Peace in our time! Now for the Middle East peace settlement, or maybe Korea.
Printable View
Peace in our time! Now for the Middle East peace settlement, or maybe Korea.
Okay, I'm not going to sit in a circle, hold hands and sing Kumbaya.Quote:
Originally Posted by peejaye
Are you and RedVex aware that people like you are not exactly treated well in Russia? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Russia
Yes, Putin has 'made Russia great again', which is why he is probably popular with most Russians. Hitler also made Germany great again in the 1930s, and the average German would have had the same view at the start of WW2. That's if they where Aryan, heterosexual and had no past left-wing associations (the Nazis were very effective in suppressing 'commies'). That did not end well.
That's how it goes with dictatorships. Power corrupts and once they are in power there is no easy way to get them out. As Churchill said, democracy is the worst form of government apart from all the others.
It's unlikely I'm watching too much BBC news as I don't live in the UK.
I was about to say take a good look at this place & the scum running it but if you don't reside here it looses its context?
I've been to Russia many times & I've had no unpleasant experiences & met many of my ex girlfriends friends too who were very hospitable.
It's a shame we(I) live in a country promoting so much fake news about Russia, I know Putins' not whiter than white but Russians buy their own homes now & most live in a Westernized society, in the cities.
Take a look at our Leaders before we mock the Russians;
1. Our Prime Minister is married to a man who advises the rich on how to avoid tax!
2. Our Head of State as also had income hidden away in offshore accounts to avoid paying taxes, that amounts to the crown robbing the crown!
3. 25% of our children live below the poverty line!
4. 16,000 more homeless people on our streets than this time last year!
5. We have Members of the cabinet jetting off for secret meetings with other foreign Diplomats, who knows WTFk they are up to?
Russia is not a dictatorship, I don't care what the BBC say, I wouldn't believe those cunts if they told me tomorrow was Monday! It doesn't matter where you live but you are probably aware of the "BBC World service"? All I do know is you're probably living in a better place than I am? If this place doesn't get a change to replace this current Establishment very soon & predict some sort of civil war brewing!
Apologies as this thread is about Climate change, let's respect that!
There are some important differences between the UK and Russia, Peejaye. The absence of political opposition to Putin -how many parties and opposition politicians can you name, compared to the same exercise in Europe and America? Britain has been part of the Gulf Wars and regime change in Libya just as Russia has been deeply involved in Syria, but Russia has also invaded Ukraine and created two phoney statelets compliant to Russian interests in the east of that country, and provided the weaponry that shot down a civilian airliner killing all on board. I don't believe the British have intervened in domestic Russian politics since the days of Sidney Reilly, whereas the Russians are now implicated in the EU Referendum campaign and are delighted with the result, much as they have been directly involved in the US Presidential election of 2016.Quote:
Originally Posted by peejaye
Yes, the money the UK as lost from -legal, mostly- tax avoidance schemes should have been retained for use in the UK, and we may yet hear of new measures to stop this from Philip Hammond's budget speech in ten days time; but spare a thought for the trillions lost to Russia that oligarchs and criminals have sent to the USA via the City of London, where it has been transformed into plush apartments in Manhattan (think Tower Block, think 'Tower Heist') and real estate in Florida.
And don't forget the answer to the question-Who killed Alexander Litvinenko? A nuclear attack on the UK as a result of which we should probably have either gone to war, or broken off diplomatic relations.
As for climate change and the environment, this article from the FT discusses the enduring importance of oil and gas and coal, and the feeble attempts to promote alternative energy, constrained by the impact of sanctions, although Russia has signed the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, indeed with Syria doing so recently only the USA has walked away from it. But I guess for their current President, a majority of one is all you need.
One extract from the interesting article:
Russia’s tiny use of renewables, at 3.6 per cent of total energy consumption, is a black spot in a global surge in the use of green technology, which accounted for more than 18.3 per cent of the world’s energy supply in 2014, according to the International Energy Agency. Fellow Bric nations China and Brazil boast usage of more than 25 and 45 per cent respectively.
https://www.ft.com/content/638e1dc6-...c-6d03d067f81f
Saw some intesting stats that helped me better understand the general apathy toward claimant change in the USA.
