Forum: pol
Page 3575
Subject: Green Jobs Leading the Way


  Posted by: Boldwin - [35615181] Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 15:26

*chortle*

The future that wasn't. Green jobs will happen when green tech and green science make sufficient progress in efficiencies and not one forced moment sooner.

 
1Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 15:32










Source Zombie of Pajamas Media

(Credit: Art and lettering by buzzsawmonkey; Concept by zombie)
 
2Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 18:04
As ABC News​ reported, many solar energy company analysts have long doubted Solyndra’s business plan:

While Energy Department officials steadfastly vouched for Solyndra — even after an earlier round of layoffs raised eyebrows — other federal agencies and industry analysts for months questioned the viability of the company. Peter Lynch, a longtime solar industry analyst, told ABC News the company’s fate should have been obvious from the start.

“Here’s the bottom line,” Lynch said. “It costs them $6 to make a unit. They’re selling it for $3. In order to be competitive today, they have to sell it for between $1.5 and $2. That is not a viable business plan.”

Based on the evidence assembled so far, no Wall Street investment officer would have recommended the loan or, if he had, would have kept his job for five minutes. Pouring $535 million into an objectively lousy investment is not how Wall Street makes money.

But it all too often is how politicians get re-elected. “Green jobs” are a big plus for the “environmental movement,” which is a very important liberal special interest. That backing these particular jobs was also a favor for a very important Obama political fundraiser was another plus.

This is a textbook case of capital being allocated for political reasons (it will earn us votes) instead of economic reasons (it will make us rich). It is also further proof that politicians can’t make economic decisions even if they wanted to. And they can’t make them for the exact same reason pigs can’t fly: they aren’t designed to.
 
3Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 19:20
This is a textbook case of capital being allocated for political reasons

Actually, this is filed in the dictionary already, under "Halliburton."
 
4Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 19:28
Haliburton made a profit and delivered the goods.
 
5Mattinglyinthehall
      ID: 37838313
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 21:49
Haliburton made a profit and delivered the goods.

Not so hard when you overcharge the US government by $100million in the first year in Iarq alone.

In fact even easier when the food you overchard for and fed American troops was spoiled.

Defrauding the US military might improve those profit margins a touch as well.

And if you still have trouble, maybe you could set up some side deals with America's enemies through your Caymans subsidiary.

And what ungrateful bastards we are here in the US to thank teyr impeccable delivery of goods them with a series of audits
 
6Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 21:57
I never said anything about "profit." Surely you aren't dismissing any of the claims against Solyndra because that company was profitable?

The point was whether Halliburton, like Solyndra, was defrauding the government. That is a certainty in the case of Halliburton--who took in at least 25 times that of Solyndra, and have been busted many, many, many times for violating agreements of all sorts. Including violating federal laws against trade with Libya and Iraq.

The proper response for you in #4 isn't to somehow try to defend Halliburton. It is "yes, they were pretty bad, too."
 
7Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 21:58
Still a better record than Solyndra's. By far.
 
8sarge33rd
      ID: 16881011
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 22:06
roflmfao...did our resident wingnut REALLY say that it is BETTER to deal with terrorists and show a profit...than to not?
 
9sarge33rd
      ID: 16881011
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 22:07
whats next B? Gonna dance with the Devil at the Fri night sock-hop?
 
10Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Sat, Sep 10, 2011, 22:18
Still a better record than Solyndra's. By far.

You mean "so far." I genuinely have no idea how they will do, but like a lot of conservative "analysis" of stimulus money, they like to take a snapshot of things right now, eliminate a lot of positive news, and forget all about the long-term advantage of something.

This is like taking a look at the Bush tax cuts a year after they were in, and declaring them a failure because the promises weren't kept. Or saying the surge was a crock two weeks after it began.
 
11Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 02:19
The thread is young, PD. Point to those future bright spots of future tech. Find me the best solar project, wind, wave, whatever. There must be some successful project out there that benefited from stim money. At least one you would imagine.
 
12Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 08:55
some successful project

There may be. It *is* quite early. In fact, too early to be calling all of them failures, or pointing to clear successes at this point, IMO.
 
13Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 09:16
There must be some successful project out there that benefited from stim money. At least one you would imagine.

Too easy. Only a few miles from my house,
New South Jordan School a Model of Efficiency

The 48,000-square-foot facility was built using $8 million in federal stimulus money, Dunham said. It utilizes a combination of spray foam insulation and continuous rigid insulation to seal the structure and help maintain a constant temperature within the building.

Instead of traditional heating and air conditioning, the school has a ground source heat pump that circulates water to cool or heat the building, said Jeffrey Seare, principal of the Salt Lake City-based engineering consultant firm Olsen and Peterson, which contributed to the school’s design.

During the summer, the circulating water releases heat from the building into the ground, and during the winter, heat is absorbed from the earth back into the water and used to warm the building.

“The ground source heat pump should prove itself to be 20 to 40 percent more efficient than a conventional heating and cooling system,” Seare said.

On the roof, 230 solar panels generate electricity, which is supplemented with power created by the three wind turbines.

The solar panels alone are expected to generate 70,000 kilowatt hours of electricity a year, enough to power 6.5 homes, said architect Cory Ferguson of the firm Pasker Gould Ames and Weaver, which designed the River’s Edge School. The panels are expected to provide between 50 and 65 percent of the school’s total electrical needs, he said.


 
14Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 11:41
Another boondoggle - My favorite [non-religious] magazine in all the world, Fine Homebuilding
Unfortunately this means that the geothermal heat pump actually will burn significantly more fossil fuel than a high-efficiency gas or oil boiler or furnace.

Almost nobody knows this, though, because almost nobody is measuring. And no measuring means nobody is learning from mistakes that are wasting energy.
The only experts who like ground source heat pumps are the utility companies selling you the eletricity to run the pump.
 
15biliruben
      ID: 59551120
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 12:29
I drove by a number of projects last week:

Eastern Washington Wind Farms

 
16Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 12:48
Geothermal heat pumps are amazingly efficient at delivery exactly what they promise, despite the fact that some of the electricity to run it might come from fossil fuels themselves.

What the article doesn't really address very much is that there is significant savings over what the geothermal system is replacing. The article says:

A more honest approach would be to admit that heat pumps use electricity, which in most cases means burning more fuel than would be consumed by an appliance that burns gas right in the home

How do we know this? We don't--because the article doesn't even try to examine the fossil fuel costs in delivering the gas (or, in many cases oil) to the home. Or any other cost (such as the cost in extracting the fuel from the ground, or refining it).

I did significant research on this issue before we paid the large amount of money for a geothermal system several years ago. While there is an earn-back period both in terms of cost and fossil fuel use, it does, in fact, earn it all back. And saves on money in the meantime.
 
17Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 15:00
Mmmmm....koolaid....mmmmm.
 
18sarge33rd
      ID: 138411112
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 15:23
do the world and yourself a favor B..stow your unjustified cynicism. We know your opinions, needless for you to re-express them at every turn.
 
19Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 15:33
#17: That's your response? Really? So a criticism of your linked article's point is that somehow I've drunk the koolaid of some unspecified cult?
 
20DWetzel
      ID: 33337117
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 15:34
Let's hope it's at least not a cult that protects pedophiles.
 
21Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 15:49
PD

That's the best I've found on the subject. Go ahead and find something more rigorous and link to it if you think the best builders' magazine I know of didn't give the subject it's due.
 
22Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 16:47
When you are looking for cost studies beware of features like this in the data.
The new ISO standard produces slightly higher ratings because it no longer budgets any electricity for water pumps. - wiki
They calculate payback based on that and you'll get a classic case of garbage in/garbage out.

