2three]

How about get rid of tax loopholes & entitlements like bonus' to CEO's who companies are 'too big to fail'. Tell me why the Walton family are billionares many times over, but are allowed to hire workers at abysmal wages who need those 'entitlements' just to get by paid for by the taxpayer?

My tax dollars do not go to CEO bonuses nor do yours. The Walton's are free to pay whatever wage the worker is willing to work for. You hate freedom, you want a dictatorship.

Nonsense. I want the Walton's to pay their workers enough so I don't have to pay for their food stamps, & Medicaid. When you would prevent a woman having the right to choose, then don't preach to me about what 'dictatorship' is.

Hey stupid, women do have a choice. They can choose not to get pregnant. Killing an innocent life should never be a choice.

We agree on one thing, enough with the welfare. But as for Walmart's wages, don't like it.... quit!

If you don't want them to get an abortion, you had better offer them a better solution

"Not my problem" is not a better solution

The best solution for not getting pregnant and it's 100 percent guaranteed, is to not have sex.

Perhaps let Failin Palin's daughter know about that, you know the PAID ABSTINENCE ONLY (nearly $1 million income)? She seems to have forgot, at least twice now...

 

[Dad2three]

No. Why should they?

Why not? Why should THEY pay? They aren't getting any benefit?....

For the same reason that people that dont drive cars pay for you to have nice roads to drive on.

People who drive cars pay for a lot of it in the form of gasoline (useage) taxes.

There is no comparison.

YET no gas tax in the nation, be it federal or state brings in enough for the roads, most are funded about 50%-60% by those taxes, the rest from general funds, unless it's changed in the past five years, there has NEVER been a road that was self financing off of road taxes in the US (usage-GAS-fees)

Sure it does. The problem is not the level of the taxation. The problem is what happens to the money once the politicians get their hands on it.
You people say nothing about how the money is spent. The only thing you see is "it isn't enough. so raise taxes".....That's illogical.
That's like telling a glutenous person he will be given more food as long as he will go on a diet.

Oh you make a posit? PLEASE back it up. WHERE?

Where has ANY road EVER been funded by gas/user taxes?

False premise based on "belief" that spending isn't being done responsibly!

 

[Dad2three]

Schools should be open 6 to 6, six days a week, all meals provided so you can keep an eye on them, help them learn to teach themselves, and run their fat little asses off. The parents have work to do. If you actually cared about children you'd pay up for that, but you don't, and never will...

"Pay up"?......Why?
You're right about one thing...It will NEVER happen.....There is no money to pay for it..
The sheer logistics of releasing then busing kids home at the height of rush hour is impossible.

They always seem to find all the funds necessary to fight two wars.

Meanwhile Donald Trump alone is sitting on $8 billion dollars. That's not including buffet koch Soros and Rupert Murdock.

I'm watching shark tank right now. 5 billionaires on the show. There are so many millionaires and billionaires in America. There are so many billion dollar companies in America. Please stop asking where we're going to get the money.

Nope. There are 492 billionaires for 318,000,000 people. Roughly 1 billionaire for every 600,000,000!

Yet 50,000 families worth $100,000,000+

And?

Plenty of money to get to help US, LIKE WE DID PRE REAGANOMICS?!

 

[Dad2three]

Wow....You are really uninformed. Despite the number of US maker plants that have closed over the last 4 decades, a number equal to or even greater than number of foreign auto makers have built plants here in the US employing hundreds of thousands of American workers at very high wages. The only difference? No unions needed. In fact the employees want nothing to do with Paully, Joey, Mikey and Guido's mobbed up organizations. Just last year thr UAW tried to organize the VW plant in Chattanooga, TN....The union lost. The union then said "well, we got cheated. We're suing". They lost that too....
BTW, the wages plus those Cadillac health plants cost GM for example, $70 per hour per worker. There is no way that in this highly competitive auto marketplace, that is sustainable.
GM is paying over ONE MILLION pensioners....That is one million people not working but being paid wages and medical benefits.
Oh and while we're on the subject of record corporate profits....Oh well, no need to explain. You are well aware the hypocrisy I am about to point out...
Lastly. What makes you believe that taxation forces business to invest in anything but paying taxes?

