What it means is that your car is a rollerskate with a Thimble Drome. We can't get "green" energy to do transportation until we invent the magic battery, and that may or may not happen, and it may or may not be soon.
LED's? Ive had my eye on them for a long time, and right now a 60 W bulb is $10. Yeah, they last a long time, but its like saying that a Tesla at $100K is fuel efficient because it is electric. Yeah, it is, but it costs too much, just like $10 for 60 watts. And no, they don't last commensurately longer because there's always some power spike on the line, or lightning, or some-such that streeses or outright fries 'em over a period of years.
And of course we consume so much energy because 1) we do a lot of industry and 2) we are huge, and have a very large transportation burden that has to be satisfied with fossil fuels, we just don't know how to do it any other way.
I have a home loan in process right now to hopefully get geothermal heat in right now, and that is a cost-thing, not a green-thing since I got a 1-month oil bill for $833 earlier this year. F-that. Going all-electric with geo has gotta save some $$$. If it helps relieve some CO2 or some other green aspect, I don't mind, but that isn't the main objective.
"No, you have got to realize that the idea of their even being a hit to the economy is a complete and total fabrication."
Bull. I was going thru West Virginia a couple years ago and heard the local radio station announcing the layoff of 1200 miners myself. I've been listening to the radio and TV for years, and hearing this sort of thing on a regular basis. These miners make good money, and now they're on welfare. Mining was the last thing a workman could do in that area - all the other (good) jobs have gone overseas like everywhere else in the country, thanks to the income taxes which are gutting our country. (They _all_ must be repealed, every last one of 'em) The only reason you don't know about this is that the liberal, mainstream media won't report anything that makes the current administration look bad. They're withholding a LOT of news lately.
"no wamring ofr 18 years" indeed....reality says otherwise buddy."
You have to go outside the USA to see stuff like this, 'cuz again, the Lamestream Media won't report it as it doesn't support the administration's power grab via the global warming scarecrow. Things like this "sky is falling" nonsense are characterized in the same manner as the old traveling salesman charlatans - ever see "The Music Man" play? "We have trouble. Right here in River City. That's Trouble with a capital 'T' that rhymes with 'P' that stand for POOL!" AGW is the same nonsense. Its trying to stampede people into spending money they way they want them too, and in the case of politicians allowing you to accept further gov't power increase. OMDB.
Of course there are reasons to assume disaster. Wind is a very expensive technology that normally cannot be used for baseload power generation, it is too unreliable. So it is a "nice-to-have" without being of great utility. The thing that people seem to miss that this FORCED decommissioning of coal plants is VERY WASTEFUL, since something of great value is destroyed, and must be replaced by something of great cost that wouldn't otherwise need to be replaced for years.
So you get to build 100's of 1000's of wind turbines, AND you still must build gas-fired or nuclear or some other tech that can produce when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing, and doing it SOONER rather than LATER is the big inefficiency. If one would wait until the coal-fired plant finally wore out and was decommissioned for being more expensive to operate than alternatives, that'd be different, but coming along and saying "Emergency, emergency, we have to spend gazillions of dollars RIGHT NOW to cure a problem that some really smart scientist believe is a lot of hokum just rubs me the wrong way. Did you know that Feeman Dyson, the man who assumed the "Smartest physicist alive" title when Einstein died signed a petition for the gov't to spend _NO MONEY_ on the AGW problem, and further declared that the computer boys with their models didn't know what the F they were doing, and hugely fudging how clouds were affected by greenhouse gas concentrations? Well, he did, and clouds are huge in the equation, so if they don't really know how to model clouds vs. CO2, then their models are most likely crap. I don't want to go spending trillions of dollars, and throwing the entire remainder of the population of the USA into poverty to chase this nonsense.
What's that got to do with the price of tea in China?
We ALREADY have the coal plants, they work, and shutting them down means having to replace them. Hint: Don't shut 'em down 'til they wear out. Then try to find something cheaper than wind to replace 'em with.
Position the wind machines where there's wind? Didn't we just calculate that there are going to ber 1,211,000 wind machines? They'll probably be located every 1 mile throughout the USA. There's 2,959,064.44 square miles in the contiguous USA, so with that many wind machines, there's going ot be one every 2 1/2 square mles or so. BUT, by the time that the evironmental extremists get done saying you can't put 'em here and you can't put 'em there, and then you also subtract the Rocky Mountains and much of the Appalacian mountains because they are too steep and rugged to be building and servicing wind machines, you're going to have them probably every 2500 feet apart in any place that the wind actually blows at all. What to have your scenic landscape dotted with wind machines virtually everywhere? I didn't think so.
Biggest wind machine now produced is 8 megawatts. Figure you need 3 of these to make up for when the wind doesn't blow. $$$ is 2 million per megawatt. USA consumes 3.23 terawatts. 3.23 X 10^12 watts / 8 X 10^6 watts / wind turbine X 3 turbines = 1.211 X 10^6 turbines. 1.211 X 10^6 turbines at (2 dollars / watt X 8 X 10^6 watts / turbine) = 19.38 X 10^12 dollars. That's 19,380 billion dollars, ladies and germs, just to buy the wind turbines. Would you really like to go there? Such expenditures could convert the USA into a 3rd world country, which it is to be suspected that these environmental zealots - watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) would like to accomplish in order to allow the communists and socialists to dominate the world and "take care" of everyone with their welfare states.
You pollution and global warming zealots have to realize that "hit to the economy" translates to extreme misery and death to some parts of the population. People die every day of poverty, from everything including hunger that weakens their immune system and allows diseases to kill people, to people becoming homeless and dying of exposure or criminal attack on the streets. Recent research has revealed that living in poverty results in about 6.5 years being taken off the lifespan of those doing it, and if done in childhood, those 6.5 years are still unrecoverable regardless of better circumstances later in life.
The quest for an absolutely pristine environment is not worth the human suffering it causes. Eliminate coal fired electricity and about the only ones that may notice are, reportedly, 2500 or so people in the country with asthma that will no longer be at risk, but 1000's of people get thrown into poverty from the jobs that will be killed and the eventual increase in the price of electricity. Some of those in poverty will die from it.
As for global warming, there hasn't been any for about 18 years now. This is the most egregious hoax perpetrated on the world's people since the eugenics nonsense that inspired the likes of Hitler, only this may be even more devastating that WW2 if these global warming extremists continue to degrade the prosperity of the American people, as well as others around the world. I'd like to make a deal with the global warming nuts, and cease all this nonsense about shutting down power plants and attempting to get 65 mpg out of cars, and instead we'll use all that money to work in geo-engineering mechanisms to do things like removing CO2 from the atmosphere, and then deploy it of necessary. It would save a lot of lives and eliminate a lot of misery that the current approach is costing us.
Anti-pollution zealots that keep attacking coal fail to realize that the 2nd-cheapest form of electricity promotes prosperity for the lowest-classes in the USA. That is, pollution from these sources may cause some health problems, but shutting down these sources eliminates coal mining jobs which pay really good money ($95K/yr in at least 1 case I know of) to mine coal and provide the 2nd lowest electricity prices available, with only hydroelectric being lower. So, eliminate coal and, overall, raise the misery level in the USA from (further) lack of jobs and higher energy prices.
My personal experience is that exercise kills my excessive appetite and sitting around tends to make me hungry. It may not make sense, but that's the way it works for me.
And no, if I was OK with fruits and veggies, I probably WOULD be thin and not need to diet, but I'm not. I don't enjoy them as foods, I enjoy dead burnt cow, and things like that. So, I need to exercise.
At 1800 calories of metabolism because of my otherwise sedentary nature, and the fact that below about 1200 calories you'd have to be extremely careful not to get into deficiencies of some nutrients, I really need to exercise. When I get off this diet, I'll be back to "regular" food and a lot of exercise, keeping my heart healthy, and enjoying life. I wouldn't enjoy it on oranges and bananas, nor tofu and whatever else is supposed to be healthy this week, only to be exposed as the wrong answer next week. I've long since quit listening to the medical pundits, since they are always, always reversing themselves. I think it was the CDC that just a few months ago declared a "my bad" and said that salt wasn't all that big a deal, and go ahead and have some. I only add salt to corn on the cob, and movie popcorn. That's it. Nothing else gets any extra salt from me. But I ignored the CDC and its minions for decades and had a really good time eating corn on the cob and movie popcorn, and now I'm vindicated. And I'm healthy.
We hate cyclists because they're all over the G-damned place and eventually we're going to crush one with the car and then go to jail for 20 years. F cyclists, get 'em off the G-damned roadway where they aren't a hazard to themselves and others. Even worse are night cyclists - I can't see a F'n thing when I've got boneheads coming at me with their bright lights on on a 2-lane twisty-A'd road, and so if there's a biker just beyond them, I can't see him. What am I supposed to do, stop until the oncoming car goes by? Then I'm just as likely to get rammed in the A by someone that doesn't expect me to be stopping in the middle of the F'n road. U can't imagine how much I hate cyclists on the public roads.
Sure, $7 a gallon fuel tax in a country 3000 miles wide and 1500 miles tall where public transport is near-impossible most places makes all kinds of sense.
Even if this global warming nonsense wasn't the most huge hoax ever perpetrated upon mankind and probably more dangerous than the last hoax of eugenics which inspired the likes of Hitler, pauparizing everyone except the very very rich, and attempting to create a society of only the very very rich and the very very poor by raising energy prices is not a righteous goal.
Lets compromise. Lets do everything we can to lower energy prices and thereby boost near-universal prosperity, while spending the resultant surplus money from said prosperity to bury the internal combustion engine, and later the external combustion ways of generating power forever. Something like this may someday actually happen:
but if it doesn't, then SOMETHING, but only if we have the available money supplies to pursue it. Available money supplies do not tend to spring out of a society where 99% of the people are dirt-poor and 1% are extremely wealthy, but that's what high-cost energy tends to promote.
The obesity problem is not what we're eating, its what we're not doing, which is physical work of some sort. "Work" doesn't mean drudgery, it means also not playing basketball, baseball, and football but instead screwing around with our smart phones, computers, and playstations while sitting, sitting, sitting. Attacking obesity on the consumption end of the calorie spectrum will fail. Hell, I only eat about 2400 calories a day when eating comfortably, but know that I metabolize around 1800. So I have to go to the gym, or _something_ to eat comfortably, or else eat uncomfortably and not enjoy life all that much. Right now, Nutrisystem is keeping me down to around 1500 calories a day, but without exercise I'd lose a pound about every 12 days. 1000-calorie stints in the gym whenever I can make that happen is what really gets me to lose. 20 lbs since July 11, but it wouldn't be happening without the 53,000 calories I've exercised since that date. Tried for 2 years to "simply exercise" it away while "eating normally" at 1800 calories, but couldn't execute eating 1800 calories, as I was hungry too often and foods I eat are delicious and I couldn't stop at 1800. I have a LOT of personal experience with this problem, and starving people just doesn't work. Getting them moving works.
Just about the time it gets airborne, the whole imaging system malfunctions and there you are with blank screens for a view, and missing anything interesting. Doubt that keeping the imaging running would be much of a priority, either. It'd probably work about as well as the other aspects of airline travel.
Detroit can be saved quite simply by repealing the income taxes. American industry will come roaring back to dominate the world, and Detroit will be one of the richest cities on the planet if we do that. JFK said about the income taxes:
"“The largest single barrier to full employment of our manpower and resources and to a higher rate of economic growth is the unrealistically heavy drag of federal income taxes on private purchasing power, initiative and incentive.” John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963 "
Income taxes suppress industry. Removing them entirely will make the USA the manufacturing center of the world again.
Look, the disease is hard to get. We've had 1 case, that has infected 2 other people at one Dallas hospital that apparently was not prepared for it. The 2 Americans that went to the Atlanta hospital were treated and survived without infecting anyone. There is no "outbreak." An outbreak is something with geometric progressions in the number of infected. This is not threat to us unless we become monumentally stupid. All its good for is to give the talk channels like Fox something to yammer about, over and over, all day, trying to make everyone afraid so they can boost ratings. Relax. This is going nowhere.
Global warming whiners have ABSOLUTELY NO solution to the problem, no actual thing we can do that will SOLVE the problem. They have ways of making life more miserable, like skateboards with Thimble Dromes instead of cars, but no real solution. The FACT is that we HAVE to burn fossil fuels in the developed countries because their populations are so large that to not do so would kill a significant portion of their people from starvation when the food is not delivered by trucks that are no longer burning fossil fuels.
I think they should stop whining and WORK ON A REAL SOLUTION, and cease doing things that impede progress and create poverty, like carbon taxes and the like. Create as much prosperity in society as possible, even tho it involves a little more carbon fuel use, and maybe the money will be available for the right person to make the discovery that enables the magic battery that will enable the use of electricity for transportation.
Transportation is the key. We burn something like 13.02 million barrels of petroleum a day in the USA. If we could stop doing that entirely, and use electricity, that would make a dent. If we could make it cheap enough for the rest of the world, that would likely be the solution. But it isn't going to happen with the current whining about CO2 causing widespread poverty that consumes billions of dollars to deal with, which are billions of dollars that could otherwise be used on research for the magic battery, solar energy conversion efficiency, and so forth.
My favorite, not-the-cheapest hotel is Comfort Inns, where I've found that the Internet "always works." Nothing else seems to be as reliable. The last event I went to with SCCA's Road Rally championship was using Staybridge, and people were complaining about that not working. It was $114 a nite, which is why I was 12 blocks away at the Comfort Inn, $80 a nite, and the internet was fairly flawless. It would sometimes "go away" for 20 seconds or so with respect to responding, but other than that, it was perfect.
You can get mostly "decent and current" but it happens on cable's premium channels and its a lot more that $25. Still, you don't get _all_ the "decent and current" as a lot of what goes thru theaters (I see almost everything except the stuff too stupid for words - Transformers, for instance) still never comes out on even the premium channels. For instance, 2 similar movies, "Olympus has Fallen" and "White House Down" seem to be very different, with "White House Down" all over the premiums, easily obtainable, but I've never see "Olympus Has Fallen" on them. There's some great stuff that I've never seen on the premiums, too. HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Starz, etc. just don't have 'em. Don't know why.
Letter to Wm. S. Smith, 1787: God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. . . . We have had thirteen States independent for eleven years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half, for each State. . . . And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? . . . The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure.
Y'know, I'm not really interested in one website that claims to have debunked so many founding father quotes, who says THEY are not lying?
The pro-gun movement arose from liberal Democrat attacks against the right to keep and bear arms that occurred since the Kennedy assassination. I myself joined the NRA when a small suburb of Chicago completely banned handguns. That was enough to scare me, and convince me that the democrats are out to, step by step, collect up all the guns, one particular type of gun at a time.
Since then, many judges have looked at the 2nd Amendment from a historical point of view and concluded that yes, the FF's had just fought a war and won it with the help of a lot of privately owned arms, and wanted to preserve the nation's ability to do that again.
And history aside, the NRA now has 5 million members, and for every member they have, there are probably 50 - 100 that believe the same way, but have simply not joined. There are over 300 million guns in American society, so good luck trying to collect them all up. Do know that if you try, it will not be bloodless.
There are those that think the English Bobbies who are unarmed are the way to go. No, they never made it to a legislature anywhere in the US.
The reason that the law people hadn't thought of the 2nd protecting the individual right to keep and bear arms is that they hadn't much considered it. When they were forced to by court cases, they came to the conclusion that "the people" in the 2nd Amendment were the same people as in the other parts of the constitution, and meant US as the people, not a state or governmental entity.
The founding fathers were quite clear in their rhetoric that they meant "the people" when they wrote the constitution. Here's a few samples:
ALEXANDER HAMILTON:
"The Constitution shall never be construed....to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms."
"Let us recollect that peace or war will not always be left to our option; that however moderate or unambitious we may be, we cannot count upon the moderation, or hope to extinguish the ambition of others."
RICHARD HENRY LEE:
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them."
"No free government was ever founded, or ever preserved its liberty, without uniting the characters of the citizen and sol- dier in those destined for the defense of the state...Such are a well regulated militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen and husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as individuals, and their rights as freemen."
TENCH COXE:
"The power of the sword, say the minority of Pennsylvania, is in the hands of Congress. My friends and countrymen, it is not so, for THE POWERS OF THE SWORD ARE IN THE HANDS OF THE YEOMANRY OF AMERICA FROM SIXTEEN TO SIXTY. The militia of these free commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when com- pared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresisti- ble. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state govern- ments, but, where I trust in God it ever will remain, in the hands of the people."
JOHN DEWITT:
"It is asserted by the most respectable writers upon govern- ment, that a well regulated militia, composed of the yeomanry of the country, have ever been considered as the bulwark of a free people. Tyrants have never placed any confidence on a militia composed of freemen."
JAMES MADISON:
"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed...the Americans possess over the people of all other nations...Notwith- standing the military establishments in the several Kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
"Congress shall never disarm any citizen unless such as are or have been in Actual Rebellion."
PATRICK HENRY:
"The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun."
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."
"Have we the means of resisting disciplined armies, when our only defense, the militia, is put in the hands of Congress? Of what service would m
Slashdot Mirror
What it means is that your car is a rollerskate with a Thimble Drome. We can't get "green" energy to do transportation until we invent the magic battery, and that may or may not happen, and it may or may not be soon.
LED's? Ive had my eye on them for a long time, and right now a 60 W bulb is $10. Yeah, they last a long time, but its like saying that a Tesla at $100K is fuel efficient because it is electric. Yeah, it is, but it costs too much, just like $10 for 60 watts. And no, they don't last commensurately longer because there's always some power spike on the line, or lightning, or some-such that streeses or outright fries 'em over a period of years.
And of course we consume so much energy because 1) we do a lot of industry and 2) we are huge, and have a very large transportation burden that has to be satisfied with fossil fuels, we just don't know how to do it any other way.
I have a home loan in process right now to hopefully get geothermal heat in right now, and that is a cost-thing, not a green-thing since I got a 1-month oil bill for $833 earlier this year. F-that. Going all-electric with geo has gotta save some $$$. If it helps relieve some CO2 or some other green aspect, I don't mind, but that isn't the main objective.
"No, you have got to realize that the idea of their even being a hit to the economy is a complete and total fabrication."
Bull. I was going thru West Virginia a couple years ago and heard the local radio station announcing the layoff of 1200 miners myself. I've been listening to the radio and TV for years, and hearing this sort of thing on a regular basis. These miners make good money, and now they're on welfare. Mining was the last thing a workman could do in that area - all the other (good) jobs have gone overseas like everywhere else in the country, thanks to the income taxes which are gutting our country. (They _all_ must be repealed, every last one of 'em) The only reason you don't know about this is that the liberal, mainstream media won't report anything that makes the current administration look bad. They're withholding a LOT of news lately.
"no wamring ofr 18 years" indeed....reality says otherwise buddy."
Nope.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sci...
You have to go outside the USA to see stuff like this, 'cuz again, the Lamestream Media won't report it as it doesn't support the administration's power grab via the global warming scarecrow. Things like this "sky is falling" nonsense are characterized in the same manner as the old traveling salesman charlatans - ever see "The Music Man" play? "We have trouble. Right here in River City. That's Trouble with a capital 'T' that rhymes with 'P' that stand for POOL!" AGW is the same nonsense. Its trying to stampede people into spending money they way they want them too, and in the case of politicians allowing you to accept further gov't power increase. OMDB.
Of course there are reasons to assume disaster. Wind is a very expensive technology that normally cannot be used for baseload power generation, it is too unreliable. So it is a "nice-to-have" without being of great utility. The thing that people seem to miss that this FORCED decommissioning of coal plants is VERY WASTEFUL, since something of great value is destroyed, and must be replaced by something of great cost that wouldn't otherwise need to be replaced for years.
So you get to build 100's of 1000's of wind turbines, AND you still must build gas-fired or nuclear or some other tech that can produce when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing, and doing it SOONER rather than LATER is the big inefficiency. If one would wait until the coal-fired plant finally wore out and was decommissioned for being more expensive to operate than alternatives, that'd be different, but coming along and saying "Emergency, emergency, we have to spend gazillions of dollars RIGHT NOW to cure a problem that some really smart scientist believe is a lot of hokum just rubs me the wrong way. Did you know that Feeman Dyson, the man who assumed the "Smartest physicist alive" title when Einstein died signed a petition for the gov't to spend _NO MONEY_ on the AGW problem, and further declared that the computer boys with their models didn't know what the F they were doing, and hugely fudging how clouds were affected by greenhouse gas concentrations? Well, he did, and clouds are huge in the equation, so if they don't really know how to model clouds vs. CO2, then their models are most likely crap. I don't want to go spending trillions of dollars, and throwing the entire remainder of the population of the USA into poverty to chase this nonsense.
What's that got to do with the price of tea in China?
We ALREADY have the coal plants, they work, and shutting them down means having to replace them. Hint: Don't shut 'em down 'til they wear out. Then try to find something cheaper than wind to replace 'em with.
Position the wind machines where there's wind? Didn't we just calculate that there are going to ber 1,211,000 wind machines? They'll probably be located every 1 mile throughout the USA. There's 2,959,064.44 square miles in the contiguous USA, so with that many wind machines, there's going ot be one every 2 1/2 square mles or so. BUT, by the time that the evironmental extremists get done saying you can't put 'em here and you can't put 'em there, and then you also subtract the Rocky Mountains and much of the Appalacian mountains because they are too steep and rugged to be building and servicing wind machines, you're going to have them probably every 2500 feet apart in any place that the wind actually blows at all. What to have your scenic landscape dotted with wind machines virtually everywhere? I didn't think so.
Biggest wind machine now produced is 8 megawatts. Figure you need 3 of these to make up for when the wind doesn't blow. $$$ is 2 million per megawatt. USA consumes 3.23 terawatts. 3.23 X 10^12 watts / 8 X 10^6 watts / wind turbine X 3 turbines = 1.211 X 10^6 turbines. 1.211 X 10^6 turbines at (2 dollars / watt X 8 X 10^6 watts / turbine) = 19.38 X 10^12 dollars. That's 19,380 billion dollars, ladies and germs, just to buy the wind turbines. Would you really like to go there? Such expenditures could convert the USA into a 3rd world country, which it is to be suspected that these environmental zealots - watermelons (green on the outside, red on the inside) would like to accomplish in order to allow the communists and socialists to dominate the world and "take care" of everyone with their welfare states.
You pollution and global warming zealots have to realize that "hit to the economy" translates to extreme misery and death to some parts of the population. People die every day of poverty, from everything including hunger that weakens their immune system and allows diseases to kill people, to people becoming homeless and dying of exposure or criminal attack on the streets. Recent research has revealed that living in poverty results in about 6.5 years being taken off the lifespan of those doing it, and if done in childhood, those 6.5 years are still unrecoverable regardless of better circumstances later in life.
The quest for an absolutely pristine environment is not worth the human suffering it causes. Eliminate coal fired electricity and about the only ones that may notice are, reportedly, 2500 or so people in the country with asthma that will no longer be at risk, but 1000's of people get thrown into poverty from the jobs that will be killed and the eventual increase in the price of electricity. Some of those in poverty will die from it.
As for global warming, there hasn't been any for about 18 years now. This is the most egregious hoax perpetrated on the world's people since the eugenics nonsense that inspired the likes of Hitler, only this may be even more devastating that WW2 if these global warming extremists continue to degrade the prosperity of the American people, as well as others around the world. I'd like to make a deal with the global warming nuts, and cease all this nonsense about shutting down power plants and attempting to get 65 mpg out of cars, and instead we'll use all that money to work in geo-engineering mechanisms to do things like removing CO2 from the atmosphere, and then deploy it of necessary. It would save a lot of lives and eliminate a lot of misery that the current approach is costing us.
Anti-pollution zealots that keep attacking coal fail to realize that the 2nd-cheapest form of electricity promotes prosperity for the lowest-classes in the USA. That is, pollution from these sources may cause some health problems, but shutting down these sources eliminates coal mining jobs which pay really good money ($95K/yr in at least 1 case I know of) to mine coal and provide the 2nd lowest electricity prices available, with only hydroelectric being lower. So, eliminate coal and, overall, raise the misery level in the USA from (further) lack of jobs and higher energy prices.
My personal experience is that exercise kills my excessive appetite and sitting around tends to make me hungry. It may not make sense, but that's the way it works for me.
And no, if I was OK with fruits and veggies, I probably WOULD be thin and not need to diet, but I'm not. I don't enjoy them as foods, I enjoy dead burnt cow, and things like that. So, I need to exercise.
At 1800 calories of metabolism because of my otherwise sedentary nature, and the fact that below about 1200 calories you'd have to be extremely careful not to get into deficiencies of some nutrients, I really need to exercise. When I get off this diet, I'll be back to "regular" food and a lot of exercise, keeping my heart healthy, and enjoying life. I wouldn't enjoy it on oranges and bananas, nor tofu and whatever else is supposed to be healthy this week, only to be exposed as the wrong answer next week. I've long since quit listening to the medical pundits, since they are always, always reversing themselves. I think it was the CDC that just a few months ago declared a "my bad" and said that salt wasn't all that big a deal, and go ahead and have some. I only add salt to corn on the cob, and movie popcorn. That's it. Nothing else gets any extra salt from me. But I ignored the CDC and its minions for decades and had a really good time eating corn on the cob and movie popcorn, and now I'm vindicated. And I'm healthy.
We hate cyclists because they're all over the G-damned place and eventually we're going to crush one with the car and then go to jail for 20 years. F cyclists, get 'em off the G-damned roadway where they aren't a hazard to themselves and others. Even worse are night cyclists - I can't see a F'n thing when I've got boneheads coming at me with their bright lights on on a 2-lane twisty-A'd road, and so if there's a biker just beyond them, I can't see him. What am I supposed to do, stop until the oncoming car goes by? Then I'm just as likely to get rammed in the A by someone that doesn't expect me to be stopping in the middle of the F'n road. U can't imagine how much I hate cyclists on the public roads.
Sure, $7 a gallon fuel tax in a country 3000 miles wide and 1500 miles tall where public transport is near-impossible most places makes all kinds of sense.
Even if this global warming nonsense wasn't the most huge hoax ever perpetrated upon mankind and probably more dangerous than the last hoax of eugenics which inspired the likes of Hitler, pauparizing everyone except the very very rich, and attempting to create a society of only the very very rich and the very very poor by raising energy prices is not a righteous goal.
