Nov 10, 2010 at 19:40:57
“No one poor suffers here. Try going to India, China, Mexico, Eastern Europe....the people suffering here are mentally ill and drug addicts.
In America we call it 'suffering' because we only give them 1 bedroom per child, a living room, kitchen, refrigerator, air conditioning, clean water, heat, food, cable tv, free school, free transportation, tvs, electricity........
Try walking through the streets of other countries with babies crawling naked through construction sites and on the road. They live in MUD with whole families peeing and pooping 3 feet from a tarp house with the babies crawling through the mud.
You are sick to think anyone in america suffers.”
LinLew on Nov 10, 2010 at 19:53:29
“I was referring directly to the Katrina disaster, and I see your point about suffering not being as bad as third world countries. I also believe the areas in New Orleans were(are?) areas of suffering during the Katrina Disaster. And my response to your post was about proving that Bush was not a racist because he donated money to Africa. So, no i wasn't trying to compare suffering, I was just saying there are people here who OUR president should be worried about. To keep a country thriving, you needs its people to thrive. So please don't deviate from your original post by calling others sick. By saying he donated money to Africa, you were trying to show proof that he wasn't a racist. And that is no proof at all.”
Nov 10, 2010 at 19:35:25
“I mad at Beck for apologizing. Somebody had the courage to call a racist a racist He apologized saying Obama doesn't hate white people, he just believes black liberation theology which just blames white people.”
mamapower on Nov 11, 2010 at 01:35:53
“It's because you are !gnorant.”
LinLew on Nov 10, 2010 at 19:40:37
“Well, I mean we white people were the ones who kidnapped Africans from their homes and enslaved them....who should be blamed? They've never had a chance to get over slavery because we white people want them to just forget about it and move on. Glenn Beck displays white guilt at its finest!”
“My job is in part to help companies set up facilities or departments and it is pretty much a last alternative to use US labor with the new healthcare law.
It use to be required to have a ~50% total cost reduction or greater to move to Mexico, India, China. The raw labor when available is 10% of the US, additional considerations bring the total cost higher.
It is impossible anymore to justify hiring in the US when it is uncertain the cost of the mandate to have insurance. It is fine for jobs making over $100k however below this threshold many jobs are unskilled and can be easily sourced anywhere in the world. Adding $20k in healthcare to a $40k job simply guarantees hitting the 50% threshold can not be reached with a US employee.
I don't have an answer for what should be done to provide healthcare for all our citizens however this existing law is a disaster for jobs and it will soon be a collective disaster for all companies dropping insurance.”
cdkfrog on Nov 9, 2010 at 17:58:54
“$20K for health insurance? Seems high, but maybe not for a family. I pay $138 per month as a single male in my 40's. I think we should get away from attaching health insurance to our jobs, property insurance does not. But if health care were off the books for business, would they really pay their workers more, or charge less for products/services? Clearly, people with lower paying jobs have a right to affordable/quality health care too. I thought the health care bill requires individuals to carry health insurance, not mandates business to make it available to all? If the cost is too high, then don't provide, but affordable access is the key. I believe single payer in the long run is best as insurance for big profit is mostly immoral and is run to make huge profits, not care for people. My job eliminated health insurance and private pay only cost me $25 more per month, but I maybe lucky there.”
Twayn on Nov 9, 2010 at 17:54:29
“Businesses put themselves into this situation by using health insurance as an employment perquisite. When deregulation opened the floodgates of insurance premium hikes, the costs of health insurance soon outweighed the benefits. Now Big Business uses healthcare as another convenient excuse to outsource jobs. If Big Business was serious about lowering its health insurance costs, it should have supported a single payer healthcare system during the national debate on healthcare reform. Single payer is the only way to ensure open access to healthcare for all Americans while also helping Big Business eventually eliminate employee health insurance as an operational cost.”
Joshy Anderson on Nov 9, 2010 at 17:42:04
“public option. That or single payer.
Employers otherwise will have to eventually drop health insurance altogether. This is what happens when we water down legislation into redundancy.”