Since 2001, the country has lost 42,400 factories, including 36 percent of factories that employ more than 1,000 workers (which declined from 1,479 to 947), and 38 percent of factories that employ between 500 and 999 employees (from 3,198 to 1,972). An additional 90,000 manufacturing companies are now at risk of going out of business.


Long before the banking collapse of 2008, such important U.S. industries as machine tools, consumer electronics, auto parts, appliances, furniture, telecommunications equipment, and many others that had once dominated the global marketplace suffered their own economic collapse. Manufacturing employment dropped to 11.7 million in October 2009, a loss of 5.5 million or 32 percent of all manufacturing jobs since October 2000. The last time fewer than 12 million people worked in the manufacturing sector was in 1941. In October 2009, more people were officially unemployed (15.7 million) than were working in manufacturing.



But American companies have difficulty competing against foreign countries that undervalue their currencies, pay health care for their workers; provide subsidies for energy, land, buildings, and equipment; grant tax holidays and rebates and provide zero-interest financing; pay their workers poverty wages that would be illegal in the United States, and don't enforce safety or environmental regulations.

Proponents of free trade and outsourcing argue that the United States remains the largest manufacturing economy in the world. Yet, total manufacturing gross domestic product in 2008 (at $1.64 trillion) represented 11.5 percent of U.S. economic output, down from 17 percent in 1999, and 28 percent in 1959. As for our balance of trade, U.S. imports of goods totaled $2.52 trillion in 2008, while exports came to $1.29 trillion -- creating a goods deficit of $821 billion. Those imported goods represented 17.6 percent of U.S. GDP. The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services in 2008 stood at $700 billion -- or more than $2,000 for every American.

Damn that Guido and Mikey!



The Plight of American Manufacturing

And the ceo's that cut the most jobs got the biggest bonus'. Yes, tax them more.

Do you know what the tax rate is on a "bonus check"?

It's considered "Luxury Tax".
The government gets 1/3 of it

Weird, MOST CEO's top exec's get stock options, taxed at Cap gains rate, 20% today



EFFECTIVE RATES

So?....
Contrary to your side's beliefs, the purpose of taxation is to raise revenue for essential government functions. Not as a means to punish those who make you feel uncomfortable.
The proof in the pudding is this. When Obama was considering an executive order which woudl treat capital gains as ordinary income thus subjecting it to the top marginal rate of 39.2%, he was reminded that since the rate was lowered to its present level, revenues from capital gains receipts increased dramatically. Obama said that the current capital gains rate was inappropriate.
With these people, it is not what it does. What matters is how it looks.

LIAR, First NO CREDIBLE economist thinks you cut taxes and bring in more revenues, NONE. Second Obama never considered executive orders on cap gains you fukkn POS, TAX RATES ARE SET BY LAW NOT EXECUTIVE ACTION WHICH JUST ADMINISTERS THE LAW!


Bush CEA Chair Mankiw: Claim That Broad-Based Income Tax Cuts Increase Revenue Is Not "Credible," Capital Income Tax Cuts Also Don't Pay For Themselves.


Tax Foundation's Prante: "A Stretch" To Claim "Cutting Capital Gains Taxes Raises Tax Revenues."





April 2008 blog post, the Tax Foundation's Gerald Prante responded as follows to then-ABC World News anchor Charles Gibson's statement (TO OBAMA, THE FALSE PREMISE YOU PUSHED AS E/A) that "history shows that when you drop the capital gains tax, the revenues go up":


Gibson's implying that cutting capital gains taxes raises tax revenues by the mere time series correlation he cited was a stretch. Much of the short-run response to changes in the capital gains tax rate are for tax timing purposes. This is a well-known fact, and it is why CBO projects a huge spike in capital gains collections in 2010 (the last year of the scheduled low 15% rate on long-term gains) and thereby also a large decline in 2011 (when the rate on long-term gains is scheduled to revert to 20%) under current law. There is no doubt some revenue feedback will occur over the long-run from lower capital gains tax rates spurring investment, but most estimates would say that we are currently on the left side of the Laffer Curve with respect to capital gains.


www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23137.html


CBO's 2002 study found that a cut in the capital gains rate will tend to spike tax revenues, but only temporarily


Rate cuts "may not be enough to produce additional receipts over a long period," it concluded, but "may do so over a few years."

Similarly, the Congressional Research Service found in 2010 that "changes in the tax rate or anticipated changes have coincided with large increases in capital gains realizations, but realizations quickly fell back to previous levels.