Utility companies like it cause they can sell more electricity to pump continuously and it shifts some load to off peak hours. They are not 'saving the planet'.
 
23Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 16:48
So the best you can find has holes in it I poked myself. And you not only can't rebut my criticism, you won't look any further to back up the point you are making (which, I remind you, is no longer propped up by the article I demonstrated doesn't say what you think it does).

No wonder you hate science so much--the need for proof would drive you nuts.

Look--you want to examine my criticism of an article you linked to please go ahead. Otherwise, you are simply standing silently by an article which doesn't prove anything at all.
 
24Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 16:54
I don't trust your research as much as Fine Homebuilding's. Sorry. In fact I won't trust any research until I see convincingly that they've accounted for the electricity for the pumping and all the costs.

And I love science plenty.
 
25Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 20:28
In fact I won't trust any research until I see convincingly that they've accounted for the electricity for the pumping and all the costs.

Good. Then you are putting that article aside until they do, yes?
 
26Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 21:38
I won't trust any research until I see convincingly that they've accounted for the electricity for the pumping and all the costs.

Guess you didn't care to read my link in #13 that you immediately and erroneously ignored; most likely because it answered your challenge to find a green stimulus project that was clear success. From the article:

Although it is too early to say how much money the school will save, Dunham said, early estimates are optimistic. On a recent day, the school’s power meter was running backwards, signaling that the facility’s solar panels and wind turbines were generating more power than the school was using.

“When we see things like that, we get really excited,” he said.

The River’s Edge School’s first monthly power bill was $1,800, compared with the $8,000 to $10,000 it normally would cost to power a school of its size


How much convincing do you need? It's A Model of Efficiency, and no amount of hating on your part will change that fact.




 
27Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 22:36
I have no problem with the solar. It's the ground source heat pump that is the boondoggle.
 
28Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sun, Sep 11, 2011, 22:55
According to you, the boondoggle is: Unfortunately this means that the geothermal heat pump actually will burn significantly more fossil fuel than a high-efficiency gas or oil boiler or furnace.

In this case, they're not burning fossil fuels, at least not much. The solar panels and the wind turbines are handling most of the power needs, even exceeding them on one day. The power bill is way down.

My guess would be Fine Homebuilding has a lot more advertising money from traditional fossil fuel burning appliances than upstart geothermal heat pump manufacturers, thus skewing their article accordingly.

 
29Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 00:43
That's silly. Pick one up and check the ads. They would love to teach a novel new building technology. That's what they do and what they did in this case. They also looked at the available research.
 
31Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Mon, Sep 12, 2011, 22:51
“The fact that the government chose Solyndra as their white horse is mind- boggling.” - Jonathan Dorsheimer, an analyst in Boston for Canaccord Genuity Inc. of Vancouver

Bloomberg.com discovered thru Instapundit
 
32Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Wed, Sep 14, 2011, 10:50
After Paul Krugman [and the lamestream] spent a couple years fulminating about Enron and calling it bigger than 9/11...

...how much did their breakup cost the taxpayers again?
-------------
Place your bets how quickly the Obama enablers manage to bury the Solyndra story. Moveon.org.
-------------

Don Wade of WLS radio broke the code on this one.

Administration figures were actually in the Solyndra boardroom and knew they were spending $6 to make a product they sold for $3. They knew that was the business plan the day Obama got in office and pushed the 500 billion loan thru.

They were fully warned. How was it possible that Obama would decide to make green jobs and this company in particular the marquee initiative to reset the economy?

Answer: Obama was counting on Cap-N-Trade and administration agency impediments to fossil fuels doubling the cost of energy and make those solar panels profitable. Cap-n-Trade was defeated of course...for now. Draconoian EPA restrictions are still coming on line, agencies acting as if Cap-n-Trade had passed however.

 
33J-Bar
      ID: 107281218
      Wed, Sep 14, 2011, 22:39
re: 13 i did read the article and i am quite sure that i could have built a very efficient building for 35 students for a whole lot less. At $7000 a month savings it would only take roughly 50 years to get back the return on the investment if you built for half the cost.
 
34J-Bar
      ID: 107281218
      Wed, Sep 14, 2011, 22:42
The beginning of the thread was typical of what PD, Tree, ect.. always tell Boldwin is irrelevant and a straw man. The ol they did it so it is ok for us to do. LMAO
 
35Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Wed, Sep 14, 2011, 23:49
Nah--just giving a sense of perspective. Not a peep from the Right about Halliburton breaking laws and defrauding the government for at least 25 times the amount of what this single company got.

The Right's selective outrage is on display here. My prediction: This will be almost all overblown, and the Right will drop it like a bad habit as they whip up the next fake outrage.
 
36J-Bar
      ID: 107281218
      Thu, Sep 15, 2011, 23:36
Plenty of peep, wrong is wrong. You giving perspective is hilarious on its face, kind of like the NYT writing an article agout right wing bias in MSM. Halliburton fraud wrong, Blackwater fraud wrong, giving millions to your cronies under the guise of stimulus wrong. Wait, thats right the last one is a fake outrage according to some. LMAO.
 
37Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 00:14
Except that we don't really know the whole story on Solyndra yet.

You are right--fraud is fraud. So wait until it is actually shown to be fraud before lumping it all in and calling them all "wrong."
 
38biliruben
      ID: 59551120
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 01:14
Death is part of life. Bankruptcy is part of capitalism.

If companies couldn't fail, then capitalism wouldn't work.

Whether there was fraud involved, or whether due diligence wasn't performed by those providing the loan, is something else entirely. We'll see.

But getting a loan and the company fails - that's healthy capitalism at work.
 
39weykool
      ID: 343561414
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 13:21
If you drive from LA to Palm Springs you will see a bunch of wind farms similar to post #15.
Guess how they all got there....tax shelters used by rich people during the late 70's and early 80's to avoid the punitive tax rates at the time.
Oh the irony of the far left.
 
40sarge33rd
      ID: 178571611
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 13:25
Oh the irony of the far left.

Therein lies the REAL problem. What is in fact a moderate position, is seen by the Right as FAR Left, thus stoking their irrational fears of Marxist-Leninist_Stalinist-Socialist-Communist etc etc etc misnomers.
 
41biliruben
      ID: 358252515
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 14:13
Uh... I don't think you understand the word irony, and you certainly don't understand the far left.

If the tax code gets people to invest widely, why would this be a bad thing?

My dad was whining that the company he started had to make a choice of how to reinvest money, and he lamented that the corporate tax structure was such that it made more sense to hire someone than to squirrel the money the way as profit.

All I could say was, "at 9%unemployment this is a bad thing?"
 
42sarge33rd
      ID: 178571611
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 14:22
well if THAT conversation doesnt define the very crux of the problem. It aint the economy stupid, its the attitude.
 
43weykool
      ID: 343561414
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 15:59
The irony of the far left is crying about wealthy taxpayers taking advantage of tax loopholes to avoid paying their "fair share" and then touting those same projects that they invested in as the "system" working and its a good thing.
The bottom line is those wind farms probably wouldnt exist without the tax subsidies.

If the tax code gets people to invest widely, why would this be a bad thing?
So its good if the left says its good but if taxpayers invested in oil drilling tax shelters its bad?
Got it.

 
44DWetzel
      ID: 53326279
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 16:15
The irony of the far right is bitching about the left bitching about the things everybody does, and being completely serious about it.
 