Duppy on Nov 9, 2010 at 17:36:41
“Its called Tea Bag logic..............LOL”
Bella Lee on Nov 9, 2010 at 17:36:28
“The best part of the law is that the uninsured will have the opportunity to buy insurance. I am praying that my employer cancels my insurance so I buy my own insurance followed by a raise to make up for not having benefits.”
gerald4 on Nov 9, 2010 at 17:36:13
You should also point out that your analysis (and mine) should will include the effects of property taxes, environmental regulations, business taxes, utilities, and other government influenced manufacturing costs in addition to labor cost considerations.
US businesses know that even if they can economically survive the current environmental regulations, more and more environmental legislation and regulations will certainly be "piled onto" them in the future.
If a US business prepares an economic life cycle cost analysis that would allow their US factory to stay in the USA today, the business managers should fire their US workers and relocate that factory to a foreign country in order to escape the costs of future environmental regulations that the US government will almost certainly create and "pile onto" their US operations.”
Duppy on Nov 9, 2010 at 17:35:24
“Yes, but this cost cutting by companies / outsourcing has been happening for the last 10 years. If you are a business person and have been in business for years and a success, there are ALWAYS uncertainties in running a business. So you logic is pretty lame.”
“Your post is in agreement with me it seems. The debate is NOT over.
The problem is that the left declared the Debate is over by holding up a series of phony facts.
Does this fact mean the rest of the climate warming facts are phony? No. You do need to flush the liars, punish those that tried to create fake science, and come back with a clear explanation of what science remains and agree to debunk opposing views in a debate.”
“I apologize as my post and reply was simply a tease to those who think everyone who disagrees or is still undecided is therefore stupid.
My honest reply to you is that
I do listen to the left - despite their obvious repetitive corruption of fake science - despite the obvious personal gain of promoting their cause - because the vast majority of knowledgeable people are on one side.
- Most every time I see a panel on TV....the dumbest person in the discussion is a 'professor'....as worldwide culture we have replaced intelligence/knowledge with a certificate from 7 years of attending a university. US universities are nothing more than 'pay a fee - get a B'. This is a classic left vs. right conflict on trusting a designated official vs. capability / achievement on who one believes. I personally hold the left's 'scientists' with skeptism.
- I see Europe as having little to no honesty in academics....Europe has lost science to an ideology.... so the fact the majority of these 97% come from Europe I 80% discount them.
- The media has broadcast so many lies....the dems have run with so many lies out of convenience....I can not discern what facts if any are useful.
- The left does not acknowledge the frauds....so now you can't seem to trust anyone as the lies are obvious”
“First I will agree the is some validity about anger about Zionism........I understand on both sides a deep lifelong hatred if someone in their family was killed by the other side.....but there is similar truth about most the countries across Europe, Asia and Africa.
However - I was not at all referring to Palestinians. I was speaking to the POSTS on this article by American Liberals / Democrats.
So 99% of the American dems are irate at all the countries we created or were redrawn across China, India, Europe, Russia, Pakistan, most of Aftrica....
I don't think so.
The dems are only irate and justify mass murder against 1 country on Earth.
If you believe the Palestinians do not hate Jews you are not watching the news.”
AtlantaIconoclast on Nov 9, 2010 at 22:34:56
“And as I said, Of course many Palestinians hate Jews, but not because they are Jews. They hate them for what has been done to them! Wake up! Sometimes, Jews can be wrong just like any other people. Israel is truly the blind spot for too many in this country.”
AtlantaIconoclast on Nov 9, 2010 at 22:33:33
“You just dont get it. The only reason why so many of us get worked up about Israel is because the vast majority of the spineless hacks in our Congress, in our White House, etc. are committed to Israel right or wrong! We don't give billions every year to Iran, but we do give to Israel every year, and offer them diplomatic cover. I certainly don't argue that Israel is the worst violator of human rights on the planet. Nor do I think that Israel's actions within Israel or the territories merit aggression from other nations. However, we must stop subsidizing their bad behavior year after year! That is why we are so upset. This illegal occupation, and needless colonization of the territories has gone on since 1968! What other nation gets to occupy another people for that long? China? Well, is that the standard Israel wants to live up to? If so, please support us in cutting them loose!”
