But again, the President is the one who introduced the bill, based on promises that were made during the campaign. When the bill got passed, it was after deliberations in both the house and senate, where 20% of the republicans in the house voted against it. Why did you feel it was needed to list 3 Democrats who voted against it, instead of listing the 46 that voted for it?
It has been discussed that the main reason that the Republican party voted 'yea' in such high numbers was purely for political advantage. The perceptions of the constituents at the time, were much more closely tied into how their representative worked with the President, and not against.[1] And my personal opinion, is that the distinction is not between 'D' and 'R', but between 'The South' and the rest of the U.S. Attaching political distrinction will wind up giving you a hodge podge of data points that looks random with both republicans, and democrats, both opposing the Civil Rights Act. When the distinction is made using the geographical area represented, the connection becomes much more relevant. Where were all of your examples from again? I suppose it doesnt help too much if one of your examples 'opposed' the civil rights act because he already believed the constitution guaranteed these rights to ALL. Or that the other one of your examples admitted his opposition to be the 'biggest mistake in his career' when he supported the 1965 Voting Rights Act?
Trying to point out that a few racists were also in the democratic party does not accomplish anything. "But mommy, he did it too" stopped being a valid point of argument for most people when their age rolled over to double digits. Since 100% of the Republican party didnt support the Civil Rights Act either, it would be a trivial exercise to pull out a handful of names with an 'R' next to their names. Neither of those things would change the fact that John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, was the one who brought the legislation to both the house and senate. The Civil Rights Act was introduced by a Democrat, supported by a majority of Republicans, and was pushed through a filibuster(by other southern democrats) with the help of the above linked Democrats that wanted to see the presidents ideals codified into law. It was a GREAT example of what can be accomplished when two political sides work together, and overcome two geographic sides that wont.
Being blatantly partisan helps nobody, except those in politics. Are you in politics? Drone indeed
While the earth is closer to the sun in January, this is summer in the southern hemisphere. However, there is less land mass in the southern hemisphere than there is in the northern. When the Earth is farthest away, in July, this is summer in the northern hemisphere. Because of the differences in albiedo between land and water, this actually results in the northern hemisphere being warmer during its summer months than the southern hemisphere.
Long story short, land heats up faster than water.
No one would write boks, or movies or take pictures of any quality
That is completely wrong on almost infinite levels. What would really happen; 'No one would write books, or movies, or take pictures of any quality WHO WAS ONLY INTERESTED IN PROFITING FROM THEM. And frankly, Im fine with that.
There is no copyright on the bible, and my guess is that the bible has many more publications than any of your copyrighted books.
I replied below-thread to a similar question, but i can repeat it here.
The demand was not to remove false information, the demand was to remove the information regarding an administrative part of the court process that had her court date scheduled.
By this time, the arrest, conviction, and sentencing had ALREADY happened. The person simply wanted to remove their name from the court schedule of cases. What made it interesting was that by the time the person noticed it to complain, all the court website schedule listed was the name/date/room that the case was scheduled for, and not the charges. It was only from the persons demands to take down this information that it became known exactly what conviction was trying to be hidden
No, the fact that she was arrested for DUI, charged, found guilty, and was still on the schedule for an administrative hearing, means she was guilty of the offense.
If it was false information, it would have easily been able to be removed. However, that was not what her argument was at the time. She wanted to remove the information about what she knew was her conviction from the court schedule. However, all the court schedule said was the date/time/room number and her name. It did not identify the charge currently against her. It was only by her demanding for that non-identifying information to be removed, that it was able to be ascertained on further inspection what the charge was against her.
What exactly did you want to discuss about making that information public? All I can see here is a straw-man argument about making assumptions of guilt. Although I do enjoy the humor in reading your post about me jumping to conclusions, by... well, jumping to conclusions about what was written, just to argue against it:)
I know someone who works in the court clerk's office of my county, and I can rattle off hundreds of examples of this.
One of the more notable ones was a real estate agent who came into the court and was upset that her case, and arrest, for DUI was posted online on the court schedule. Demands were made that this information not be published because the person was worried about how it would affect their reputation. I honestly dont think it ever occured to them to avoid the actual driving while intoxicated to avoid that damaged reputation. Only the publishing of that information was what was the problem.
Closer to home, I had posted a listing of all the court cases of a local real estate agency. Some of them arbitration cases, and some of them small claims cases. All that was posted was an exact copy of the information from the court website. This was up for about 6 months when I received a letter from an attorney DEMANDING I take the information down because it was 'making knowingly libelous claims'.
It gets worse. In the Cease and Desist letter, the demands were for me to turn over my domain names to this company free of charge, or they were going to move forward with criminal charges against me. Needless to say, I ignored the letter. Suprisingly, I never heard from them again. But that might be because I decided to post the nice Cease and Desist letter online that was sent by Caton Commercial. I can only imagine the point at which they realized that it might have been a bad idea to bring MORE attention to what they were trying to keep hidden.
To this very day, simply typing in the company name "Caton Commercial" into Google, returns the courthouse website and schedule with all their cases listed in the #2 spot. The 'streisand effect' is a beautiful thing to watch unfold sometimes. If you doubt the story, you can always type it in and see for yourself.
Although it was probably the most amusing thing in my life, when I saw the bands members in front of congress testifying about file sharing. You know, the band that performed the song MASTER OF PUPPETS
I know many people who dont like the classical music of Wagner because of his later association with the Nazi party(not his fault), and his overt racism against Jews(very much his fault). Sometimes things are more than one dimensional.
Both of those scenarios are examples of how liking or disliking an artist can go far beyond just their music.
Well, unfortunately, these people are REPRESENTING a certain portion of our population. Its not mature, no, but this is the behavior certain groups of people have chosen to reward.
Its simply a reflection of the place this country has become. Somehow, that when everything doesnt go exactly the way you want it, the only available option is to complain and point at the other guy for being 'at fault'.
Take a situation for example, of a company who is involved in quite a few small claims, and arbitration cases. A third party then publishes the information that is made available on the local county court website regarding this(PUBLIC INFO). What does the company do? Caton Commercial decided to send a Cease and Desist letter claiming that publishing this information was libel. And now what happens? When typing in their company name 'Caton Commercial' into google, the second entry is for the link to the courthouse webiste listing all the case schedules.
The point being, that sometimes drawing attention to yourself in such extremely overboard displays, sometimes has whats best known as 'unintended consequences'. Granted, logically thinking through such a response would have prevented this company, or the republicans, from looking like children. But thats rarely the case when a damaged ego is looking for retribution.
Normally, those who choose to micromanage EVERY aspect of their business experience the same problem.
They are so busy focusing on the most minute detail, that they never really take a step back and see the big picture.
Take the example of a real-estate company in my area. They were so 'concerned' about the most minute detail, in this case domain names that other people owned, they never took a step back to see the big picture and how their actions would be percieved to the world outside of the bubble that they seem to exist in.
The company was Caton Commercial, and instead of attempting to broker a deal to legally purchase the property they wanted, they chose to hire a lawyer to send a threatening C&D letter that demanded the domains be turned over to them for no charge, under threat of legal action. For reference, the entire Cease and Desist letter has been posted online
The end result, searching for their company name, now brings up near the #1 result, the current court cases in this county that the company is involved in.
How is the fact that home values around you are falling affecting your personal financial situation?
How exactly do you think the local municipality is going to balance the budget sheets when a few percent of foreclosed houses who WERE paying property taxes, water taxes, sewer taxes, school taxes, are now gone? Are they going to just be nice to you and not raise your property taxes out of the kindness of their hearts?
The only point I have been trying to make throughout this thread is that the actions of those around you DO affect you(not you secifically but the general you), it has always been prudent to keep an eye on the big picture and not fall into the 'Im a self-made man' bullshit, because nobody is.
If you(again, the general you) are the selfish type you can always look at it as paying an extra $5 now, instead of bailing out the problem when its too late with $500. Either way, the balance sheet... will.
When did I say that I took out a home equity loan? All I am doing is paying attention to the economic conditions around me that are in a position to affect my personal financial situation, and those that are close to me. My personal financial situation is very comfortable... for now. But things are changing rapidly around us.
Things are bad, and they are getting worse... fast. When the bank failures start to come, and they will, the remaining outstanding debt will be called in to balance the books for the unitholders of the bank. This isnt sensationalism either, the FDIC is planning for a huge increase in bank failures by hiring additional staff to deal specifically with the upcoming wave of failures [1]
What does the value of your house have to do with your ability to pay your property taxes?
The value of your house is what is used to generate the amount of taxes you pay. While you may live in an area that shows no appreciable growth in the past decade, the rest of us have seen taxes go up by as much as 100% in some instances.
If you don't like the way your property is valued for taxation, complain to your local officials
Obviously, you have never done this. If an error is made, you PAY it first, no matter how insane the error is. Then you go through months, sometimes years, in the process of appeals before the board. Then and only then, do you get your 'adjustment' paid back to you as a credit of 'taxes due', with no interest for the difference.
But dont worry, Im sure you are so smart that you know for a fact that this could never happen to you, because things are 'different' because you are smart enough to avoid it.
When that house down the block sells for 30% less than it was purchased, that then becomes a 'comparable' for judging the value of YOUR house. Even though you have made perfect on-time payments, and have never been late with any bill ever in your life.
Now your bank is calling in your home equity loan, that you have also never been late on, all because the bank now has to write down its balance sheet. When that happens, the results spread to EVERY member of the bank, not just the 'dumb' people, as you seem to like to call them.
This bullshit of blaming the victim needs to be stopped. Or do you live on an island, all by yourself, with no connection to the outside world?
Cry you a river? How about the anger you are going to feel when you realize that your local government has been raising your property taxes in lockstep with the increasing home prices, but try to get them to lower them when the values fall.(unless you live in CA where this is law) When your property taxes go up 30% or more, but your property value has also fallen 30% simply because of all these 'dumb' people, are you still going to run around saying 'cry me a river'.
So you rent, you say. It doesnt affect me, you say. Well, do you know the financial position of your landlord? Do you know what will happen if they are unable to meet their funding responsibilities on the property you are renting because the near collapse and now tightening of the credit markets are requiring higher capital to get the same loan amounts? Will they sell it to the 'lowest bidder' who will then neglect it simply because they are looking to make a buck, and arent really into caring about your standard of living?
If you have managed to avoid any negative ramifications of what has been happening the past 12 months, you should count yourself lucky. Within the next 3-4 weeks however, we will all find out just how much this will spread when the fed comes face-to-face with having to make the choice of letting the dollar collapse, or fixing the housing market. Sitting on that precipice is where we are RIGHT NOW.
Hopefully that wont happen, but if it does, I honestly hope the people you come in contact with afterwords have a more human attitude with regard to your situation, and dont just say 'cry me a river' to your face.
Personal attacks aside, there is nothing in that quote that mentions the current technologies we currently have available. Do you honestly believe the problem is one of more funding?
The purpose of his comment seemed to be that the answer was to drill for more oil. That somehow the problem is some sort of 'us vs. them' problem. The 'problem' is the government, period. Both sides have held up progress in their own way, and that is because most people dont give a shit until it comes to MONEY, when they look to point blame at the 'enemy' of their personal ideology. Its an ego trip plain and simple. And having both ends fight against the middle isnt the solution. All it does is distract from what damage has already been done.
The parent post neglected to mention that the wells from China were in a sovereign country. That is a lie of omission intended to try to further the premise that is a 'democrat' problem. The reality of the situation is that the only 'problem' is that there happens to be another country in control of their own sovereign territory, it has nothing to do with the US political parties.
This is YOUR country, This is MY country, and its turning to an absolute disaster because of our OWN fault. The government isnt some distant enemy to be blamed, the government is you and me, and the parent post, and everyone that disagrees with any of them. We have simply let the wrong people be in charge, and for the most part, we only have ourselves to blame! Not the democrats, not the republicans. US! So, are you finding the appropriate outlets for your own civic responsibilities? I know I am.
What was the purpose of his comment in your perception?
The only thing I saw was a vague mention of improving efficiencies, and that if a more efficient source of energy existed, we would move to it. Although the tariffs that the US has on Brazilian ethanol makes that impossible on an economic level, further aggravating the rest of the problems with a food->fuel program. [1]
Where was the mentions of the regulations in the US that have made it cost-prohibitive to construct a nuclear plant [2]
No, the original post did not mention alternatives, it parroted a point that is meaningless. That somehow we need to fund 'research' for something down the road. When the reality is that we HAVE the technologies, we just have dont the legal and market forces setup in this country to allow it to happen.
In all of that, not a single mention of the alternatives to oil. Not a single mention of nuclear power. Not a single mention of wind power. Not a single mention of solar power.
But the part that gave you away, was the part about "China is drilling off the shore of Florida, that should be OUR OIL". Because, you have somehow taken the fact that the straights of florida are 90 miles wide, and HALF of them are legally within the territoy of Cuba. 45 miles is ours, and 45 miles is theirs. Cuba has leased out the dilling rights to a company from China. Whats the problem with that? If the world oil market global as you say it is, then it doesnt really matter who is drilling it, as it will be sold to the person who pays market value for it.
Its not OUR oil, its the oil of a sovereign country that happens to be within 90 miles of our own coastline. It makes me skeptical that you chose to not present that fact in your post.
I know you made a mistake in typing out the first can(t) in the following sentence, but the humor of saying "If he can handle an interview with Sean Hannity or Bill O'Reilly, then he can't handle being president!" was probably the most amusing Freudian slip Ive seen in a very long while.
The theory that is commonly accepted as the one people are referring to when they say; "Jupiter is undergoing global warming as well"
However, the theory does not actually say Jupiter is undergoing global warming, it specifically says that the appearance of the new storms are a result of the equator warming, and not the poles. On Jupiter, there are what would be similar to jet streams on Earth, except there are between 10-15 of them. This is the mechanism which moves heat from the hotter regions to the cooler regions, just like on Earth. When this mechanism breaks down, the transfer of heat is impeded and regions of storms such as whats being observed, form. You can check with space.com if you would like to verify what Im saying
On Earth, the theory that what most accept to be 'global warming' is that the globe is on a whole getting warmer. Although, the polar regions are experiencing a faster rate of warming than the equatorial regions, which are warming more slowly.
So the word 'warming' is being used in both circumstances, the mechanisms that are occuring are very different
Great, so now is anyone going to talk about the logical inconsistency of two different sets of data being used to prove or disprove each other?
Can you separate the concepts being presented from the person presenting them? Pointing out all of my faults does nothing to advance the discussion that is being presented here, except to dodge it
not really. The entire planet still isnt warming overall. Just one location.
And that is by indirect observation, as opposed to the mountain of direct observations on this planet that show global increases in temp, not just around the poles, or the equator. It just is warming faster at the poles than it is warming at the equator.
So, which is it? Jupiter is warming at the equator because indirect measurements seem to point to that theory of localized heating, or the earth is being warmed faster at the poles because of the same phenomenon?
Dont know why I bother explaining the concepts involved here, its obvious the larger picture of the scientific method is to complex an issue to discuss. Instead we focus on self-admitted errors, because thats how science works now in the good ol' US of A!
I provided the observation that with two identical sets of data, one can not selectively pick details from one theory, to support the idea that another theory is wrong. And at the same time trying to say that that data is valid in one circumstance, but not in another
There is no mea culpa, no matter how big your desire to use the phrase.
Jupiter is experiencing warming NEAR THE POLES. Not the entire planet. Did you read the research behind what you are spouting? Or are you just cherry-picking the sound bites that make you point you have already 'decided' must be true.
If you decided to read it, then you surely came across the fact that "While the analysis remains to be proven, it is seen by other researchers as interesting and, importantly, testable even with large backyard telescopes."
So while evidence that is mounting in favor of the cause of the RETENTION of the heat on the planet earth, which causes it to retain heat energy in the infrared part of the spectrum, then that is just 'junk science' and needs to be pointed out how there is no hard evidence to support it.
But when the same limited data set and hypothesis is put forward that jupiter is experiencing climate change, that lack of actual evidence to prove the theory is something that can just be brushed aside for the sake of arguing against the same cirumstances on Earth that have similar holes in the data set?
Next time, you need to be able to think about what you are parroting, lest it make you like a complete fool.
Slashdot Mirror
Who opposed the 1964 Civil Rights act?
Because that is more important than who wrote it ?
Or more important than Mike Mansfield and Hubert Humphrey
But again, the President is the one who introduced the bill, based on promises that were made during the campaign. When the bill got passed, it was after deliberations in both the house and senate, where 20% of the republicans in the house voted against it. Why did you feel it was needed to list 3 Democrats who voted against it, instead of listing the 46 that voted for it?