45sarge33rd
      ID: 178571611
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 16:20
True irony of the right...they'd chop their own damn foot off, if they saw where it would be "profitable" to do so.
 
46Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 16:36
The bottom line is those wind farms probably wouldnt exist without the tax subsidies.

Neither would a lot of things, including the Internet. Or a lot of corporate charitable giving. Or any current sports stadium.
 
47biliruben
      ID: 358252515
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 16:53
I don't know who you think the far left is. The last vestiges of communists?

Everyone here pretty much toes the good capitalist, free market line. That would be center-right in any normal period in history.
 
48biliruben
      ID: 358252515
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 17:03
Also, go look up irony. That the "far left", whoever they are, thinks the rich should pay a greater actual percentage of their income is not irony. I was taken to school on this by James Polk a decade ago, back when you couldn't spew muddled thoughts on these boards without being called on it.
 
49weykool
      ID: 343561414
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 19:14
From dictionary.com:
the use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning:
For years the left has been beating the drums to close loopholes and tax shelters used by the rich.
I find it very IRONIC that they now tout the very things those tax shelters have produced.
Perhaps you feel hypocryte is a better description?
 
50DWetzel
      ID: 31111810
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 19:20
Let's give it a try:

The hypocrisy of the far right is bitching about the left bitching about the things everybody does, and being completely serious about it.

Yeah, that fits too.
 
51Perm Dude
      ID: 5510572522
      Fri, Sep 16, 2011, 19:58
I've not known the left to be about closing this particular loophole. Find some who did that now supports then, and I guess you might have the beginning of an ironic stance on an issue.

But you haven't drilled down near enough to make that claim. Only some warmed over generalistic statements about "the left."
 
52Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Tue, Oct 04, 2011, 16:27
Mickey Kaus just thiiiiis close to dumping O.
“What’s terrifying is that after looking at some of the ones that came next, this one [Solyndra] started to look better,” another OMB e-mail exchange said of Solyndra. “Bad days are coming.” - OMB released e-mail

-----------------------

P.S.: At some point, if you are a Dem who wants Obama’s health care plan to survive (in a form intact enough to allow us to find out if it works)** you can rationally reach a tipping point, after which you start hoping all the election-related news is bad for the President, so he will have no choice but to pull an LBJ and not run in 2012, allowing a more electable candidate to be nominated. … Plan A won’t work. Let’s set the phasers on full reverse! … I’m almost there. …. - Mickey Kaus
Bill Clinton helpfully just announced he will release his new book next Nov 8, entitled, “Back to Work: Why We Need Smart Government for a Strong Economy.”

Why he is doing that, I can't imagine.

 
53Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sun, Oct 09, 2011, 21:33
The agency which loaned to Solyndra is no more.
The program’s [DOE’s Loan Programs Office - B] authorization expired Friday: On its last day the agency committed an additional $4.7 billion in loan guarantees to support four major clean-technology projects across the country.
Not suitably chastened. But gone at least. - pajamasmedia.com
 
54Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Thu, Oct 27, 2011, 18:43
Inspector General of the Labor Department said that a $500 million green jobs training program should be shut down.
With 61 percent of the training grant periods elapsed and only 10 percent of participants entered employment, there is no evidence that grantees will effectively use the funds and deliver targeted employment outcomes by the end of the grant periods.
Naturally the Labor Dept has no such intention of shutting down the program.

 
55Perm Dude
      ID: 39961218
      Thu, Oct 27, 2011, 18:54
The Labor Department can't shut down the program. The Congress sets the budget, and funds the programs, not Labor.

Naturally.
 
56sarge33rd
      ID: 2992712
      Thu, Oct 27, 2011, 18:57
It would yes, be illegal for any Govt Dept to unilaterally terminate a program authorized and funded by Congress. Is that not true?
 
57Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Fri, Oct 28, 2011, 01:37
Best I can determine after looking into this for an hour is that this would be called a 'regular or routine' impoundment rather than a 'policy' impoundment and would be allowable. I am not sure if the president would be required to report it to congress.
 
58Boldwin
      ID: 35615181
      Sat, Nov 05, 2011, 15:23
Whattayaknow? A successful green jobs story.

Zipcar car-sharing that isn't car-pooling. I actually like this model.

Unicorns discovered: 'news at 10'.
 
59Boldwin
      ID: 1510432817
      Mon, Nov 28, 2011, 19:36
Everyone wants the incentives, no one needs the inefficient boondoggles after the artificial credits run out.
it is in California where the impact of past mandates and subsidies is felt most strongly. Thousands of abandoned wind turbines littered the landscape of wind energy’s California “big three” locations—Altamont Pass, Tehachapin (above), and San Gorgonio—considered among the world’s best wind sites…
California’s wind farms— comprising about 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity—ceased to generate much more quickly than Kamaoa. In the best wind spots on earth, over 14,000 turbines were simply abandoned. Spinning, post-industrial junk which generates nothing but bird kills…”
Every pointless birdkill a hypocritical sacrifice to the false nature god of AGW.

Thanks environmentalists, for nothin'.
 
60Boldwin
      ID: 1111427
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 09:29
I probably don't need to link to the ubiquitous news reports of Chevy Volt fires...and the offer from Chevy to buy them back.

Perhaps you weren't aware that 3 Volts caught on fire in federal crash tests.

Perhaps you weren't aware that hazmat teams will need special training to defuse Chevy Volts which have been in accidents.

More green jobs.

When do we send in the hazmat teams to defuse the broken mercury green lightbulbs?

Hire more hazmat if we are gonna force green tech which is still green.

Someone less charitible might suggest those aren't green jobs. They are instead maybe the adults cleaning up after liberals with bad ideas.
 
61Razor
      ID: 551031157
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 09:33
Electric cars were invented by liberals? Electric cars are a bad idea? You're rooting against more full efficient technology being brought to market? You're rooting against an American auto manufacturer? Do you ever listen to yourself?
 
62Tree
      ID: 41512710
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 10:30
Electric cars were invented by liberals?

apparently.

in Baldwin's world, liberals endorse Republican candidates for Senate, in particular, candidates who were Reagan appointees, co-chairs of Jack Kemp's presidential campaign, and, oh yea, helped draft the Republican party platform 1984 that President Reagan ran under and won his landslide re-election.
 
63sarge33rd
      ID: 17117210
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 11:10
Actually B, the Volts have been found to sometimes catch fire, as much as 3 weeks AFTER the crash test was conducted. Both the Govt and GM are looking for the cause of the fires. No Volt caught fure at the time of the crash test, and none have yet done so in real life. GMs buy back offer, is a VERY pro-active one and SHOULD be applauded, not ridiculed.
 
64Razor
      ID: 551031157
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 11:57
For the record, I have had a car catch on fire. A non-electric car. As far as I know, Nissan did not offer a buy back program and no federal study was conducted. Is my old Maxima the only non-electric car in America that has caught on fire?
 
65Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 12:31
The electric car troubles can all be traced to their batteries.


 
66weykool
      ID: 131146211
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 12:48
The stupidity of electric cars is that it adds far more carbon emissions to generate the electricity used to charge them.
Where do the liberals think the electricity comes from?
Lets not forget the problem of finding a suitable place to dump all these bio-hazardous batteries when they die.
Its the same story with renewable energy sources like ethanol.
More energy is used to make a gallon of ethanol than the gallon of ethanol produces.
When you add in the fact that our tax dollars are being wasted on these projects it adds insult to injury.
 
67sarge33rd
      ID: 17117210
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 12:54
Tell me WK, which technological advancement, STARTED out competitively priced? Flat screen TVs for ex, were not very long ago, $10,000 for a 30". Or should we just forego R&D in order to maintain this qtrs dividend payout?
 
68Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 12:56
Ethanol is a different thing from electric cars--try not to confuse them.

Electricity can often come from dirty sources--you are exactly right. And the disposal problem is a real problem.

This is the same thing liberals have been wrestling with, with regard to nuclear power.

My own belief is that, like nuclear power, electric cars should be in the mix and the more experience we have with it the better these problems will become smaller.
 
69Boldwin
      ID: 1111427
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 13:01
Electric cars were invented by liberals? - Razor

Incentivizing green tech that isn't ready for primetime is a liberal idea.

Electric cars are a bad idea? - Razor

Electric car tech which isn't mature and well implimented is a bad idea.

You're rooting against more full efficient technology being brought to market?

When green tech passes sufficient performance milestones I'm all for it and we won't even need to bribe people and industry to use it.

If you think pushing this stuff too early makes sense I shudder to think people like you make decisions like when we start forcing tokamaks into the power-grid. If early is good, why not even earlier?
 
70Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 13:43
Young industries need support in order to come about. You wouldn't be typing on this board if if weren't for the support of the internet by the government in its early stages, long before it was "ready for primetime."
 
71sarge33rd
      ID: 17117210
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 13:47
I dont recall ANY, of the leaders of capitalsim turning down fed monies with which to conduct R&D. So tell me B, if they have no issue with it, why do you? (Or do you profess to know better than the captains of industry?)
 
72bibA
      ID: 48627713
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 13:48
I don't know if the Prius is mature or being pushed too early, but I see them all over the place in my neck of the woods, and I haven't heard of anyone who is unhappy with them. My daughter has one, and is ecstatic with it.
 
73weykool
      ID: 131146211
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 14:45
Ethanol and electric cars ARE the same thing.
It is liberals spending taxpayer money we don't have to make themselves feel better.

Sarge, I have no problem with private companies or individuals spending their own money on R&D.
That is what the American dream is all about.
The problem now is that liberals want to demonize anyone who is successful.
Liberals need to stop using the government to foist their beliefs on the rest of us.
 
74sarge33rd
      ID: 17117210
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 14:53
So, allowing one the freedom to do as they please, and helping to make those choices more available; is foisting?
 
75DWetzel
      ID: 53326279
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 14:55
Shocking, weykool with an uninformed "it's all the liberals fault" post.

All the environmental risk is already completely socialized -- the companies certainly aren't responsible for repairing it all themselves, and they have no incentive to change the system they're benefiting from at the expense of others -- so why shouldn't we socialize the other parts of the operation?

 
76Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 15:01
Ethanol and electric cars ARE the same thing.

Uh, no they aren't. I think you've conflated anything that you believe "liberals" might promote as being the same thing, without regard for the facts.

In fact, the biggest supporters of ethanol production are rural representatives from "red" states. Can you really call Steve King a "liberal" with a straight face, for instance? Mitch McConnell?

Liberals need to stop using the government to foist their beliefs on the rest of us.

This is a knee slapper, particularly when coupled with the GOP's traditional deathgrip of supprt for the Farm Bill.
 
77boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 15:23
I don't know how accurate it is but I did a little reading and a little math and from a CO2 output measurement a hybrid out preforms both all electric and gas engines with the numbers for electric and gas being very similar. I guess this point of this is that the most efficient hybrid is probably the best way to go.
 
78weykool
      ID: 131146211
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 15:40
Sarge: I have no idea what you are talking about and I suspect neither do you.
The more money the government takes from me the less freedom I have.
Taking money from me to pay for liberal ideals is foisting their ideals on me.
If liberals believe in their ideals so strongly then they should give their own money to their causes and stop using the government.

The same goes for the farm bill.
Scrap 99% of it.
I dont have a problem helping the small farmer get through a bad year when prices plummet and they cant make enough to keep the farm going, but to give farm money to large corporate farms or people who have other sources of income is criminal.
Finally PD something we can agree on.
 
79sarge33rd
      ID: 17117210
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 15:52
Do you drive on public roads WK? Expect police to answer of you call, fire dept the same? Agree that living in the US grants you certain benefits and opportunities which do not exist anywhere else on the planet? Then you are not getting nothing for your money. Quit whining.
 
80Tree
      ID: 41512710
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 16:19
Electric cars were invented by liberals? - Razor

Incentivizing green tech that isn't ready for primetime is a liberal idea.


but in the case of the Chevy Volt, that's not why it was conceived - Bob Lutz, a republican and co-author of the 1984 Republican Party Platform that Reagan won his historic landslide with - was inspired to build the car based on the designs of another car company and the advances made in lithium-ion battery technology. in fact, he actually wanted an All-Electric car, but was overruled.

 
82Boldwin
      ID: 1111427
      Fri, Dec 02, 2011, 19:35
so why shouldn't we socialize the other parts of the operation?

How can anyone take an idea like that seriously?

The free market is great at picking the Prius and not the Volt.

The government when picking winners and losers?

Not so much.
 
83Razor
      ID: 09441723
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 02:27
How is the government picking winners and losers? By offering a subsidy?
 
84Boldwin
      ID: 28111535
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 06:35
Ask the coal power plant, the abandoned wind turbines, Solyndra, the vehicles we want that the government makes impossible to build.

Every targeted tax credit, every loan guarantee, every TIFF, every no-bid contract, every inch of red tape, every penalty, every stimulus, every subsidy, everytime the government picks a favored class and a class of people to punish.
 
85Razor
      ID: 09441723
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 11:01
Was there an answer in there? Do you have specific legislation you can point to or just broad, unfocused outrage?
 
86Boldwin
      ID: 28111535
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 11:25
1) They don't call it Obama motors for nothin. He bought it.

2) He has an obvious role in directing it since he ordered the last CEO to pack his bags and Obama put his own choice in there.

3) He had them planning like they were gonna sell 100,000 volts a year starting in 2012.

4) $7,500 subsidy and CAFE killing the cars I really want built instead.
 
87Seattle Zen
      Leader
      ID: 055343019
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 11:42
CAFE killing the cars I really want built instead.

What a tired, old narcissist. Go start a blog.
 
88Boldwin
      ID: 28111535
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 11:43
For the record, I'm not against saving strategic industries in rare and extreme cases. I am of course against liberals running them.
 
89Razor
      ID: 09441723
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 11:56
You are against perceived liberals holding executive positions in the business community now?

Tax subsidies worked wonders for hybrids. The potential upside in terms of advancing our need to get off of oil dependence, both of the foreign and domestic kind for a variety of reasons, is huge. That's precisely why the government has a vested interest in encouraging consumers to buy these vehicles, which in turn encourages manufacturers to produce them. But if people decide they do not want them, so be it. The government will not have lost that much money as most of the burden is placed on the burden of car manufacturers.
 
90Boldwin
      ID: 28111535
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 12:03
Your tax dollars hard at work:
In late 2010, General Motors agreed to sponsor a propaganda film celebrating the 90th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The CCP made film titled (translated to English) “The Birth of a Party” or “The Great Achievement of Founding the Party” is set to premiere all over the Communist nation on June 15.
How you can tell Obama is running things there.
 
91sarge33rd
      ID: 101112311
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 12:12
Just out of curiosity...Is China not seen currently as THE emerging market? Does GM not havge then, a very capitalist reason, for wanting IN that market and wanting to ingratiate itself with that market? Might such a move on their part, grease some wheels so to speak, with the powers that be IN China, so as to make GMs presence there, a little smoother?

