Advice on purchase
- By spife7980
- Bolt Action Rifles
- 8 Replies
Not a bad price at all if it’s what you want anyways. I wouldn’t buy it just for the sake of doing so, that’s how you end up with a closet of crap you never use.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nothing I have accomplished or have earned was at your expense. If it makes you feel better to blame someone for your shortcomings, then go ahead. My background is taking responsibility for myself and making the choices that get me where I want to be. I don’t blame anyone for my not having more.Dismissing real data and real world facts in order to avoid reassessing your worldview?
Yea that sounds about boomer.
I got a chick naked one time to find an A cup on the right and a C on the left!!
We agree on that.Releasing the Epstein files will not, and has no power to, convict any of the people mentioned.
Only a court can convict.
Under our system someone is innocent until proven guilty.
Therefore the release of documents has no legal impact on those mentioned therein, and the excuse being used is spurious.
Release them all and stop lying.
They 'are' the reason, not a tough concept.Because a federal judge ruled they can’t release the files as it would impugn a bunch of people who haven’t been proven guilty of any crimes thus far.
I know that innocent until proven guilty is a tough concept for some of the retards on here but they is the reason the Epstein files have not, and probably never will be released.
You don’t say…WHO could’ve predicted something this…unpredictable???
I was in Johnson City. They have their fair share of crime for sure.And I’m sure in your AO there is no serious crime , gangs or outstanding murder warrants or unsolved homicides .
Cause of course there couldn’t be ; it would make them HUGE CUNTS to be doing traffic while crime runs rampant.
well,Savage has always been over the top. not that it matters,by none of the things we are being told about this whole event do not add up and equal the gov story. just a bunch of small things which added together don't seem to fit. at the end of the day,gov account may be true. but,personally,i believed the 9/11 story for years. learned that was not a complete rendering or the truth. there are explanations given for everything i see wrong but added together they don't = the gov story.i'm not saying this is the case...but like i always try to do, i am sharing it.
as he tells it, it does seem unlikely. we have folks that can tell us if this is true or not.
Login to view embedded media
I bring receipts
I ran the numbers. I used U.S. federal minimum wages (1968 and today) and current spot gold to compute how many troy ounces a full-time minimum-wage worker could buy per week in 1968 vs today, and then calculated the annual income today that would be required to match 1968’s gold-buying power.
Key source numbers I used
- Federal minimum wage (effective Feb 1, 1968): $1.60 / hr.
- Federal minimum wage today (federal floor, still in effect in 2025): $7.25 / hr.
- Spot gold price (used for “today”): $3,648.25 per troy ounce (spot; source sampled Sept 2025).
- Historical 1968 gold market prices: after the London gold-pool stresses 1968 saw market prices above the $35 official parity; daily fixes cluster around ~$38–$40/oz for much of 1968 (I used $38.50/oz as a representative 1968 market average).
Calculations (step-by-step)
Assumptions: full-time = 40 hours/week, 52 weeks/year. Gold measured in troy ounces.
1968 (using $1.60/hr and $38.50/oz):
- Weekly earnings = $1.60 × 40 = $64.00.
- Ounces of gold/week = $64.00 ÷ $38.50 ≈ 1.6623 oz/week.
Today (federal minimum $7.25/hr and spot gold $3,648.25/oz):
- Weekly earnings = $7.25 × 40 = $290.00.
- Ounces of gold/week = $290.00 ÷ $3,648.25 ≈ 0.07949 oz/week.
Relative buying power:
- 1968 oz/week ÷ 2025 oz/week ≈ 1.6623 ÷ 0.07949 ≈ 20.9.
So a minimum-wage worker in 1968 could buy ~21× more gold per week than a federal minimum-wage worker can buy today (using the numbers above).
How large would yearly income
today
need to be to match 1968’s gold-buying power?
Take the 1968 annual gold quantity (1.6623 oz/week × 52 weeks = 86.44 oz/year). At today’s spot price:
- Required annual income today = 86.44 oz × $3,648.25/oz ≈ $315,370 per year.
Equivalently, you’d need about $6,065 per week (which ×52 ≈ $315,370) to buy the same gold annually a 1968 minimum-wage earner could.
You have to think like a Democrat. You see anyone who disagrees with them is using hate. If you argue with the Democrats it’s hate speech.i'm scrolling through shorts looking for hate, and can only find the guests being rude or hateful.
Login to view embedded media
According to the judge that isn’t the case. You can bitch and cry about it all you want, but a judge who has the authority to make that decision has already ruled.
The logic is pretty simple.
Ask yourself if your name and contact information were in Epstein’s contacts list because you were his lawn care service in NY, would you want to have your information released with no context?
Sure you will have committed no crimes, and no charges will be forthcoming much less a conviction. All the same your name and reputation will be unjustifiably covered in shit.