Go Back   Android Forums > Android Forums Community > The Lounge > Politics and Current Affairs
Politics and Current Affairs All things political.

New Forums: Nexus Player | Nexus 9
Like Tree12Likes

test: Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old October 28th, 2012, 01:30 PM   #51 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Or perhaps the state could provide less services and people could fix their own mess themselves. I still remain completely unconvinced that wealth transfers are needed at all. Personally I don't want any money that I didn't earn myself, but that's just me. Maybe I'm weird that way. A handout mentality is what is wrong with some people in this country.
A handout mentality is evidently not wrong with America, countries with this mentality are actually more efficient.

And no, the states should provide services to their people. Thats their job. The US seems to be the only place in the world where states bitch and moan yet fail to provide healthcare, comprehensive education etc.

Advertisements
__________________
Sign up for Minus online storage and get 10 GB of Free Space today! Sign up Here!
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old October 28th, 2012, 01:40 PM   #52 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
kool kat2's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Carson, CA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,018
 
Device(s): HTC One M8
Carrier: Sprint

Thanks: 217
Thanked 140 Times in 116 Posts
Default

.
kool kat2 is offline  
Last edited by kool kat2; October 28th, 2012 at 01:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2012, 08:25 PM   #53 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
A handout mentality is evidently not wrong with America, countries with this mentality are actually more efficient.

And no, the states should provide services to their people. Thats their job. The US seems to be the only place in the world where states bitch and moan yet fail to provide healthcare, comprehensive education etc.
More efficient in what way?

States rights in the US went the way of the dodo back after the civil war. I don't blame you for not knowing that as you don't live here, but to anyone who lives here that is obvious. The states have gradually surrendered their rights to the feds ever since. It is generally thought that the responsibility for providing such things rests at the federal level, not the state level.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2012, 08:43 PM   #54 (permalink)
Member
 
Bob Blaylock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: 38 28′ North, 121 26′ West
Gender: Male
Posts: 123
 
Device(s): Motorola Triumph
Carrier: Virgin Mobile

Thanks: 18
Thanked 35 Times in 28 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
You can't just completely rely on sales tax (or VAT as we call it). The highest rate in Europe is 27% (minimum allowed is 15%), and I don't think it should be higher than that, as you then have to provide more transfers to the working and lower middle classes. Perhaps if the federal government was to set minimum income tax rates for states

Thanks for this vivid reminder of why, two centuries ago, we kicked the Eurofilth out of what part of North America we then occupied, and founded a new country of our own.

The idea of legally mandating a minimum rate at which government forcibly takes wealth from those who have earned it has no place in a civilized nation; where government is to be a servant to the people rather than a master over them.
Bob Blaylock is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2012, 08:51 PM   #55 (permalink)
Member
 
Bob Blaylock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: 38 28′ North, 121 26′ West
Gender: Male
Posts: 123
 
Device(s): Motorola Triumph
Carrier: Virgin Mobile

Thanks: 18
Thanked 35 Times in 28 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
I still remain completely unconvinced that wealth transfers are needed at all. Personally I don't want any money that I didn't earn myself, but that's just me. Maybe I'm weird that way. A handout mentality is what is wrong with some people in this country.
I agree that this is certain a way in which our nation has gone badly downhill since its founding.

It does seem noteworthy to see you arguing with a European, who thinks we don't have enough of a handout mentality, and arguing in favor of a much worse version than what now infests our nation. I guess this demonstrates that as much as our own society has degraded, it is still far ahead of the rest of the world.
Bob Blaylock is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2012, 08:57 PM   #56 (permalink)
Member
 
Bob Blaylock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: 38 28′ North, 121 26′ West
Gender: Male
Posts: 123
 
Device(s): Motorola Triumph
Carrier: Virgin Mobile

Thanks: 18
Thanked 35 Times in 28 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
More efficient in what way?