"While the effect of changes in the capital gains tax rate continue to be debated and researched," the CRS concluded, "the bulk of the evidence suggests that reducing the capital gains tax rate reduces tax revenues."



Rep. Jim Renacci says raising the capital gains tax has lowered revenue, while cutting it has increased revenue

 

[Dad2three]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

Oh right, take hungry, insert "starving" and argue YOUR false premise from that posit. Nicely done Bubba

 

[Dad2three]

Dad2three should have his taxes raised immediately since he's all in favor of big brother doing the job of parents.

Your vote against helping hungry kids noted Bubs

The facts belie your entire premise. There are not any "starving kids"....
This idea which is by the way dead on arrival, is nothing more than a political ploy.
If these kids were starving to death why then is child obesity such an issue among the ones in the poorest families?

He said hungry not starving

The difference is?
Do try to stay on point. Getting into semantics to strengthen your argument is never successful.

Difference between hungry and starving? Gawd

Congrats, YOU are King Moron of Right Wing "Reality" World today, ask Druggster Limbaugh to pass you the Crown Bubs

 

[Dad2three]

"Democrats want to give school kids 3 meals a day YEAR ROUND!!!"

Liberal Progressives, ie 'Socialists', want to 'give' away LOTS of things for 'free'...as long as THEY do not have to pay for it. The truth about Socialism, as nearly every nation that has ever adopted it and ended up collapsing found out, is that Socialism is GREAT...until you run out of OTHER PEOPLES' money!

Liberals love to talk about how the GOVERNMENT is going to 'pay for it'. The government CAN'T pay for anything. The government doesn't make any money. The government SEIZES money from tax payers - that is how the government 'makes' money and has money to pay for the cr@p it spends money on.

Unlike the LIES Obama told when peddling his Obamacare, no government has EVER created a massive entitlement / spending program that has ever cost NOTHING. No government has EVER created a massive entitlement program that 'paid for itself'.

The nation is TRILLIONS in debt because our budget is created and controlled by a bunch of lawyers / greedy self/party-serving politicians all with one goal in common - to be re-elected. They are supported by Special Interest groups who share that goal - to get them re-elected for what they will get out of it. There is not 1 CPA that looks over the budget and ensures it is efficient and not over budget (how much we collect in taxes). In fact, our politicians have allowed it to be OK for us to spend more than we take in...although none of us could survive or operate our expenses that way.

Despite being trillion in debt, for example, Liberals passed the horrendous Obama Stimulus Plan ,a bill that cost nearly a TRILLION dollars and contained over 7,000 pieces of self-serving DNC-Only PORK. In the end it cost tax payers over $742,000 PER JOB reportedly 'created / saved', and those final numbers were doctored to look better than they were. (One company reported that Obama claimed to have saved more jobs at their company than actual people who worked there.)

'GIVING' people something, 'but not enough to really make a difference', has been Liberal Standard Operating Procedure for decades, resulting in the creation of a class of 'economic slaves' completely dependent on those programs to survive, guaranteeing they will continue to vote for the party that keeps those programs fully funded and coming.

LBJ, for example, was the architect and founder of 'economic slavery'. Liberals opposed Civil Rights, and when it passed they were scared shi'iteless of blacks' growing power. The KKK had failed to 'keep them in their place, so they had to come up with another way to control them. LBJ was quoted as saying:
- "These uppity negroes now have something they have never had before - power to back their movement. We have to give them something, BUT NOT ENOUGH TO MATTER. I will have these ni@@ers voting Democrat for the next 200 years."

LBJ and Democrats conned the blacks into surrendering their new-found freedom and power to the Democrats in exchange for welfare, food stamps, free gub'ment cheese, Obamaphones...the scraps that fell from the elitist Democrat 'massahs' table. Since the passage of Civil Rights, their loyalty to the Democrats have resulted in almost NO progress at all, arguably even a step back. Unemployment for young blacks - even after 7 years of having a black President - is DOUBLE that of whites. Poverty, deserted / abandoned cities, crime, drugs.... is the legacy Liberals have provided for blacks, ensuring they remain 'economic slaves'. And every election year Liberals engage in fear-mongering, telling blacks that the GOP is going to take away all their welfare, food stamps, ABORTIONS, and other social programs so they had better vote for the Democrats.