41% of Americans believe Christ will return to earth by the year 2050!
When that large a percentage of the population believe, even pray, for the “End of Days” in the next 33 years it’s not hard to see why they don’t concern themselves much with the long term affects of anything, let alone climate change!
JESUS FUCKING CHRIST!Quote:
Originally Posted by Aticus100
I didn't know so many of us were idiots; according to a PEW research poll conducted in 2010 ( http://www.people-press.org/2010/06/...ise-and-peril/ ). To be fair only 28% believed He would definitely return by 2050. The other 18% thought it was probable. That was seven years ago. Maybe people have since brightened up? Please God please, enlighten the blind, and let science shine in.
The Litvinenko business was awful, I agree. The point I was making is the level of corruption at the helm of OUR democracy at the moment!Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
Putin's almost untouchable, yes. I don't think anyone else dare stand against him? Back to the this thread though; I think it's commendable that they(Russia) have signed the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, the level of pollution in that place is something else, no surprise considering all the heavy industry they still have! Are we the only country who've decimated most of it?
I would have to go to school for four years to actually get a grip on climate change, so I can't comment on it....It kind of brings up a problem I used to bump into posting on this site: who am I talking to, the dumb people or the smart people?
Smart people are wasted on me, he he. If Einstein explained everything to me in a dream, that would be a miracle.
That's why we have experts. Most people understand that if they have a serious health problem they should find a good doctor, rather than trying to find the answer on the internet. But on this issue we have some people who think they know more than the climate science experts because of a few things they picked up on the internet.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttslinger
If people were really smart they would be getting paid to work on these issues rather than debating them here. You probably have as much chance finding wisdom on this forum as you would from a few random people on the street.
The anti-reality people ARE getting paid. Trump is unregulating every regulation he can find because that's where the money is.Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
Democrats want to be right, Republicans want to win.
If the Republicans stood up for sane gun laws, sane regulations, sane climate control.......their donors would disappear and so would they.
Climate Control experts get most of their funds from donors too, I imagine.
And we working stiffs pay for it all.
I personally would rather go poor paying taxes than give all my money to some fat-cats who control Congress. When we buy their crap we pay their taxes. They want it more than we do.
Like the man said, "don't boo...vote!!!"
Let's privatise NHS and let the communists get eaten by germs and cancer. This will reduce their CO2 emmissions.
"Let's privatize NHS......co2 emmissions",,, Who hurt you?
ah , but seriously, what it does for Global warming if fewer people on the planet, still use primitive energy that pollutes those left behind? Admit it , we leave in ses pool. We should be doin better....
Climate change is the worst thing to think of when it comes to our species. This is so true. Sometime I think everything around us depends on just and just climate. We should do something to stop this climate change
https://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...n-1960/546104/
Not especially relevant to this thread but there is a tangential relationship. Turkeys have been selectively breeded so effectively that they are twice the size they were 50 years ago, with similar diets. When I read the article I thought it was definitely interesting how industrialized this process has become. Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving!!!
Also, selective breeding doesn't have anything to do with communism so I would be especially thankful on this holiday if we don't call our domestic farmers communists. It's one of those articles where none of the players are communists; the farmers, the turkeys, the people who eat the turkeys, definitely not communists.
Privatising NHS means less taxes, less sick people, less communists.. But no, it has nothing to do with global warming - just like CO2 emissions caused by humans, which is my point.
You actually think taxes will come down when the NHS is privatised? People will be less sick? What planet are you currently orbiting RedVex?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
If power goes to someone who is going to privatise state-owned businesses like the NHS then taxes may actually go down. Unless it is going to be another lunatic that believes in global warming and equality, of course... And yes - people will not get sick as often as they do now simply because they will know that whenever they see their gp, they will have to draw that tenner out of their pocket. So it will suddenly not make sense to take time off work and make another appointment with the doctor just to see the results of an earlier examination, or just to have a chat with other old people in the waiting room of a hospital, at the cost of taxpayers', or see a doctor whenever you get hayfever, or be asked by the gp to come in for a repeat prescription review when you are feeling perfectly well, etc, etc... Nobody even talks about how many work-hours are lost due to all that bollocks.
