Re: Government Shutdown

by Head Idiot Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:46 pm

Was watching 60 minutes last night and in a piece on Monaco old Anderson Cooper threw out this gem "In this era of inequality, Monaco's wealth..."

Umm, Anderson, all of human history is an era of inequality.

by Teetime Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:10 pm

Not as much as today.

Since 1978, and adjusted for inflation, American workers have seen an 11.2 percent increase in compensation. During that same period, CEO’s have seen a 937 percent increase in earnings. That salary growth is even 70 percent faster than the rise in the stock market, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

CEO pay still remains high compared to that of “very high wage earners.” The average CEO in a large firm earns 5.33 times the annual earnings of those in the .1 percent.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/22/heres-how-much-ceo-pay-has-increased-compared-to-yours-over-the-years.html

by Head Idiot Mon Mar 18, 2019 2:12 pm

Teetime wrote:Not as much as today.

Since 1978, and adjusted for inflation, American workers have seen an 11.2 percent increase in compensation. During that same period, CEO’s have seen a 937 percent increase in earnings. That salary growth is even 70 percent faster than the rise in the stock market, according to the Economic Policy Institute.

CEO pay still remains high compared to that of “very high wage earners.” The average CEO in a large firm earns 5.33 times the annual earnings of those in the .1 percent.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/22/heres-how-much-ceo-pay-has-increased-compared-to-yours-over-the-years.html

Yes. I'm sure that data from 1978 until now is inclusive of all of history. Medieval times were an era of equal bliss.

Come on. This is climate change level of stat picking.

by Teetime Mon Mar 18, 2019 3:44 pm

I think Anderson Cooper got it right. This is "an era of inequality".

You want proof that it is so....and you want it to start with the beginning of recorded history? It was a throw away line in a soft news report about Monaco. He was as correct as that report needed and as you could tell when you read the link I posted the change since 1978 has been epic.

You need to study up on climate change. It's real and no level of cold water will douse the truth.

by Head Idiot Mon Mar 18, 2019 4:57 pm

Teetime wrote:I think Anderson Cooper got it right. This is "an era of inequality".

You want proof that it is so....and you want it to start with the beginning of recorded history? It was a throw away line in a soft news report about Monaco. He was as correct as that report needed and as you could tell when you read the link I posted the change since 1978 has been epic.

You need to study up on climate change. It's real and no level of cold water will douse the truth.

If you think anything he says, or any media member right or left, is just throw away, I don't know what to tell you. Both sides are well versed in what language to use to view their point across. Cooper isn't real secret about his political viewpoints.

And ya, climate change is real. Ask dinosaurs or woolly mammoths. The idea that we're responsible for it is new and incredibly manufactured. We've been keeping weather records for what 150 years? That's about a half a millisecond of earth's history. A history that has included ice ages, incredibly warm periods, hell, it even rained for 2 million years straight at one point. The whole thing is aimed at securing political power and trillions of dollars in green industry money. There is absolutely no way we can even possibly know that we're responsible for it.

But scientists say it's so, right? And the only people that contest that are oil scientists right? There's no possible way those climate change scientists could be on anyone's payroll could there? 40 years ago we were headed for the next Ice Age according to climate scientists. Then it was the hole in the ozone. Then the Greenhouse Effect. Now it's carbon. At some point, after they've made a few billion off this round, they'll "discover" a new reason it's happening along with something new we need to buy to combat it.

by Head Idiot Mon Mar 18, 2019 5:08 pm

Saying humans caused the current climate change is akin to Cardinals fans saying Bo Hart was destined for the HOF after his first month. Way too small a sample size.

by BirdWatcher Mon Mar 18, 2019 5:19 pm

Head Idiot wrote:Saying humans caused the current climate change is akin to Cardinals fans saying Bo Hart was destined for the HOF after his first month. Way too small a sample size.

Climate is changing. The latest UPCC report says that ONE MILLION people per year will die from climate change.... 70 years from now.

Of course, 2-3 million people die on this planet every year for lack of clean water and sanitation. We KNOW how to fix that, and the UN has a price tag for it: $220 billion. So, we could save 2-3 million lives a year, TODAY, for a fixed price. Yet, we don't.

The solution to CO2 in the atmosphere is available today. We won't use it. France does. South Korea does. China is hiring US companies to get there. Gen IV nuclear runs on existing nuclear waste (there's a 10,000 year supply) and doesn't have the melt-down hazard of old nuclear tech. But the Left recoils at the word "nuclear."

by Head Idiot Mon Mar 18, 2019 5:26 pm

BirdWatcher wrote:
Head Idiot wrote:Saying humans caused the current climate change is akin to Cardinals fans saying Bo Hart was destined for the HOF after his first month. Way too small a sample size.