Not to worry...the GOVERNMENT / Socialists will pay for it all...with OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY....until it runs out and the US collapses the same way EVERY other country that has embraced Socialism has done. It's all good until they run out of other people's money...

MORE right wing BS based on hate talk radio, shocking

First the stimulus designed to keep US out of ANOTHER GOP great depression, was $787 billion AND 40% tax cuts, 20% aid to States and 40% jobs


Dubya's tax cuts cost $3 trillion in 10 years, and the US economy lost over 1+ million PRIVATE sector jobs, how much did each job cost?

Grow a fukkn brain, or better yet, get off hate talk radio/Faux "News" dumbshit1

 

[Dad2three]

I'm Black and Obama has helped me increase my networth in the midst of a recession started by cons.

I am very glad you are doing well; however, as I pointed out, you are misled about who started the recession.

Liberals claim that the slide in the economy began in the later half of Bush's last term in office. I would agree with that, especially since it was the Democratic Party who owned a Super majority control in Congress and who controlled the nation's purse strings Bush's last 2 years in Office, on into the 1st 2 years of Obama's 1st administration.

Liberals blame Bush's 'wars' for the slip in the economy...how so? 'Bush's Wars' had been going on for nearly 6 full years prior to those last 2 years of him being in office, and the economy had not begun to decline all that time. It did not decline until the last 2 years of him being in office. WHAT CHANGED? It was the Democratic Party taking over control of Congress and the nation's 'purse strings' those last two years!

Up until the last 2 years of Bush's time in office, with a Congress NOT Controlled fully by Democrats, Bush had racked up approx. 2 1/2 Trillion in debt after 6 years in office. (That is almost a THIRD of Obama's debt in only 4 years!) In the last 2 years of him being in office, with Democrats controlling Congress that amount soared up to (still only) $4 trillion after 8 Years! And, again, With a DNC-Controlled Congress (just like Bush had his last 2 years), at the end of 4 years Obama had racked up a record-setting $6+ TRILLION in national debt! In one proverbial shot OBAMA (not Bush) added nearly $1 trillion in debt with the passage of his failed Stimulus bill (Nearly $1 trillion/7,000 pieces of DNC tax-payer-funded pork/$742,000 PER job created / saved) in a declining economy almost as soon as he entered office!

So your regurgitation of the Liberal talking points about hos it was the Conservatives and Bush who wrecked the economy and added all the debt amounts to brainwashing and lies.

MORE BS TALKING POINTS DEVOID OF LOGIC

Show the bills the Dems passed that caused ANYTHING to happen? ANYTHING you screech about Bubs? lol
And NO the Dems DIDN'T have a super majority under Dubya

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Why not? Why should THEY pay? They aren't getting any benefit?....

For the same reason that people that dont drive cars pay for you to have nice roads to drive on.

People who drive cars pay for a lot of it in the form of gasoline (useage) taxes.

There is no comparison.

They need gas to drive their cars. Try again.

If roads are paid in part by gasoline taxes, then those who are driving are carrying a larger share of the load.

I didn't need to try again....I got it the first time.

Yes you need to try again. When you show me a road completely paid for by gasoline taxes then you might have a point. Since there are none you dont have a point. Try harder to convince me.

Why would I "try harder".

I've made the point. You insist the emperor has clothes on.....I'll leave you to your foolishness.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

And the ceo's that cut the most jobs got the biggest bonus'. Yes, tax them more.

Do you know what the tax rate is on a "bonus check"?

It's considered "Luxury Tax".
The government gets 1/3 of it

Weird, MOST CEO's top exec's get stock options, taxed at Cap gains rate, 20% today



EFFECTIVE RATES

My brother is a VP and he has so much money he doesn't know what to do with it. And he's just a VP. He doesn't make $1 million a year yet he is rich beyond any of these right wingers could dream of being and I swear it would bother poor Republican usmb members more than it would him.

Could be. I am a reading/language arts teacher....not math, lol.

Which means you're a welfare bum yourself since you're paid for a job that has no social value.. We should only teach STEM in school. THINK

Eat crap.

Language arts has no social value ?

I hope to tell you it has value.