I just wonder B. did you give ANY thought, to a practical reason why GM would do that? (No, I havent clicked/read the link yet. I seldom do with your propagandizing BS)
 
92Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 13:12
I'm waiting for the connection between Obama and the film...

There are literally millions of minority stockholders in GM, including (dare I say it) lots of Republicans. Are each of those people now communist?

Better check your market funds, Boldwin--you might be a communist!
 
93sarge33rd
      ID: 101112311
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 13:22
BTW, the article you link B, is 6 months old. Didnt GM long ago, payback the Govt monies? IOW, the assertion made BY the article, that the taxpayers own 33%of GM...is false.
 
94Tree
      ID: 41512710
      Sat, Dec 03, 2011, 13:31
reading Baldwin's posts reminds me of Texts From Bennett
 
95Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 06:05
Rushing solar and subsidizing wind power has been a world-wide disaster of an idea.

These liberal debacles are usually global initiatives which the MSM doesn't give us the complete perspective on.
 
96Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 06:30
Sarge

Nope, the government still owns a huge chunk of GM. [USA Today, Dec 26, 2011] Of course the price of the stock is stinking up the place since government guidance has produced a spectacular run of bad decisions within the company. The fact that volts have cost the american taxpayer over $250,000 per volt, the highest cost per mile electric vehicle in the world being just one of them. [not counting the flaming death and destruction]

Obama will probably have to sell the stock for political reasons before the next election but he can't because he has cratered the stock price.
 
97Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 08:01
For the record 24 out of 51 billion has been paid back. The initial 6.7 of that was bailout money used to payback bailout at a politically propitious moment where the MSM made the public think it had gotten it's money back.

Government ownership of GM has been reduced from 61% to 26.5%.
 
98Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 10:19
The government is making a small profit out of some of the bailout monies. A win-win.
 
99Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 11:00
If Obama hadn't forced the GM president out, and forced green policy in, we might even have broken even with GM.

That's one bailout I agree with in principle, but not in execution.
 
100Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 11:01
If the government hadn't stepped in, there might be no GM at all.
 
101Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 11:17
I have consistently stated that preserving strategic businesses makes sense. However Obama's disaster-in-chief at GM is doubling down on his disaster by pumping out even more volts in 2012. This guy is anathema to the taste of the buying public. I hope GM can survive till Obama is out of office. So far volts have cost $250,000 per car when you add in what you and I have been forced to chip in, depending on how you count the 18 Federal and state rebate, tax credit, and grant programs totaling over $3 billion that benefited the Volt as well as other GM projects.

On the plus side Obama and GE are buying a boatload of volts, so the price per unit will go down and maybe government and GE will burn down to a more manageable size, saving us all a lot of money.

 
102Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 11:21
For extra credit compare the number of NBC reports on Chevy Volt fires with how many staged phony fire reports they ran against the Ford Pinto.
 
103Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 11:55
BTW the Volt will be competing with this in 2013:



...which gets 239 mpg.

As well as with the Prius which costs $10,000 less than a Volt, works great and also costs less per mile.
 
104Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 14:55
For extra credit

Are we competing for partisan points here?
 
105Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 09, 2012, 15:22
There are significant advantages to SSP compared to ground solar power, according to an NSS statement: solar energy in space is seven times greater per unit area than on the ground, and the collection of solar space energy is not disrupted by nightfall and inclement weather, avoiding the need for expensive energy storage. And it’s especially valuable for isolated areas of the world (parts of Africa and India, for example.)There are significant advantages to SSP compared to ground solar power, according to an NSS statement: solar energy in space is seven times greater per unit area than on the ground, and the collection of solar space energy is not disrupted by nightfall and inclement weather, avoiding the need for expensive energy storage. And it’s especially valuable for isolated areas of the world (parts of Africa and India, for example.)

in the eyes of the leading experts on aerospace technology worldwide: harvesting solar power in space and transmitting it to earth is no longer science fiction,” says author Howard Bloom in a companion announcement by the Space Development Steering Committee. “It is sound, current-technology-based science fact. And it is a green energy option we can’t ignore.
Tho the cost of earth-to-space transport should come down with private enterprise's entry into the field near-term...it still doesn't balance with earth-based costs, and I wonder what all that energy does to living things.
 
106Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 09:16
I hope GM can survive till Obama is out of office

Not just surviving, but thriving

General Motors Co. is on track to retake the title of world’s top-selling automaker, riding strong sales in the U.S. and China to beat surprise No. 2 Volkswagen and Toyota.

GM, which lost the crown to Toyota in 2008 after holding it for more than seven decades, won’t release global sales numbers until later this month, but it’s on pace to finish 2011 at around 9 million cars and trucks, at least 800,000 more than its German and Japanese rivals.


 
107boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 10:22
If you read past the first paragraph you will also see that becoming the #1 car maker a) has not necessarily helped GM's bottom line and b) is probably not permanent. I was surprised by the growth of the VW brand which have always seemed to make over priced low quality vehicles(though I do like their TDI line).
 
108Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:01
has not necessarily helped GM's bottom line.

That's not really what it says at all. To quote the article:

Winning the global sales crown doesn’t mean much to a company’s bottom line, but for GM, it’s an example of just how far the company has come since it nearly collapsed in financial ruin back in 2009.

The increase in sales of 1.5 million vehicles obviously helped GM's bottom line from 2009 to 2011. Given that the topic is:

I hope GM can survive till Obama is out of office

I can only conclude that the level of cynicism necessary to equate GM's impressive 2011 sales as a negative rivals the "I won't get serious about my business until Obama is out of office, and neither will every businessman I know" concept for least competent business analysis ever.



 
109Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:02
No matter what, spending $250K making cars that sell for $38K and which are outperformed by cars that cost $24K is not sustainable. But thanks for lecturing the rest of us about sustainability every chance you get.
 
110Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:10
Even if Imelt and Obama buy every last one of them, and they may have to.
 
111Frick
      ID: 387512315
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:20
Do you have any facts that back up the profitability/losses on the Volt and Prius. From what I've read in autoblogs, the Prius makes money for Toyota, if you don't factor in the $1B that they spent in R&D developing technologies used in the car.

Are you accounting for the Volt and Prius in the same way? Or including R&D costs for the Volt, but not the Prius. I have a hard time believing that the actual manufacturing costs of the Volt are that high.
 
112Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:36
Those are mainly the government incentives per Volt sold to date.
 
113Biliruben
      ID: 358252515
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:39
Which I assume was spent mainly on r&d, and falls every time another volt is bought, right?
 
114Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:41
Do you have any facts that back up the profitability/losses on the Volt

Frick, we're dealing with the increasingly lazy technique of parroting, ie reading something and repeating it without taking the time to actually research the issue.

Bad Math
 
115Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:41
Yup. But taxpayers are the ones Obama is charging as he buys them. I am not happy about it. Depending on how the winds blow the flames.
 
116Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:50
Actually the incentives GM is getting add up to $500,000 per Volt sold, but the people making that claim made allowances that some of that will go to R&D that benefits other GM products. I don't know how precise and targeted the manufacturing incentive language is. On the otherhand incentives for individual purchasers of Volts will not go down as volume goes up. I don't know how purchase incentives add up.
 
117Frick
      ID: 387512315
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 11:57
Again, didn't the Honda Insight and Toyota Prius get the same tax incentives when they came out? Those would be attributed to Bush correct?
 
118Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 12:33
I am sure Obama defenders will dig those specifics up if they help Obama. I think the Volt will be an albatross all the way thru the election so better look that up, Frick.
 
119boikin
      ID: 532592112
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 14:07
I am going to partially agree with Boldwin here, the question you have to ask is not if the volt is failure or success, instead ask why do they make such inferior hybrid cars.
 
120Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Tue, Jan 10, 2012, 15:18
Because there are no previous versions to improve upon.

In that framework, "success" or "failure" is a different metric. It certainly isn't how Boldwin would define it (that is, as "helping" or "hurting" Obama).

The truth is, some companies who innovate can use government funds to bring to the marketplace all sorts of stuff (like the internet) who might never see the light of day since the marketplace would otherwise strangle the projects in the crib.
 
121Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sun, Jan 22, 2012, 14:25
Cutting their way thru the endangered and at risk species like butter.

A small sacrifice to the green godess. Between six and eighteen million birds and bats a year in a country .7x the size of Texas.

Migrate thru that.

Just so long as it's performed without guns.
 
122biliruben
      ID: 59551120
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 09:50
Man. I was hoping for some actual credible numbers. All I got was photoshop and speculation from poorly done studies from 20 years ago.

Just go and count the birds, will you?
 
123Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 10:27
Just stop backing these wildlife menaces, will you?
 
124Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 10:34
Let's shut down the airports then
 
125Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 10:48
Why? Flying is actually cost effective and better than the alternative. Something we cannot say about Obama's favorite hobby horses.
 
126Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 11:58
It appears to be more "cost effective" than otherwise because it has been subsidized.

There's nothing wrong with using a cost effective argument. But in that case, public transportation like trains will come out looking very good.
 
127Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 18:31
That depends on how you do the math.

I actually just looked into riding Amtrak to my sons in Minnesota.

It would take two round trips of four hours each to drop me off at the train station and pick me up.

So I could take my 8 hour train ride.

But if you listen to the PD's of the world, I'll get some savings out of that deal.
 
128Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 18:42
Sorry my point was lost on you.

Cost effective in terms of time--sure. Often, in fact. But not in terms of money. The ability of people like yourself to catch flights all over the place and save that time is the result of billions of dollars every year, paid for by taxes.
 
129Biliruben
      ID: 358252515
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 19:19
Train rides up to about 4 hours seem to make sense as a single passenger, both in terms of time and money. I regularly took NY to DC, Champaign to Chicago (though that could end up a nightmare due to freight priority) and now Seattle to Portland.

Beyond that it's generally gonna be to enjoy the train itself, which most trips aren't ideal for. There's an overnight to Glacier I am tempted to take.

But of course this is besides the point.
 
130Tree
      ID: 18082319
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 20:10
A four hour train ride to Austin would be quicker than a one hour plane ride.
 
131Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 20:22
Sorry PD, but there is no metric by which that train ride has an advantage.

If it was free it would not be advantageous for me to take it

Not in time.

Not in money, because I am paying for the same 8 hr car ride anyway, whether I get driven to the train station or I drive to Minnesota myself.

So quit complaining because transportation which is better in every way get subsidies.
 
132sarge33rd
      ID: 211332319
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 20:24
Since when Boldwin, are YOU the metric by which all transportation is judged???? Park your arrogance, along with your car.

That 4 hr train ride Tree refers to, between Austin and DFW; would be 2 hrs faster than the 6 hr drive it took over Thanksgiving weekend, to traverse DFW to Austin. No wrecks, no detours for construction, no delays for roadwork...just roughly 240 miles of bumper to bumper traffic on I-35S.

 
133Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 20:34
Oh no, you are right of course.

Trains are perfect for the few people who happen to both live near a station and whose destination is close to a station and who like being trapped with perfect strangers for extended periods and who don't want the freedom to spontaneously change their route or destination en route and who like paying for redundant means of transportation for routes that don't fit those tight specifications.
 
134sarge33rd
      ID: 211332319
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 21:00
pretty narrow minded arent you?
 
135Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 21:42
Yeah, so narrow minded not to let you pull tax dollars out of my pocket for terrible ideas and projects.
 
136Tree
      ID: 17039238
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 23:28
TrainsAirplanes are perfect for the few people who happen to both live near a station and whose destination is close to a station and who like being trapped with perfect strangers for extended periods and who don't want the freedom to spontaneously change their route or destination en route and who like paying for redundant means of transportation for routes that don't fit those tight specifications.
 
137sarge33rd
      ID: 211332319
      Mon, Jan 23, 2012, 23:47
maybe you need B, to reread the part about highway subsidies, and the tax dollars spent there, but never collected from drivers. (ie, the way YOU pull tax dollars from bicyclists pockets, to subsidze YOUR car)
 
138Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Tue, Jan 24, 2012, 00:06
If it was free it would not be advantageous for me to take it

By the metric of time, perhaps.

Yet literally millions of people drive long distances, along subsidized roads using subsidized fuels, etc., spending far more time than a train would between those places.

Subsidizing trains by a fraction of the amount we subsidize roads and air travel would make it far more advantageous for far more people, even if train travel will never be one you take.
 
139Boikin roaming
      ID: 237522111
      Tue, Jan 24, 2012, 15:55
How does air travel get subsidized? I understand indirectly through oil and government subsidize of airports run ways...but do the directly?
 
140Biliruben
      ID: 358252515
      Tue, Jan 24, 2012, 16:09
I'm not sure, but the trillion or so we've spent on airports would dwarf any other subsidies that exist in any case.
 
141Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Tue, Jan 24, 2012, 17:37
Take away the direct subsidies and the cost of building the airports (which are typically built through taxpayer bonds--another form of subsidy) and airlines have not turned a net profit in their 100 year history.

Airlines and the canine features of unprofitable industries.

In fact, to get the cost efficiency that Boldwin hails, the US government sometimes subsidizes routes to the tune of $3700 per passenger.

If airlines were treated like we treat Amtrak, only about ten percent of us would have ever flown in a plane.
 
142biliruben
      ID: 59551120
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 05:34
Activists Fight Green Projects, Seeing UN plot.

I can't prove it, but I'm sure that's Boldwin in the blue dress.

In Maine, the Tea Party-backed Republican governor canceled a project to ease congestion along the Route 1 corridor after protesters complained it was part of the United Nations plot. Similar opposition helped doom a high-speed train line in Florida. And more than a dozen cities, towns and counties, under new pressure, have cut off financing for a program that offers expertise on how to measure and cut carbon emissions.

“It sounds a little on the weird side, but we’ve found we ignore it at our own peril,” said George Homewood, a vice president of the American Planning Association’s chapter in Virginia.

The protests date to 1992 when the United Nations passed a sweeping, but nonbinding, 100-plus-page resolution called Agenda 21 that was designed to encourage nations to use fewer resources and conserve open land by steering development to already dense areas. They have gained momentum in the past two years because of the emergence of the Tea Party movement, harnessing its suspicion about government power and belief that man-made global warming is a hoax.
 
143Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 11:01
Suprising poster child company for green jobs leading the way
 
144Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 11:10
If it was known for a fact it would stop Agenda 21, they could fill any hearing room audience with blue dresses.
 
145Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 11:18
How big was your lunatic check to ICLIE, bili?
 
146biliruben
      ID: 59551120
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 11:29
I generally don't do lunatic checks.

Just helping you out, giving your ideas some sunlight, and perhaps lending them more credibility than they deserve. People can then make up their own mind on the lunacy issue.
 
147Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 11:57
I did appreciate the belated recognition that I was onto something big and real. Far less belated in your case than anyone else here.