It has been discussed that the main reason that the Republican party voted 'yea' in such high numbers was purely for political advantage. The perceptions of the constituents at the time, were much more closely tied into how their representative worked with the President, and not against.[1] And my personal opinion, is that the distinction is not between 'D' and 'R', but between 'The South' and the rest of the U.S. Attaching political distrinction will wind up giving you a hodge podge of data points that looks random with both republicans, and democrats, both opposing the Civil Rights Act. When the distinction is made using the geographical area represented, the connection becomes much more relevant. Where were all of your examples from again? I suppose it doesnt help too much if one of your examples 'opposed' the civil rights act because he already believed the constitution guaranteed these rights to ALL. Or that the other one of your examples admitted his opposition to be the 'biggest mistake in his career' when he supported the 1965 Voting Rights Act?
Trying to point out that a few racists were also in the democratic party does not accomplish anything. "But mommy, he did it too" stopped being a valid point of argument for most people when their age rolled over to double digits. Since 100% of the Republican party didnt support the Civil Rights Act either, it would be a trivial exercise to pull out a handful of names with an 'R' next to their names. Neither of those things would change the fact that John F. Kennedy, a Democrat, was the one who brought the legislation to both the house and senate. The Civil Rights Act was introduced by a Democrat, supported by a majority of Republicans, and was pushed through a filibuster(by other southern democrats) with the help of the above linked Democrats that wanted to see the presidents ideals codified into law. It was a GREAT example of what can be accomplished when two political sides work together, and overcome two geographic sides that wont.
Being blatantly partisan helps nobody, except those in politics. Are you in politics? Drone indeed
Actually, there is a variation.
While the earth is closer to the sun in January, this is summer in the southern hemisphere. However, there is less land mass in the southern hemisphere than there is in the northern. When the Earth is farthest away, in July, this is summer in the northern hemisphere. Because of the differences in albiedo between land and water, this actually results in the northern hemisphere being warmer during its summer months than the southern hemisphere.
Long story short, land heats up faster than water.
So if the US isn't going to use it for defense, then what are they going to use it for?
Have you not been paying attention? Its 'use' is simply to be able to award no-bid contracts to defense contractors.
Next question...
No one would write boks, or movies or take pictures of any quality
That is completely wrong on almost infinite levels. What would really happen; 'No one would write books, or movies, or take pictures of any quality WHO WAS ONLY INTERESTED IN PROFITING FROM THEM. And frankly, Im fine with that.
There is no copyright on the bible, and my guess is that the bible has many more publications than any of your copyrighted books.
I replied below-thread to a similar question, but i can repeat it here.
The demand was not to remove false information, the demand was to remove the information regarding an administrative part of the court process that had her court date scheduled.
By this time, the arrest, conviction, and sentencing had ALREADY happened. The person simply wanted to remove their name from the court schedule of cases. What made it interesting was that by the time the person noticed it to complain, all the court website schedule listed was the name/date/room that the case was scheduled for, and not the charges. It was only from the persons demands to take down this information that it became known exactly what conviction was trying to be hidden
No, the fact that she was arrested for DUI, charged, found guilty, and was still on the schedule for an administrative hearing, means she was guilty of the offense.
If it was false information, it would have easily been able to be removed. However, that was not what her argument was at the time. She wanted to remove the information about what she knew was her conviction from the court schedule. However, all the court schedule said was the date/time/room number and her name. It did not identify the charge currently against her. It was only by her demanding for that non-identifying information to be removed, that it was able to be ascertained on further inspection what the charge was against her.
What exactly did you want to discuss about making that information public? All I can see here is a straw-man argument about making assumptions of guilt. Although I do enjoy the humor in reading your post about me jumping to conclusions, by... well, jumping to conclusions about what was written, just to argue against it :)
I know someone who works in the court clerk's office of my county, and I can rattle off hundreds of examples of this.
One of the more notable ones was a real estate agent who came into the court and was upset that her case, and arrest, for DUI was posted online on the court schedule. Demands were made that this information not be published because the person was worried about how it would affect their reputation. I honestly dont think it ever occured to them to avoid the actual driving while intoxicated to avoid that damaged reputation. Only the publishing of that information was what was the problem.
Closer to home, I had posted a listing of all the court cases of a local real estate agency. Some of them arbitration cases, and some of them small claims cases. All that was posted was an exact copy of the information from the court website. This was up for about 6 months when I received a letter from an attorney DEMANDING I take the information down because it was 'making knowingly libelous claims'.
