Paris Is Burning Over Climate Change Taxes -- Is America Next?

[Illurion + 894]

1 minute ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

So instead of backing your opinion up with measureable facts we are to accept "what you always felt" as gospel... I assume you win a lot of discussions, because if you disagree with someone you can just dis-regard measureable facts. 

Sad that this is happening on an intellectual forum. 

That is exactly correct.

I gave you my opinion based on the facts i have encountered in my life.

I am not going to waste my time doing research for you.

As for your "measurable facts", 

I do not accept your ability to measure correctly.

After all,  your idea of "measurable facts" is to refer me to read the "OPINIONS OF HITLER ?"

Are you kidding me ?

In fact,  i find it disturbing that you actually believe what you read in Hitlers My Story book.

No thank you.    I am not interested in the NAZI view on things.

Apparently you subscribe to a very different definition of "intellectual" than i.

 

But have a nice day anyway.

 

Happy New Year.....

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

49 minutes ago, Illurion said:

Such fun things in the news today:

 

https://thenationalsentinel.com/2019/01/01/despite-uns-dire-warnings-world-is-revolting-against-climate-change-policies/

https://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/31066-is-the-liberal-international-order-2018-s-biggest-loser

https://tsarizm.com/news/2019/01/01/poland-says-coming-election-will-change-eu-political-trajectory/

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/12/27/orban-bringing-africas-problems-europe-destroy-culture/

I've only finished the second article and already I have to say I like what I am reading.  Thanks for finding and sharing, Illurion.

Edit:  The 3rd and 4th were o.k. but not as complete.  Good reading nonetheless.  Thanks again.

Edited January 2, 2019 by Dan Warnick

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

22 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

So instead of backing your opinion up with measureable facts we are to accept "what you always felt" as gospel... I assume you win a lot of discussions, because if you disagree with someone you can just dis-regard measureable facts. 

Sad that this is happening on an intellectual forum. 

OilPrice.com is an intellectual forum? (Sorry OilPrice)  Hang on, I've got to dig out my bow-tie now.  And all the while I thought I was talking to folks with oil and dust on their jeans and farmer's tans on their arms.   

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

19 minutes ago, Dan Warnick said:

OilPrice.com is an intellectual forum? (Sorry OilPrice)  Hang on, I've got to dig out my bow-tie now.  And all the while I thought I was talking to folks with oil and dust on their jeans and farmer's tans on their arms.   

Of course it is an intellectual forum.  I write here!  😘😀

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 minute ago, Jan van Eck said:

Of course it is an intellectual forum.  I write here!  😘😀

Every rig's gotta have a foreman!  And even though nobody wants to admit it, when he comes out of his trailer to tell us the oil's not gonna drill itself, we put our gloves back on and try a little harder.

Edited January 2, 2019 by Dan Warnick

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

34 minutes ago, Illurion said:

That is exactly correct.

I gave you my opinion based on the facts i have encountered in my life.

I am not going to waste my time doing research for you.

As for your "measurable facts", 

I do not accept your ability to measure correctly.

After all,  your idea of "measurable facts" is to refer me to read the "OPINIONS OF HITLER ?"

Are you kidding me ?

In fact,  i find it disturbing that you actually believe what you read in Hitlers My Story book.

No thank you.    I am not interested in the NAZI view on things.

Apparently you subscribe to a very different definition of "intellectual" than i.

 

But have a nice day anyway.

 

Happy New Year.....

I am lost. What are you talking about? 

I was responding to your post stating following:

qte

I do not agree that the Nazis were right wing.

There were actual conservative Right Wing Nationalists in Germany at the time,  and they were the RIGHT WING...

unqte

I kindly asked you to back up your opinion with qoutes from Mein Kampf, Hitlers manifesto, to document that Nazies were lefties. Instead you espouse nonsense. Sad, that when asked to actually debate you resort to attacking. 

ps. I was encouraging you to prove me wrong using facts. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, Dan Warnick said:

Every rig's gotta have a foreman!

And every  forum needs a seriously funny humourist!  

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 minute ago, Jan van Eck said:

And every  forum needs a seriously funny humourist!  

Well, one will probably come along eventually.  Have faith!

[Otis11 + 551]

On 12/31/2018 at 7:33 PM, Jan van Eck said:

Contrary to what you say, I do not "hate on anything," excepting the denizens on Wall Street.  As far as your "gun" arguments go, those are inaccurate, which is not surprising.  I am going to decline to discuss this further with you, as (1)  I don't much care, and (2)  you are set in your ways, so it is not going anywhere, and (3) you have this bad habit of doing that red-arrow downvote thingy, which is contrary to the (informal but foundational) etiquette on this forum.  As long as you persist in that conduct, I shall not respond to whatever you write, see if I care. 

If my arguments are inaccurate, please, enlighten me. I am not stauchly set in any of my positions. I know what I know, and I share that knowledge - if someone can teach me that I'm wrong, or even just that I have an overly simple view, I will gladly admit it and learn. That's why I come to places like this, to expand my understanding. (I would actually take the stance that I haven't made an argument, rather sighted facts. I try very hard to keep my opinions out of hot-button topics on internet forms because it tends to devolve into something that's of no value to anyone and not worth our time)

On the red-arrow thingy - yes, yes I do have a tendency to use that on posts that devolve into ad hominems. Simple character attacks add nothing to the forum and what we are trying to learn/teach here. I try very hard not to use that on factual, enlightening arguments - no matter how much I may disagree with them. If you, or anyone else, see a post that I downvoted and does not have a personal attack, please let me know - I will correct it and apologize to the poster as it tends to shut down discussions (which is good when those discussions add no value - hence the reason for using it. This is patently bad when used to create an echo-chamber - which I want to strictly avoid. Btw, this is an open invitation to anyone to keep me accountable. Not just Jan.)

If you don't want to respond, that is your right, but I will continue to post facts countering mis-statements and inaccuracies where I see them, regardless of my position on the topic.

[Illurion + 894]

3 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I am lost. What are you talking about? 

I was responding to your post stating following:

qte

I do not agree that the Nazis were right wing.

There were actual conservative Right Wing Nationalists in Germany at the time,  and they were the RIGHT WING...

unqte

I kindly asked you to back up your opinion with qoutes from Mein Kampf, Hitlers manifesto, to document that Nazies were lefties. Instead you espouse nonsense. Sad, that when asked to actually debate you resort to attacking. 

ps. I was encouraging you to prove me wrong using facts. 

Rasmus:

Yes,  you are lost.

The nonsense is yours.

You have everything backwards.

I believe that the Nazi's were "left-wing".

Jan said they were "Right-wing".

Your argument is with Jan,  not me,  as you just wrote above that you also believe (like me) that the Nazi's were "left-wing".  (lefties)

......................................

YOU WROTE THE FOLLOWING TO ME back on 12/28/2018 at 10:48pm:

"What are you talking about? 

This is a checkable fact. Read "mein kampf". It is loaded with anti-communism and anti-semitism.  If you are serious about your claim then qoute Mein Kampf. I can to back my claim up. "

......................................

And you wrote that to me in response to me stating that i "DO NOT" agree that the Nazi's were right wing."   (which means that i believe the Nazi's were "left-wing" obviously),  and i said that in response to Jan's post in which he says that the NAZIS WERE RIGHT WING....!

......................................

Rasmus:

As you can see,  in your (purple) post above from 10/28/2018,  you are citing Hitler's MY STORY book as a "checkable fact"..........

And you actually asked me to (read obviously) and "QUOTE MEIN KAMPF" back to you as fact.........

 

FRANKLY I FIND BOTH OF THOSE THINGS OFFENSIVE....!!!

 

I am a Christian,   but one of my Grandparents was Jewish,  and i have many Jewish friends......

 

So Rasmus,  there is no "KINDLY" way for you,  or anyone in their right mind,  to suggest to ANYONE,  especially someone like me,   that they should go check anything Hitler wrote for FACTS..........  or anything that Hitler wrote  PERIOD......

......................................

So,  in conclusion,   apparently both you and i agree that the Nazi's were "left-wing",   which means that both of us disagree with Jan,  who thinks they are "Right-wing".       ( In his defense,  Jan is quoting Wikipedia, which he treats as the Bible. )

However,  you appear to have misread what i was stating back on 12/28/2018  (or you made a typo in what you wrote today) .

No big deal.

I even forgive you for referring me to read Hitler's garbage,  because you would have no way of knowing my ancestry.

But please,   do not ever mention that man's name to me again.