“wow! Look at the posts! Democrats are down to 30% support of Israel while republicans are at 90%....but look at the posts...it seems to me the 30% is down to 5% at best with the rest deeply angry at the jews.”
Rich Baska on Nov 9, 2010 at 00:31:40
“Republicans confuse Israel with "the Jews" quite often. The protesters were Jewish, in case you missed it.”
AtlantaIconoclast on Nov 9, 2010 at 00:19:22
“Stop the nonsense. This has zero to do with "anti Semitism", and everything to do with outrage at the ability of right wing Zionists to continue to get away with an illegal occupation and colonization that has been going on since 1968. Get over yourself. It isnt always about anger at "Jews" per se. I guarantee you that the Palestinians do not hate Israelis because they eat gefeltifish, or attend synagouge. They do hate them for stealing their land, and dehumanizing them.”
“So if Foxnews is 10x bigger than MSNBC then Fox is always correct? Which news source will you trust...the one most everyone watches (6m watched oreilly) or the one that came in 25th in primetime behind food reruns and cartoons?”
Publicola on Nov 9, 2010 at 00:10:00
“dontsayit: "Which news source will you trust...the one most everyone watches (6m watched oreilly) or the one that came in 25th in primetime behind food reruns and cartoons?"
Uh, you aren't seriously trying to suggest that the veracity of a news network is based on how many people watch it, are you?
And you also aren't seriously suggesting that "most everyone" regularly watches Fox News, are you?
And you do understand that, for example, NBC gets larger ratings that Fox - don't you?”
“I thought we already fixed all this....I understand everything Obama says is true...or please hit reply if there is any part of Obama's speech you feel may be incorrect....else we will assume we are done.
2008 - President Obama:
this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal;
Of course he also said:
this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on earth.
This was the moment—this was the time—when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves and our highest ideals.
We measure progress in the 23 million new jobs that were created when Bill Clinton was president”
hp blogger Shan Wells on Nov 9, 2010 at 09:27:15
“It may yet be that moment. Although now that voters such as yourself have put pro-polluters back in charge of the House, that moment is less likely.
Unless you are of the belief that using metaphor in a victory speech makes such assertions instantly true, I fail to understand the point of your comment.”
“8. Climate change is a non-linear (chaotic) process, some parts of which are only dimly or not at all understood. No deterministic computer model will ever be able to make an accurate prediction of climate 100 years into the future.
9. Not surprisingly, therefore, experts in computer modelling agree also that no current (or likely near-future) climate model is able to make accurate predictions of regional climate change.
10. The biggest untruth about human global warming is the assertion that nearly all scientists agree that it is occurring, and at a dangerous rate.
The reality is that almost every aspect of climate science is the subject of vigorous debate. Further, thousands of qualified scientists worldwide have signed declarations which (i) query the evidence for hypothetical human-caused warming and (ii) support a rational scientific (not emotional) approach to its study within the context of known natural climate change.”
Publicola on Nov 8, 2010 at 23:47:44
“8. Really. Why is it then that computer models have correctly predicted global warming of recent decades?
9. See #8.
10. The scientific consensus supporting anthropogenic global warming overwhelming.
"The reality is that almost every aspect of climate science is the subject of vigorous debate. "
The reality is that almost every aspect of all science is "the subject of vigorous debate".
Do you believe in evolution, dontsayit? And if yes, why your double-standard with respect to climate science.”
1. Climate has always changed, and it always will. The assumption that prior to the industrial revolution the Earth had a "stable" climate is simply wrong. The only sensible thing to do about climate change is to prepare for it.
2. Accurate temperature measurements made from weather balloons and satellites since the late 1950s show no atmospheric warmingsince 1958. In contrast, averaged ground-based thermometers record a warming of about 0.40 C over the same time period. Many scientists believe that the thermometer record is biased by the Urban Heat Island effect and other artefacts.
3. Despite the expenditure of more than US$50 billion dollars looking for it since 1990, no unambiguous anthropogenic (human) signal has been identified in the global temperature pattern.
4. Without the greenhouse effect, the average surface temperature on Earth would be -180 C rather than the equable +15 C that has nurtured the development of life.
Carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas, responsible for ~26% (80 C) of the total greenhouse effect (330C), of which in turn at most 25% (~20C) can be attributed to carbon dioxide contributed by human activity. Water vapour, contributing at least 70% of the effect, is by far the most important atmospheric greenhouse gas.”
Publicola on Nov 9, 2010 at 00:01:52
“1. Straw man - climate scientists have never said or suggested that climate hasn't always changed.
Moreover that "only sensible conclusion" is stupefyingly facile. Cancer has been around since pre-history; using that same science denier "logic" the "only sensible thing to do about" cancer is to "prepare for it" too... so keep smoking your cigarettes.
Known natural forcing agents of past global warming - including changes in orbital cycles and increases in solar radiative output - cannot explain the bulk of said recent warming. Neither has any scientific theory to explain the bulk of said recent warming other than anthropogenic global warming survived scientific scrutiny.
4. Again,wrong. Without the greenhouse effect the Earth's temperature would be ~-18 C, not -180 C. At least this science denier acknowledges that the Greenhouse Effect is real - many science deniers it.
That science denier also omits the fact that CO2 and other anthropogenic greenhouse gases drive water vapor concentrations, which is to say CO2 and said other gases are drive water vapor's contribution to the greenhouse effect.”
hp blogger Shan Wells on Nov 8, 2010 at 23:34:06
“Every one of Dr. Carter's points is demonstrably wrong.
My question to you is this: would you walk over a bridge that 97 of 100 engineers tell you will collapse causing you to fall to your death the minute you get to the middle, or would you believe the three that tell you the other 97 are full of it, and you should sally forth unconcerned?”
So what is the conflict between your link and all the news:
Climate change data dumped
Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor
SCIENTISTS at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have admitted throwing away much of the raw temperature data on which their predictions of global warming are based.
It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years.
The UEA’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) was forced to reveal the loss following requests for the data under Freedom of Information legislation.
The data were gathered from weather stations around the world and then adjusted to take account of variables in the way they were collected. The revised figures were kept, but the originals — stored on paper and magnetic tape — were dumped to save space when the CRU moved to a new building.
The great climate change science scandal
EU figurehead says climate change a myth
The admission follows the leaking of a thousand private emails sent and received by Professor Phil Jones, the CRU’s director. In them he discusses thwarting climate sceptics seeking access to such data.
In a statement on its website, the CRU said: “We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data.””
Publicola on Nov 8, 2010 at 23:16:19
“There is no conflict. First off, you do understand what this means, right?
“We do not hold the original raw data but only the value-added (quality controlled and homogenised) data."
Second and as I explained to you above: *most* temperature data still exists, not all of it.
By the way: climate scientists also do not, as you claim above, assert that "the world is ending."
“Not in this case....millions saw it was hot so they believed....now it is cold and they don't.
You are in the first group.”
UnderTheHedgeWeGo on Nov 8, 2010 at 19:04:09
“"Not in this case....millions saw it was hot so they believed....now it is cold and they don't. You are in the first group."
Hmmm, ya............ I'll have to assume that was bitingly insightful comment cus' I don't have clue what it is you're trying to express.
It was hot......now its cold .........ah, nope.
Oh, it was hot so I thought it was hot? I'm in the first group. Didn't everybody think it was hot when it was hot? Did you think it was cold when it was hot because you'd be wrong but I'd at least understand why you're so confused.”
“We don't need 700 'experts' until you show us the data. The world has paid a few bufoons to collect data from around the world. They claim the world is ending if we don't give the left a bunch of tax money....but 'lost' the data when asked to prove it.
Demand the data. You and I both know these fools are afraid the world will scorn them once we see that the 700 experts all made predictions based upon faulty facts.”