Lets compromise. Lets do everything we can to lower energy prices and thereby boost near-universal prosperity, while spending the resultant surplus money from said prosperity to bury the internal combustion engine, and later the external combustion ways of generating power forever. Something like this may someday actually happen:
http://www.extremetech.com/ext...
but if it doesn't, then SOMETHING, but only if we have the available money supplies to pursue it. Available money supplies do not tend to spring out of a society where 99% of the people are dirt-poor and 1% are extremely wealthy, but that's what high-cost energy tends to promote.
The obesity problem is not what we're eating, its what we're not doing, which is physical work of some sort. "Work" doesn't mean drudgery, it means also not playing basketball, baseball, and football but instead screwing around with our smart phones, computers, and playstations while sitting, sitting, sitting. Attacking obesity on the consumption end of the calorie spectrum will fail. Hell, I only eat about 2400 calories a day when eating comfortably, but know that I metabolize around 1800. So I have to go to the gym, or _something_ to eat comfortably, or else eat uncomfortably and not enjoy life all that much. Right now, Nutrisystem is keeping me down to around 1500 calories a day, but without exercise I'd lose a pound about every 12 days. 1000-calorie stints in the gym whenever I can make that happen is what really gets me to lose. 20 lbs since July 11, but it wouldn't be happening without the 53,000 calories I've exercised since that date. Tried for 2 years to "simply exercise" it away while "eating normally" at 1800 calories, but couldn't execute eating 1800 calories, as I was hungry too often and foods I eat are delicious and I couldn't stop at 1800. I have a LOT of personal experience with this problem, and starving people just doesn't work. Getting them moving works.
Just about the time it gets airborne, the whole imaging system malfunctions and there you are with blank screens for a view, and missing anything interesting. Doubt that keeping the imaging running would be much of a priority, either. It'd probably work about as well as the other aspects of airline travel.
Detroit can be saved quite simply by repealing the income taxes. American industry will come roaring back to dominate the world, and Detroit will be one of the richest cities on the planet if we do that. JFK said about the income taxes:
"“The largest single barrier to full employment of our manpower and resources and to a higher rate of economic growth is the unrealistically heavy drag of federal income taxes on private purchasing power, initiative and incentive.” John F. Kennedy, Jan. 24, 1963 "
Income taxes suppress industry. Removing them entirely will make the USA the manufacturing center of the world again.
Look, the disease is hard to get. We've had 1 case, that has infected 2 other people at one Dallas hospital that apparently was not prepared for it. The 2 Americans that went to the Atlanta hospital were treated and survived without infecting anyone. There is no "outbreak." An outbreak is something with geometric progressions in the number of infected. This is not threat to us unless we become monumentally stupid. All its good for is to give the talk channels like Fox something to yammer about, over and over, all day, trying to make everyone afraid so they can boost ratings. Relax. This is going nowhere.
False. Anyone can go to a hospital, its the law, insurance or not.
Martial law won't work for long here. There are 300 million guns in American society.
If its "exclusively", that might explain why its not on the premiums on the cable.
Global warming whiners have ABSOLUTELY NO solution to the problem, no actual thing we can do that will SOLVE the problem. They have ways of making life more miserable, like skateboards with Thimble Dromes instead of cars, but no real solution. The FACT is that we HAVE to burn fossil fuels in the developed countries because their populations are so large that to not do so would kill a significant portion of their people from starvation when the food is not delivered by trucks that are no longer burning fossil fuels.
I think they should stop whining and WORK ON A REAL SOLUTION, and cease doing things that impede progress and create poverty, like carbon taxes and the like. Create as much prosperity in society as possible, even tho it involves a little more carbon fuel use, and maybe the money will be available for the right person to make the discovery that enables the magic battery that will enable the use of electricity for transportation.
Transportation is the key. We burn something like 13.02 million barrels of petroleum a day in the USA. If we could stop doing that entirely, and use electricity, that would make a dent. If we could make it cheap enough for the rest of the world, that would likely be the solution. But it isn't going to happen with the current whining about CO2 causing widespread poverty that consumes billions of dollars to deal with, which are billions of dollars that could otherwise be used on research for the magic battery, solar energy conversion efficiency, and so forth.
My favorite, not-the-cheapest hotel is Comfort Inns, where I've found that the Internet "always works." Nothing else seems to be as reliable. The last event I went to with SCCA's Road Rally championship was using Staybridge, and people were complaining about that not working. It was $114 a nite, which is why I was 12 blocks away at the Comfort Inn, $80 a nite, and the internet was fairly flawless. It would sometimes "go away" for 20 seconds or so with respect to responding, but other than that, it was perfect.
...I've seen today. Or can remember for a long time. Bastids! Marriot is definitely off my list.
You can get mostly "decent and current" but it happens on cable's premium channels and its a lot more that $25. Still, you don't get _all_ the "decent and current" as a lot of what goes thru theaters (I see almost everything except the stuff too stupid for words - Transformers, for instance) still never comes out on even the premium channels. For instance, 2 similar movies, "Olympus has Fallen" and "White House Down" seem to be very different, with "White House Down" all over the premiums, easily obtainable, but I've never see "Olympus Has Fallen" on them. There's some great stuff that I've never seen on the premiums, too. HBO, Showtime, Cinemax, Starz, etc. just don't have 'em. Don't know why.
Short search found the Jefferson quote:
Letter to Wm. S. Smith, 1787: God forbid we should ever be twenty years
without such a rebellion. . . . We have had thirteen States independent for
eleven years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a
century and a half, for each State. . . . And what country can preserve its
liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people
preserve the spirit of resistance? . . . The tree of liberty must be
refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is
its natural manure.
Y'know, I'm not really interested in one website that claims to have debunked so many founding father quotes, who says THEY are not lying?
The pro-gun movement arose from liberal Democrat attacks against the right to keep and bear arms that occurred since the Kennedy assassination. I myself joined the NRA when a small suburb of Chicago completely banned handguns. That was enough to scare me, and convince me that the democrats are out to, step by step, collect up all the guns, one particular type of gun at a time.
Since then, many judges have looked at the 2nd Amendment from a historical point of view and concluded that yes, the FF's had just fought a war and won it with the help of a lot of privately owned arms, and wanted to preserve the nation's ability to do that again.
And history aside, the NRA now has 5 million members, and for every member they have, there are probably 50 - 100 that believe the same way, but have simply not joined. There are over 300 million guns in American society, so good luck trying to collect them all up. Do know that if you try, it will not be bloodless.
There are those that think the English Bobbies who are unarmed are the way to go. No, they never made it to a legislature anywhere in the US.
The reason that the law people hadn't thought of the 2nd protecting the individual right to keep and bear arms is that they hadn't much considered it. When they were forced to by court cases, they came to the conclusion that "the people" in the 2nd Amendment were the same people as in the other parts of the constitution, and meant US as the people, not a state or governmental entity.
The founding fathers were quite clear in their rhetoric that they meant "the people" when they wrote the constitution. Here's a few samples:
ALEXANDER HAMILTON:
"The Constitution shall never be construed....to prevent the
people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from
keeping their own arms."
"Let us recollect that peace or war will not always be left to
our option; that however moderate or unambitious we may be, we
cannot count upon the moderation, or hope to extinguish the
ambition of others."
RICHARD HENRY LEE:
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of
the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially
when young, how to use them."
"No free government was ever founded, or ever preserved its
liberty, without uniting the characters of the citizen and sol-
dier in those destined for the defense of the state...Such are a
well regulated militia, composed of the freeholders, citizen and
husbandman, who take up arms to preserve their property, as
individuals, and their rights as freemen."
TENCH COXE:
"The power of the sword, say the minority of Pennsylvania, is
in the hands of Congress. My friends and countrymen, it is not
so, for THE POWERS OF THE SWORD ARE IN THE HANDS OF THE YEOMANRY
OF AMERICA FROM SIXTEEN TO SIXTY. The militia of these free
commonwealths, entitled and accustomed to their arms, when com-
pared with any possible army, must be tremendous and irresisti-
ble. Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it
feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his
own bosom? Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their
swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are
the birth-right of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the
sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state govern-
ments, but, where I trust in God it ever will remain, in the
hands of the people."
JOHN DEWITT:
"It is asserted by the most respectable writers upon govern-
ment, that a well regulated militia, composed of the yeomanry of
the country, have ever been considered as the bulwark of a free
people. Tyrants have never placed any confidence on a militia
composed of freemen."
JAMES MADISON:
"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed ...the
Americans possess over the people of all other nations...Notwith-
standing the military establishments in the several Kingdoms of
Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will
bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."
"Congress shall never disarm any citizen unless such as are or
have been in Actual Rebellion."
PATRICK HENRY:
"The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is
able may have a gun."
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect
everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will
preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that
force, you are ruined."
"Have we the means of resisting disciplined armies, when our
only defense, the militia, is put in the hands of Congress? Of
what service would m