Socialists want to exorcise the O&G demon by 2030

I would say that it's irrelevant, as all other property would have also increased in proportion, so although you'll get more money if you sell your house, you'll pay more to buy another one.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top headline story on today's Drudge report. 

Reminds me of Al Gore about a dozen years ago.  Al Gore got fatter and richer preaching the doom and gloom of ZOMG GLOBAL WARMING WILL KILL US ALL ELEVENTY PANIC ! ! !

Pretty sure a similar fate of getting fat and richer will befall this new politician, preaching the same doom story:

OCASIO-CORTEZ ON MILLENNIALS: ‘WE’RE LIKE THE WORLD IS GOING TO END IN 12 YEARS IF WE DON’T ADDRESS CLIMATE CHANGE’

OCASIO-CORTEZ: “And I think the part of it that is generational is that millennials and people, in gen z, and all these folks that come after us are looking up and we’re like, the world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change. You’re biggest issue, your biggest issue is how are going to pay for it? — and like this is the war, this is our world war II. And I think for younger people looking at this are more like, how are we saying let’s take it easy when 3000 Americans died last year, how are we saying let’s take it easy when the end person died from our cruel and unjust criminal justice system? How are we saying take it easy, the America that we’re living in today is dystopian with people sleeping in their cars so they can work a second job without healthcare and we’re told to settle down. It’s a fundamental separation between that fierce urgency of now, the why we can’t wait that King spoke of. That at some point this chronic reality do reach a breaking point and I think for our generation it reached that, I wished I didn’t have to be doing every post, but sometimes I just feel like people aren’t being held accountable. Until, we start pitching in and holding people accountable, I’m just gonna let them have it.”

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

the world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change. 

This morning the regional Superintendent of School sent an automated message out that, yet again, there would be a two-hour delay so that the little kids would not be standing out in the minus-21 degree weather.  I look out and down my driveway at the cars that are buried under two feet of fresh snow from the weekend's snowfall, and out over the local river that is covered over with a layer of ice and then several feet of fresh snow, and then over at the mounds that the snowplow guy has shovelled up, now over eight feet tall, and reflect that I am living in a new phenomenon - the Earth version of Ice Planet Hoth. 

This morning will warm up to a toasty minus-2.  OK,  I consider that to be a heat wave.  Be happy for the warmth being generated, this planet's destiny is to get quite a bit colder.   The planet may end, but when it does, it will be a frozen ball of ice. The idea that it is going to turn into a steaming jungle of hot gases collapsing civilization is preposterous. 

  • Great Response! 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The planet will end, scored beyond belief, not an ice ball. In terms of the lifespan of the sun, our star will expanded to where the planet is too close to the sun, and everything scorched, no atmosphere. Add another billion years and the sun will have expanded past the earth's orbit. 

We are but tiny zits in time. It will be impressive if humanoids last as long as the dinosaurs (discounting birds, which are still around). 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe during the  last eclipse of the sun many astronomers mentioned that the sun was getting older and it was shrinking.  I hear they are sending or sent a probe last summer that will orbit the Sun two dozen times.  Should be interesting.  I wonder if they find the Sun is really shrinking what about all those solar panels?  :)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I already paid for everything society has done. Especially as a home and landowner in Illinois where property and other taxes are high. So, of course, I deserve the profits. Much of the increase would also be due to how I improved or neglected my properties.

Additionally, I don't think I should be paying tax on social security income. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2019 at 1:51 AM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Sorry. A bit stressed at the moment. 

In short I think the overlooked factors in the discussion of universal healthcare and free education, subsidized child care, welfare etc is the longterm economic benefit as evidenced by Scandinavia and maybe more importantly the social stabillity. A balance needs to be found - it is easy to take it too far, but there are no denying the "results" in scandinavia. 

