Today, I decided that I am going to buy the Nikon D80 10.2MP Digital SLR with the 18-135mm AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor lens. The problem is that is costs $1,159. Well, that's not actually the problem. The problem is that I only have $900 to spend. However, I learned something this week from Martin O'Malley and I am going to apply my new found knowledge. Recently, Martin O'Malley decided that he wanted to spend $33 billion (yes, billllllllllionsssss) for 2008. The problem is that he only has $31.3 billion to spend. (whah!) He brags that he wanted to spend more, but decided to cut $280 million from his plan. $280 million?
So he's Mr. Wonderful because he cut 0.8% of his budget? And now we have to dish out billions more in new taxes so that he can spend more money for our benefit? To make matters worse, he says that if we don't hurry up and give him this money, he's going to demand more money? How does this make any sense?
So....using Martin O'Malley's logic, it doesn't matter if I don't have $1,158 for that new Nikon D80. It's what I want, and that's what matters. All I need to do now is tell my employer that they need to pay me a little more money (and it's for their benefit!) and I can get my new camera. And if they don't give it to me, I'm not doing anything for them. Easy as pie, eh?
2 comments:
So are you REALLY going to buy a fancy camera? I get your little metaphor but just wanted to know if you were truly going to join the 'fancy camera' club.
Hey, did you get an idea to buy a camera like that because of me? Why is everyone buying the D80 and not the D40x like me!?!? Or like Mrstwink says, you're not really buying the camera, but putting it in for your post about O'malley's tax hike?
Post a Comment