Still it was called lunatic for even being suggested, and you did joke? thereafter that you felt like cutting a check in favor of the lunatic idea.
 
148Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 12:27
The lunacy was well established in the Antelope Valley thread, with this from #139 cementing the lunacy:

And those people got what they wanted at Earth Summit in Rio in 1992

And they got what they wanted in Earth Summit Rio+20 this year.

And they got what they wanted when Bush signed the Agenda 21 document.

And they got what they wanted when the president tasked ICLIE to draw up model local laws to impliment Agenda 21 in every county in America.

And they always eventually get what they want after as many iterations of Delphi Technique phony 'public buy in' sessions as it takes.

And they always get what they want when the zoning boards adopt ICLIE models for their own county/region etc.

And they always get what they want when the regional General Plan is drawn up because you wouldn't want to miss out on any federal dollars.

And you are as good as screwed and dumped on the asphalt in front of a crowded crowded tenement building never to own a car again and you don't even know it.
 
149biliruben
      ID: 59551120
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 12:59
Well, the UN conspiracy theory angle is pretty out-there, though I'm not particularly motivated to make too much effort to examine or refute.

As far as giving money, though I'd never heard of Agenda 21, I have long espoused parallel ideals, so why wouldn't I support the cause?

Our world cannot support ranch houses on an acre of land for 6 billion people. We have to come up with ways to live together with our fellow humans in closer proximity while still maintaining the essential pieces of our way of life. Anyone working towards that goal is pro-human race. Anyone spouting on about conspiracies while ignoring the essential truth that we need to start trying minimize our impact on the earth to sustainable levels, is attempting to doom humankind.
 
150Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 14:26
Thanks PV

bili

The planet can be 'saved' without stealing people's property.
 
151Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 14:26
Which is what is actually going on here in the United States of America.
 
152Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 14:36
Your property has just been re-zoned completely unusable. Per UN design.

Robbinhood will be around shortly to make you a worthless offer you can't refuse.

Or you can just go on paying full property taxes on a now useless property.
 
153bibA
      ID: 4057177
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 15:27
Bummer for you Perm. Must have spoiled your whole day when you found out about the re-zoning of your property, making it essentially worthless.
 
154Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 15:35
If he's on wooded property outside the city, this isn't academic. He will run into this eventually.
 
155Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 15:38
And even inside the city, I'd be surprised if someday he isn't forced to convert his single family residence into multiple before he gets a remodeling permit.
 
156Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 17:06
Yeah, because "UN = bad" and the Constitution doesn't matter because of the nefarious Agenda 21...

What a pathetic thing the far right has turned into.
 
157Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 19:14
Send us the big grinning photo of you turning the mortgage over to a squirrel.
 
158sarge33rd
      ID: 211332319
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 19:29
I'd be surprised if someday he isn't forced to convert his single family residence into multiple before he gets a remodeling permit.

How many other unsubstantiated, wildly random, hyseteric driven suppositions are you planning on jumping to yet today?
 
159Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 19:41
You can't even build a mall or commercial building in parts of California without adding multiple dwelling space to it.

If you think they only have eyes on wealthy property owners, that is where you are wrong.
 
160sarge33rd
      ID: 211332319
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 19:44
ummm, FTR? PD lives in PA, not CA. So it doesnt much matter WHAT building requirements are
"in parts",{anonymous and unidentified parts apparently} of CA, when referencing PDs possible building requirements.
 
161Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 20:00
ICLIE is the national conduit of UN rules. Cities from sea to shining sea copy their planning codes from ICLIE.

Ya'know, like all the way from California to PA.
 
162Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 20:10
Cities from sea to shining sea copy their planning codes from ICLIE.

False. Cities that ICLIE members are under no committment to implement any of the template provided. They may implement some and ignore others. There's no steadfast adherence and no "they" with a gun to city councils and planning commissions.

I demonstrated this clearly in another thread concerning Las Vegas, whose mayor is a regional ICLIE director, and the city charter is replete with ICLIE suggestions. Yet, in the planning, development and zoning of Las Vegas, the developers have had a free hand in overriding ICLIE suggested codes, which is the case in most cities which subscribe to ICLIE.



 
163Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 20:26
are under no committment to implement

Nor did I say they were.

That's why this stealthy thing is called soft tyranny.

Ask the crushed people in Antelope Vally.
 
164sarge33rd
      ID: 211332319
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 20:55
Funny, I thought the GOP was the leading practitioner of "stealthy, soft tyranny".
 
165Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 21:01
Yeah, soft tyranny and Gadsden Flag go together. */sarc*
 
166Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 21:15
Ask the crushed people in Antelope Vally.

288,476(98.8%) Antelope Valley residents expressed no problem with current codes. However, 78.5% of residents were upset that an antelope hadn't been spotted in the valley since 1972. Most blame former Gov. Reagan.
 
167Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 21:35
That's why we call them sheep. They don't see it coming until the hammer comes down.
 
168Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 22:15
You keep going back to Antelope Valley, yet you claim this is happening in every city and county in the country. It's unfortunate that Antelope Valley, which is separated from the LA basin by a mountain range, is subject to the same codes and zoning as Compton, East LA, Malibu, Hollywood and my hometown of Pasadena. Yet, Lancaster and Palmdale are now simply LA suburbs, which is why only a handful of people in the remote desert are affected in such a negative fashion as reported in the LA Weekly article.

But you've projected it to every city council, every planning commission, every zoning department in the country, qualifying it, of course, with eventually. And the Antelope Valley evictions have nothing to do with ICLIE anyway.
 
169Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 23:04
ICLIE is infiltrating everywhere more or less. Maine is a nightmare. They are stealing the land left and right. Humans will nearly go extinct in Maine. Clinton stole so much land in the west it should have been called his personal war against America. This isn't limited to a few places.
 
170Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sat, Feb 04, 2012, 23:51
#169

There's not a coherent moment in that entire post.
 
171Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sun, Feb 05, 2012, 00:50
What's not coherent? It's a coherent UN takeover of sovereignty. All over the coherent earth for that matter.
 
172Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sun, Feb 05, 2012, 00:54
And don't tell me to forget it because you know a strip of land where it isn't happening. They come for a corridor here, a corridor there, and then they come for everything in between.
 
173Tree
      ID: 17039238
      Sun, Feb 05, 2012, 10:08
<>are under no committment to implement

Nor did I say they were.

That's why this stealthy thing is called soft tyranny.

so, um, because they're not doing something, it's a tyranny. perfect.

They come for a corridor here, a corridor there, and then they come for everything in between.

you had better move out of the United States fast! i hear that next week they're coming for your little plot of land in Dogsniff, Illinois.

 
174Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Sun, Feb 05, 2012, 10:37
And don't tell me to forget it because you know a strip of land where it isn't happening

We already went through this and your Agenda 21 map, which I showed, in detail, is a work of fiction. That you insist on clinging to They come for a corridor here, a corridor there, and then they come for everything in between in the face of empirical evidence to the contrary makes a mockery of your self-identification as a conservative. There's no conservative principle that blindly accepts that Agenda 21 map as reality; no conservative principle in play by stating Clinton stole so much land in the west it should have been called his personal war against America; no conservative principle by claiming Humans will nearly go extinct in Maine. It's radically hysterical propaganda.

As for Maine, and property rights, it appears stealing the land left and right is more appropriately connected to corporate giant Monsanto than any feared Agenda 21 conspiracy. These farmers face the threat not just from Monsanto, but their friends in high places:

Justice Clarence Thomas served as an attorney for Monsanto from 1976-1979 and has failed to recuse himself from other cases involving the corporation.