America has become more socialistic every decade since the industrial age brought on a lot of social issues that needed to be addressed. We have made great progress in creating a social cushion to protect and feed the homeless, helpless, and mentally ill. We would do more IF we could afford to. The rich and upper middle class pay most of the taxes. Any increased taxation needs to go for paying off our huge annual deficits of around a trillion dollars per year. Fortunately, private charities are also very effective at feeding those who fall in between the cracks and providing medical and other services. The American people vote every two years and they are the ultimate arbiter of who runs our government and makes the decisions on finances and welfare. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

OCASIO-CORTEZ: “And I think the part of it that is generational is that millennials and people, in gen z, and all these folks that come after us are looking up and we’re like, the world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change. You’re biggest issue, your biggest issue is how are going to pay for it? — and like this is the war, this is our world war II. And I think for younger people looking at this are more like, how are we saying let’s take it easy when 3000 Americans died last year, how are we saying let’s take it easy when the end person died from our cruel and unjust criminal justice system? How are we saying take it easy, the America that we’re living in today is dystopian with people sleeping in their cars so they can work a second job without healthcare and we’re told to settle down. It’s a fundamental separation between that fierce urgency of now, the why we can’t wait that King spoke of. That at some point this chronic reality do reach a breaking point and I think for our generation it reached that, I wished I didn’t have to be doing every post, but sometimes I just feel like people aren’t being held accountable. Until, we start pitching in and holding people accountable, I’m just gonna let them have it.”

Video of Ocasio-Cortez saying these words, to a cheering audience.

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:ugcPost:6493523513301962752

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2019 at 5:16 AM, Jan van Eck said:

Yet the money for healthcare (and a ton of other things) can come from elsewhere than taxes.  The problem with Leftists  ("Democrats" and "Progressives" in the USA) is that they have this mindless closed-cycle thinking:  either a service gets charged for, via some private insurance scheme - where the insurers grotesquely gouge the system for their own grotesque profits - or the public is taxed, and a bureaucracy gets installed by the govt to "oversee" the new system. 

Yet there is a third way, and that is the sale of govt services to willing buyers who are third parties.  One good example is the Quebec system, where one-third of the provincial budget is paid for by the sale of electricity via Hydro-Quebec, a provincial govt or "Crown" Corporation.  The govt ownership of HQ and its sale of electricity to the Americans is so successful that the province will be entirely debt-free within fifty years.  Meanwhile the physicians are on salary, along with the rest of hospital staff, and no patient is directly billed.   You have a similar system in France, including no-payment medications, and that seems to have worked well in the past  (dunno how it is working out today, with the govt under pressure). 

Where single-payer gets into trouble is when the costs are directly borne from only tax revenues. Then, inevitably, at some point the funds start to dry up and the level of those services decays.  And you see that in neighboring Ontario  (Canada), where they have not developed a good funding source and the govt effectively rations the services by both time and wait time. There, and in Romania, it looks like a good idea to be prudent and get the flu shot!

How is establishing a government monopoly and selling at inflated prices to fund social programs substantially different from taxes?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2019 at 6:29 AM, Jan van Eck said:

Not really.  At one point in recent times, within the last 60 years or so, personal income taxes topped out at 94%  (marginal bracket).

Technically true, but those with money simply lobbied for exemptions.  The effective effective tax rate was approximately the same as it is today.  The proletariat never figured this out, of course, one degree of separation being too much complexity for them to grasp.  See also: "employer payroll taxes". 

On that note, raising the official tax rate - or any other attempted wealth transfer - does not help the common man.  It puts more money and power in politicians' hands as they sell exemptions like the Catholic Church sold indulgences.  It also creates an alliance of politicians with some fraction of the business community, who gain an advantage over the remainder of the business community. The result is more mergers & acquisitions, greater concentration of economic power, layoffs, lowering of wages, destruction of communities, bankruptcies, etc.  There's no scenario in which higher income taxes take from the rich and give to the poor. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2019 at 3:16 AM, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

yeah... Universal healthcare and free education has truely wrecked havoc on Scandinavia... 