& what about people who are genuinely ill? Not just bored pensioners wanting a chat! If you want to know about private medical bills, ask our friends in the US, you think a tenner is going to be the going price. An overnight stay in hospital can cost over a $1,000!
Wake up if you think a privatised health service is a good idea & prey you don't get fucking ill or have a nasty accident because a "tenner" won't cover the entry fee!
Apologies, again, for going off-topic & taxes DON'T come down after privatisation, we should know!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
Quite frankly, anyone who wants to privatise healthcare, is a money grubbing cunt!
...or else a witless pawn of money grubbing cunts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jericho
I don't want privatising NHS. I want government to withdraw from economy all together. That is the only way of bringing back normality, free market, humanity.
Imagine what it takes to build an MRI scanner. There has to be multiple industries involved in the process and each and every one of them has to pay taxes - including the income tax which basically punishment for doing any work at all and is higher the bigger the company is. You democrats are against those big companies, voting for higher taxation for big firms. Those firms have to use services of other firms for their logistics, providing materials. All of those employ people who pay taxes. That is the theory. Because the reality is that all those taxes propagate down and it is always the consumer who wants to use that MRI scanner who has to pay all those taxes you think these companies are paying. That is why the night at a public hospital is so expensive. I mentioned a few times that according to E Savas any public enterprise is 40% less effective that it would have been, had it been in private hands. That means your 1000 dollars per night would come down to 600 dollars if it only was in private hands - neglecting the taxation bit, as those are so high due to the fact many more enterprises are also funded from your taxes... But you think your unions, democracy and pride will make the world a better place. Well fuck you. Cos it isn't. You are the witless pawns of those who tell you that they are giving you something for free.
I think I'll send a huge corporation a thousand dollar check to save the country.
So far so good.Quote:
Imagine what it takes to build an MRI scanner. There has to be multiple industries involved in the process and each and every one of them has to pay taxes -
Still with you - although for companies and corporations it’s a tax on revenue; income tax is a term usually reserved for taxes on an individual’s income (as opposed to the revenue of a company or corporate entity) through wages, dividends and gifts.Quote:
- including the income tax
This is just utter nonsense. Taxes are not fines, because labor is not a crime. But as long as we’re stretching the meanings terms: taxes are the wages we pay to government entities (schools, transportation departments, justice departments, police, fire etc.) to perform the services we expect civilized societies to provide.Quote:
the income tax which basically punishment for doing any work at all
In principle yes, but in practice no. GE didn’t pay any Federal taxes this last year.Quote:
...and is higher the bigger the company is.
This is a straw-man argument together with a obfuscatory lie. Democrats are not against companies big or small, provided they operate within the law, do not endanger the general public and pay their fair share. What we’re against is both individual and corporate freeloaders of any kind.Quote:
You democrats are against those big companies, voting for higher taxation for big firms.
It’s a nice theory but in reality it doesn’t fit the facts. In the U.S. there were no private hospitals until the 80’s. The cost of hospital stays rose as more and more hospitals went private. It’s just a fact. The cost of any given procedure, or any given dose of medicine, or even an elastic bandage varies enormously from one hospital to the next. High prices have very little to do with taxation and more to do with kickbacks and barely under the counter deals with private insurance companies - deals that vary from hospital to hospital and insurance representative to insurance representative.Quote:
Those firms have to use services of other firms for their logistics, providing materials. All of those employ people who pay taxes. That is the theory. Because the reality is that all those taxes propagate down and it is always the consumer who wants to use that MRI scanner who has to pay all those taxes you think these companies are paying. That is why the night at a public hospital is so expensive.
Unions yes. Democracy yes. Both have already amply demonstrated their usefulness in making the world a better and more livable place. Pride? Yeah, you can fuck my pride if you want. I don’t see how it enters the equation.Quote:
But you think your unions, democracy and pride will make the world a better place. Well fuck you.