Now that we've seen a real case of property rights issues in Maine, let's try and find some egregious examples of stealing the land left and right in Maine due to ICLIE membership in local municipalities. This website by


Maine Republic: Stop Agenda 21 is well representative of what I found.

Agenda 21 seeks for the government to curtail your freedom to travel as you please, own a gas-powered car, live in suburbs or rural areas, and raise a family. Furthermore, it would eliminate your private property rights through eminent domain.

They provide no support for these rather generic claims. Now, I have no problem with opposition to Agenda 21 and no problem with communities withdrawing from ICLIE for whatever reason. My problem is the blatant dishonesty by presenting hypothetical speculations and projections as if they are actually happening now, and using fear-based propaganda to demonize the rather innocuous concept of sustainable growth, a concept that needs to be addressed whether there's ICLIE membership or not. Claiming that Humans will nearly go extinct in Maine takes you out of the mix in regard to any intelligent discussion of this issue.
 
175Boldwin
      ID: 49030519
      Sun, Feb 05, 2012, 14:05
Maybe in a more enightened administration we can get the EPA to recognize people from Maine as an endangered subspecies maine homo sapiens and forestall all the 'willing seller' zoning forced buyouts.

Invited to give a one hour speech with questions afterwards, the speech they wouldn't let me finish. The Delphi Technique facilitator forced him right out the building.
 
176Pancho Villa
      ID: 597172916
      Mon, Feb 06, 2012, 12:20
Tom DeWeese having his "presentation" cut short has nothing to do with any Delphi technique, a technique used at public hearings, not small, private business gatherings with Fortune 500 CFOs. Whoever booked DeWeese obviously didn't do the proper due diligence, and didn't realize he was an Alex Jones wannabe who would insult the intelligence of a room full of very intelligent people.

The sad thing about all this is that DeWeese makes the same mistakes Boldwin does, which ultimately renders his presentation futile and dismissed. He fails to present facts and wanders aimlessly into wildly speculative scenarios that completely take the focus off the subject matter.

There is legitimacy to the subject matter, especially in California, which is losing business by leaps and bounds thanks to government regulations, some of which can be tied to Agenda 21 and ICLIE concepts and components There is legitimacy in addressing zoning codes which strip people of their property rights as illustrated in the Antelope Valley incidents.

It's unfortunate that the legitimacy is usurped with hysterical claims like the Agenda 21 map; the stealing of land left and right; every land use and zoning issue in the country is already determined by the UN globalist conspiracy; humans will be herded into cities away from suburbs and rural areas; gas-powered cars will be outlawed; and any mention of "sustainable growth" is proof of the menacing conspiracy which aims to enslave mankind.

These drama queen speculations play well to a very small minority, and are counter-productive to the vast majority of the public. It has nothing to do with stealth tyranny. It has to do with people hearing things they know are obvious distortions of reality and ignoring it all together. That makes it all the harder when there are land use, zoning and development issues that need to be carefully examined and debated.

Tom DeWeese and Boldwin aren't interested in examination and debate. They want to dictate to you, then tell you how stupid and naive you are for not agreeing. It's an ineffective way to draw support for any position.
 
177Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 13:57
Bloomberg News reports that the default rate on the green energy loans like Solyndra's is about a third of what was projected--under 4%, in fact.

Probably worth remembering as Team Romney cherry-picks its way through the Obama record.
 
178Boldwin
      ID: 43492714
      Mon, Jun 04, 2012, 22:35
Yeah, let's not forget who's guarding the chicken coop and counting the chickens.

Most of those companies are campaign finance bundling crony capitalist friends of Obama.

One was just revealed to have been using government subsidies to buy products from itself over international borders.

This is the sort of whitewash the 'lapdog' media puts out there to cover for the fact that Obama's admin has been illegally stonewalling congress his whole administration on this matter so that we really don't have any oversight and reliable accounting over this green boondoggle.
 
179Perm Dude
      ID: 3210201915
      Tue, Jun 05, 2012, 00:58
Most of those companies are campaign finance bundling crony capitalist friends of Obama.

Mixing up your memes again.

Show me a "real conservative" who has a company applying for green job loans.

Meanwhile, all you can do is cherry pick.
 
180Boldwin
      ID: 43492714
      Tue, Jun 05, 2012, 06:47
You act as if there is anything unusual to find Obama in bed with a corrupt businessman. No more so than finding Putin in bed with a corrupt oil oligarch who was handed his privilege by the mob in power.
 
181Boldwin
      ID: 2664163
      Sat, Jul 14, 2012, 13:23
President Obama’s heavy-handed regulation of the booming old-energy economy—the moratorium on offshore drilling following the BP spoil, the decision to block the Keystone XL Pipeline, and the prospect of a fracking ban—and his embrace of green-energy policies has played well in the solidly Democratic post-industrial coastal economies that he also depends on for fund-raising. But it’s left him with few friends in the energy belt that spans the Great Plains, the Gulf Coast, Appalachia and now some parts of the old rustbelt, despite his election-year claims of an “all-of-the-above” energy policy.

It’s a far cry from Bill Clinton, whose close ties with Great Plains and Gulf Coast Democrats and energy producers there helped him twice carry Louisiana, Kentucky and West Virginia—all states that appear to be solidly behind Romney this year. [which makes Obama's phrase 'winning the future' even more interesting - B]

Today, Democratic senators in regions that depend on fossil fuels are becoming an endangered species. Over the past two years, Virginia’s Jim Webb and Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad, both from booming North Dakota, have announced their retirement or retired, while Montana’s Jon Tester has distanced himself from the president as he faces a difficult re-election fight. And that diminishing presence in turn means less intra-party resistance to any potential second-term plans to cut the burgeoning fossil-fuel business to size.

The administration’s hostility to the dirty business of energy, and the sector’s fear of new bans or regulations in a second Obama term that would gut the industry were perhaps best captured by the then-EPA administrator who claimed Administration policy was to “crucify” fossil fuel.

---

Sixty-percent of the electricity in Los Angeles, a key bastion of Obama support, comes from coal-fired plants in Utah and Arizona; much of the natural gas that provides nearly half of the power for California’s grid is imported.

Nowhere is the element of choice inherent in energy policy more evident than in California, home to five of the nation’s twelve largest oil fields and energy reserves equal to those of Nigeria, the world’s tenth-largest producer. As high-paying energy jobs swell payrolls in the Great Plains, the Intermountain West and parts of the Gulf, the Golden State has double-digit unemployment, a collapsed inland economy and a series of bankrupt municipalities. Amidst a great national energy boom, California’s energy production has remained stunted even as the state’s draconian “renewable” energy mandates are slated to drive up its already high electricity rates. The state’s high cost of energy has impacted industry: despite its vast human and natural resources, the Golden State, with 12 percent of the nation’s population received barely 2 percent of the country’s manufacturing expansions last year.

Such inattention to California’s resources may be popular in wealthy precincts of Silicon Valley, San Francisco and west Los Angeles, but the state’s green approach has helped place traditionally manufacturing-oriented communities such as Oakland, east Los Angeles, San Bernardino and Stockton in deep distress. Despite central California’s vast deposits of oil and gas, unemployment rates in some oil-rich areas there are over 15 and sometimes even 20 percent.

“As economic forecaster Bill Watkins recently told an audience in hard-hit Santa Maria: ‘If you were in Texas, you’d be rich.’
How bankrupt does California government and the underwater California homeowner need to get before this becomes an over-riding political issue?