States rights in the US went the way of the dodo back after the civil war. I don't blame you for not knowing that as you don't live here, but to anyone who lives here that is obvious. The states have gradually surrendered their rights to the feds ever since. It is generally thought that the responsibility for providing such things rests at the federal level, not the state level.
See the Tenth Amendment. The vast majority of what the federal government now does, it does in open violation of the Constitution.
Bob Blaylock is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old October 28th, 2012, 10:12 PM   #57 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
bberryhill0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rhinelander, WI> Wayzata, MN>Sisters, OR
Posts: 2,470
 
Device(s): Q9c, Eris xtrROM 4.6.5, Droid Concepts 11, Incredible 2 EclipticSense
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 860
Thanked 366 Times in 325 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by OutofDate1980 View Post
"Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) acknowledged on Wednesday that House Republicans had consciously voted to reduce the funds allocated to the State Department for embassy security since winning the majority in 2010."
Wait, are you saying that politicians are conscious?!?
__________________
My Eris apps
bberryhill0 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2012, 08:02 AM   #58 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
More efficient in what way
Well, there is less wastage, more services for less, whatever. I'm not saying a handout mentality is good or anything but it really is irrelevant as such.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
States rights in the US went the way of the dodo back after the civil war. I don't blame you for not knowing that as you don't live here, but to anyone who lives here that is obvious. The states have gradually surrendered their rights to the feds ever since. It is generally thought that the responsibility for providing such things rests at the federal level, not the state level.
Of course I know this, but the fact remains that states have a lot more sovereignty than they would in many other federations,

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
Thanks for this vivid reminder of why, two centuries ago, we kicked the Eurofilth out of what part of North America we then occupied, and founded a new country of our own.
Uhm... hi o/

Anyway, the reason there is a minimum rate of VAT is due to the customs union. If there wasnt a minimum rate, one state wold set there standard rate at 0% and everyone would buy their TVs there, and in the end you would have to set up customs checkpoints inside the union (!).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
The idea of legally mandating a minimum rate at which government forcibly takes wealth from those who have earned it has no place in a civilized nation; where government is to be a servant to the people rather than a master over them.
From what I have seen, it is in place in every civilised nation, from New Zealand to Malta.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Blaylock View Post
I agree that this is certain a way in which our nation has gone badly downhill since its founding.

It does seem noteworthy to see you arguing with a European, who thinks we don't have enough of a handout mentality, and arguing in favor of a much worse version than what now infests our nation. I guess this demonstrates that as much as our own society has degraded, it is still far ahead of the rest of the world.
Ah yes, American superiority. Low life expectancy, higher poverty rates than most of post-communist Europe, people going bankrupt because they get ******* sick, ridiculous teen pregnancy rates, excruciatingly high greenhouse gas emissions, terrible divorce statistics, high murder rates... the list goes on.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ElasticNinja For This Useful Post:
Gmash (October 29th, 2012)
Old October 29th, 2012, 08:35 AM   #59 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
Anyway, the reason there is a minimum rate of VAT is due to the customs union. If there wasnt a minimum rate, one state wold set there standard rate at 0% and everyone would buy their TVs there, and in the end you would have to set up customs checkpoints inside the union (!).
Here in the states, states are allowed to set their own sales tax. Some states have no sales tax and people who live near the borders regularly cross the state line to buy their big ticket items. The company I work for was founded in California and has since relocated almost all of it's business to North Carolina. Only it's main HQ is still in California since we're a tech company and you basically have to have a presence there. Why did they relocate everything to North Carolina? Because it's cheaper to do business there. If a state can get a way with 0% taxes, let them. Competition is good IMHO.

Quote:
Ah yes, American superiority. Low life expectancy, higher poverty rates than most of post-communist Europe, people going bankrupt because they get ******* sick, ridiculous teen pregnancy rates, excruciatingly high greenhouse gas emissions, terrible divorce statistics, high murder rates... the list goes on.
Same problems you have in every other country on the planet. Just saying. The US isn't perfect. But we do tend to produce more and innovate more than any other country on the planet. Those who live in poverty in the US tend to live a higher standard of living than the middle class in a lot of countries in the world.
Bob Blaylock likes this.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2012, 08:47 AM   #60 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Here in the states, states are allowed to set their own sales tax. Some states have no sales tax and people who live near the borders regularly cross the state line to buy their big ticket items. The company I work for was founded in California and has since relocated almost all of it's business to North Carolina. Only it's main HQ is still in California since we're a tech company and you basically have to have a presence there. Why did they relocate everything to North Carolina? Because it's cheaper to do business there. If a state can get a way with 0% taxes, let them. Competition is good IMHO.
Oh of course, countries set there own sales tax rates here too, and they often have different exemptions! Its just a minimum rate which makes sense. Tax competition is not good at all. It merely creates a race to the bottom, leading more of the burden to be placed on lower earners.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Same problems you have in every other country on the planet. Just saying. The US isn't perfect. But we do tend to produce more and innovate more than any other country on the planet. Those who live in poverty in the US tend to live a higher standard of living than the middle class in a lot of countries in the world.
Well you know, I am talking about developed countries. And these developed countries are doing better on most of these fronts. Most of which have experienced far more war and and have far less resources per head than the US. Those in poverty in the developed world will obviously live better than the middle class in Bihar, for loads of reasons. But that is a moot point as Bihar for example is 20 times as poor as our countries.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old October 29th, 2012, 12:01 PM   #61 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Got it. Competition is bad.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2012, 02:57 PM   #62 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Got it. Competition is bad.
It often is! Of course in some areas the government needs to enforce monopolies for the populaces benefit, in other areas it needs to prevent monopolies. Can't be black and white about this.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2012, 05:21 PM   #63 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Can't agree. I think competition almost always (99%) of the time good for everyone and certainly good for consumers. Here we have states businesses are abandoning (looking at you CA) because taxes are high and the cost of doing business there is simply much higher than going across the country. States competing for business is good for everyone IMO. Brings jobs. Improves the economy. Etc.....

Monopolies can be good or bad but tend to be bad. I can't think of a case where the government needs to protect a monopoly. At least not off hand.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 29th, 2012, 08:39 PM   #64 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
bberryhill0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rhinelander, WI> Wayzata, MN>Sisters, OR
Posts: 2,470
 
Device(s): Q9c, Eris xtrROM 4.6.5, Droid Concepts 11, Incredible 2 EclipticSense
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 860
Thanked 366 Times in 325 Posts
Default

The government regulates natural monopolies like utilities.
bberryhill0 is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old October 30th, 2012, 06:13 AM   #65 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bberryhill0 View Post
The government regulates natural monopolies like utilities.
True. Regulates is different than protect though. If mom and pop open a nuclear power station and start competing with the local power company I don't think it's the feds job to stop mom and pop from doing so. Granted, this is an extreme example, but you know what I mean.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 30th, 2012, 01:19 PM   #66 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
True. Regulates is different than protect though. If mom and pop open a nuclear power station and start competing with the local power company I don't think it's the feds job to stop mom and pop from doing so. Granted, this is an extreme example, but you know what I mean.
I guess though the government might only feel certain companies are fit to run large power stations. In most countries nuclear power is run by state-owned companies, and for very good reasons (EDF is one plenty will know of). Perhaps a better analogy is if the Johnsons put a wind turbine on their land, and decide to sell power back to the grid - should they be forced to sell it to the monolpoly, or be part of a free market where they sell it to the company who will pay the most (I don't really have an opinion on this, competition is good in most cases, but for stuff like power its inefficent and government needs more influence in energy use what with greenhouse gas emissions and pollution).
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 30th, 2012, 02:52 PM   #67 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 214
 
Device(s): HTC Desire Motorola Electrify
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 2
Thanked 19 Times in 14 Posts
Default

>And no, the states should provide services to their people. Thats their job<

Ok... it's been awhile since I read the Constitution, but I don't recall anything in there about healthcare, education, welfare, or any of the other "services" most on the left seem to expect government to provide...
__________________
NO Child Should Live in Fear
Strings is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 30th, 2012, 03:28 PM   #68 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Strings View Post
>And no, the states should provide services to their people. Thats their job<

Ok... it's been awhile since I read the Constitution, but I don't recall anything in there about healthcare, education, welfare, or any of the other "services" most on the left seem to expect government to provide...
So? Thats not the point of constitutions. Anyway I'm sure a few states have that set out in their constitutions anyway, its a common thing to do to set out some sort of moral ideal for their societies.

Also most on the left? I can assure you those to the right of center expect the government to provide and/or ensure these things, although perhaps in a different way to the Social Democrats or Greens or whatever.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2012, 08:00 AM   #69 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
I guess though the government might only feel certain companies are fit to run large power stations. In most countries nuclear power is run by state-owned companies, and for very good reasons (EDF is one plenty will know of). Perhaps a better analogy is if the Johnsons put a wind turbine on their land, and decide to sell power back to the grid - should they be forced to sell it to the monolpoly, or be part of a free market where they sell it to the company who will pay the most (I don't really have an opinion on this, competition is good in most cases, but for stuff like power its inefficent and government needs more influence in energy use what with greenhouse gas emissions and pollution).
Nuclear power may not have been the best example, but you see my point. Government regulation that quashes competition causes more problems than it cures IMO. Just look at wireless carriers in the US vs the UK. Only one UK carrier has LTE and they just turned it on recently. Here in the US where regs are much looser three of the 4 carriers have LTE, all of them have some version of 4G and we've had LTE here for the past two years.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2012, 08:13 AM   #70 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Nuclear power may not have been the best example, but you see my point. Government regulation that quashes competition causes more problems than it cures IMO. Just look at wireless carriers in the US vs the UK. Only one UK carrier has LTE and they just turned it on recently. Here in the US where regs are much looser three of the 4 carriers have LTE, all of them have some version of 4G and we've had LTE here for the past two years.
In the US, the government not getting involved has ruined the telecoms industry. You have to pay to receive calls in the US! In Europe there is way more competition between carriers, and roaming is free in your home country, and almost completely free outside your carriers country. Yes 4G is coming down the pipeline slower, but thats because our 3G network is so good in the first place. Customers in Europe are a lot less tied down, contracts are largely the domain of business users and people who wont pay up front for their expensive shiny new phone.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ElasticNinja For This Useful Post:
Gmash (October 31st, 2012)
sponsored links
Old October 31st, 2012, 08:31 AM   #71 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,796
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,286
Thanked 1,573 Times in 1,204 Posts
Default

The US is one of the worst in the developed world when it comes to cellular service.
__________________
"Machete don't text"
Gmash is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old October 31st, 2012, 09:44 AM   #72 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
In the US, the government not getting involved has ruined the telecoms industry. You have to pay to receive calls in the US! In Europe there is way more competition between carriers, and roaming is free in your home country, and almost completely free outside your carriers country. Yes 4G is coming down the pipeline slower, but thats because our 3G network is so good in the first place. Customers in Europe are a lot less tied down, contracts are largely the domain of business users and people who wont pay up front for their expensive shiny new phone.
I've looked at UK contracts before just for fun since I had been told that cell service was cheaper over there. I came away unconvinced. Plans are still limited by minutes like they are in the US. (How those minutes are calculated I confess I don't know.) Here domestic roaming is free on every major network that I know of. Leave the country and you get charged an arm and a leg. I don't know of any real complaints about the 3g network here there is just demand for faster speeds. Providers are trying to differentiate themselves. Sprint rolls out wi-max. VZW rolls out LTE which is faster and blasts Sprint and ATT for having slower speeds. Now all three networks have LTE. Data plans in the UK just look so limited to me. I haven't seen one unlimited plan (though people may be grandfathered into them over there) while most people here either are grandfathered into one or they can go to Sprint and get unlimited. I don't see very many unlimited talk plans in the UK though those are common here and the highest data plan I've found limits you to 2gb a month. You can easily get 4 -10 GB a month plans here though you pay extra for it.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 4th, 2012, 08:31 PM   #73 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
jefboyardee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 3,740
 
Device(s): Fuel W7hp Mint
Carrier: Stray Talk

Thanks: 472
Thanked 526 Times in 449 Posts
Default

Someone explain, how the Republican party is still alive...

At least 30 papers that supported Obama for president in 2008 have flipped to endorse Romney for president in 2012.
__________________
jefboyardee is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 4th, 2012, 11:00 PM   #74 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
savethebees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Utah
Gender: Female
Posts: 38
 
Device(s): HTC Sensation
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 6
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Can't agree. I think competition almost always (99%) of the time good for everyone and certainly good for consumers. Here we have states businesses are abandoning (looking at you CA) because taxes are high and the cost of doing business there is simply much higher than going across the country. States competing for business is good for everyone IMO. Brings jobs. Improves the economy. Etc.....

Monopolies can be good or bad but tend to be bad. I can't think of a case where the government needs to protect a monopoly. At least not off hand.
I can't agree more. If we didn't have competition and all we had was, say, a single cellular company monopoly, we would never be offered any specials because they wouldn't need to be offered. It would be like that in a lot of other aspects.
savethebees is offline  
Last edited by savethebees; November 4th, 2012 at 11:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 12:30 AM   #75 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,796
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,286
Thanked 1,573 Times in 1,204 Posts
Default

I don't think anyone wants a monopoly, but the role the government should play is in setting some standards. They should have settled on one network format, either GSM or CDMA, instead of competing incompatible networks that have held the whole country back. Asia is far ahead in terms of network speeds and reliability.
Gmash is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Gmash For This Useful Post:
ElasticNinja (November 5th, 2012)
Old November 5th, 2012, 12:35 AM   #76 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,796
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,286
Thanked 1,573 Times in 1,204 Posts
Default

X
Gmash is offline  
Last edited by Gmash; November 5th, 2012 at 01:08 AM. Reason: posted in wrong thread
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 05:26 AM   #77 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
copestag's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,353
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 247 Times in 193 Posts
Default

a very very small portion of asia perhaps............ its easy to have great infrastructure when an area is so small a single tower in the middle can be seen by all

as far as government picking between gsm or cdma...... hogwash....... these are exactly the things government shouldnt be regulating but always feel the need to do so

let the free market decide which is the better format...... in the end one will survive the other wont...... but the competition will force them both to reach their peaks

should the government step in and regulate which data format is best 7 bits or 8 bits making the decision between PCs and Apple?

the government shouldnt be picking winners and losers
copestag is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 06:53 AM   #78 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,796
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,286
Thanked 1,573 Times in 1,204 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by copestag View Post
a very very small portion of asia perhaps............ its easy to have great infrastructure when an area is so small a single tower in the middle can be seen by all

as far as government picking between gsm or cdma...... hogwash....... these are exactly the things government shouldnt be regulating but always feel the need to do so

let the free market decide which is the better format...... in the end one will survive the other wont...... but the competition will force them both to reach their peaks

should the government step in and regulate which data format is best 7 bits or 8 bits making the decision between PCs and Apple?

the government shouldnt be picking winners and losers
If they tried to step in now and pick one or the other, that would be picking winners and losers, but that ship has sailed. This is something they should have done at the very beginning, because the way it is now makes no sense and is bad for the country. Imagine if your electricity voltage was different depending on which utility company you used, and part of the country used European style plugs while other parts of the country used the standard US style plugs we use now. That wouldn't make any sense, that's why we have one standard. Not all regulations are bad.
Gmash is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 08:25 AM   #79 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
buzzcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Duluth, Minnesota
Gender: Male
Posts: 540
 
Device(s): LG 2G
Carrier: AT&T

Thanks: 75
Thanked 89 Times in 80 Posts
Default

I laugh at the attacks on the rich. When the Liberals take all the money away from the rich and spend in on hugging trees and nurturing dandelions, then who is going to fund your lives?

I believe in the American dream, but not so it can be stripped away and used to give away condoms and give druggies methadone.

Take responsibility for your own life and quit making others do it.

We need to curb spending. China has us by the short hairs and it's getting worse at an alarming rate.
__________________



buzzcon is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; November 5th, 2012 at 11:00 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 10:37 AM   #80 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzcon View Post
I laugh at the attacks on the rich. When the Liberals take all the money away from the rich and spend in on hugging trees and nurturing dandelions, then who is going to fund your lives?

I believe in the American dream, but not so it can be stripped away and used to give away condoms and give druggies methadone.

Take responsibility for your own life and quit making others do it.

We need to curb spending. China has us by the short hairs and it's getting worse at an alarming rate.
Theres enough rhetoric here to even out do Obama himself.

'Hugging tree and nurturing dandelions' are exactly the kind of things government should do. Its essential to protect our environment.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Last edited by EarlyMon; November 5th, 2012 at 11:01 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to ElasticNinja For This Useful Post:
savethebees (November 5th, 2012)
sponsored links
Old November 5th, 2012, 11:02 AM   #81 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
buzzcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Duluth, Minnesota
Gender: Male
Posts: 540
 
Device(s): LG 2G
Carrier: AT&T

Thanks: 75
Thanked 89 Times in 80 Posts
Default

Let me guess, you believe global warming is just from man made green house gases and has absolutely nothing to do with increased solar activity. We may have a small part in it but I feel there are much larger natural events that are at work. But as in my previous post, this is just my opinion. I have a hard time ingesting what I am being force fed by the media in the US.
buzzcon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 11:33 AM   #82 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzcon View Post
Let me guess, you believe global warming is just from man made green house gases and has absolutely nothing to do with increased solar activity.
Oh I am sure the climate has plenty to do with changing solar activity. Thing is, the vast majority of the change is man made, caused by the burning of hydrocarbons!



Nice little graph there for ya! Anyway, in Europe, and in the rest of the developed world, the effect of man on our climate is not really questioned. But we still argue over how to reduce our impact.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ElasticNinja For This Useful Post:
Gmash (November 5th, 2012), savethebees (November 5th, 2012)
Old November 5th, 2012, 11:52 AM   #83 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzcon View Post
We may have a small part in it but I feel there are much larger natural events that are at work.
We have an absolutely massive and fundamental part in it! Are your 'feels' worth more than the opinions of tens of thousands of scientists?
Quote:
Originally Posted by buzzcon View Post
But as in my previous post, this is just my opinion. I have a hard time ingesting what I am being force fed by the media in the US.
But the problem is, because many other Americans share your opinion, EVERYBODY'S Earth is being ruined. Sure, the mainstream US media is biased with regards to climate change, giving lobbyists equal time with respected, educated scientists who have a body of work. The US public still thinks there is a debate on the issue due to this!

May I ask, what qualifies you better than those who actually research and investigate this? What qualifies the emitters lobby, who have all to lose, more than scientists? Why would you take a biased coal companies word over a team of scientists who have been peer reviewed and could actually make much more money by denying the science? Why?
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 12:00 PM   #84 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Saving the environment is all fine and good. The problem is that many proposals to do so involve crippling the economy. The economy is bad enough as it is and we're proposing to completely cripple it in a way that will take decades to recover from? Not practical.
Bob Blaylock likes this.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to A.Nonymous For This Useful Post:
Bob Blaylock (November 5th, 2012)
Old November 5th, 2012, 01:13 PM   #85 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
Saving the environment is all fine and good. The problem is that many proposals to do so involve crippling the economy. The economy is bad enough as it is and we're proposing to completely cripple it in a way that will take decades to recover from? Not practical.
As Hurricane Sandy has showed us, the cost of not doing anything will be higher. That storm alone has caused damage equal to maybe 0.3-0.5% of US GDP.
To replace every coal and oil plant would nuclear in one year would cost a couple of percentage points of GDP. Do it over 20 years and its negligible. Replace every natural gas station with renewables, same story.

Making vehicles more efficient will have a positive effect on GDP as Europe and Asia have shown. Increasing public transport will cost, but it has social benefits and will make cities nicer... or something.

You know, spending 5% of GDP on the military has not crippled the US economy. It has, for all its faults, promoted research and development, and made America stronger. Spend that on R&D and infrastructure to save the planet and we will see the same benefits, in a different way. And the planet > the military.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 01:43 PM   #86 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

You can't build nuclear plants here in the US sadly. It would be nice if we could. Americans, in general, aren't fans of public transportation. Sure, it's widely used in large metro areas like NYC or Chicago, but generally no where else.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 02:04 PM   #87 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
You can't build nuclear plants here in the US sadly.
I'm sure you can in some places. This whole thing requires attitude change. Its all about a mix of renewables and nuclear anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
\Americans, in general, aren't fans of public transportation. Sure, it's widely used in large metro areas like NYC or Chicago, but generally no where else.
Well, the problem is that American urban areas are not conductive to public transport. Limit city sizes, pedestrianise more roads, more bus routes etc.

European cities with massive urban sprawl have become highly reliant on public transport. In theory, all one has to do is toll roads, and make them smaller. Not advocating that, but merely saying. Give pedestrians, cyclists and public transport priority over private transport.

Attitude change, thats half the battle. And stop saying its impossible. Countries which lynched gays a hundred years ago marry them now, and the environment is not such a hot button issue.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 02:07 PM   #88 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
savethebees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Utah
Gender: Female
Posts: 38
 
Device(s): HTC Sensation
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 6
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
You can't build nuclear plants here in the US sadly. It would be nice if we could. Americans, in general, aren't fans of public transportation. Sure, it's widely used in large metro areas like NYC or Chicago, but generally no where else.
Salt Lake City's public transit is always loaded. It is actually a very eco-conscious city. More cities are popping up with bike lanes and trains these days... I do think people are starting to get it. Big money saver.
savethebees is offline  
Last edited by savethebees; November 5th, 2012 at 02:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to savethebees For This Useful Post:
Gmash (November 5th, 2012)
Old November 5th, 2012, 02:21 PM   #89 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja View Post
I'm sure you can in some places. This whole thing requires attitude change. Its all about a mix of renewables and nuclear anyway.
A lot of it is regulations. It's virtually impossible to get through all the red tape just to build one. Then you have to deal with the fact that over here no one wants to live anywhere near one as they're convinced that if they do they'll end up glowing in the dark for the rest of their lives. The ignorance and the bureaucracy is ridiculous.

Quote:
Well, the problem is that American urban areas are not conductive to public transport. Limit city sizes, pedestrianise more roads, more bus routes etc.

European cities with massive urban sprawl have become highly reliant on public transport. In theory, all one has to do is toll roads, and make them smaller. Not advocating that, but merely saying. Give pedestrians, cyclists and public transport priority over private transport.

Attitude change, thats half the battle. And stop saying its impossible. Countries which lynched gays a hundred years ago marry them now, and the environment is not such a hot button issue.
I have no idea how you limit city sizes. Americans tend to like their personal space more than Europeans do and that is reflected in our cities. I have not visited a great many cities in Europe, but do they really have the same kind of sprawl that you have in the US? Here if you hit a big city you can easily spend an hour or more on a highway driving from a suburb on one end to the suburb on the other end.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 02:51 PM   #90 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
A lot of it is regulations. It's virtually impossible to get through all the red tape just to build one. Then you have to deal with the fact that over here no one wants to live anywhere near one as they're convinced that if they do they'll end up glowing in the dark for the rest of their lives. The ignorance and the bureaucracy is ridiculous.
Ah there is a reason there is such more bureaucracy. I just wish fossil fuel plants required as much.

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post

I have no idea how you limit city sizes. Americans tend to like their personal space more than Europeans do and that is reflected in our cities. I have not visited a great many cities in Europe, but do they really have the same kind of sprawl that you have in the US? Here if you hit a big city you can easily spend an hour or more on a highway driving from a suburb on one end to the suburb on the other end.
America used to be the home of urban planning. Of course one can limit the size of cities! In Ireland, our cities tend towards sprawl (Our capital is a quarter as dense as greater LA, go figure), but we still have decent public transport. But if our urban areas were denser we would have less problems. In the Netherlands they do density very well. Again, one just has to change attitudes. Or just force change anyway. Either way, has to be done.
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
sponsored links
Old November 5th, 2012, 03:23 PM   #91 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 292
 
Device(s): Samsung GS3
Carrier: T-Mobile (US)

Thanks: 8
Thanked 44 Times in 34 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Nonymous View Post
A lot of it is regulations. It's virtually impossible to get through all the red tape just to build one. Then you have to deal with the fact that over here no one wants to live anywhere near one as they're convinced that if they do they'll end up glowing in the dark for the rest of their lives. The ignorance and the bureaucracy is ridiculous.
I grew up near a nuclear power power plant (Limerick, PA). It took forever for the plant to come online because of environmentalists kept tying things up in court. I read an article not long ago that many of the old guard greenies here in the US still won't accept nuclear power as a 'clean' energy source much to the consternation of environmentalists more concerned about CO2 emissions.
cjr72 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 03:30 PM   #92 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,796
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,286
Thanked 1,573 Times in 1,204 Posts
Default

Anybody heard about these quack scientists who say smoking cigarettes causes cancer? What a bunch of liberal media BS. Must be the same crowd who believes in this climate change nonsense.
Gmash is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 03:32 PM   #93 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
ElasticNinja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Cork City, IMF, EU
Posts: 4,488
 
Device(s): Galaxy S3 Mini, ZTE Blade
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 811
Thanked 460 Times in 408 Posts
ciaranhurley0@gmail.com
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cjr72 View Post
I grew up near a nuclear power power plant (Limerick, PA). It took forever for the plant to come online because of environmentalists kept tying things up in court. I read an article not long ago that many of the old guard greenies here in the US still won't accept nuclear power as a 'clean' energy source much to the consternation of environmentalists more concerned about CO2 emissions.
The Green party are in a lot of state governments in Germany. Few weeks back they supported the building of a coal plant to replace nuclear, because Germany was surpassing its emissions targets. Right bunch of spanners. Greens we had in Ireland were a lot more reasonable...
ElasticNinja is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 04:08 PM   #94 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
copestag's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,353
 
Device(s):
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 0
Thanked 247 Times in 193 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gmash View Post
If they tried to step in now and pick one or the other, that would be picking winners and losers, but that ship has sailed. This is something they should have done at the very beginning, because the way it is now makes no sense and is bad for the country. Imagine if your electricity voltage was different depending on which utility company you used, and part of the country used European style plugs while other parts of the country used the standard US style plugs we use now. That wouldn't make any sense, that's why we have one standard. Not all regulations are bad.
that would be a cool example except its totally incorrect for your point........ the government didnt set the standard for voltage or plugs..... it was set by private organizations which catered to the market

imagine if the govt had decided beta was better than VHS (which it was) and regulated that?

or perhaps they decided that chevy was better than ford......... oh wait they did that and still failed to the marketplace

government does have a role in regulating certain things.... picking winners and losers is not part of that role
copestag is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 05:00 PM   #95 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cjr72 View Post
I grew up near a nuclear power power plant (Limerick, PA). It took forever for the plant to come online because of environmentalists kept tying things up in court. I read an article not long ago that many of the old guard greenies here in the US still won't accept nuclear power as a 'clean' energy source much to the consternation of environmentalists more concerned about CO2 emissions.

There its a certain irony to it being environmentalists who are the biggest opponents of nuclear power. There is money to be made in said plants but the opposition is such that companies don't even try to build them.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 06:02 PM   #96 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,796
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,286
Thanked 1,573 Times in 1,204 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by copestag View Post
that would be a cool example except its totally incorrect for your point........ the government didnt set the standard for voltage or plugs..... it was set by private organizations which catered to the market

imagine if the govt had decided beta was better than VHS (which it was) and regulated that?

or perhaps they decided that chevy was better than ford......... oh wait they did that and still failed to the marketplace

government does have a role in regulating certain things.... picking winners and losers is not part of that role
None of those things are in the public interest. I'm not talking about favoring a particular brand or company. I agree the government has no role in things like that, which is rather obvious.
Gmash is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 06:53 PM   #97 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gmash View Post
None of those things are in the public interest. I'm not talking about favoring a particular brand or company. I agree the government has no role in things like that, which is rather obvious.
Define "public interest". I ask because fluoridation of the water supply is on the ballot here locally. The proponents argue that fluoridation is in the public interest. The opponents argue that it's not. Strangely enough, the most vocal supports are dentists. Shouldn't that tell you something?
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 5th, 2012, 09:25 PM   #98 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Gmash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: neither Here nor There
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,796
 
Device(s): Samsung Galaxy S3, Huawei Mercury (stock/rooted), Huawei Ascend (CM7 2.3.5 @710mhz)
Carrier: Cricket

Thanks: 2,286
Thanked 1,573 Times in 1,204 Posts
Default

Things that effect or benefit the general public like roads and utilities I would consider in the public interest. Cell service is pretty much a necessary part of life these days. Fluoride in the water is a no brainer to all except the tin foil hat crowd, but I would still leave that up to the locals. You have to choose your battles.
Gmash is offline  
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Gmash For This Useful Post:
savethebees (November 5th, 2012)
Old November 6th, 2012, 08:43 AM   #99 (permalink)
AF Contributor
 
buzzcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Duluth, Minnesota
Gender: Male
Posts: 540
 
Device(s): LG 2G
Carrier: AT&T

Thanks: 75
Thanked 89 Times in 80 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja
Oh I am sure the climate has plenty to do with changing solar activity. Thing is, the vast majority of the change is man made, caused by the burning of hydrocarbons!



Nice little graph there for ya! Anyway, in Europe, and in the rest of the developed world, the effect of man on our climate is not really questioned. But we still argue over how to reduce our impact.
Nice graphs! Please explain why the separation in the top graph around 1980? This is around the same time the auto industry implemented catalytic converters to protect the environment. My guess is it coincides with the industrial development in China. I am sure they are concerned with the environment . I also think natural events like wildfires in the US releasing carbon (and there have been several in recent years) as well as other events around the world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElasticNinja
May I ask, what qualifies you better than those who actually research and investigate this? What qualifies the emitters lobby, who have all to lose, more than scientists? Why would you take a biased coal companies word over a team of scientists who have been peer reviewed and could actually make much more money by denying the science? Why?
I am just stating my opinion, right or wrong, I never claimed to know it all. Something else is at work, I don't know what it is, but blaming us (humans) can make guys like Al Gore tons of money and money is the root of all evil. My qualifications are I just a regular guy with two eye's and believe what I see, not what I hear or read from the media.
buzzcon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2012, 09:08 AM   #100 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
A.Nonymous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 7,061
 
Device(s): Motorola Razr M, Galaxy Tab 10.1 I/O edition
Carrier: Not Provided

Thanks: 66
Thanked 971 Times in 704 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gmash View Post
Things that effect or benefit the general public like roads and utilities I would consider in the public interest. Cell service is pretty much a necessary part of life these days. Fluoride in the water is a no brainer to all except the tin foil hat crowd, but I would still leave that up to the locals. You have to choose your battles.
I'd bet good money fluoride gets voted down by like 60%. There are some really dumb arguments being circulated about it. There's a neighboring city that has naturally occurring fluoride in the water and has significantly less cavities. The anti-fluoride peeps say there is a difference between "natural" fluoride in the water and "man-made" fluoride in the water. So apparently fluoride ions are different. Who knew? The bad science being tossed around is appalling. The fact that the vast majority of the public here is buying into it is even more appalling.
A.Nonymous is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


Go Back   Android Forums > Android Forums Community > The Lounge > Politics and Current Affairs
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:57 AM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.