What Do We Think About Climate Change

"Global Climate Disruption" is not my bag, nor any of yours (Get your dictionaries warmed up. But, you can remove the echerché "antipastipogenic" from the abstract, and that strikes Troy, and others from the rolls of those pretending to have had that big word in their repertoire antecedent to the discussion) but... When utter nonsense is adduced in argument, especially by simple folk putting on airs to win over their peers or to inflate their own ego (I'm not doing this) first, it begs the question with "why wud any sane person introduce "anthropopogenetic" as a concise substitute for "man made"" (if not simply to conflagrate the nascent embers of younger mental siblings' sencience, thus snuffing them out before they can grasp more advanced concepts like... "truth"), second, how F'ing evil can one be to decree ukase edicts (by peer, if not by government yet) that have not withstood the test of scientific scrutiny - nay, not only "not withstood the test" but bypassed the test, apple on teachers desk, and graduated magna cum-laude? Anthropodagenic, my ass.

This is my bag (scratching): I preface by stating that no amount of progressive, unionized hogwash will convince me that we don't, here, have the best healthcare in the world. The best schools, therefore the best doctors, the best, most available technology, the best research, ALL - the total package (can it be argued that the US, Australia, and Japan don't lead the world in U education - specifically research and not just churning out drivel, papers and drones? I think not.). This is not to say that there isn't room for improvement. There is - we could improve it by getting government out of the way. "...because employers are refusing to chip in enough..." - this demonstrates a plebeian's understanding of economic theory (and hence nullifies all attempts at rebuttal). "Third party" is the very thing that causes healthcare costs to skyrocket whilst suppressing the drive for quality. Troy almost had me in one of his intermittant contacts with reality (old corroded aluminum wiring, Troy?) ("In the first place, there isn't nearly as much competition as you apparently believe there is. Are you aware that it's generally illegal to sell health insurance across state lines? The companies in Florida, for example, are only competing with each other; everyone else is blocked out. So it's a cozy little relationship inside each state, where each company is careful not to upset the apple cart by undercutting its so-called competition enough to matter.
It baffles me that you think anything could be worse than the way the health insurance companies are stuck between us and our doctors, with their hands stuck out both directions.
I don't think anyone expects health coverage to be 'free;' obviously it has to be paid for somehow...") - but he lapsed into his unionbabble and I was dismayed and deflated once again at how he "knows so much that just isn't so" ( -RR)... Troy, with all due respect, I am not going to regurgitate my entire education here but... can it suffice to point out that (I'm using one of your vaunted fallacies here) it simply can't work that way ("because employers don't chip in enuf")? The entire history of the world says it can't! Employers, employers/government, cannot provide a sustainable product in competition with the free market. There is not enuf money, there is not enuf incentive, and there is too much artificial demand generated (tooth whitening, maternity leave for the husband, pills, pills, pills, every scratch needs an ER visit, etc.). Can this ever be driven thru the thick bone skull of someone who needs to believe? No, I expect not. That's why I'll dive in and kibitz for amusement or dialectic (funny, huh?) practice but weary of debate with someone not grounded in economics. May I recommend that you, at least, steer her back to climate disruption?

[hoytedow]

Hear, hear(applause).

[wardd]

no one said we don't have quality, we don't have quantity

and for the average person it's not quality if he doesn't have access to it

why shouldn't unions have the same free speech as the republican party, the chamber of commerce and other business associations and wall street?

after all the unions represent more people/voters than all those others combined

shouldn't workers/people be free to organize for their best benefit?

or is this a selective democracy?

[hoytedow]

Unions have more free speech than the Republican Party, at least on main stream media, where their point of view gets much more air time, Comrade.

Democracy is for people, not entities.
"the unions represent more people/voters than all those others combined" - false.
Unions are another matter, and have overplayed their usefulness thru growing too strong, to be sure, but at least you are coherent today. Thank you.

Tag in for me, Hoyt. Have a good one.

[wardd]

Originally Posted by hoytedow

Unions have more free speech than the Republican Party, at least on main stream media, where their point of view gets much more air time, Comrade.

surely you jest, or are you just talking about that liberal media, fox?

mainstream media is as big business as you can get, they don't express views, they make money

when you realize that no big business got that way not by altruistic means, you'll begin to understand why there has to be laws and regulations. or is your perfect society the 17th and 18th century england

i always laugh at something i read years ago where a colledge professors wife was complaining about not being able to get decent help for a party she was throwing and that 200 years ago that wouldn't be a problem where upon he quipped, 200 years ago she would have been the help

most here carrying water for the right wing pols and big business don't understand that they are as well off as they are because of those that came before them fought those big business types for the life they enjoy now

an old saying " wanna live like a republican vote democratic"

[Boston]

its a corporate oligarchy if you ask me
the people have very little influence at this point

[hoytedow]

Without a fair and unbiased media, our Republic is doomed, but that is what you want, no?

[wardd]

I'm a liberal we can't agree on anything

lockstep is the republican march, just ask karl rove

[Boston]

you mean a corporate owned and operated including foreign ( soudi arabian ) holders media

or can you show me a fair and unbiased media somewhere on this planet

cause it looks like they are all owned and operated by corporations who by definition are in it for themselves

and yes I am referring to that soudi prince who bought up a chunk of fox news in order to quell ( ah the vernacular raises its ugly head so that the more astute protagonists might maintain there interest ) the backlash from 9/11

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by wardd

I'm a liberal we can't agree on anything

lockstep is the republican march, just ask karl rove

Goosestep is the liberal march. Ask your goose. They loved the axis gang. It took the bombing of Pearl Harbor to shake them into reality.

http://books.google.com/books?id=fCN...iberal&f=false

[wardd]

Originally Posted by hoytedow

Goosestep is the liberal march. Ask your goose. They loved the axis gang. It took the bombing of Pearl Harbor to shake them into reality.

http://books.google.com/books?id=fCN...iberal&f=false

au contrair it was the right that was in love with hitler, lindbergh was far from a liberal

we wont count the english aristocracy

wasn't it rosevelt that died in the wool republican that led us into the war?

[hoytedow]

Originally Posted by wardd

au contrair it was the right that was in love with hitler, lindbergh was far from a liberal

we wont count the english aristocracy

wasn't it rosevelt that died in the wool republican that led us into the war?

Au contraire mon frere. Go soak your head.

http://www.traces.org/charleslindbergh.html

http://books.google.com/books?id=XLS...page&q&f=false

[wardd]

your history is about as accurate as your climate beliefs