OK ?

ps:  Happy New Year.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

On 1/2/2019 at 11:17 AM, mthebold said:

Out of curiosity, what part of Nederland are you from? 

Amsterdam.  However, that is hardly exclusive.  Go to Amsterdam and look in the phone book, there are perhaps twelve pages of van ecks in there. And that is just in the City!...

The Dutch did not exactly have small families:   

Edited January 4, 2019 by Jan van Eck

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

25 minutes ago, Illurion said:

 

Jan said they were "Right-wing".

Your argument is with Jan,  not me,  as you just wrote above that you also believe (like me) that the Nazi's were "left-wing".  (lefties)

......................................

 

OK ?

ps:  Happy New Year.

Now, THAT is interesting.  I have no recollection of saying that. 

IN any event, time to leave this topic (of Hitler etc) alone.  Incidentally, it might fascinate you to learn that Jews actually volunteered to serve in the SS, and actually shot dead captured Jews.  You cannot explain away bizarre historical anomalies by general broad-brush comments. 

And everybody thanks you for the "Happy New Year"!

[Illurion + 894]

15 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Now, THAT is interesting.  I have no recollection of saying that. 

IN any event, time to leave this topic (of Hitler etc) alone.  Incidentally, it might fascinate you to learn that Jews actually volunteered to serve in the SS, and actually shot dead captured Jews.  You cannot explain away bizarre historical anomalies by general broad-brush comments. 

And everybody thanks you for the "Happy New Year"!

Darn...

You are right Jan,   it wasn't you, 

it was Jaycee back on page 20.

He was quoting wikipedia,  and stated that the Nazi's were "RIGHT-WING",   which is totally wrong.

That set in motion a series of posts between me, and others who also believe that the Nazi's were "left-wing."

Rasmus seems to have confused our points.

And i got confused today by stating it was you instead of Jaycee.

I apologize.

I am getting old.

So,  Rasmus,  you and i agree,  and your dispute is with Jaycee and wikipedia,  not me, or Jan.

 

Have a nice day.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

3 minutes ago, mthebold said:

Ah, ok.  I ask because you're occasionally quite direct, and that reminds me of my family.  I'm curious to know which traits are shared by most Dutch and which are more uniquely Frisian. 

The Dutch and the Fries are totally distinct; you cannot confuse the two.  The Dutch are totally ridiculous, a just impossible race,  while the Fries tend to be circumspect  ("conservative" in their personal lives and public demeanor).  As the photo above shows, the Dutch mom views sex as for procreation, not recreation.  Then again, those kids will likely reverse the tradition, when they become adults  (adopting the American view of things).  Oh, well. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

I don't know, Jan.  When I first saw the photo I didn't think the look on her face was more about procreation, but rather looks like she is one happy woman, period (procreation AND recreation).

[Illurion + 894]

3 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Jews actually volunteered to serve in the SS, and actually shot dead captured Jews.

Yep.

Soros was one like that.

Only he didn't shoot them,  he sold them out.

Only he and the dead know the full truth,  but the story goes that at about the age of 14 or so,  he worked for the Germans to find hiding Jewish families.

He would pretend to be hiding,  and get taken in, and would then sell out the people that took him in to the Germans.

[shadowkin + 584]

15 hours ago, Red said:

Try to keep to the facts - I have no interest in your opinions.

We've already established you very much care about everything I have to say.

I’ll pick one of your ‘rebuttals’. Your mother regards herself as Australian. So what? That’s not a basis on which to claim nationality and doesn’t make it legitimate for anyone to claim the nationality of any country in which they find themselves because of what your mother regards herself as. Even if true in one country it doesn’t mean it’s true in another. Laughably bad argument based on your mother’s 'feelings'.

This is all of piece with liberals believing white people can claim they’re black or that males can claim they are females and vice versa. You can claim anything you want it doesn’t make it so. It’s a belief based on feelings and has nothing to do with logic, common sense, or biology.

Imagine.

Immigration Judge: On what basis do you claim you are Japanese?

Migrant: Well Ms. Schlampe from Australia regards herself as Australian even though she’s originally from elsewhere. I regard myself as Japanese…

Immigration Judge: Well why didn’t you say so Mohammed. Let me issue you your citizenship papers asap.

I could equally dismiss your remaining ‘rebuttals’ (I've already done so) beginning with your silly claim that the EU is simply a common market. You’ve spent many hours searching for some wording to back up your claim but it’s all in vain. You almost get it but not quite. Your writing combined with your self-confessed inability to understand easily intelligible posts on this thread indicate that your first language is not English and it’s the cause of your difficulties in comprehension.

[shadowkin + 584]

15 hours ago, Red said:

I forgot to reiterate the point that what Merkel said translates differently to your link, as others have pointed out, and I regard the purest interpretation being: "Member States must be today - should today, I say - prepared to cede sovereignty".

You are welcome to believe something which clearly was not conveyed in her speech, as her words remain testament.  However, your KAF link was not a full and detailed translation of her speech, as KAF would not need to do this given that their audience would be predominantly German speakers.  

Why would I need to read her speech, when I can listen to it?  Merkel covered a lot of ground in 4 minutes and was very well received.

For kicks let’s go with your translation. All you did was confirm that Merkel wants EU states to surrender sovereignty. Already established. It's a distinction without difference.

[Red + 252]

17 minutes ago, shadowkin said:

We've already established you very much care about everything I have to say.  I point out your incompetence.

I’ll pick one of your ‘rebuttals’. Your mother regards herself as Australian. So what? This point made your claim false. That’s not a basis on which to claim nationality  Really?  So a person's passport and the fact they regard themselves as belonging to that country do not constitute nationality?   and doesn’t make it legitimate for anyone to claim the nationality of any country Australia regards her as Australian, but in your mind that is not "legitimate" - your logic is poor! in which they find themselves because of what your mother regards herself as. Even if true in one country it doesn’t mean it’s true in another.  Yet again you completely miss the point, and want to create a straw man. Laughably bad argument based on your mother’s 'feelings'.  Based on Australian law - again, totally incompetent with your reasoning.

This is all of piece with liberals believing white people can claim they’re black or that males can claim they are females and vice versa. You can claim anything you want it doesn’t make it so. It’s a belief based on feelings and has nothing to do with logic, common sense, or biology.  This has no relevance to Merkel's speech and despite it being pointed out you persist with the same irrelevance.

Imagine.

Immigration Judge: On what basis do you claim you are Japanese?

Migrant: Well Ms. Schlampe from Australia regards herself as Australian even though she’s originally from elsewhere. I regard myself as Japanese…

Immigration Judge: Well why didn’t you say so Mohammed. Let me issue you your citizenship papers asap. A competent person would draw a relevant example to base an argument.   Focus on what Merkel's speech was about and base it on how Germany deals with those issues.

I could equally dismiss your remaining ‘rebuttals’ (I've already done so) beginning with your silly claim that the EU is simply a common market.   Not exactly what I said, as I addressed a specific claim which was not correct. You’ve spent many hours searching for some wording to back up your claim but it’s all in vain.  I spent 3 minutes, and your claims were countered and found to be false. You almost get it but not quite. Your writing combined with your self-confessed inability to understand easily intelligible posts Again, that's not what I said, so please be more careful of your attributions... on this thread indicate that your first language is not English and it’s the cause of your difficulties in comprehension.  Guessing is a poor substitute for knowledge.

 

[Red + 252]

25 minutes ago, shadowkin said:

For kicks let’s go with your translation. All you did was confirm that Merkel wants EU states to surrender sovereignty. Already established. It's a distinction without difference.

OMG, let's look at your logic:

If your argument were to be true, then Merkel's speech would be unconditional.  However Merkel made it clear how nations had a Parliamentary process for determining what to cede to the EU - ie, there were conditions to ceding.  Moreover, Merkel did not advocate that Germany relinquish all its sovereign powers.  Therefore your premise is not sufficient.  Which renders false your claim "It's a distinction without difference."

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 hours ago, mthebold said:

Personally, I don't see why sex can't be for both.  Seems like it would be more fun that way, what with fulfilling the biological imperative and all.  Maybe I should try finding a wife in Nederland...

Anyway, I know I'm part Fries, but there's a dearth of information on the culture.  I've read a little about Dutch culture and gather the Dutch tend to be rather direct, but that was more hearsay than established fact.  I would describe myself as direct and, thus far, seem to get along well with the Dutch - but that's anecdotal.  Can you recommend a way to learn more about this?  I think it would be interesting to understand my own culture.  It would probably also be helpful in interacting with others. 

Paul, that little aside about sex for procreation was tongue in cheek.  Guess it lost something in the translation!

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

15 hours ago, Illurion said:

Darn...

You are right Jan,   it wasn't you, 

it was Jaycee back on page 20.

He was quoting wikipedia,  and stated that the Nazi's were "RIGHT-WING",   which is totally wrong.

That set in motion a series of posts between me, and others who also believe that the Nazi's were "left-wing."

Rasmus seems to have confused our points.

And i got confused today by stating it was you instead of Jaycee.

I apologize.

I am getting old.

So,  Rasmus,  you and i agree,  and your dispute is with Jaycee and wikipedia,  not me, or Jan.

 

Have a nice day.

last comment then I will ditch the WW2 topic.

For starters it migth interest you that my grandfather, albeit not a key person, actually worked with the resistance and helped Jews into Neutral Sweden. 

Anyways, I never claimed that the Nazies were lefties. In fact I said that they were definetly NOT lefties. And I backed this up by saying that "mein Kampf" was loaded with anti-communist statements. I further encouraged you to back your claim up as this well documented history and therefore easy to do (i.e. I encouraged you to prove me wrong using REAL facts. If you present REAL facts I will accept them and publicly declare that you are rigth). However, you opted not to so. Hey, why should you; afterall your opinion is Gospel. 

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Alrighty then, here we go.  This should fail spectacularly.  

● What new taxes will fund all this? ●

On Drudge Report:

THE 'GREEN NEW DEAL': A MANDATE FOR GOVERNMENT CONTROL OF AMERICAN SOCIETY

'Ocasio-Cortez sees this plan is being a vehicle through which social equality might finally realized, as it will use reparations to right historical injustices'

Incoming New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez brings with her a massive online following, influence she says she’ll deploy only in support of candidates who support her plan for a “Green New Deal.”

“The Green New Deal” is something Ocasio-Cortez invokes frequently in media appearances and rallies.

So what’s actually in it?

Her office recently released the text of a proposed House rules change outlining the plan.

The proposed rule change for the upcoming 116th Congress would require the creation of a “Select Committee for a Green Deal” that would be responsible for creating the plan by January 1, 2020, with corresponding draft legislation soon after. The text of the rule change lays out the committee’s jurisdiction and required areas of action.

It’s scope and mandate for legislation authority amounts to a radical grant of power to Washington over Americans’ lives, homes, businesses, travel, banking, and more.

Early on, under “Jurisdiction,” the document makes clear its grandiose philosophical vision: “The select committee shall have authority to develop a detailed national, industrial, economic mobilization plan for the transition of the United States economy to become greenhouse gas emissions neutral and to significantly draw down greenhouse gases from the atmosphere and oceans and to promote economic and environmental justice and equality.”

In addition to achieving its goal of “meeting 100% of national power demand through renewable sources,” the document also repeatedly states the Green New Deal will advance non-environmental projects, such as, “social, economic, racial, regional and gender-based justice.”

... More, Ocasio-Cortez sees this plan is being a vehicle through which social equality might finally realized, as it will use reparations to right historical injustices: “mitigate deeply entrenched racial, regional and gender-based inequalities in income and wealth (including, without limitation, ensuring that federal and other investment will be equitably distributed to historically impoverished, low income, deindustrialized or other marginalized communities in such a way that builds wealth and ownership at the community level).”

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

I can't believe I'm about to say this:  I am so thankful for all those white haired members of Congress, because they will see to it that this crazy loon's plans receive the fewest possible votes, if they ever bring any of it to a vote.

On the other hand, if they do try to pass an agenda that contains 1/1000 of her "goals" the world will finally get to see what a superpower looks like in civil war.

I think they should start with taking control of everyone's financial accounts (of all types and kinds) and putting anything more than what they deem necessary to live on into a pool.  This should include England, right?  I mean, hey, they were the reason we came over in the first place so most of the reparations should come from them.  The French should be targeted too, because they supported us when we separated ourselves from England (and those French sure like a good fire!).  Then they should form a committee to decide on a formula to determine how to redistribute everybody's money to the people who did not earn it.  They can start with Congress as a test case!

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

Oh, and if this thread is going to go full blown Godwin, I call dibs on Godwin jokes...