I love those who discredit the ability of people to be altruistic, then propose we place social responsibility into the hands of a government made up of those same selfish people.
The thing is, we're all required to pay into SS and all the funds are used to buy special treasury bonds. Since the money is now in the general fund, it can be (and is) spent. Essentially, the money is moved from one pocket to the other, then spent, and yet we claim that there is a "trust fund". It's far and beyond even fractional banking; we're banking on the future faith and trust of the US government in the future, 100%. And nowhere in law are they required to pay anyone.... NOWHERE. It's a tax.
So, tell me how this is smarter and safer than letting people use low-risk investments, again?
Other than specific exemptions for clergy and state workers, participation in SS is MANDATORY. So is paying income tax. Even if you don't get an SSN, you STILL must pay into SS and STILL must pay income tax. De facto, it just might be harder for Uncle Sam to collect if you don't have an SSN. Otherwise, what you have said is true.
You just called the State of Californa a bunch of Luddites.
Appealing to the popularity of a belief is fallacious. In addition, this is the same state that democratically, through referendum, opposed same-sex marriage and the courts decided that popularity didn't matter in that case.
GMO is often used to make the foods more pest resistant. Now this could be bad because our GMO foods have trace amounts of poison in them.
One life form's poison is another's food. Or, at least, the "poison" has no effect and is passed without incident. Biologists know this. Greenies get up in arms about GMO, then use "natural" pesticides to keep insects from damaging their "organic" crops without a sense of irony.
Capitalism is not the problem; greed is the problem. Socialists call for collectivism as the solution to the world's woes, as if a command economy can't also be used for evil.
I don't know... polls? They all show trust in Congress below 20%, and trust in the President oscillates between 40% and 50% depending on how sympathetic the source is and what lies he's told this week.
Cruise ships were still pretty popular until the major carriers decided to stop maintaining their vessels and leave their passengers stranded in the Atlantic, waist-deep in sewage.
Yes, hoards, as in all the "celebrity authority" reinforcements they send in to get all the skeptical Gen Xers on board, like Bill Nye (the engineer with no climate credentials whatsoever). They have Paul Zaloom in the wings if "the science guy" continues to tank. I heard they had Mr. Wizard and Mr. Rogers in the pirate's chest too, but it started to smell funny.
There are cars that get 40 mpg, but people prefer to take out improvements in efficiency in bigger cars, better acceleration and by driving longer distances.
[citation needed]
What you say only happens when the economy is robust enough to overcome things like our relatively expensive fossil fuels. The "Canyonero" is a favorite straw man of the eco-Left, but the fact is that the SUV is a dying breed and has been replaced by the more efficient crossover vehicle that looks more like a modernized AMC Eagle without the vinyl woodgrain. The cars might have better acceleration, but I can only punch it so much when the speed limit on the highway is still only 65 MPH. And my driving distance is determined by where I have to go. I suppose if gasoline is cheap, I might decide to take a road trip where a airplane flight might actually be more economical, but the real consumption is in the daily commute and regular trips to visit family and weekend entertainment destinations. Those aren't really determined by the MPG of my vehicle.
Which kinda ignores that in pre-industrial times, you needed many to be in slavery just to provide the "cheap energy" -- today, oil and gas is our "slave power", which is why we can live daily, as if with the energy of hundreds of slaves at our disposal.
Indeed... it's reminiscent of the "noble savage" concept of the late 19th century.
A cap and trade marked based solution worked beautifully for SO2, there's absolutely no reason it wouldn't work for other pollutants as well,
Except CO2 is not like other "pollutants", in that it is "toxic" in the way that a plastic bag pulled over one's head is "toxic", and every human being produces this "pollutant" regardless of activity. Therefore, it gives us an opening to saddle every living person with personal responsibility for control of this "pollutant". Besides that, we're expecting the same corporate masters we blame for every evil in the world when it's convenient to our socialist leanings to treat this suppostitious market in a fair, open manner.
beyond intentional and sociopathic sabotage that is.
paint roofs and roads white to stop the heatsink effect
Ouch, my eyes. Does it have to be white? We'd have to choose a different color for road stripes. Maybe a tan that's similar to the concrete we should probably be using anyway?
Does it matter? Well, tell me: if the amount decreased by 60%, would that matter? I think it would be in every headline, along with pitches from nearly every prominent client scientist (plus Bill Nye) for global economic governance to avert this oncoming tragedy.
And this is why we don't let de facto temperance lobbyists like MADD dictate federal policy. Once of the worst failures of the Reagan administration (and I'm someone who actually liked Reagan).
The fact that a lot of rich people stand to be made even richer off the backs of the poor and middle class tend to make those people skeptical. It's rather fallacious reasoning, but the threat is real and you need to understand that skeptics aren't all mouth-breathing anti-scientists.
First of all, it was a hurricane with winds exceeding 80 MPH at landfall. Number two, it was unusual because its wind diameter was over 1,000 miles-- an unusually large area. It caused real damage and severe weather over a huge amount of land.