It gets worse. In the Cease and Desist letter, the demands were for me to turn over my domain names to this company free of charge, or they were going to move forward with criminal charges against me. Needless to say, I ignored the letter. Suprisingly, I never heard from them again. But that might be because I decided to post the nice Cease and Desist letter online that was sent by Caton Commercial. I can only imagine the point at which they realized that it might have been a bad idea to bring MORE attention to what they were trying to keep hidden.
To this very day, simply typing in the company name "Caton Commercial" into Google, returns the courthouse website and schedule with all their cases listed in the #2 spot. The 'streisand effect' is a beautiful thing to watch unfold sometimes. If you doubt the story, you can always type it in and see for yourself.
Although it was probably the most amusing thing in my life, when I saw the bands members in front of congress testifying about file sharing. You know, the band that performed the song MASTER OF PUPPETS
I know many people who dont like the classical music of Wagner because of his later association with the Nazi party(not his fault), and his overt racism against Jews(very much his fault). Sometimes things are more than one dimensional.
Both of those scenarios are examples of how liking or disliking an artist can go far beyond just their music.
Well, unfortunately, these people are REPRESENTING a certain portion of our population. Its not mature, no, but this is the behavior certain groups of people have chosen to reward.
Its simply a reflection of the place this country has become. Somehow, that when everything doesnt go exactly the way you want it, the only available option is to complain and point at the other guy for being 'at fault'.
Take a situation for example, of a company who is involved in quite a few small claims, and arbitration cases. A third party then publishes the information that is made available on the local county court website regarding this(PUBLIC INFO). What does the company do? Caton Commercial decided to send a Cease and Desist letter claiming that publishing this information was libel. And now what happens? When typing in their company name 'Caton Commercial' into google, the second entry is for the link to the courthouse webiste listing all the case schedules.
The point being, that sometimes drawing attention to yourself in such extremely overboard displays, sometimes has whats best known as 'unintended consequences'. Granted, logically thinking through such a response would have prevented this company, or the republicans, from looking like children. But thats rarely the case when a damaged ego is looking for retribution.
Normally, those who choose to micromanage EVERY aspect of their business experience the same problem.
They are so busy focusing on the most minute detail, that they never really take a step back and see the big picture.
Take the example of a real-estate company in my area. They were so 'concerned' about the most minute detail, in this case domain names that other people owned, they never took a step back to see the big picture and how their actions would be percieved to the world outside of the bubble that they seem to exist in. The company was Caton Commercial, and instead of attempting to broker a deal to legally purchase the property they wanted, they chose to hire a lawyer to send a threatening C&D letter that demanded the domains be turned over to them for no charge, under threat of legal action. For reference, the entire Cease and Desist letter has been posted online
The end result, searching for their company name, now brings up near the #1 result, the current court cases in this county that the company is involved in.
Chicago Cubs?
(except this year)
How is the fact that home values around you are falling affecting your personal financial situation?
How exactly do you think the local municipality is going to balance the budget sheets when a few percent of foreclosed houses who WERE paying property taxes, water taxes, sewer taxes, school taxes, are now gone? Are they going to just be nice to you and not raise your property taxes out of the kindness of their hearts?
The only point I have been trying to make throughout this thread is that the actions of those around you DO affect you(not you secifically but the general you), it has always been prudent to keep an eye on the big picture and not fall into the 'Im a self-made man' bullshit, because nobody is.
If you(again, the general you) are the selfish type you can always look at it as paying an extra $5 now, instead of bailing out the problem when its too late with $500. Either way, the balance sheet... will.
When did I say that I took out a home equity loan? All I am doing is paying attention to the economic conditions around me that are in a position to affect my personal financial situation, and those that are close to me. My personal financial situation is very comfortable... for now. But things are changing rapidly around us.
Things are bad, and they are getting worse... fast. When the bank failures start to come, and they will, the remaining outstanding debt will be called in to balance the books for the unitholders of the bank. This isnt sensationalism either, the FDIC is planning for a huge increase in bank failures by hiring additional staff to deal specifically with the upcoming wave of failures [1]
Banks can't call in loans, so no matter how much they want you to pay off your loan, they can't make you
They can and they have before, thats how the great depression came into being... there can be wider economic effects: as the surviving banks try to raise cash by calling in loans, there can be a vicious circle in which bank runs cause a credit crunch, which leads to more business failures, which leads to more financial troubles at banks, and so on. And they are doing it again, as this process has already begun by CitiBank [1]
What does the value of your house have to do with your ability to pay your property taxes?
