 | | Re: New quarter?
|
| Yup. Get ready for 49 more, one for each state. (...) (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Re: New quarter?
|
| Larry Pieniazek wrote in message <36DA1B7F.E081FE8E@v...er.net>... (...) I totally forgot about that. I don't think it's necessary. Jesse ___...___ Jesse The Jolly Jingoist Looking for answers? Read the rec.toys.lego FAQ! (URL) in Deja News! (URL) (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Re: New quarter?
|
| (...) Relatively harmless as government boondoggles go, I guess, but certainly not necessary. (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Re: New quarter?
|
| On Mon, 1 Mar 1999 04:51:55 GMT, Jesse Long uttered the following profundities... (...) Well, if the US Government still has enormous debt problems, they can always hold back numbers of certain states, in order to ensure "scarcity." They can then (...) (26 years ago, 1-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Re: New quarter?
|
| (...) Why do I have the feeling that at this very moment, an FBI official is comtemplating this very thing.... Stupidity tax. Jasper (26 years ago, 2-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| | | | | Re: New quarter?
|
| (...) Better a stupidity tax than a smart tax (like income (in general)). (26 years ago, 2-Mar-99, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
| |