Slashdot Mirror
Everyone's waiting for a holodeck. At that time, civilization will collapse.
Don't forget pointy knives! Those are too dangerous for the subjects.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem
I love those who discredit the ability of people to be altruistic, then propose we place social responsibility into the hands of a government made up of those same selfish people.
What good is devalued currency to a person? Our senior citizens will still starve, as a wheelbarrow of currency will be insufficient to buy bread.
Thanks for your information and insights.
The thing is, we're all required to pay into SS and all the funds are used to buy special treasury bonds. Since the money is now in the general fund, it can be (and is) spent. Essentially, the money is moved from one pocket to the other, then spent, and yet we claim that there is a "trust fund". It's far and beyond even fractional banking; we're banking on the future faith and trust of the US government in the future, 100%. And nowhere in law are they required to pay anyone.... NOWHERE. It's a tax.
So, tell me how this is smarter and safer than letting people use low-risk investments, again?
Other than specific exemptions for clergy and state workers, participation in SS is MANDATORY. So is paying income tax. Even if you don't get an SSN, you STILL must pay into SS and STILL must pay income tax. De facto, it just might be harder for Uncle Sam to collect if you don't have an SSN. Otherwise, what you have said is true.
There are lawyers who specialize in that sort of thing. Also, your mother should be getting a death benefit.
Appealing to the popularity of a belief is fallacious. In addition, this is the same state that democratically, through referendum, opposed same-sex marriage and the courts decided that popularity didn't matter in that case.
One life form's poison is another's food. Or, at least, the "poison" has no effect and is passed without incident. Biologists know this. Greenies get up in arms about GMO, then use "natural" pesticides to keep insects from damaging their "organic" crops without a sense of irony.
Capitalism is not the problem; greed is the problem. Socialists call for collectivism as the solution to the world's woes, as if a command economy can't also be used for evil.
I don't know... polls? They all show trust in Congress below 20%, and trust in the President oscillates between 40% and 50% depending on how sympathetic the source is and what lies he's told this week.
Cruise ships were still pretty popular until the major carriers decided to stop maintaining their vessels and leave their passengers stranded in the Atlantic, waist-deep in sewage.
Yes, hoards, as in all the "celebrity authority" reinforcements they send in to get all the skeptical Gen Xers on board, like Bill Nye (the engineer with no climate credentials whatsoever). They have Paul Zaloom in the wings if "the science guy" continues to tank. I heard they had Mr. Wizard and Mr. Rogers in the pirate's chest too, but it started to smell funny.
[citation needed] What you say only happens when the economy is robust enough to overcome things like our relatively expensive fossil fuels. The "Canyonero" is a favorite straw man of the eco-Left, but the fact is that the SUV is a dying breed and has been replaced by the more efficient crossover vehicle that looks more like a modernized AMC Eagle without the vinyl woodgrain. The cars might have better acceleration, but I can only punch it so much when the speed limit on the highway is still only 65 MPH. And my driving distance is determined by where I have to go. I suppose if gasoline is cheap, I might decide to take a road trip where a airplane flight might actually be more economical, but the real consumption is in the daily commute and regular trips to visit family and weekend entertainment destinations. Those aren't really determined by the MPG of my vehicle.
Indeed... it's reminiscent of the "noble savage" concept of the late 19th century.
Except CO2 is not like other "pollutants", in that it is "toxic" in the way that a plastic bag pulled over one's head is "toxic", and every human being produces this "pollutant" regardless of activity. Therefore, it gives us an opening to saddle every living person with personal responsibility for control of this "pollutant". Besides that, we're expecting the same corporate masters we blame for every evil in the world when it's convenient to our socialist leanings to treat this suppostitious market in a fair, open manner.
Oh, there it is.
Taxes... you mean those things that politicians use to leverage power in democracies, and only the middle class pays?
Ouch, my eyes. Does it have to be white? We'd have to choose a different color for road stripes. Maybe a tan that's similar to the concrete we should probably be using anyway?
Does it matter? Well, tell me: if the amount decreased by 60%, would that matter? I think it would be in every headline, along with pitches from nearly every prominent client scientist (plus Bill Nye) for global economic governance to avert this oncoming tragedy.
And this is why we don't let de facto temperance lobbyists like MADD dictate federal policy. Once of the worst failures of the Reagan administration (and I'm someone who actually liked Reagan).
Here come the draconian government regulations. This is just what they needed to make the skies clearer for their assassination drones.
Really? I thought that was called journalism. You know, let the reader decide? Journalists aren't scientists.
The fact that a lot of rich people stand to be made even richer off the backs of the poor and middle class tend to make those people skeptical. It's rather fallacious reasoning, but the threat is real and you need to understand that skeptics aren't all mouth-breathing anti-scientists.
First of all, it was a hurricane with winds exceeding 80 MPH at landfall. Number two, it was unusual because its wind diameter was over 1,000 miles-- an unusually large area. It caused real damage and severe weather over a huge amount of land.