Climate is changing. The latest UPCC report says that ONE MILLION people per year will die from climate change.... 70 years from now.

Of course, 2-3 million people die on this planet every year for lack of clean water and sanitation. We KNOW how to fix that, and the UN has a price tag for it: $220 billion. So, we could save 2-3 million lives a year, TODAY, for a fixed price. Yet, we don't.

The solution to CO2 in the atmosphere is available today. We won't use it. France does. South Korea does. China is hiring US companies to get there. Gen IV nuclear runs on existing nuclear waste (there's a 10,000 year supply) and doesn't have the melt-down hazard of old nuclear tech. But the Left recoils at the word "nuclear."

Because they can't make money off it.

by tincup1215 Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:34 pm

BirdWatcher wrote:
Head Idiot wrote:Saying humans caused the current climate change is akin to Cardinals fans saying Bo Hart was destined for the HOF after his first month. Way too small a sample size.

Climate is changing. The latest UPCC report says that ONE MILLION people per year will die from climate change.... 70 years from now.

Of course, 2-3 million people die on this planet every year for lack of clean water and sanitation. We KNOW how to fix that, and the UN has a price tag for it: $220 billion. So, we could save 2-3 million lives a year, TODAY, for a fixed price. Yet, we don't.

The solution to CO2 in the atmosphere is available today. We won't use it. France does. South Korea does. China is hiring US companies to get there. Gen IV nuclear runs on existing nuclear waste (there's a 10,000 year supply) and doesn't have the melt-down hazard of old nuclear tech. But the Left recoils at the word "nuclear."

by OSUBucks Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:58 pm

BirdWatcher wrote:
Head Idiot wrote:Saying humans caused the current climate change is akin to Cardinals fans saying Bo Hart was destined for the HOF after his first month. Way too small a sample size.

Climate is changing. The latest UPCC report says that ONE MILLION people per year will die from climate change.... 70 years from now.

Of course, 2-3 million people die on this planet every year for lack of clean water and sanitation. We KNOW how to fix that, and the UN has a price tag for it: $220 billion. So, we could save 2-3 million lives a year, TODAY, for a fixed price. Yet, we don't.

The solution to CO2 in the atmosphere is available today. We won't use it. France does. South Korea does. China is hiring US companies to get there. Gen IV nuclear runs on existing nuclear waste (there's a 10,000 year supply) and doesn't have the melt-down hazard of old nuclear tech. But the Left recoils at the word "nuclear."

Absolutely agree that we should be building the 4th Generation reactors. They are much more efficient than the typical reactors in place today. You still have nuclear waste to store but it's only radioactive for a few centuries as opposed to thousands of years with the earlier reactors. According to MIT we could have a fusion reactor (all reactors currently are fission) on the grid in 15-20 years. No nuclear waste to deal with and an inexhaustible supply of hydrogen. Until which time that fusion power is a reality build the Gen 4 reactors. Wind and solar proponents say that these power sources could provide 60-70% of our power 100 years from now. If climate change is as big a problem as the environmentalists say we can't wait that long. The most viable solution right now is nuclear.

by Teetime Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:54 pm

Nuclear is fine by me and I’m a lefty. Are you saying the political right in this country is pro-nuclear? I never hear them say so or propose pro nuclear legislation. When did they become so pro nuke?

We just had two full years of republican control of all of the levers of government, yet no mention of a nuclear power initiative. Who did you say is opposed to nuclear?

by Teetime Mon Mar 18, 2019 9:59 pm

BirdWatcher wrote:sez CNN....

And I've seen other reports (not Fox) that he quickly grasps details and makes executive-like decisions.... you know, like an executive. Oh, and he fires alot of people. Are you surprised a guy whose tagline is "You're Fired" fires alot of people?.

I have to admit, I haven’t seen those reports. Who has he fired in person....like a man?

by OSUBucks Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:29 pm

Teetime wrote:Nuclear is fine by me and I’m a lefty. Are you saying the political right in this country is pro-nuclear? I never hear them say so or propose pro nuclear legislation. When did they become so pro nuke?