Last time I checked it was the private market place telling me that if I buy two I’ll get the third for free. Read any ad sheet and you get coupons for free this, and free that. The government never told me I’d get anything for free. I have no children, but I’m happy to help pay for their public schooling. I was more than happy to help pay for CHIP which provided healthcare for impoverished children in the U.S. I pay taxes that build and maintain roads I’ll probably never drive on, but that’s fine with me, because the goods and services that I and my town depend upon ride over those surfaces. I’m proud to support my country and pay my taxes. Then again, you can fuck my pride, ‘cause it’s neither here nor there. What’s important is to realize that the optimization of corporate profits is not a principle that can guarantee optimal welfare for all citizens. The two concepts are distinct. It doesn’t even guarantee survival of the fittest, it only assuages the conscience of those most concerned with making a profit.Quote:
You are the witless pawns of those who tell you that they are giving you something for free.
Here's something to ponder.
So with all this ice melting on the poles, we're finding all kinds of dinosaurs, prehistoric men, etcetera thawing out from underneath the ice.
What does all this mean?
Well, it means that those areas once covered by were actually warm! Add to that , was it global warming that caused the earth to come out of the Ice Age - or did it warm up naturally?
We know the answer to the last question....
Continental drift.Quote:
...those areas once covered by [ice] were actually warm
Precession of the Earth's spin.Quote:
was it global warming that caused the earth to come out of the Ice Age - or did it warm up naturally?
We also know the answer to the question, "Why have the Earth's oceans and its atmosphere been warming for the last century?" Anthropocentric release of geologically sequestered greenhouse gasses largely through the burning of fossil fuels but also aided by various feedback mechanisms like the release of methane via the thawing tundra.
All of these processes are natural, although the last is (or was) preventable. Humans are just product of evolution like all the other organisms in the biosphere. Whatever we do is natural in that sense, whether we kill ourselves or thrive.
The only people in the centre of this anthropocentric global warming is you and other commies so why don't you just do mankind a favour realise your idea and go kill yourselves.
I’m not sure what you mean by ‘the centre of anthropocentric global warming’ (the two dimensional surface of the Earth has no center). Perhaps you think I’m the center of some sort of scientific conspiracy whose aim is to study, test and explain the processes of nature as objectively as humanly possible. I am involved in that project but hardly its center. In regard to anthropocentric climate change I do stand with the professional consensus of those scientists who have studied the phenomenon without regard to personal politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
Oh yes, thank you for your kind suggestion. Were you always such a wonderful person?
Once again: my answer to the question, "Why do you believe in climate change?"
http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/sho...=1#post1796012
Redvex is dismantling every thread she's in. Who but a communist would be so obsessed with communism? In fact, if I were a communist, this is the exact cover I would come up with. I would literally call everything a communist plot in an attempt to make people think I'm not a communist and that opponents of communism are irrational. Just a thought.
Yes. That is more less what I meant, only you are not describing anything objectively, as then you would not be spreading your crooked "science".
I am only so nice to the communists so you may consider yourself lucky.
Following your scientific methods, based on my observation, global warming is mostly due to the number of communists in the region. (fig. 1) If we extrapolate these into the future, another taking into consideration 2megacarrots, a microapple and 200 gigatonnes of sugar, with very sophisticated indeed anthropocentric global warming software using our publicly funded federal sophisticated indeed state-of-the-art computers at University of Middleofbuttfucknowhere we see further evidence that confirms global warming is dependent on number of communists in the region (fig 2).
Attachment 1041922
In reference to the not-at-all communist USA. Future generation looks very capitalist indeed.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mE0gass-21E
This is why I can't be bothered with this section of the forum any more. I'm not sure how we can eradicate the RedVex virus, but depriving it of oxygen by not responding to her nonsense might be good start.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
The chief executive of AccuWeather, Barry Myers (a lawyer by training) has been appointed head of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The appointment was back in October. Myers is a business man who has no scientific training although one may argue he has experience dealing with forecast meteorologists and not interfering with the objectivity of their product. Concerns have been raised that he has no experience with oceanographers nor climatologists.
Myers is a conservative who has contributed to Santorum’s campaign for the Senate, and Romney’s run for the Presidency as well as Trump’s (although to cover his bases it is also reported he contributed to Clinton). A personal aside: I used to use the AccuWeather app until it started pushing political ads.
The Washington Post reported yesterday that in his Senate confirmation hearing, Barry Myers confirmed his belief in the “current state of the articulated science” that the climate change we’ve been experiencing and measuring for the last century or more is primarily driven by human activity.
It seems Barry’s main concerns are eliminating competition between the forecast branch of NOAA and private weather forecasters. He stated, “Quality, peer reviewed, scientific research, and the underlying data, to provide an ongoing narrative about our environment, which can offer the scientific basis for policy considerations and ongoing scientific discussion and advancement, are national assets that should be disseminated to the nation.” But he wants this information to be packaged and sold by private companies who produce ‘value-add’ forecast products.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.d28443674fa4
Another reason why government should not interfere with economy, or science...
Or an ex-communist. The extreme right and left have more in common with each other than with the centre, so it's not uncommon for people to start on one side and move to the other. RedVex has the same mentality as the communists, but with a mirror-image reversal of the policy positions. There are the same utopian claims about her preferred system, the same arguments that any failings are because the system has not been properly implemented, and the same arguments that the people don't know their own interests and been to be directed.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
No. I am not saying communist systems have not been implemented properly. There have been numerous attempts to implement them properly and they all failed. The most relevant example is Chile, where the communist leader was elected in democratic elections in 1973. Socialism have brought countries into crises 100% of times while capitalism had built the power of the USA in a couple of centuries - excluding of course the 20th and the 21st centuries, when the US has begun develop the socialist cancer. Unfortunately, there was never a monarchy in the USA and the money needed for a republic to work have run out, so the only remaining system that is left in this line of politics is social democracy, which inevitably leads to socialism, as its name would suggest.
In the case of global warming, it is the fascist government's target to propel the "green" businesses that would not have the right of existence in a free market, because the governments need to have an excuse for being funded by taxpayers. Global warming has nothing to do with Earths well-being. Politicians, lawyers, and all that kind of scum should not interfere in domains they have not the foggiest idea about.
fuck it ima add a vid with a special dedication to all your communist ass-holes out there:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_UAHZsrX_A&t=59s
[QUOTE=Ts RedVeX;1805672]
There have been numerous attempts to implement them properly and they all failed. The most relevant example is Chile, where the communist leader was elected in democratic elections in 1973.
--Salvador Allende was elected President of Chile in 1970, he was murdered in 1973 by the military led by the fascist Augusto Pinochet.
Socialism have brought countries into crises 100% of times while capitalism had built the power of the USA in a couple of centuries - excluding of course the 20th and the 21st centuries, when the US has begun develop the socialist cancer.
--Depending on how you define socialism, what crises in the UK were caused by the governments of Clement Attlee between 1945-51, given he would be a communist in your definition? How many socialist governments have there been in Sweden since the 1940s and what crises did they create?
There has never been any form of socialism in the USA, not in the 20th or the 21st century.
Unfortunately, there was never a monarchy in the USA and the money needed for a republic to work have run out, so the only remaining system that is left in this line of politics is social democracy, which inevitably leads to socialism, as its name would suggest.
--Evidently nobody has told you that the USA used to be part of British America, ruled by the Monarch in London from c1607 to 1776 or 1815 if you take in the last military confrontation between the British Empire and the US.
The USA is a liberal democracy, not a social democracy.
In the case of global warming, it is the fascist government's target to propel the "green" businesses that would not have the right of existence in a free market, because the governments need to have an excuse for being funded by taxpayers.
--If you don't like fascists, why do you keep posting videos of the mass murdering fascist Augusto Pinochet?
Global warming has nothing to do with Earths well-being. Politicians, lawyers, and all that kind of scum should not interfere in domains they have not the foggiest idea about.
--I have yet to be convinced you know what you are talking about as you have not provided any evidence based on science that proves that man-made global warming is not taking place, and that it does not pose a threat to life on planet earth.
My point was that one of your standard responses to anyone pointing out any failings of the market is to argue that it's not a free market because there are laws and regulations. This is the same strategy used by diehard communists who argued that what was implemented in communist countries was not true communism and, hence, any failures were not failures of communism. It's a convenient argument for people who never want to concede they've been wrong because, obviously, the 'ideal' will never be achieved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ts RedVeX
Me when I enter this communist-den of a hungangels section:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCt1SVgwIMU
Oh noo there is absolutely no sign of a crisis or communism in the US... These are prolly all fake:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLCmemsW8rI
and the effect:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOkfTxPyEPA