Math Programs Up! Spread The Word

<p>"And as a final note on gay marriage, I would think homosexuals would want to be involved with the government. You ever hear of taxes? Filing single versus married? A couple filing single would pay substancially more to the government every year only to have the government deny their "rights" as americans."</p>

<p>Actually, if you are married w/o children, then you have to pay a higher tax rate. With children, then yes, your tax rate will be lower. However, homosexual couples are anatomically unable to have children. The only way for them to acquire a child would be to adopt, which is a long and painstaking process. So in conclusion, a married gay couple would be paying more taxes than if they were single (at least until the adopted child is legally theirs).</p>

<p>madskier87:</p>

<p>Other than that, most of what you said makes a lot of sense. I would like to see you and GeorgeS debate live one day. =P</p>

<p>"Kennedy::moderation as Reagan::SEVERE MARKET RECESSION."</p>

<p>BTW, this is not really important, but you are supposed to write analogies in this format.</p>

<p>Kennedy:moderation::Reagan:SEVERE MARKET RECESSION
: means "is to"
:: means "as"</p>

<p>GeorgeS:</p>

<p>"Re-read what you just said and re-consider your views on abortion. Then, re-read what you just said a second time and re-consider whether or not you are a conservative (because that statement is as pure as conservatism gets)."</p>

<p>Aww come on man. I liked what I was reading in your arguement until I came across that statement. Man that is weak sauce. I hope you can do a better job next time.</p>

<p>(man I just love watching/reading a conservative argue with a liberal) =P</p>

<p>
[quote]
Conservatives wish to ban abortion because they feel it is "murder" and the woman who has an abortion should be culpable of a criminal charge. First of all, many conservatives feel abortion violates their religious principles.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Would you shut up about Christianity? My argumentation wasn't based around that, so stop it. Furthermore, It's kind of hard to ignore the fact that the same Judeo-Christian philosophy that enlightened us through the ages with an American form of government would also have something to say against abortion. Please, however, refrain from getting Christianity involved in this debate as it doesn't need to be. My points written above stand: abortion is murder in principle and cannot be allowed by a government to happen (you bringing up Christianity didn't touch a speck of my logic).</p>

<p>As far as that "research refuting my own argument" goes, I find it cheap for you to copy and paste one sentence from a several page document and dance around pretending the whole paper has been decimated. DIRECTLY AFTER YOUR QUOTE reads as follows in that research paper:</p>

<p>
[quote]
First, measured on a year-to-year basis, the country was beset by double-digit inflation in 1979, 1980, and 1981. Second, that inverse harbinger of confidence in all paper currencies, the price of gold, was pushing $900 – and silver was also at an all-time high. Third, the U.S. dollar had weakened steadily, since its link to gold had been severed by Nixon in Aug. 1971. For example, the dollar fetched 360 Japanese yen at the start of the decade, but only half of that by 1980. Fourth, the tax system was becoming punitive even for middle-class families, “bracket creep” raised rates from 22% in 1965 to 49% in 1980 – and the highest income taxpayers faced a 70% federal marginal rate, and an 11% D.C. tax on top of that.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>With that being said, it doens't even matter anyway because my point was that a deficit is created when you SPEND more than you HAVE. It was the DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS THAT CREATED THE DEFICIT BY SPENDING $1.83 FOR EVERY $1.00 THEY HAD, NOT REAGAN WHO ROSE TAX REVENUE (even HELPING Congress' spending habits) BY GIVING TAX-CUTS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I will give you some credit; You correctly Identified that a liberal (John F. Kennedy) was the first president to utilize deficit spending.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I not once made that point. My point was that the democrats in Congress had to have created the deficit as they were the ones who were in charge of all of the SPENDING.</p>

<p>Finally, your attempt at refuting my gay marriage points didn't even touch my primary argument (only a secondary comment I made about questioning why gays would even want to get involved with the government). Even if I granted your point about gay people wanting to get involved with the government, it wouldn't have to be through "MARRIAGE" (see above posts), it could be through civil unions. Again, gay "marriage" is illogical and goes against the point on why we have a marriage institution to begin with: procreation! (Remember, this isn't an argument against gay PEOPLE, this is an argument against gay "MARRIAGE".)</p>

<p>
[quote]
Aww come on man. I liked what I was reading in your arguement until I came across that statement. Man that is weak sauce. I hope you can do a better job next time.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That wasn't weak sauce lol, he made a conservative statement, so I had to nail him on it (no offense madskier) =P</p>

<p>"Conservatives wish to ban abortion because they feel it is "murder" and the woman who has an abortion should be culpable of a criminal charge."</p>

<p>I am politically inept...so could someone please explain to me why a person who kills a pregnant woman is put on trial for a double count of murder? After all, the woman wouldn't be able to testify as to whether or not she wanted the child. If abortion doesn't count as murder, but an external killer does, then it seems rather inconsistent. Shouldn't these two legal aspects be resolved, not for religious or moral reasons, but simply for simplicity of the law?</p>

<p>"Even if I granted your point about gay people wanting to get involved with the government, it wouldn't have to be through "MARRIAGE" (see above posts), it could be through civil unions. Again, gay "marriage" is illogical and goes against the point on why we have a marriage institution to begin with: procreation!"</p>

<p>Civil union = Star of David
Forcing gays to get civil unions is marking them as different. When they have to state their marital status, they are automatically forced to reveal their sexual orientation as well. And I don't mean just on forms. If someone were to casually ask a civil union member, "Are you married?", shouldn't they be allowed to answer yes in earnest?</p>

<p>"It was the DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS THAT CREATED THE DEFICIT BY SPENDING $1.83 FOR EVERY $1.00 THEY HAD, NOT REAGAN WHO ROSE TAX REVENUE (even HELPING Congress' spending habits) BY GIVING TAX-CUTS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE."</p>

<p>I read somewhere that the currently GOP-controlled Congress is spending more than its Democrat-controlled predecessor. But I don't follow politics very closely, so...either way, though, I don't think it's a good idea to put that much text in all-caps...</p>

<p>GeorgeS, I think I've finally realized that this debate on a math program forum needs to end. You made some good points on these issues; I just so happen to take a different stance on the majority of issues. I'm glad to see that you take a vested interest in politics because not many people do. Even if you do disagree with my opinions, I'm glad you care enough to develop your own political point-of-view.</p>

<p>tanonev, I think the point you are getting makes a lot of sense. Many of the issues we face today are difficult to even approach. It's a shame politics is not like a math problem with one, definitive answer. We truly live in a grey world</p>

<p>Madskier, agreed. Quickly though, I our world isn't grey (there is a black and white answer to everything), it's just that we are incapable at times of identifying what is black and what is white. Don't mistake my rhetoric for "extremism", I understand that I may not be right on everything and you may not be right on everything, I'm just stating there IS a right answer and a wrong answer to every problem America faces. </p>

<p>Thankfully, however, people like us can have debates about what is "white" and what is "black" while at the same time respecting each others dignity. In other countries, opposing political factions bring out the guns over election results, but in America that is unheard of. Why? Because we have come such a long way over the centuries and our republic is full of freedom loving, respectful people. </p>

<p>IN OTHER WORDS: I appreciate the debate and am going back to my SAT books, lol.</p>

<p>PS - tanonev, I have something to say on every argument you posted, but am going to have to throw in the towel like madskier on this one. Hopefully this thread won't be completely stolen by a political debate.</p>

<p>Sorry people, it was me who started this debate.
But it was a really interesting debate.
Thank you</p>

<p>lol interesting way to diverge...but nonetheless pretty good. just got a chance to read the whole thing lol...wow!</p>

<p>bump....one thing updated.</p>

<p>appreciate it if people can comment on what they think of these progs for feedback purposes. thanks</p>

<p>I'm not reading all these pages. I just think its like this:</p>

<p>If you can get an 800 with out the calculator good for you. But if you're allowed to use a calculator, why not use it to your advantage since you can't get the 800 with out the calculator? If you're mad about that, use the programs yourself. Why make things difficult?</p>

<p>Unfortunately, I have a TI-83. I can't use the programs. I'm looking to see if I can immitate them, though. ONe that will actually help me. Sometimes I feel the program is unneccesary.</p>

<p>UNNECCESARY. ...XD</p>

<p>Here's my TI-83+ version of SAT_OS:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.ticalc.org/archives/files/fileinfo/366/36668.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.ticalc.org/archives/files/fileinfo/366/36668.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>PEOPLE! These programs do NOT promise an 800.... They just contain formula's and reference information. They may speed your progress on the test, however, but you need to be good at math in general and have the ability to critically think about the harder math questions.</p>

<p>good insight harvard....anyway site temporarily down.</p>