Remember me
▼ Content

global warming



Page 1 of 212>
global warming14-08-2019 05:02
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
It can be really simple to combat climate change.
Here it is - a dollar spent is a dollar that is respent many times by other people. Each time a dollar is spent and respent it is eventually spent on something that produces CO2 and pollutants. The more you spend the more CO2 you produce.
So - just stop spending, or more realistically, spend as little money as possible.

And remember, the purpose of life is NOT to grow the economy - that is just the brainwashing talking. If we all just quit spending so much money, we could solve the problem of global warming.
14-08-2019 05:52
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4906)
keepit wrote: It can be really simple to combat climate change.

Nope. It's not possible to combat the completely undefined. Try it, you'll see.

keepit wrote: Here it is - a dollar spent is a dollar that is respent many times by other people. Each time a dollar is spent and respent it is eventually spent on something that produces CO2 and pollutants.

It's called the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Did you only just learn this?

keepit wrote: The more you spend the more CO2 you produce.

The more you simply live the more CO2 you produce. I pray that I'm not the first person to tell you this.

keepit wrote: If we all just quit spending so much money, we could solve the problem of global warming.

Nope. There is no solution for any completely undefined problem.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-08-2019 10:49
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1346)
keepit wrote:
It can be really simple to combat climate change.
Here it is - a dollar spent is a dollar that is respent many times by other people. Each time a dollar is spent and respent it is eventually spent on something that produces CO2 and pollutants. The more you spend the more CO2 you produce.
So - just stop spending, or more realistically, spend as little money as possible.

And remember, the purpose of life is NOT to grow the economy - that is just the brainwashing talking. If we all just quit spending so much money, we could solve the problem of global warming.


Sort of a one track mind here... It's not about growing the economy, it is the economy. With no economy, there wouldn't be jobs, or much to spend money on anyway. We would individually produce the same or more CO2, since we all would be working harder and longer producing what we want and need, and hopefully a little more, that we might trade for things we can't produce ourselves.

You obviously don't practice what you preach either, you spent money on a computer, internet service. Neither is essential to survival. What sort of things should we be spending less on? How am I going to have money to spend on essential items, if I have no job. My current job (of the past 28 years), relies heavily on people spending money. With people 'spending less', there would fewer, if any jobs, where I work, to earn the money I spend on essentials. Most people's jobs, the businesses they work for, exist, because people spend money. Most people don't have enough land to grow their own food, or raise their own livestock, nor the desire to work sunrise to sunset, hoping nature is favorable each year, to keep food on the table, and provide enough extra to trade for goods and materials, to keep clothes on your family's back, and a roof over their head.

So, how does it work, in your dream world? How do we get everything we need, by spending less. How do people earn money to spend on essentials, the things they need, like food, clothing, energy to heat their homes? Most business exist, simply because people spend money. It's all inter-related, you can't reduce one, without reducing the other. The people that lose their jobs and business, still need food and shelter, just no longer have an income to pay for them. It won't be about spending less, they just lost the capacity to spend anything at all.

I really don't understand how anyone in the 21st century could have no idea how money works, unless money was always free, never had to work for it. You wouldn't be getting free money from the government, because that is dependent on many people working, jobs and business, people spending. I'm not entirely knowledgeable in how a socialist country would work, successfully, since most fail quickly, just never seemed relevant. I should probably study up on it some, since our democratic party, is now openly the socialist party, and it might be good to know how to take advantage of their re-distribution of wealth, before the cash runs out, and society is reduced to chaos and anarchy.
14-08-2019 18:18
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
This just a simple general principle here - Sharing of jobs and therefore less work per week per person - aw shucks.
Less buying of stuff wouldn't be hard at all.
The hard part is managing debt and mortgages. I wouldn't want socialism but govt intervention in debt could work.
There are several socialist programs in the US but that doesn't mean we are socialist.
14-08-2019 18:48
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
keepit wrote:
This just a simple general principle here - Sharing of jobs and therefore less work per week per person - aw shucks.
Less buying of stuff wouldn't be hard at all.
The hard part is managing debt and mortgages. I wouldn't want socialism but govt intervention in debt could work.
There are several socialist programs in the US but that doesn't mean we are socialist.


You want a government-mandated paycheck somebody else earned... Socialism

You want the government to pay your debts... Socialism

Socialism has been tried how many times around the world, it has never worked. Why do you want more of it? You say you don't want it, but then you say you do.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
14-08-2019 18:54
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
GAs - often wrong, never in doubt.
What you said has nothing to do with me or the meaning of my post.
14-08-2019 19:20
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
Then please explain how gov debt intervention will work....I didn't say perfectly, just a general overview
14-08-2019 20:15
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4906)
keepit wrote: This just a simple general principle here - Sharing of jobs and therefore less work per week per person - aw shucks.

Unacceptable. The single biggest employment issue I find is people not getting enough hours. Anything that intentionally makes that worse is summarily dismissed.

keepit wrote: Less buying of stuff wouldn't be hard at all.

My wife's response: summarily dismissed!

keepit wrote: The hard part is managing debt and mortgages.

That currently is the hard part. You seek to make it the impossible part.

Dismissed.

keepit wrote: I wouldn't want socialism but govt intervention in debt could work.

Translation: I wouldn't want socialism, ... I DEMAND socialism.

keepit wrote: There are several socialist programs in the US but that doesn't mean we are socialist.

Perhaps the way to truly make America great again is the find those socialist programs and to eliminate them.

When can we start?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-08-2019 20:37
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1346)
keepit wrote:
This just a simple general principle here - Sharing of jobs and therefore less work per week per person - aw shucks.
Less buying of stuff wouldn't be hard at all.
The hard part is managing debt and mortgages. I wouldn't want socialism but govt intervention in debt could work.
There are several socialist programs in the US but that doesn't mean we are socialist.


Job sharing, is also paycheck sharing. Lot of households barely making it on two full time jobs. You still end up with less money going back into the economy, which will shut down business, and remove more jobs.

What sort of stuff, do you figure we should stop buying? There is more to life, than punching the clock, and try to keep up with the bills. Work sucks, it's even worse, when after the bills are paid, there is much, or anything left over, to make it worth while. If people stop spending on stuff, you kill jobs. Most of the spending people do, go back toward paying someone else's wages. Usually not a high profit margin, it's the volume of 'stuff' moving off the shelves.

Nothing is truly free, somebody has to pay the bill eventually, even the government. They can raise taxes on the 'wealthy', who happen to also be the business owners, who tend to pass that on to employees and customers, reduce quality.

Yeah, we do have several socialist programs, that just keep plunging us further into debt. Obama doubled the national debt, of all previous presidents combined, plus we are still paying for his socialism programs, and probably will for another 10 years or so. ObamaTrains, are each billion dollar deals, and he got quite a few states to take the bait. Florida took the bait, on both the light-rail, and high-speed models. Fortunately, we spit out the hook on the high-speed project, with a new governor. Unfortunately, spending had already started on the light-rail, which probably will never see enough use, to float on it's own. State has to pay, to keep it running. Of course, there is also ObamaCare, those who already had insurance, got to pay more, for less, and still doesn't cover all the subsidies, and free policies, government will continue to pick up a good deal of the costs. Then there are the oldies, like welfare, and education. There are a lot of free stuff programs, which are actually paid by us working folks. What happens, when there are few people paying taxes, fewer businesses to tax. You have more people needing assistance, and the government has less to spend? Just keep adding to the national debt? I'm surprised it's gotten as high as it has, and not sure what happens when we can't add to it, or lenders expect some return.

The founding fathers never promised us anything for free, just that we are free to work as hard as we want, to obtain our personal goals. Socialism kills dreams and ambitions.
14-08-2019 21:22
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
Gas - sorry to have mispelled your name.
For example, back in 2008 when we had the crisis, the fed and others lowered interest rates so that so many houses would not be foreclosed on. In a very real way that devalued the debt on mortgages. It worked for huge numbers of people and saved the financial system of the US and the world since the US is so integral in the world economy. I don't want to get into the semantics of the word socialism but that event was one example of a socialistic measure. I hope noone self implodes over that fact.
Those people at the Fed and the Treasury are very smart and can devise ways to slowly devalue debt and mortgages. They can help to pay off the national debt by issuing a few dollars to foreign countries rather than issuing new treasuries which we have to pay interest on.
There is so much misunderstanding about economics that in my mind it amounts to brainwashing.
Not that i'm an economist, i'm just an amateur but if debt could be helped by fancy economic manipulations we wouldn't need such a big paycheck.
14-08-2019 21:38
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
keepit wrote:
Gas - sorry to have mispelled your name.
For example, back in 2008 when we had the crisis, the fed and others lowered interest rates so that so many houses would not be foreclosed on. In a very real way that devalued the debt on mortgages. It worked for huge numbers of people and saved the financial system of the US and the world since the US is so integral in the world economy. I don't want to get into the semantics of the word socialism but that event was one example of a socialistic measure. I hope noone self implodes over that fact.
Those people at the Fed and the Treasury are very smart and can devise ways to slowly devalue debt and mortgages. They can help to pay off the national debt by issuing a few dollars to foreign countries rather than issuing new treasuries which we have to pay interest on.
There is so much misunderstanding about economics that in my mind it amounts to brainwashing.
Not that i'm an economist, i'm just an amateur but if debt could be helped by fancy economic manipulations we wouldn't need such a big paycheck.


In 2008, the dollar was devalued by creating fake ones. Real money and real assets, including my house, we're devalued. People at retirement age lost trillions.

Your plan only creates another 2008 crisis, this time with massive inflation.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
Edited on 14-08-2019 21:40
14-08-2019 21:44
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
Gas - it wasn't the manipulations of the fed that devalued houses, it was the manipulations of the fed that solved the problem (gradually).
It was the manipulations of the private sector that caused the problem.
I remember that every home appraisal that i knew of seemed to be as high as necessary to make the bank able to make the mortgage loan.
14-08-2019 22:01
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4906)
keepit wrote:For example, back in 2008 when we had the crisis, the fed and others lowered interest rates so that so many houses would not be foreclosed on. In a very real way that devalued the debt on mortgages.

... which imperiled the economy. The surest way to destroy an economy overnight is to cripple the financial institutions, creating a run on the banks.

Beware of socialists promoting solutions that are veiled attacks on Wall St., banks, investment firms and other financial institutions that aim to nullify individuals' obligations to repay legally acquired debt to those financial institutions.

keepit wrote: I don't want to get into the semantics of the word socialism ...

... but I will: Marxism, as outlined in the Communist Manifesto. The corruption of every aspect of economics to ruin the world economy and to impoverish everyone as a manifestion of pure hatred for humanity, and the incorporation of every possible vehicle of dishonesty to accomplish this end.

keepit wrote:There is so much misunderstanding about economics that in my mind it amounts to brainwashing.

Tell me about it. Marxists are totally brainwashed into fearing sound economics as "criminal exploitation" and to view MBA programs as "evil capitalist indoctrinations."

keepit wrote: Not that i'm an economist, i'm just an amateur but if debt could be helped by fancy economic manipulations we wouldn't need such a big paycheck.

I'm happy to assist you with economics.

Debt cannot be "helped" by any accounting trickery. Any attempts to screw with the currency end up hurting everyone much worse than simply requiring debtors to pay their just debts.

.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-08-2019 22:01
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
keepit wrote:

I remember that every home appraisal that i knew of seemed to be as high as necessary to make the bank able to make the mortgage loan.


I'll skip straight to this because it makes my point. You are damn right appraisals were high. Lot of shady appraisal work going on with the banks and loans. 125% loans on houses that were appraised 125% higher than their actual value....

.... But who cares, right? All these loans were backed by the federal government. How could it possibly in badly?

In 2010, I started a business servicing these foreclosed homes. Geez, I was making anywhere from 800 to $1,500 a day mowing lawns on foreclosed homes. In a way, I felt guilty because the guy next door the paid his taxes and paid his mortgage was paying me. Fannie Mae paid me every dime, what's wrong with that?

You keep advocating getting the government involved to fix things, they do such a great job. how about going the other way and getting the government the **** out anywhere they shouldn't be?


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
Edited on 14-08-2019 22:05
14-08-2019 22:10
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
often wrong, never in doubt.

Sometimes you need a little govt regulation. I don't like it either but sometimes you need it.
I haven't seen anyone on this website that knows very much about economics.
14-08-2019 22:10
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4906)
GasGuzzler wrote:You keep advocating getting the government involved to fix things, they do such a great job. how about going the other way and getting the government the **** out anywhere they shouldn't be?

Excellent point.

Beware of socialists working to closely integrate ever increasing government into our lives.

Beware of socialists working to give government ever increasing control of our lives.

Beware of socialists working to make people's existence one of serving the government as opposed to the other way around.

Beware of socialists couching policy questions in terms of "Should people be allowed to ...?" as a way of alleviating any need on their part to justify why ever increasing aspects of our lives should be prohibited ... by the government.

Beware of socialists throwing the word "science" around.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
14-08-2019 22:15
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
IBdaMann wrote:


Beware of socialists working to make people's existence one of serving the government as opposed to the other way around.


All excellent points, but this one is spot-on gold.

May I quote you in my signature line with this?


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
14-08-2019 22:20
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
often wrong, never in doubt.

So many GENERAL PRONOUNCEMENTS on this website. Wrong conclusions on top of other wrong conclusions on top of more and more.
What a hoot.
14-08-2019 22:23
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4906)
GasGuzzler wrote:May I quote you in my signature line with this?


I'm listening to Rammstein right now, so you should be quoting everything I write.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
15-08-2019 19:49
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(9573)
keepit wrote:
often wrong, never in doubt.

Sometimes you need a little govt regulation. I don't like it either but sometimes you need it.
I haven't seen anyone on this website that knows very much about economics.


People here know more than you do.

We know where our economics ideals lead to. Misery and poverty.
We know where capitalism leads to. Prosperity and wealth.

We know that socialism can only exist by stealing wealth. It cannot create any wealth. Since people want to avoid theft, that means socialism requires oligarchies and dictatorships to implement.

No thanks.


The Parrot Killer
15-08-2019 20:14
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
Into the Night wrote:
keepit wrote:
often wrong, never in doubt.

Sometimes you need a little govt regulation. I don't like it either but sometimes you need it.
I haven't seen anyone on this website that knows very much about economics.

People here know more than you do.

We know where our economics ideals lead to. Misery and poverty.


Your?



I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
Edited on 15-08-2019 20:22
15-08-2019 20:29
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
More general pronouncements. Geez.
I wouldn't want to live anywhere else.
And a few socialistic programs don't bother me at all. Socialized medicine, socialized education. Money for folks that become unemployable because of automation, etc.
People need medicine and education and money, and they need help getting it sometimes.
Some of you guys are such whiners.
15-08-2019 20:49
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
keepit wrote:
More general pronouncements. Geez.
I wouldn't want to live anywhere else.
And a few socialistic programs don't bother me at all. Socialized medicine, socialized education. Money for folks that become unemployable because of automation, etc.
People need medicine and education and money, and they need help getting it sometimes.
Some of you guys are such whiners.


Who do most enjoy taking from to pay for these things?


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
15-08-2019 21:02
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
Start by taking it from people who don't need it.

Often wrong, never in doubt.
15-08-2019 21:07
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
You are OK with the gov deciding how much YOU need?

I'm not.
15-08-2019 21:14
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
I didn't say that Gas.
Isn't it obvious that many people have much more than they need?
15-08-2019 21:21
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
keepit wrote:
Start by taking it from people who don't need it.

Often wrong, never in doubt.


Like it or not, money is an amazing incentive for people to accomplish great things.

Doctors that save lives, gone. How many doctors quit or retired early or never started with the implementation of Obamacare? These people don't want to work for the government. They want the paycheck they deserve for the schooling and training and skill they have.

What about all the wonderful devices you use everyday? The smartphone was not invented out of the goodness of someone's heart. The incentive was money, and shitloads of it!

What about products like gas and oil? I find it amazing they can go halfway around the world, remove the oil, send it back to the United States, refine it in the gasoline, and sell it back to me for ONLY $2.50 a gallon. it's a great product at a great price, and once again somebody is making shitloads of money off of it. Why? Because somebody took the risk and made the investment in developing and using new technologies to bring us what we want. Shall we see how the economy does on $8 gasoline?

There are Literally hundreds of thousands of examples of free markets working as they should.
Without the government all up in our shit, free markets have produced the greatest lifestyle ever known to mankind anywhere on the Earth. Why do you want to screw with that?


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
15-08-2019 21:26
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
keepit wrote:
I didn't say that Gas.
Isn't it obvious that many people have much more than they need?


I can only speak for myself. I have more than I need. I suspect there are many people I know that have more than they need, but I don't get to decide what they need. Certainly the government should not decide who needs what.


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
15-08-2019 21:43
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
I never said the govt should decide. You suggested that in a negative way.
I think the people should vote on it, not the govt.
15-08-2019 22:10
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
The people DO vote on it. People like Hillary and Bernie and a whole host of others are YOUR representatives that shares your opinion. This is how our gov works.

However, Trump won.

Maybe the next election will find more people in favor of socialism. I hope not.
15-08-2019 22:15
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4906)
keepit wrote:People need medicine and education and money, and they need help getting it sometimes.

Somebody's mere claim to "need" something doesn't come anywhere close to being his right to have me bankroll it for him.

keepit wrote: Some of you guys are such whiners.

You are clearly a loser who wants me to fund his ability to stay at home all day, sitting on the sofa, cramming Pringles into his mouth with one hand while surfing channels with the other.

You just want stuff for free and to have the government compel me to pay for it.

... *and* you want me to support your efforts to achieve that.

Goo news! You plan will work if you hold your breath long enough.


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
15-08-2019 22:18
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4906)
keepit wrote: Start by taking it from people who don't need it.

Who do you imagine will state that he has money he doesn't need for it to be taken?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
15-08-2019 22:30
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
keepit wrote:
Start by taking it from people who don't need it.

So, you chose the name "keepit". Why?

From here forward, you will be referred to by me as "takeit".

Fair enough?


I think people screw me over because they don't want to see someone willing to put out the effort that they won't.~James~
Edited on 15-08-2019 22:32
15-08-2019 23:32
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
Back to name calling and false accusations huh.
15-08-2019 23:36
GasGuzzler
★★★★☆
(1431)
Takeit,

I also said Bernie was a socialist. Is that name calling too?
15-08-2019 23:55
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
I think Bernie calls himself a democratic socialist. I'm not very knowledgible about these things but i think there's a difference between a socialist and a democratic socialist.
I'd rather deal with these things issue by issue rather than argue semantics.
Edited on 15-08-2019 23:58
16-08-2019 00:23
HarveyH55
★★★★☆
(1346)
keepit wrote:
More general pronouncements. Geez.
I wouldn't want to live anywhere else.
And a few socialistic programs don't bother me at all. Socialized medicine, socialized education. Money for folks that become unemployable because of automation, etc.
People need medicine and education and money, and they need help getting it sometimes.
Some of you guys are such whiners.


There is a big difference between 'need', and 'want'. I don't have a problem helping out people in need, occasionally, for a short period. That's not really a function of government though, it should be the responsibility of the local community, to help each other through the rough spots in life. That's why we have family, friends, and neighbors, and the incentive to get along well with other people. Those in 'need' tend to do their best to avoid needing a helping-hand, and make it short and cheap, because it's coming from family, friends, and neighbors, who they want to stay on good terms with.

We all 'want' something, which requires a certain level of work, to obtain. Work is hard, not usually what we want to be doing, but it's a means to get the thing we want and need. Naturally, we'd like to do less work, and get more of the things we 'want', and 'need', but that isn't an option. The more we 'want', the harder we work to obtain it. Unfortunately, there are many who have the same wants and needs as everyone else, but lack the drive and motivation to do the work, to obtain. The more free stuff the government gives them, also gives them less incentive to work. It also gives some people the incentive not work hard anymore, since they can get everything they need for 'free, as well as much of what they 'want'.

During the Obama recession years, there were a lot of people getting laid off from their jobs, and living off Unemployment insurance. There were still jobs available, the company I work for, 26 warehouses across the country, was hiring the whole time. I kept putting the word out, because I get a small incentive for referrals, they just need to write my name on the application. I've yet to get that incentive... Unemployment insurance lasts only 6 months, but Obama kept extending it, for about 3 years... Some people held out for specific types of jobs, or a job with similar pay/benefits, rather than take what they could find, and either work their way through that company to a position they wanted, or keep looking for a better company to work for. Many didn't bother seriously looking for a job, as long as they had an income, from Unemployment, mostly two income households.

The trouble with our current welfare (freebie) socialism programs, is that there is no need or incentive to get jobs, or keep them. All the basic needs are generously covered, which only leaves stuff that is 'wanted'. Since they are actually given more, than their minimal needs to survive, they have a little extra to sell or trade, for what they 'want'. Some also turn to taking the things they 'want', or the money to buy them.

Keeping a job, is a responsibility. You have to show up on time, and expected to perform a task, as specified by the employer, for compensation, which hardly makes it worthwhile. Fortunately, there are many options, and you can keep working and looking for jobs and positions, that better fit the hours, level of effort, and compensation, that better suits the individual. There is still the responsibility of showing up on time, consistently and performing a task as expected. Lot of people choose the 'free stuff' route, so they can avoid those responsibilities. It's not just 'free stuff', but the freedom to stay up all night partying, having a good time, then sleeping late the next day or two, if you don't feel like getting out of bed. You get to do whatever you want, anytime you want, and the government picks up the tab.
16-08-2019 01:51
keepit
★★★☆☆
(598)
Harvey,
Thanks for the explanation.
16-08-2019 02:23
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(4906)
keepit wrote:I think Bernie calls himself a democratic socialist.

Marxists hijack the word "democratic" and "democracy" every chance they get.

Have you noticed how Marxist extremists have hijacked the Democratic Party?

keepit wrote: I'm not very knowledgible about these things but i think there's a difference between a socialist and a democratic socialist.

There's no difference. They both hate humanity and want to destroy the world economy. They hate the USA and anyone who is making the world a better place.

keepit wrote: I'd rather deal with these things issue by issue rather than argue semantics.

That's the most ridiculous comment I've read today. This is a forum of ideas. It runs entirely on semantics. How do you not know this?

The only way to not argue semantics is for everyone to agree with you completely on everything. I'm here to tell you that's not going to happen. Does this mean you are planning on leaving the forum?


.


Global Warming: The preferred religion of the scientifically illiterate.

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

When the alt-physics birds sing about "indivisible bodies," we've got pure BS. - VernerHornung

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
16-08-2019 07:09
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★☆
(1322)
keepit wrote:just stop spending, or more realistically, spend as little money as possible.


I think that you can make things valuable by investing money in them.

If you don't want a rain forest cut down for cattle the most reliable way of doing that it to make worth more to tourism.

You don't always have to fight capitalism you can wield it.

Case in point: Organic food.

For people that are into it there is a HUGE business now and plenty of farmers are cashing in.

The answer wasn't to not buy GMO it was to actively buy organic.
Page 1 of 212>





Join the debate global warming:

Remember me

▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2019 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact