Re: Housing starts a.k.a. land attrition

"Dan Bloomquist" <public21@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:iaxIj.982$NU2.398@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Matt W. Barrow wrote:
>> "Dan Bloomquist" <public21@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>> news:OtsIj.973$NU2.834@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> Matt W. Barrow wrote:
>>>> "Dan Bloomquist" <public21@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
>>>> news:4NjIj.960$NU2.256@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> Matt W. Barrow wrote:
>
>>>>> You didn't answer the question.
>
>>> So, you make a claim and refuse to back it up.
>>>
>
> You didn't answer the question.

You guess so? As a matter of fact, I did, I just wasn't about the be drawn

into your guessing game.

You're the one that made the claim, snotball. You said we were running out

of fuel and used two totally irrelevant substitutes to make your point.
That 
is utter ignorance that I'm not willing to sift out from you.

Then you GUESSED at what we (a couple others) meant.

(I'm having such fun playing with this pompous and pretentious
know-nothing)

Ask an INTELLIGENT and RELEVANT question and I'll answer it - I'm not
going 
to respond to your SFB tantrums.