Scandinavians are, on average, more intelligent, more disciplined, and more cooperative than Americans.  They also have a culture of honor, which means people will do the right thing because it's the right thing.  Americans, on the other hand, will abuse the hell out of anything.  What works well in Scandinavia would be an absolute disaster in the US.  For more information, consider VA healthcare...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

This morning the regional Superintendent of School sent an automated message out that, yet again, there would be a two-hour delay so that the little kids would not be standing out in the minus-21 degree weather.  I look out and down my driveway at the cars that are buried under two feet of fresh snow from the weekend's snowfall, and out over the local river that is covered over with a layer of ice and then several feet of fresh snow, and then over at the mounds that the snowplow guy has shovelled up, now over eight feet tall, and reflect that I am living in a new phenomenon - the Earth version of Ice Planet Hoth. 

This morning will warm up to a toasty minus-2.  OK,  I consider that to be a heat wave.  Be happy for the warmth being generated, this planet's destiny is to get quite a bit colder.   The planet may end, but when it does, it will be a frozen ball of ice. The idea that it is going to turn into a steaming jungle of hot gases collapsing civilization is preposterous. 

When climate alarmists say humanity will suffer, what they mean is that the specific segments of humanity they care about will suffer.  I.e.  those who are ethnically Northern European.  They've made it clear that, for all they care, we can die and go to hell. 

What I can't figure out is why ethnically Northern European women go along with this.  Do they really gain so much pleasure from virtue signaling? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2019 at 10:12 AM, Erik Halvorseth said:

I can only back Red up. I come from Norway and the situation is pretty much the same here. We are the country in the west producing most oil/capita-way more than Canada, USA and Australia.
We are pretty much the arcetype of socialism here in Scandinavia.Compared to us AOC is equivalent with a Trump-supporter :)
That said, college education have never been completely for free, although it has never been close to enter Harward, Stanford & such.
Things happen fast over here now- every 3. car purchased is a Tesla or smth else with el-engine.
By 2022 our government's ambition is that every new car will be el or hydrogen-driven etc. Petrol will soon be extinct

Frankly, both of you live in very small countries with large amounts  of natural resources which serve to subsidize such spending.  That isn’t possible in the US.  For example the state of California conducted a study on providing universal healthcare to residents and found the initiative would double the budget.  That’s just healthcare, to say nothing of the rest of the “free stuff” ideas.  Also last I checked housing was extremely expensive in both countries.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ronwagn said:

America has become more socialistic every decade since the industrial age brought on a lot of social issues that needed to be addressed. We have made great progress in creating a social cushion to protect and feed the homeless, helpless, and mentally ill. We would do more IF we could afford to. The rich and upper middle class pay most of the taxes. Any increased taxation needs to go for paying off our huge annual deficits of around a trillion dollars per year. Fortunately, private charities are also very effective at feeding those who fall in between the cracks and providing medical and other services. The American people vote every two years and they are the ultimate arbiter of who runs our government and makes the decisions on finances and welfare. 

 

what I am talking about is that society wide investment in education and healthcare benefits the whole of society longterm. You are talking about short-term effects. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, A&W said:

Frankly, both of you live in very small countries with large amounts  of natural resources which serve to subsidize such spending.  That isn’t possible in the US.  For example the state of California conducted a study on providing universal healthcare to residents and found the initiative would double the budget.  That’s just healthcare, to say nothing of the rest of the “free stuff” ideas.  Also last I checked housing was extremely expensive in both countries.

Norway as a whole has been extremely fortunate regarding natural resources no doubt about that. Not only do we have huge oil and gas resources, but also a lot of waterfalls generating electic energy, large natural fish resources etc.
I agree with you that our politicians have money to spend that very few other countries have. If one cuts away oil and fish-related income our deficit gap would resemble that of the US

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/23/2019 at 12:31 AM, A&W said:

Frankly, both of you live in very small countries with large amounts  of natural resources which serve to subsidize such spending.  That isn’t possible in the US.  For example the state of California conducted a study on providing universal healthcare to residents and found the initiative would double the budget.  That’s just healthcare, to say nothing of the rest of the “free stuff” ideas.  Also last I checked housing was extremely expensive in both countries.

Denmark is very small country too. We have no natural resources to speak of. Yet, we have universal healthcare and education. 

I cannot follow the logic in your argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites