Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Yeah right, trickle down really worked didn't it? We all got pee'd on. The economy actually thrived under higher taxes on the rich. They are not monarchs. Higher taxes are used to discourage them accumulating wealth. Let's not be dependent on the wealthy. Spread the wealth around instead. And I'm all for teaching someone to fish (metaphorically). That might be a lot easier if wealth was spread around. shempmcgurk wrote: There is that old adage: Give a man a fish and he'll become dependent upon you giving him fish. BUT teach a man to fish and he'll soon become independent of you. Deficit spending is the former. It does bugger-all for the economy. BUT if you cut taxes -- particularly for the rich -- then less is in government hands and more in the hands of those most creative and productive with their money and they'll soon have oodles and oodles of the unemployed back at work. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6...@... wrote: Bhairitu, look at the deficit spending and also in relation to the over all size of the budgets of Bush and Obama. Bush also had an expanding economy most of his 8 years. The economy was steadily growing out of any deficit spending Bush did, year by year. What remains to be seen is if the economy will grow out of the Obama deficits. If Obama can't stimulate the economy to start growing, we are up a cree, with the size of his deficits. --- On Fri, 6/12/09, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: From: Bhairitu noozg...@... Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, June 12, 2009, 12:08 AM Mike, I know you can't be that stupid. Go look at the expenses and the money spent on the war forchissakes! It was a boondoggle for the military industrial welfare complex. The US was borrowing money like crazy for that war. Even without the banking crisis there was a problem with so much debt. Do yourself a favor and go rent The International on DVD (or BD if you have that). Listen to that little monologue the head of the Italian armaments company gives in the middle of the film about how war creates debt. That monologue is so right on and all explained in a nutshell. With the money spent on that dumbass war everyone's mortgage could have been paid off with change left over. Mike Dixon wrote: Sorry Bhairitu, the war had nothing to do with the state our economy is in now. That was caused by the housing bubble finally bursting after years of Bush warning that it was coming and that Fanny and Freddy were in serious need of regulation overhauls. But I am flattered that you admitted we* had* a healthy economy, at least through 2006. The Democratic point of view all during the Bush years was that the economy sucked, the whole time. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal. net wrote: From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal. net Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 7:42 PM I've always thought we should send Shemp off to Mumbai for a while to see how he liked living in a polluted city. But then India, since I've been there in 1996 has been working on cleaning things up. I believe that included a government sponsored program to fix those polluting motor carts. Every time I hear the sound of those in an Asian movie I get good feelings because it reminds me of India. We don't hear that sound around here as there are none of those little cart taxis and mopeds are pretty much nonexistent though they are available. Instead we get egotistical assholes who like to flaunt their loud Harley's. Downtown they'll get a ticket for that. BTW Mike, the last time I looked we no longer have a healthy, prosperous economy. Bush blew it all on his little war with Saddam. So maybe we will see more mopeds. We won't see those motor taxis because they would be electric here. And the mopeds come with pollution devices. Mike Dixon wrote: Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: Oh come now, those stimulus packages were from the Bush administration. You can't have it both ways. Either it's change you can believe in or Obama is continuing Bush's policies. Every indication is that with few exceptions he is continuing Bush's policies, only with even greater fervour. Yes, and that is very much a concern for his supporters. It has often been said our elections and democracy are an illusion brought to you by the magicians of the very rich.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozguru@ wrote: Oh come now, those stimulus packages were from the Bush administration. You can't have it both ways. Either it's change you can believe in or Obama is continuing Bush's policies. Every indication is that with few exceptions he is continuing Bush's policies, only with even greater fervour. Yes, and that is very much a concern for his supporters. It has often been said our elections and democracy are an illusion brought to you by the magicians of the very rich. Thank you for at least acknowledging this. Are you one of his supporters that you refer to? I voted for him and contributed to the campaign. I also jerk the chain if I don't like what he is doing.