Re: Hurricane Bertha

On Jul 13, 2:15 am, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 13, 12:01 am, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 12, 12:46 am, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 10, 3:32 am, Joerg <notthisjoerg...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Richard The Dreaded Libertarian wrote:
On Tue, 08 Jul 2008 10:56:32 -0500, Bit Farmer wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 8, 8:09 am, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@My-Web-
Site.com> wrote:
Hurricane Bertha...
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gVWjsPEiqe1tEu2mhBIRaxxGi8owD91P3HM80

<snip>

We are going to have to decrease the proportion of energy we generate
by burning fossil fuels and increase the proportion we generate from
sustainable sources - from windmills and solar cells. By adjusting the
costs to the usuers and manufacturers with taxes and subsidies to
reflect the hidden costs of the damage extra CO2 is doing to the
environment now and will do later, we can use the free market
mechanism to make the change-over work smoothly and efficiently, and
with a minimum of bureaucracy. If you can come up with a better
mechanism, the world will beat a path to your door.
You don't believe that yourself, do you? Taxes are a method of
socialism.

That's nonsense. Taxes predate socialism by a very long time, and
while socialist governments have tried to use taxation as a tool to
decrease the power of capital, it never worked very well, and has long
since fallen out of favour.

That's why I left the Netherlands in the 80's. I didn't want to feed
lazy kids via >50% income tax. Taxes are ok as long as the level is
reasonable and as long as they don't foster "leaning back" tendencies
especially in the younger population.

The Dutch and the Germans have more effective social security systems
than the US, and that does cost money

It pays off. The coloured kids of US servicemen who grew up in Germany
after WW2 weren't noticably disadvantaged, while the legitimate kids
of the same coloured servicemen growing up in the US dropped
progressively further behind their white contemporaries every year.
The children of the poor in the U.S. don't get enough of the right
food to take full advantage of what education is on offer, and a
disproportionate number of them grow up to be unemployable.

Right wig commentators make a great fuss about the "dependency
culture" which is a myth, and ignore the damage done to the children
of the poor by inadequatesocial security.

         ... Everybody has long since learned the lesson that
it pays to let the free market provide any service that isn't a
"natural monopoly". Transport systems do tend to be natural monopolies
- it doesn't make sense to have duplicated independent rail, road or
canal networks - and for these sorts of services, government-run
systems do seem to serve the community better than privately owned
systems.

Like the gvt subsidized train "system" here. Yeah, right. We go
everywhere by air and that's all corporate run.

Who make very sure that their tame legislators don't subsidise the
train system to a point where it could offer an attractive and
competitive service, as it does in continental Europe, and did in the
UK until Thatcher (who hated trains and never used them) privatised it
into a condition where it barely works, to the benefit of the
corporate run airlines who were "contributing to the Conservative
Party funds".

<snip>

Al Gore's "The Assault on Reason" has a fair bit to say about this
kind of self-indulgent foolishness
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assault_on_Reason
Sorry, this guy does not have credibility in my eyes anymore.

So you too have been suckered by Exxon-Mobil's propaganda ...

Nope. you don't remember the hockey stick scare?

You really have been suckered. The temperature rise was real enough,
but Mann's crime was to modify a well-known statistical technique - in
a fashion that he should have realised was wrong - to make his graphs
illustrating the point look better than they should have done. It was
perfectly ordinary human error, but the anti-global warming
propagandists have blown it up out of all proportion, and nitwits like
Eeyore carry on as it is was evidence of extensive and systematic
fraud by the whole IPCC, which is as daft a conspiracy theory as any
you can find.

<snip>

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
.

Quantcast