I don't know the answer to that. You would think the the environmentally conscious folks (the left) would be the pro nuclear folks. It is cheaper to supply power by a coal or natural gas fired plant than a nuclear one plus a nuclear plant cost more to build and takes longer to get online. The up front cost are very substantial. The US has an abundance of coal, countries like France don't have a lot of it. Coal fired plants produce power more cheaply than gas or nuclear but they produce the heat trapping gases that are melting the poles. The Sierra Club doesn't mind if we all pay more for our power as long as it is more environmentally friendly. You may recall the deal they leveraged Springfield into making, spending $100 million on wind power. I agree with you that climate change is real and I think nuclear is the best option we presently have to wean ourselves off fossil fuels.

by BirdWatcher Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:34 pm

Teetime wrote: I never hear them say so or propose pro nuclear legislation.

You need some real news....

https://www.justtherealnews.com/2019/03/14/u-s-department-of-energy-announces-30-million-for-front-end-engineering-design-studies-for-carbon-capture-systems/

Trump's DoE is also doing some small 4th Gen pilots. (sorry link not available)

by BirdWatcher Mon Mar 18, 2019 10:43 pm

Teetime wrote:
BirdWatcher wrote:sez CNN....

And I've seen other reports (not Fox) that he quickly grasps details and makes executive-like decisions...

I have to admit, I haven’t seen those reports.

Admittedly, this is an opinion piece. But it's CNN, where everything is an opinion piece.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/25/opinions/michael-cohen-donald-trump-tape-strategy-zelizer/index.html

by Teetime Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:49 pm

And who has he fired in person....like a man?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/18/opinions/something-terribly-wrong-with-donald-trump-dantonio/

by Teetime Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:52 pm

BirdWatcher wrote:
Teetime wrote: I never hear them say so or propose pro nuclear legislation.

You need some real news....

https://www.justtherealnews.com/2019/03/14/u-s-department-of-energy-announces-30-million-for-front-end-engineering-design-studies-for-carbon-capture-systems/

Trump's DoE is also doing some small 4th Gen pilots. (sorry link not available)

I asked about nuclear and you show me carbon. Are republicans pro nuclear? I never hear them mention it.

by BirdWatcher Tue Mar 19, 2019 9:26 am

Teetime wrote:
BirdWatcher wrote:
Teetime wrote: I never hear them say so or propose pro nuclear legislation.

You need some real news....

https://www.justtherealnews.com/2019/03/14/u-s-department-of-energy-announces-30-million-for-front-end-engineering-design-studies-for-carbon-capture-systems/

Trump's DoE is also doing some small 4th Gen pilots. (sorry link not available)

I asked about nuclear and you show me carbon. Are republicans pro nuclear? I never hear them mention it.

Yes, I said "no link" last night. Some things I can link to from my tablet.. Others I require my PC.

Republican sponsored bills don't get coverage on CNN.... Wink

Passed October 2018
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/97/text

Nuclear Energy Leadership Act
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/3422/text?format=txt

As to "personal" firings? I have no idea how the White House works. I get the impression that very few people, even Jared & Ivanka, get one-on-one time with a President. Did Mattis get fired over the phone, like Obama did him? I can't prove it either way....

by Head Idiot Thu Mar 21, 2019 9:43 pm

https://www.11alive.com/article/news/georgia-representative-who-proposed-testicular-bill-of-rights-co-sponsors/85-b7146573-acbb-4830-af00-96df0cb41517

by OSUBucks Fri Mar 22, 2019 12:45 am

Head Idiot wrote:https://www.11alive.com/article/news/georgia-representative-who-proposed-testicular-bill-of-rights-co-sponsors/85-b7146573-acbb-4830-af00-96df0cb41517

Don't think that bill will ever make it out of committee. Laughing

by Head Idiot Sun Mar 24, 2019 10:52 pm

by Head Idiot Mon Mar 25, 2019 5:34 pm

OSUBucks wrote:
Head Idiot wrote:https://www.11alive.com/article/news/georgia-representative-who-proposed-testicular-bill-of-rights-co-sponsors/85-b7146573-acbb-4830-af00-96df0cb41517

Don't think that bill will ever make it out of committee.

Maybe you prefer this one from a couple years ago-
https://www-m.cnn.com/2017/03/13/health/abortion-texas-lawmaker-trnd/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

by Head Idiot Wed Mar 27, 2019 11:48 am

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/27/politics/joe-biden-white-mans-culture/index.html

by Head Idiot Wed Mar 27, 2019 6:23 pm

Border apprehensions expected to exceed 100,000 this month.

by BirdWatcher Fri Mar 29, 2019 1:24 pm

Teetime wrote: Are republicans pro nuclear? I never hear them mention it.

by Sponsored content