The value of your house is what is used to generate the amount of taxes you pay. While you may live in an area that shows no appreciable growth in the past decade, the rest of us have seen taxes go up by as much as 100% in some instances.
If you don't like the way your property is valued for taxation, complain to your local officials
Obviously, you have never done this. If an error is made, you PAY it first, no matter how insane the error is. Then you go through months, sometimes years, in the process of appeals before the board. Then and only then, do you get your 'adjustment' paid back to you as a credit of 'taxes due', with no interest for the difference.
But dont worry, Im sure you are so smart that you know for a fact that this could never happen to you, because things are 'different' because you are smart enough to avoid it.
You live in Charlotte.
Id sell now, as inventories are building and list price received on sale is falling. [1] Nobody ever sells at the peak though do they?
Obviously, you do not own a house.
When that house down the block sells for 30% less than it was purchased, that then becomes a 'comparable' for judging the value of YOUR house. Even though you have made perfect on-time payments, and have never been late with any bill ever in your life.
Now your bank is calling in your home equity loan, that you have also never been late on, all because the bank now has to write down its balance sheet. When that happens, the results spread to EVERY member of the bank, not just the 'dumb' people, as you seem to like to call them.
This bullshit of blaming the victim needs to be stopped. Or do you live on an island, all by yourself, with no connection to the outside world?
Cry you a river? How about the anger you are going to feel when you realize that your local government has been raising your property taxes in lockstep with the increasing home prices, but try to get them to lower them when the values fall.(unless you live in CA where this is law) When your property taxes go up 30% or more, but your property value has also fallen 30% simply because of all these 'dumb' people, are you still going to run around saying 'cry me a river'.
So you rent, you say. It doesnt affect me, you say. Well, do you know the financial position of your landlord? Do you know what will happen if they are unable to meet their funding responsibilities on the property you are renting because the near collapse and now tightening of the credit markets are requiring higher capital to get the same loan amounts? Will they sell it to the 'lowest bidder' who will then neglect it simply because they are looking to make a buck, and arent really into caring about your standard of living?
If you have managed to avoid any negative ramifications of what has been happening the past 12 months, you should count yourself lucky. Within the next 3-4 weeks however, we will all find out just how much this will spread when the fed comes face-to-face with having to make the choice of letting the dollar collapse, or fixing the housing market. Sitting on that precipice is where we are RIGHT NOW.
Hopefully that wont happen, but if it does, I honestly hope the people you come in contact with afterwords have a more human attitude with regard to your situation, and dont just say 'cry me a river' to your face.
Personal attacks aside, there is nothing in that quote that mentions the current technologies we currently have available. Do you honestly believe the problem is one of more funding?
The purpose of his comment seemed to be that the answer was to drill for more oil. That somehow the problem is some sort of 'us vs. them' problem. The 'problem' is the government, period. Both sides have held up progress in their own way, and that is because most people dont give a shit until it comes to MONEY, when they look to point blame at the 'enemy' of their personal ideology. Its an ego trip plain and simple. And having both ends fight against the middle isnt the solution. All it does is distract from what damage has already been done.
The parent post neglected to mention that the wells from China were in a sovereign country. That is a lie of omission intended to try to further the premise that is a 'democrat' problem. The reality of the situation is that the only 'problem' is that there happens to be another country in control of their own sovereign territory, it has nothing to do with the US political parties.
This is YOUR country, This is MY country, and its turning to an absolute disaster because of our OWN fault. The government isnt some distant enemy to be blamed, the government is you and me, and the parent post, and everyone that disagrees with any of them. We have simply let the wrong people be in charge, and for the most part, we only have ourselves to blame! Not the democrats, not the republicans. US! So, are you finding the appropriate outlets for your own civic responsibilities? I know I am.
What was the purpose of his comment in your perception?
Really? Quote it
The only thing I saw was a vague mention of improving efficiencies, and that if a more efficient source of energy existed, we would move to it. Although the tariffs that the US has on Brazilian ethanol makes that impossible on an economic level, further aggravating the rest of the problems with a food->fuel program. [1]
Where was the mentions of the regulations in the US that have made it cost-prohibitive to construct a nuclear plant [2]
No, the original post did not mention alternatives, it parroted a point that is meaningless. That somehow we need to fund 'research' for something down the road. When the reality is that we HAVE the technologies, we just have dont the legal and market forces setup in this country to allow it to happen.
In all of that, not a single mention of the alternatives to oil. Not a single mention of nuclear power. Not a single mention of wind power. Not a single mention of solar power.
But the part that gave you away, was the part about "China is drilling off the shore of Florida, that should be OUR OIL". Because, you have somehow taken the fact that the straights of florida are 90 miles wide, and HALF of them are legally within the territoy of Cuba. 45 miles is ours, and 45 miles is theirs. Cuba has leased out the dilling rights to a company from China. Whats the problem with that? If the world oil market global as you say it is, then it doesnt really matter who is drilling it, as it will be sold to the person who pays market value for it.
Its not OUR oil, its the oil of a sovereign country that happens to be within 90 miles of our own coastline. It makes me skeptical that you chose to not present that fact in your post.
I know you made a mistake in typing out the first can(t) in the following sentence, but the humor of saying "If he can handle an interview with Sean Hannity or Bill O'Reilly, then he can't handle being president!" was probably the most amusing Freudian slip Ive seen in a very long while.
Ok.
The theory that is commonly accepted as the one people are referring to when they say; "Jupiter is undergoing global warming as well"
However, the theory does not actually say Jupiter is undergoing global warming, it specifically says that the appearance of the new storms are a result of the equator warming, and not the poles. On Jupiter, there are what would be similar to jet streams on Earth, except there are between 10-15 of them. This is the mechanism which moves heat from the hotter regions to the cooler regions, just like on Earth. When this mechanism breaks down, the transfer of heat is impeded and regions of storms such as whats being observed, form. You can check with space.com if you would like to verify what Im saying
On Earth, the theory that what most accept to be 'global warming' is that the globe is on a whole getting warmer. Although, the polar regions are experiencing a faster rate of warming than the equatorial regions, which are warming more slowly.
So the word 'warming' is being used in both circumstances, the mechanisms that are occuring are very different
Great, so now is anyone going to talk about the logical inconsistency of two different sets of data being used to prove or disprove each other?
Can you separate the concepts being presented from the person presenting them? Pointing out all of my faults does nothing to advance the discussion that is being presented here, except to dodge it
not really. The entire planet still isnt warming overall. Just one location.
And that is by indirect observation, as opposed to the mountain of direct observations on this planet that show global increases in temp, not just around the poles, or the equator. It just is warming faster at the poles than it is warming at the equator.
So, which is it? Jupiter is warming at the equator because indirect measurements seem to point to that theory of localized heating, or the earth is being warmed faster at the poles because of the same phenomenon?
Dont know why I bother explaining the concepts involved here, its obvious the larger picture of the scientific method is to complex an issue to discuss. Instead we focus on self-admitted errors, because thats how science works now in the good ol' US of A!
except I didnt provide any 'data'.
I provided the observation that with two identical sets of data, one can not selectively pick details from one theory, to support the idea that another theory is wrong. And at the same time trying to say that that data is valid in one circumstance, but not in another
There is no mea culpa, no matter how big your desire to use the phrase.
Sorry, Jupiter is experiencing warming near the EQUATOR, not the poles like I erroneously posted in the above post.
Insightful? Yikes!!!
Jupiter is experiencing warming NEAR THE POLES. Not the entire planet. Did you read the research behind what you are spouting? Or are you just cherry-picking the sound bites that make you point you have already 'decided' must be true.
If you decided to read it, then you surely came across the fact that "While the analysis remains to be proven, it is seen by other researchers as interesting and, importantly, testable even with large backyard telescopes."
So while evidence that is mounting in favor of the cause of the RETENTION of the heat on the planet earth, which causes it to retain heat energy in the infrared part of the spectrum, then that is just 'junk science' and needs to be pointed out how there is no hard evidence to support it.
But when the same limited data set and hypothesis is put forward that jupiter is experiencing climate change, that lack of actual evidence to prove the theory is something that can just be brushed aside for the sake of arguing against the same cirumstances on Earth that have similar holes in the data set?
Next time, you need to be able to think about what you are parroting, lest it make you like a complete fool.