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: Yeah right, trickle down really worked didn't it? Yes, it did! No, it didn't. The rich took their wealth elsewhere. We don't need no stinking aristocracy or oligarchs! We all got pee'd on. The economy actually thrived under higher taxes on the rich. Actually, it thrived more when Bush lowered taxes on the rich...AND we got MORE tax revenue from the rich as a result. I posted the link to the evidence for this the other day...didn't you read it? Yes there is lots of right wing bullshit out there. The Clinton administration had higher taxes on the rich and we got a boom in tech because companies could get tax breaks for RD investment. Please do...and then stop forthwith spouting your nonsense. I've heard the screed over and over. It is all one-dimensional. They are not monarchs. Higher taxes are used to discourage them accumulating wealth. Let's not be dependent on the wealthy. Spread the wealth around instead. Your recipe is a recipe for HURTING the poor. The truth is, you don't give a rat's ass for them. The rich would rather see the poor dead.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
On Jun 11, 2009, at 8:58 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj vajradh...@... wrote: On Jun 11, 2009, at 12:29 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: Madam Speaker, before voting on the cap-and-trade'' legislation, my colleagues should consider the views expressed in the following petition that has been signed by 31,478 American scientists: Shouldn't we be worried about what CLIMATE scientists say rather than scientists in general? Yes, we should. And most climate scientists think catstrophic man-made global warming is bunk. So you're a Global Climate Change denier.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
On Jun 11, 2009, at 9:53 AM, do.rflex wrote: That list of 'scientists' was taken from a number of seriously unverified massive mailout surveys beginning in 1998 to recently. The surveys originate from an obscure wacko group and some of the signatures included such names as Drs. Frank Burns, B. J. Honeycutt. Now let's not be judgmental! :-) To Shemp and a bunch of others here, these ARE serious scientists. Ron Paul has slowly revealed himself to be a real whacko, one of those lunatic fringe right-wingers who really brings them out of the woodwork. The person who scares me more than him though is Huckabee. The gun nuts I know just love him. You know, the kind of gun nuts who stockpile ammo and think airline safety means everyone on board packin' a pistol. It's been so bad in parts of the US that they've been selling out of ammo--all because of anti-Obama hysteria. There's a similar hysteria going on with climate change.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Shemp, notice how Vaj is trying to marginalize you, the same, as if you were a holocaust denier. Vaj, really, more and more scientists are jumping off the man made global warming band wagon as they take a look at the studies and question the political motivations involved. A tanked economy isn't going to be helpful for cleaning up our environment or providing funding for scientific research on anything. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote: From: Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 1:13 PM On Jun 11, 2009, at 8:58 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Vaj vajradh...@. .. wrote: On Jun 11, 2009, at 12:29 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: Madam Speaker, before voting on the cap-and-trade' ' legislation, my colleagues should consider the views expressed in the following petition that has been signed by 31,478 American scientists: Shouldn't we be worried about what CLIMATE scientists say rather than scientists in general? Yes, we should. And most climate scientists think catstrophic man-made global warming is bunk. So you're a Global Climate Change denier.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: Shemp, notice how Vaj is trying to marginalize you, the same, as if you were a holocaust denier. Vaj, really, more and more scientists are jumping off the man made global warming band wagon as they take a look at the studies and question the political motivations involved. A tanked economy isn't going to be helpful for cleaning up our environment or providing funding for scientific research on anything. Of course you do realize, since we have now entered Extinction-6, one of the major extinction phases of sentient life on this planet, that Global Climate Change will, in effect, make the Holocaust of WW II look like a blip on the screen of loss of human and sentient life? That's not in any way meant to trivialize the Holocaust, it's just to put into perspective what the right-wing blue memers are in fact denying, all for a quick, short-sighted buck. BTW, I am not a supporter of cap and trade legislation. Personally I'd like to see a Green marketplace based on American technology, creating jobs and solutions, all assisted through tax incentives to consumers, manufacturers and entrepreneurs.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