Are you teaching grammar, spelling, sentence construction, proper use of adjectives, verbs, pronouns and prepositions?....If what used to be called "English", now language arts is the curriculum of today, I can tell you this...It ain't gettin it( used to illustrate an absurdity)....
My biggest pet peeve is the use of a preposition to end a sentence.
For example......."where you at?....."there is nothing I can think of".....Two generations of people butchering the English language. I even find this nonsense in newspapers and in scripts used in TV news broadcasts.

I am not teaching anything....apparently you were screwed in your language arts class.

The class I think they should still teach is latin.

I thought it a wonderful class.

 

[Asclepias]

For the same reason that people that dont drive cars pay for you to have nice roads to drive on.

People who drive cars pay for a lot of it in the form of gasoline (useage) taxes.

There is no comparison.

They need gas to drive their cars. Try again.

If roads are paid in part by gasoline taxes, then those who are driving are carrying a larger share of the load.

I didn't need to try again....I got it the first time.

Yes you need to try again. When you show me a road completely paid for by gasoline taxes then you might have a point. Since there are none you dont have a point. Try harder to convince me.

Why would I "try harder".

I've made the point. You insist the emperor has clothes on.....I'll leave you to your foolishness.

I was actually wondering why you were trying at all. You dont have a point and you look dumb trying exclude people from being taxed based on usage.

 

[sealybobo]

Hey stupid, women do have a choice. They can choose not to get pregnant. Killing an innocent life should never be a choice.

We agree on one thing, enough with the welfare. But as for Walmart's wages, don't like it.... quit!

Now, now, calling me names does nothing but show you to be ignorant. & enough about the welfare? What about those children that ARE BORN THOUGH 'eh? As much as you don't like abortion & seem to always mention & blame the 'woman'... the fact that a lot of little ones do come out of the uterus' of those women, REGARDLESS of how they were conceived. That is why you & those like *you* are NOT pro life. You are pro birth, because to you the fertilized egg is more important than the post born child.

Period.

What a crock of shit!

The welfare system we have doesn't help the children. it helps the parents to remain lazy. What will help the children is for their parents to have JOBS. Welfare destroys a childs self esteem, it makes them become bitter and resentful.

And teaches them that they are helpless and that laziness is a virtue.

What does it teach the kids that are hungry? To dumpster dive like oxyboy once suggested?

Sorry, fat kids are not hungry.

Yes they are actually. I heard a doctor explain how they aren't eating nutriciously and they are always hungry. Why do you think they are fat stupid?

Think about it. A fat kid isn't not hungry. Otherwise they could just live off the fat for weeks until they are finally skinny.

 

[Meathead]

Think about it. A fat kid isn't not hungry. Otherwise they could just live off the fat for weeks until they are finally skinny.

Double negatives are mind boggling. Anyway, if I understood you right, the bodies' functions were formed a while before the existence of supermarkets and food stamps, and that's exactly why bodies take unused calories and store them as fat. The body burns the fat for energy in lean times, but cannot use the original nutrients like proteins and vitamins which cannot be stored.

 

[Asclepias]

Think about it. A fat kid isn't not hungry. Otherwise they could just live off the fat for weeks until they are finally skinny.

Double negatives are mind boggling. Anyway, if I understood you right, the bodies' functions were formed a while before the existence of supermarkets and food stamps, and that's exactly why bodies take unused calories and store them as fat. The body burns the fat for energy in lean times, but cannot use the original nutrients like proteins and vitamins which cannot be stored.

Anything at all is mind boggling to a dunce like you. As for the rest of your post you did a whole lot of talking and still never explained why you think fat people dont get hungry. Did you really think everyone wouldnt see through your bullshit? What the **** is wrong with you?

 

[Meathead]

Think about it. A fat kid isn't not hungry. Otherwise they could just live off the fat for weeks until they are finally skinny.

Double negatives are mind boggling. Anyway, if I understood you right, the bodies' functions were formed a while before the existence of supermarkets and food stamps, and that's exactly why bodies take unused calories and store them as fat. The body burns the fat for energy in lean times, but cannot use the original nutrients like proteins and vitamins which cannot be stored.

Anything at all is mind boggling to a dunce like you. As for the rest of your post you did a whole lot of talking and still never explained why you think fat people dont get hungry. Did you really think everyone wouldnt see through your bullshit? What the **** is wrong with you?

My God, are you still jumping up and down?! Take it easy, aerobics are good, but you'll exhaust yourself.