No Vaj, it's not something I've *realized* or believe. What I do believe is, that the* man made global warming* issue is nothing more than a power grab by politicians. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net wrote: From: Vaj vajradh...@earthlink.net Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 3:20 PM On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: Shemp, notice how Vaj is trying to marginalize you, the same, as if you were a holocaust denier. Vaj, really, more and more scientists are jumping off the man made global warming band wagon as they take a look at the studies and question the political motivations involved. A tanked economy isn't going to be helpful for cleaning up our environment or providing funding for scientific research on anything. Of course you do realize, since we have now entered Extinction-6, one of the major extinction phases of sentient life on this planet, that Global Climate Change will, in effect, make the Holocaust of WW II look like a blip on the screen of loss of human and sentient life? That's not in any way meant to trivialize the Holocaust, it's just to put into perspective what the right-wing blue memers are in fact denying, all for a quick, short-sighted buck. BTW, I am not a supporter of cap and trade legislation. Personally I'd like to see a Green marketplace based on American technology, creating jobs and solutions, all assisted through tax incentives to consumers, manufacturers and entrepreneurs.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:41 AM, shempmcgurk wrote: Indeed, there is not one shread of evidence to support such a claim. I hear sunsets are rare for ostriches with their heads in the sand.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies that advance our civilization and economies. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: From: Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 4:14 PM Mike, Okay, I'll just say it yet again: it's not about the warming, it's about the pollution. If the warming concept is wrong, doesn't matter, addressing the warming concept entails addressing the pollution concept. I mean, what's not understood about, say, acid-rain? What's not understood about the hole in the ozone layer? What's not understood about 30,000 toxic dump sites leaching their poisons into the American water supply? What's not understood about 25% of L..A. smog is Chinese soot? What's not understood about that Texas sized garbage pile in the ocean? If we try to control global warming, we have to be targeting pollution. If we have to suffer the fact that profiteers will find ways to suck at the public tit when we try to address pollution, so be it, we'll always have bastards like that finding niches. Morally, I see no difference between the Japanese whale killers and the Chinese smoke stacks. No difference between the torturers in Guantanamo and the American cigarette manufacturers. No difference between the Navy's underwater sonar sound bombs that make whales' ears actually bleed and the use of Agent Orange. And on and on. If we wrote up a precise plan to stop global warming, it would be virtually identical with the plan to stop pollution. To waste time blathering about if or if not the warming concept is valid is like letting the whalers keep harpooning while they do everything they can to keep the debate going lest it stop and they are forbidden to hunt any whale for scientific reasons. The debate about warming effectively delays the start of work on pollution. That's what you're doing Mike. You're helping profiteers with their killing the world, face it. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@ ... wrote: No Vaj, it's not something I've *realized* or believe. What I do believe is, that the* man made global warming* issue is nothing more than a power grab by politicians. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Vaj vajradhatu@ ... wrote: From: Vaj vajradhatu@ ... Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 3:20 PM On Jun 11, 2009, at 11:05 AM, Mike Dixon wrote: Shemp, notice how Vaj is trying to marginalize you, the same, as if you were a holocaust denier. Vaj, really, more and more scientists are jumping off the man made global warming band wagon as they take a look at the studies and question the political motivations involved. A tanked economy isn't going to be helpful for cleaning up our environment or providing funding for scientific research on anything. Of course you do realize, since we have now entered Extinction-6, one of the major extinction phases of sentient life on this planet, that Global Climate Change will, in effect, make the Holocaust of WW II look like a blip on the screen of loss of human and sentient life? That's not in any way meant to trivialize the Holocaust, it's just to put into perspective what the right-wing blue memers are in fact denying, all for a quick, short-sighted buck. BTW, I am not a supporter of cap and trade legislation. Personally I'd like to see a Green marketplace based on American technology, creating jobs and solutions, all assisted through tax incentives to consumers, manufacturers and entrepreneurs.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
I've always thought we should send Shemp off to Mumbai for a while to see how he liked living in a polluted city. But then India, since I've been there in 1996 has been working on cleaning things up. I believe that included a government sponsored program to fix those polluting motor carts. Every time I hear the sound of those in an Asian movie I get good feelings because it reminds me of India. We don't hear that sound around here as there are none of those little cart taxis and mopeds are pretty much nonexistent though they are available. Instead we get egotistical assholes who like to flaunt their loud Harley's. Downtown they'll get a ticket for that. BTW Mike, the last time I looked we no longer have a healthy, prosperous economy. Bush blew it all on his little war with Saddam. So maybe we will see more mopeds. We won't see those motor taxis because they would be electric here. And the mopeds come with pollution devices. Mike Dixon wrote: Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies that advance our civilization and economies. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Edg, forgive me for not going point to point with you on your reply. But I think you have missed my original point that I was trying to make. I'm not against cleaning up or preventing pollution. The United States has spent enormous amounts of money to do just that and will continue and it shows. Countries that are currently rising up out of the third world have not, yet. They are simply trying to rise out of their poverty and I would think one day they will all have the time and money to think about reducing the pollution they create. We can't do it all nor should we. We could spend our entire GDP year after year and not get it done and you want universal healthcare to boot? Where is the money going to come from to pay for all this? No profits for businesses or investors, whats the point of being in business or investing your money? Think before you kill that goose that lays the golden eggs. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote: From: Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 6:42 PM Mike, If we focus on cleaning up pollution but don't do anything about how that pollution is created, that's half-assed, right? The cost of cleaning up needs to be factored into pricing. Right now corporations make profit by not paying for the cost-to-society of their products. If we paid the true cost of maintaining our highways via gas taxes, we'd be paying, what?, $10/gallon? Maybe. But BigOil doesn't have to pay for road upkeep or the hospital bills of those who are dying from asthma. If we put a carbon tax on stuff, it makes the corporations have to find ways to stop pollution. What alternate method do you suggest? And, your portrayal of America being so much better off than 3rd world nations on the garbage issue is hardly a useful comparison. While India etc. have massive garbage in the streets, America makes that pale when we compare India's pollution to our toxic dumps and what we put into the ocean as an industrial nation. Our production of truly toxic materials is to Indian garbage as nukes are to bullets. It is the insanity of the consumer feeding frenzy that drives most of this. I drive an eleven year old car even though I can afford a new one every year. I don't need a new car to symbolize anything to the world, ya see? But the whole world is quite unable to resist the new, improved, better, faster line of products that add nothing new except newness to folks who already have older products that do the trick. Keep up with the Jones or you're a lower-class citizen...like that. Consider how little of a carbon imprint anyone really has to create to sustain a simple lifestyle, and then consider the typical expenditures of the typical person-with- recreational- capital. Going into a lesser state of industrialization just makes sense, but the marketing forces extant are powerful shapers of consumer consciousness. The American Dream isn't a home and a chicken in every pot, it's several mansions, servants, air-conditioned garages for their fleet of cars, and restaurant sized kitchens with freezers filled with selected cuts from Angus steers. 2/3rds of the world survives on a bowl of rice a day. Shame on us. Shame on the pollution. Shame on murderous blind corporate industry. Edg --- In FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com, Mike Dixon mdixon.6569@ ... wrote: Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies that advance our civilization and economies. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroup s.com wrote: From: Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroup s.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 4:14 PM Mike, Okay, I'll just say it yet again: it's not about the warming, it's about the pollution. If the warming concept is wrong, doesn't matter, addressing the warming concept entails addressing the pollution concept. I mean, what's not understood about, say, acid-rain? What's
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Sorry Bhairitu, the war had nothing to do with the state our economy is in now. That was caused by the housing bubble finally bursting after years of Bush warning that it was coming and that Fanny and Freddy were in serious need of regulation overhauls. But I am flattered that you admitted we* had* a healthy economy, at least through 2006. The Democratic point of view all during the Bush years was that the economy sucked, the whole time. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net wrote: From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 7:42 PM I've always thought we should send Shemp off to Mumbai for a while to see how he liked living in a polluted city. But then India, since I've been there in 1996 has been working on cleaning things up. I believe that included a government sponsored program to fix those polluting motor carts. Every time I hear the sound of those in an Asian movie I get good feelings because it reminds me of India. We don't hear that sound around here as there are none of those little cart taxis and mopeds are pretty much nonexistent though they are available. Instead we get egotistical assholes who like to flaunt their loud Harley's. Downtown they'll get a ticket for that. BTW Mike, the last time I looked we no longer have a healthy, prosperous economy. Bush blew it all on his little war with Saddam. So maybe we will see more mopeds. We won't see those motor taxis because they would be electric here. And the mopeds come with pollution devices. Mike Dixon wrote: Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies that advance our civilization and economies. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroup s.com wrote:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Who was it that said, never let a crisis go to waste. I guess if you don't have a crisis, create one! It's all about political power! --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Richard J. Williams willy...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Richard J. Williams willy...@yahoo.com Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 8:58 PM Vaj wrote: I hear sunsets are rare for ostriches with their heads in the sand... Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. .. Read more: 'The Creeping Fascism of Global Warming Hysteria' By Paul Joseph Watson Prison Planet, February 13, 2007 http://tinyurl. com/3xrzm2
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Mike, I know you can't be that stupid. Go look at the expenses and the money spent on the war forchissakes! It was a boondoggle for the military industrial welfare complex. The US was borrowing money like crazy for that war. Even without the banking crisis there was a problem with so much debt. Do yourself a favor and go rent The International on DVD (or BD if you have that). Listen to that little monologue the head of the Italian armaments company gives in the middle of the film about how war creates debt. That monologue is so right on and all explained in a nutshell. With the money spent on that dumbass war everyone's mortgage could have been paid off with change left over. Mike Dixon wrote: Sorry Bhairitu, the war had nothing to do with the state our economy is in now. That was caused by the housing bubble finally bursting after years of Bush warning that it was coming and that Fanny and Freddy were in serious need of regulation overhauls. But I am flattered that you admitted we* had* a healthy economy, at least through 2006. The Democratic point of view all during the Bush years was that the economy sucked, the whole time. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net wrote: From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 7:42 PM I've always thought we should send Shemp off to Mumbai for a while to see how he liked living in a polluted city. But then India, since I've been there in 1996 has been working on cleaning things up. I believe that included a government sponsored program to fix those polluting motor carts. Every time I hear the sound of those in an Asian movie I get good feelings because it reminds me of India. We don't hear that sound around here as there are none of those little cart taxis and mopeds are pretty much nonexistent though they are available. Instead we get egotistical assholes who like to flaunt their loud Harley's. Downtown they'll get a ticket for that. BTW Mike, the last time I looked we no longer have a healthy, prosperous economy. Bush blew it all on his little war with Saddam. So maybe we will see more mopeds. We won't see those motor taxis because they would be electric here. And the mopeds come with pollution devices. Mike Dixon wrote: Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies that advance our civilization and economies. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroup s.com wrote:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Book yourself a seat on the next shuttle flight Billy and take a look at some areas of the world like India, China, etc. Or are you just so used to L.A. smog that you can't see it anymore? Now if those aren't from carbon emissions what is? Global warming or global cooling those emissions aren't good for you. BillyG. wrote: As if anybody here really knows or is qualified to comment on whether or not there truly is *global warming*; it's all about who you believe my friend, it's all about who you believe. Nobody on this forum is qualified to say, one way or the other if global warming (due to carbon emissions) is for real!! --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu noozg...@... wrote: I've always thought we should send Shemp off to Mumbai for a while to see how he liked living in a polluted city. But then India, since I've been there in 1996 has been working on cleaning things up. I believe that included a government sponsored program to fix those polluting motor carts. Every time I hear the sound of those in an Asian movie I get good feelings because it reminds me of India. We don't hear that sound around here as there are none of those little cart taxis and mopeds are pretty much nonexistent though they are available. Instead we get egotistical assholes who like to flaunt their loud Harley's. Downtown they'll get a ticket for that. BTW Mike, the last time I looked we no longer have a healthy, prosperous economy. Bush blew it all on his little war with Saddam. So maybe we will see more mopeds. We won't see those motor taxis because they would be electric here. And the mopeds come with pollution devices. Mike Dixon wrote: Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies that advance our civilization and economies. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogroups.com wrote:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
On Jun 11, 2009, at 8:12 PM, Bhairitu wrote: Book yourself a seat on the next shuttle flight Billy and take a look at some areas of the world like India, China, etc. Or are you just so used to L.A. smog that you can't see it anymore? Now if those aren't from carbon emissions what is? Global warming or global cooling those emissions aren't good for you. Sometimes we're (all) 'Burned by the fire we make'. Artist:Adrian Belew Title:Burned by the fire that we make (acoustic version) And when man gained dominion Over land and the oceans He began to harm the planet With his asphalt and his toxins And to lay the forest bare And to poison even the air And he killed every beast And taught the seas how to bleed Burned by the fire we make, What a shame Then the winds gave in And the rain knew no season And the sun came to beat On a land of sand and diseases And when God looked down On the earth and saw it was broken Then the tears of God fell down Through a hole in the ozone Burned by the fire we make What a shame This is the nature of the human race To kill off anything that gets in our way Poor mother earth we disfigured her face Man is the maker of his own disgrace Burned by the fire we make What a shame
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Bhairitu, look at the deficit spending and also in relation to the over all size of the budgets of Bush and Obama. Bush also had an expanding economy most of his 8 years. The economy was steadily growing out of any deficit spending Bush did, year by year. What remains to be seen is if the economy will grow out of the Obama deficits. If Obama can't stimulate the economy to start growing, we are up a cree, with the size of his deficits. --- On Fri, 6/12/09, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net wrote: From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, June 12, 2009, 12:08 AM Mike, I know you can't be that stupid. Go look at the expenses and the money spent on the war forchissakes! It was a boondoggle for the military industrial welfare complex. The US was borrowing money like crazy for that war. Even without the banking crisis there was a problem with so much debt. Do yourself a favor and go rent The International on DVD (or BD if you have that). Listen to that little monologue the head of the Italian armaments company gives in the middle of the film about how war creates debt. That monologue is so right on and all explained in a nutshell. With the money spent on that dumbass war everyone's mortgage could have been paid off with change left over. Mike Dixon wrote: Sorry Bhairitu, the war had nothing to do with the state our economy is in now. That was caused by the housing bubble finally bursting after years of Bush warning that it was coming and that Fanny and Freddy were in serious need of regulation overhauls. But I am flattered that you admitted we* had* a healthy economy, at least through 2006. The Democratic point of view all during the Bush years was that the economy sucked, the whole time. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal. net wrote: From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal. net Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 7:42 PM I've always thought we should send Shemp off to Mumbai for a while to see how he liked living in a polluted city. But then India, since I've been there in 1996 has been working on cleaning things up. I believe that included a government sponsored program to fix those polluting motor carts. Every time I hear the sound of those in an Asian movie I get good feelings because it reminds me of India. We don't hear that sound around here as there are none of those little cart taxis and mopeds are pretty much nonexistent though they are available. Instead we get egotistical assholes who like to flaunt their loud Harley's. Downtown they'll get a ticket for that. BTW Mike, the last time I looked we no longer have a healthy, prosperous economy. Bush blew it all on his little war with Saddam. So maybe we will see more mopeds. We won't see those motor taxis because they would be electric here. And the mopeds come with pollution devices. Mike Dixon wrote: Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies that advance our civilization and economies. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogrou p s.com wrote:
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming
Oh come now, those stimulus packages were from the Bush administration. Obama wasn't yet elected back in late September or early October. Stop trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Your observations are one-dimensional. Obama was left with the mess the Republicans made. And face it we are up a creek. Obama can't do anything about. No one can. It's just the karma of a country that was afflicted with runaway capitalism. And the prosperity was all phony and based on credit. The chickens are coming home to roost. Hold on for the ride of your life. Bhairitu, look at the deficit spending and also in relation to the over all size of the budgets of Bush and Obama. Bush also had an expanding economy most of his 8 years. The economy was steadily growing out of any deficit spending Bush did, year by year. What remains to be seen is if the economy will grow out of the Obama deficits. If Obama can't stimulate the economy to start growing, we are up a cree, with the size of his deficits. --- On Fri, 6/12/09, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net wrote: From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal.net Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Date: Friday, June 12, 2009, 12:08 AM Mike, I know you can't be that stupid. Go look at the expenses and the money spent on the war forchissakes! It was a boondoggle for the military industrial welfare complex. The US was borrowing money like crazy for that war. Even without the banking crisis there was a problem with so much debt. Do yourself a favor and go rent The International on DVD (or BD if you have that). Listen to that little monologue the head of the Italian armaments company gives in the middle of the film about how war creates debt. That monologue is so right on and all explained in a nutshell. With the money spent on that dumbass war everyone's mortgage could have been paid off with change left over. Mike Dixon wrote: Sorry Bhairitu, the war had nothing to do with the state our economy is in now. That was caused by the housing bubble finally bursting after years of Bush warning that it was coming and that Fanny and Freddy were in serious need of regulation overhauls. But I am flattered that you admitted we* had* a healthy economy, at least through 2006. The Democratic point of view all during the Bush years was that the economy sucked, the whole time. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal. net wrote: From: Bhairitu noozg...@sbcglobal. net Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Ron Paul on Global Warming To: FairfieldLife@ yahoogroups. com Date: Thursday, June 11, 2009, 7:42 PM I've always thought we should send Shemp off to Mumbai for a while to see how he liked living in a polluted city. But then India, since I've been there in 1996 has been working on cleaning things up. I believe that included a government sponsored program to fix those polluting motor carts. Every time I hear the sound of those in an Asian movie I get good feelings because it reminds me of India. We don't hear that sound around here as there are none of those little cart taxis and mopeds are pretty much nonexistent though they are available. Instead we get egotistical assholes who like to flaunt their loud Harley's. Downtown they'll get a ticket for that. BTW Mike, the last time I looked we no longer have a healthy, prosperous economy. Bush blew it all on his little war with Saddam. So maybe we will see more mopeds. We won't see those motor taxis because they would be electric here. And the mopeds come with pollution devices. Mike Dixon wrote: Edg, have you ever done any *globe trotting*? Ever been to India or China? How about Mexico city? If you had, you'll notice the filth and pollution is many times greater than the worst polluted cities in the US. Why? because these countries don't have an economy that allows them to clean up their streets let alone a toxic waist dump or the air they breath. Nobody wants to live in a garbage dump, breath nasty air or drink and bath in filthy water. However, as long as we have a healthy prosperous economy we can do whatever it takes to clean up our environment and develop new ways of preventing pollution in the first place. Look at what we have accomplished here in the US and then compare that to the newly developing countries mentioned above. We don't need to *de-industrialize* in order to clean up pollution, just modernize and develop newer technologies that advance our civilization and economies. --- On Thu, 6/11/09, Duveyoung no_re...@yahoogrou p s.com wrote:
