Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Is Nasa out of line on global warming ?

75 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

ROGER

Didn't the Industrial Revolution start with Horse drawn, water wheel power, and Steam Engines? Or has History been rewritten since I was in school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Didn't the Industrial Revolution start with Horse drawn, water wheel power, and Steam Engines? Or has History been rewritten since I was in school.

It may have started with that but I hope you're not suggesting that in the 21st century we go back to that! :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost
Jeez I never told you to do anything or spend any money on this. I'm not saying that I'm rushing out to throw up solar panels on my house and you need to follow me. No one said that. This was a thread about global warming and if humans are a cause of it. You then turned it into how much you pay on your taxes and that you'll be damned if Al Gore makes you put a $45k solar panel on your house.

Don't get me wrong, I completely understand your point on the cost. The bottomline is that a scenario requiring a solar panel on every house, that would cost every homeowner $45k, would never happen. It couldn't. The government would have to offer an easy low-cost solution to all in order for it to work.

As for "incentives" I'm not really sure what to tell you. You wouldn't have an electric bill. There would be less dependence on oil, which means OPEC wouldn't have this country by the balls anymore. I'm sure a hardworking American such as yourself could appreciate that. And again, there's the cleaner side. Less pollution = less environment destruction, so in the end your kids and your grandkids won't have to look in a history book to see what a polar bear was.

If you are only going to reply with the same points you've repeated in your last two posts, then please don't bother.

Or we could use our own. We have more than the middle east does. Not counting alaska or off shore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickian

I thought the industrial revolution started with cotton mills and factories using cheap labor to work their machines.... I remember reading an article back when I was in high school about people falling into the meat-canning machines by accident and getting ground up and sold with the other animal meats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ROGER

Yes well there is and old urban legend about a womanizing plant foreman at a hot dog factory who came up missing one day. But thats just one of those story's.

I Hope! :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Yes well there is and old urban legend about a womanizing plant foreman at a hot dog factory who came up missing one day. But thats just one of those story's.

I Hope! :blink:

"That's not herb tea, that's Herb!" - Line from the old TV series 'Night Court' when someone used the ashes in an urn labeled "HERB" to make a cup of tea. :o

Edited by MasterPo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wolfen69

I to live on LI “Waves at MasterPo”. I have six kids (Yes 6 Kids), and rent our house. What do I do to be green? First I do not own a car, I walk and take the train. Been replacing our lights with the florescent ones. O almost for got, building a computer system that will have control over lights, TV, computers and just about every thing else I can think of out of spar parts and junk computers. A smart home if you will. So I am still working on the server but it is a start. As far as solar panels and wind mills, I do good to keep food on the table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Set the Fallen

Seems like it still much going on in this issues... ^_^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Myles

I live in Indiana. I have looked into solar and wind for my home. $35,000 for solar and a little more for wind. It would take me 50 years of no electric bills to pay for that. More really because of upkeep, maintenance and replacement batteries. That would be a dumb choice for me to make. I was also told that larger windmills need an electric or gas motor tokeep the blade turning because if it atops the wind itself cannot force it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theGhost_and_theDarkness
At present, for example, we do not have a unified national grid that is sufficiently advanced to link the areas where the sun shines and the wind blows to the cities in the East and the West that need the electricity. Our national electric grid is critical infrastructure, as vital to the health and security of our economy as our highways and telecommunication networks. Today, our grids are antiquated, fragile, and vulnerable to cascading failure. Power outages and defects in the current grid system cost US businesses more than $120 billion dollars a year. It has to be upgraded anyway.

A bit from the speech Al Gore made. . . which is here

Some other points made in that speech. . .

Scientists have confirmed that enough solar energy falls on the surface of the earth every 40 minutes to meet 100 percent of the entire world's energy needs for a full year. Tapping just a small portion of this solar energy could provide all of the electricity America uses.

As well as. .

And enough wind power blows through the Midwest corridor every day to also meet 100 percent of US electricity demand. Geothermal energy, similarly, is capable of providing enormous supplies of electricity for America.

The solution isn't necessarily "everyone go out and get solar cells". The solution would have to be bigger. It leans more towards replacing not individual sources of energy, but the entire country's. Of course it would be expensive if everyone had to go out and buy solar cells or windmills ( :blink: ) but that's not what people are asking to be done.

Oil is not going to be around forever. The less there is, the higher the prices will rise. Replace oil, and we've got something that we don't have to worry about running out. . .We also dramatically reduce our dependency on foreign oil. . .Not to mention help clean up our environment in the process. We will have a home-based renewable source of energy. It will create new jobs and help our economy in the long run.

Cost reductions are taking place in field of solar and wind power. . .not to mention new technologies which are making them even more efficient.

And, I agree with Lt. Ripley. It shouldn't take some dramatic global crisis to make us want to care for our environment. Whether global warming is "real" or not, we should WANT to end our dependence on oil and we should WANT to do whatever we could to clean up our world.

It would cost me, personally, around $16000 to put solar cells on my house. That's 8 years worth of electric bills for me. More for people that live in places where electricity prices are higher. My grandma's electric bill runs an average of $500 a month, yet she uses about the same amount of electricity as me. Depending on where you live, sometimes solar IS the best and cheapest way to go. However, like I said, its not individual sources of electricity that some are arguing to change, its the entire country's.

Edit:

If a non-petroleum energy based society were feasible, perferable, and affordable. THATS WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TODAY: ALREADY

I don't think you're taking into consideration who runs this country. There are plenty that have personal reasons for wanting oil companies to stay in business, and they're usually the ones that voice how "insane" it is to believe we can switch our power sources. You have to take into consideration special interest groups that have so many politicians in their pockets.

The technology IS available, and prices ARE decreasing. Prices for solar cells goes down as demand goes up. We send nearly 2 billion dollars a day to foreign countries for oil. . . I don't think that's very cheap. Not to mention that number will only rise as oil shortages increase and demand gets higher. Put even a fraction of that money into creating a nation wide power grid that runs on renewable resources, and we've got a good solution to all the oil problems.

Edited by Sweetsalem82103

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wickian
Yes well there is and old urban legend about a womanizing plant foreman at a hot dog factory who came up missing one day. But thats just one of those story's.

I Hope! :blink:

If I remember right the article I read was a xeroxed copy of an article about workers saying how it wasn't uncommon....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
danielost
If I remember right the article I read was a xeroxed copy of an article about workers saying how it wasn't uncommon....

no one has ever fallen into a meat grinder at a meat packer. But someone did lose a finger.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theGhost_and_theDarkness
Excellent point!

I don't doubt that someday faaaaaar in the future there will be a bountiful non-petrolium based fuel source (that's assuming politics and PC-ism doesn't stop it). But we aren't there now. And, much contrary to what some are saying, we are very much NOT running out of oil for at least 200 years.

So before we turn back the clock and all have to live spartan life styles (and pay more for it!) let's give technology a chance to evolve too.

ps- If solar and wind are such great options tell me: Why isn't Europe and other countries using more of it? Has France dismantled it's nuke plants in favor of solar or wind? Is Germany replacing gas cars with electric at a break neck pace? Show me the fields of solar cells in Spain and Italy.

If it was such a great option, cheap and plentiful, others would have long since been doing it. Don't show me a field here and there. I'm sure it's there. Show me where a modern nation has replaced 40-50-60% or more of their petrolium energy with solar and wind, maintained it's high standard or living, not driven up costs or economic turmoil, and then you might have a point.

Until them, keep pipe dreaming.

Other countries ARE beginning to use more renewable resources. China, for instance, is investing considerable time and money into renewable resources, and working hard to put them in use. Look it up and you'll see all the new plants that China is building to obtain energy goals. Europe, in general, is also increasing the use of renewable resources.

Iceland has planned to be 100% renewable resource dependent in the near future, and is already at 80%. Norway also has high numbers as does Austria. Sweden is also planning to get 100% of their energy from renewable resources. Brazil gets 45% of its energy from renewable resources. Portugal is in the process of getting 45% of its energy from renewable sources as well, and are actually aiming at 60% by 2020. There are more, but, to be honest, I don't feel like looking all of them up.

As for cars, there are several countries that work hard to make and use vehicles that run on alternate fuels. I have a friend from Brazil that was telling me about their use of ethanol and flex fuel cars. Norway is using cars that run on pure hydrogen. Hybrid vehicles are extremely popular in the UK, Japan, France, and Canada as well as in the US. Electric vehicles are also gaining worldwide popularity. Just because its not breaking news and in the paper every day, it doesn't mean its not happening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
Other countries ARE beginning to use more renewable resources. China, for instance, is investing considerable time and money into renewable resources, and working hard to put them in use. Look it up and you'll see all the new plants that China is building to obtain energy goals. Europe, in general, is also increasing the use of renewable resources.

Iceland has planned to be 100% renewable resource dependent in the near future, and is already at 80%. Norway also has high numbers as does Austria. Sweden is also planning to get 100% of their energy from renewable resources. Brazil gets 45% of its energy from renewable resources. Portugal is in the process of getting 45% of its energy from renewable sources as well, and are actually aiming at 60% by 2020. There are more, but, to be honest, I don't feel like looking all of them up.

China is one of the most poluted countries on Earth! I their economy is nothing to be raving about. I higky doubt the reality of them dropping oil and coal use in favor of wind and solar. They have a boarder with Iran for Heaven's sakes! It's a no-brainer for them to have a pipeline across. And their economy, bad off as it is, is growing. They aren't going to handicap it with "alternative energies", which is another reason why global warming is BS - it's aimed at the prosperous United States and not at developing economies like China. Why not?

As for cars, there are several countries that work hard to make and use vehicles that run on alternate fuels. I have a friend from Brazil that was telling me about their use of ethanol and flex fuel cars. Norway is using cars that run on pure hydrogen. Hybrid vehicles are extremely popular in the UK, Japan, France, and Canada as well as in the US. Electric vehicles are also gaining worldwide popularity. Just because its not breaking news and in the paper every day, it doesn't mean its not happening.

If global warming is the biggest hoax going then "alternative fuels" has to be the second. If the goal is to reduce alledged global warming how will burning an "alternative fuel" be any different than burning oil?

Futher, if alternative fuels are so great why do they need huge government subsidies to produce? Why can't they stand in the market place on their own?

ps- Something else about "alternative fuels" that is never discussed: What about the moral and ethical issue of turning FOOD into fuel?! When there is a definate, viable and not-ending-any-time-soon alternative (oil) why take FOOD out of people's mouths to make fuel? You NEVER hear anyone talk about that!! :no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theGhost_and_theDarkness
China is one of the most poluted countries on Earth! I their economy is nothing to be raving about. I higky doubt the reality of them dropping oil and coal use in favor of wind and solar. They have a boarder with Iran for Heaven's sakes! It's a no-brainer for them to have a pipeline across. And their economy, bad off as it is, is growing. They aren't going to handicap it with "alternative energies", which is another reason why global warming is BS - it's aimed at the prosperous United States and not at developing economies like China. Why not?

That's one of the reasons they're trying to turn to alternate fuels, because of pollution. Here's a page on China's renewable energy plan. link

I think you fail to see alternate sources of energy for what they are. . .they don't handicap anything. They help produce jobs and slow or end dependence on oil. There's nothing handicapping about that. Go tell the countries that run on alternate fuels that its a hoax. I'm sure they'll take it well. Meanwhile, why not try to educate yourself on something before making silly arguments that don't make any sense? You argue against alternate sources of energy, but you don't seem to know much about it or the countries that use it. . .why not go ask some of them how much using this type of energy has HELPED their economy instead of blindly believing whatever it is that you do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
They help produce jobs and slow or end dependence on oil.

To the first part, that's also a mjor falsehood. "New jobs" is a feel-good term that's constantly used to (try to) make people feel more at ease about loosing economic ground. It never pans out that way! In th 80's when the EPA enacted sweeping new air quailty standards that would require major new filters on industry and machines etc. that say line "this will create new jobs and new industry" was used to claim to offset the costs and job loss. It didn't. The same companies that were sighted as being contributors to the problem just turned around and started making the filters, scrubbers etc. Very very few totally new businesses were started that made these things. I'm sure a couple of new engineers were hired to design these things and perhaps a few more fabricators to make them. But there was no great BOOM of jobs spurred by these new rules. How mahy people do you know who work in the industrial polution control industry? I rest my case on that.

As to the latter point, like it or not (and I suspect not) petrolium is THE life blood of a modern 21st century society and economy. Even without it's use as fuel there are essential chemicals that can only be derived from oil, most notably in the plastics industry. The very computer you are using to read this and the keyboard you will use to reply required several gallons of oil to be refined into chemicals to make. There are no viable synthetic alternatives. That's also something you never heard said but it's true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theGhost_and_theDarkness

Plastic has what to do with running electricity on renewable resources? Using oil to make plastic is a different story entirely. We're talking about replacing oil for creating energy.

Sorry ahead of time. I get a tad passionate about this subject.

Let me ask a purely hypothetical question. What if you went to the doctor and find out you may need an operation and the doctor tells you "You have two options. You can choose NOT to get the operation, but theres a chance you may die. If you DO get the operation, you won't die, but it will be long operation and you will likely feel a bit of discomfort afterwards followed." What would you do? Would you pass the complications of the surgery because it would cause you inconvenience, or would you get it to save yourself from that slight chance of dying?

I see the global climate crisis in the same way. Regardless of your personal beliefs, there are scientists telling us that there are reasons to believe we are contributing to the climate change as well as hurting our environment in other ways. Regardless of how small you think that chance is, do you really want to take the chance? Can you go out and personally disprove all of these scientists 100%? Even some of the scientists that disagree don't disagree 100%, they just disagree on certain points.

I'm not willing to take the chance that we may be wrong about it being true. I think its better, in the long run if we do something now. I don't want to take even the smallest risk that future generations to look back on us and say "Wow, they had the chance to stop all this, why didn't they?" I want them to look back and say "THAT'S the generation that changed the course of the world."

This goes way beyond how much cash is in your wallet or how much you pay in taxes. People pay Co2 taxes, don't they? Petrolium is the lifeblood of the 21st century? The 21st century is young. Better to say it was the lifeblood of the 20th century. I think its time to take up a new life blood. America was founded by idealists and innovation is in our Nation's blood. Its time to take a leap to the next level and into a new age. Anyone that thinks that using renewable energy is going back to a primal state should take a look at the technology involved. Its a step up, not a step down.

There should be no reservations. It would dramatically cut down on air pollution, which isn't good for anyone. It would free us from depending on the oil of other countries. It would create a better place for future generations. Certainly you see the importance in that? And, since some scientists believe that, if we don't act now, then the negative effects may be irreversible, why is the decision so hard to make? Even if these scientists are wrong, theres still a chance that they aren't. And that's a risk that is too big to take, IMO.

And I get SO sick of people spouting out all this "Those stupid left wing nut jobs" crap. Its amazing how many people I've personally met that refuse to give a second thought to environmentally friendly technology because of political stereotypes. Again, this is something that goes beyond such silly elementary school bickering. There is NOTHING wrong with wanting to do whatever possible to take care of our environment. Anyone that makes fun of someone that thinks that minimalizing our negative impact on the world is important is a sad individual. And that goes for several things such as cleaning up litter and trying to save species from extinction.

And that statement isn't aimed at anyone on here, its just a personal observation that I felt like sharing.

Edited by Sweetsalem82103

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
I see the global climate crisis in the same way. Regardless of your personal beliefs, there are scientists telling us that there are reasons to believe we are contributing to the climate change as well as hurting our environment in other ways. Regardless of how small you think that chance is, do you really want to take the chance? Can you go out and personally disprove all of these scientists 100%?

I don't have to disprove a thing. It is people of the greenie mindset that have to prove to me and others like me that they are right before you (not you personally) go ahead and destory America in order to save it.

Science is not about concensus! It is not about total agreement. No science ever is. The global warmers are practically a cult with Al Gore as the High Priest! Anyone who questions it is a heretic to be discredited and brushed aside. There are just as many scientists, PhD's and very credible who totally disagree with the greenies.

When I was a kid 30 years ago I remember summers of 98, 99, 100+ degree days here in NY. Has happened since yet we are told that now the world is even hotter then it was back then. "There will be periods of cool and mild while the world gets hotter" so the greenies say. How very convenient.

How about the hurricane seasons? After Katrina there were dire predictions that Katrina was just the tip of the iceberg. Cat 4's and 5's and even greater would be common as the world warms. Guess what? Been pretty queit ever since. Last year's hurricane season was a dud! This year isn't looking so spectacular so far. Of course someday we'll have another cat 4 or 5, maybe someplace not common and the greenies will say it's because of global warming. Well dah! Storms happen.

PLEASE. Stop and really think how life will totall change in a green-think world. Everything - and I do mean EVERYTHING - you and I enjoy now will be gone. Or at least we'll have to pay through the nose to buy/use/own/go. It will be an economic upheaval not seen since the great depression. If you thought the economy was bad now just try forcing green.

Change will happen. No doubt of that. But not by force or threat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DONTEATUS
:D Very well put MasterPro, We here on the earth today look for the magic answer to all our problems.Some blame mankinds expansion all over the planet ,some in wild beliefs of Relegions but we are just a spot in time . We have only been recording information about our surounding world for a few thousand years.What If the earth goes thru unbelivable changes every half a million years? We could wake up in a few years to the tilting of our polar regions by even just a few degrees and Its lights out for us ? Its all possible right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theGhost_and_theDarkness

Calling people "greenies" is exactly the kind of attitude I was talking about. I've already made it clear that I don't CARE whether global warming is real or not. We should want to make clean energy anyways. Its being responsible. Tell me what kind of dire things would happen if we changed our national grid over to renewable energy sources? The grid has to be upgraded anyways, why NOT use a cleaner system to do it? What of the billions lost every year due to our current faulty system? I honestly don't see the big issue there.

Why not get some people in here that live in places that have already done it? Let them tell you about how their lives DIDN'T change for the worse and how it WASN'T the major catastrophe that you are predicting. Let them tell you how becoming self sufficient worked out for the best.

What you are doing is no different then what the "greenies" are doing. You're predicting some major disaster that probably won't happen.

And I don't think scientists are so daft that they don't understand that the earth's climate shifts naturally. I'm pretty sure that's been taken into consideration. That's something that you learn in elementary school science classes. I've already said, even some of the scientists that disagree don't necessarily disagree 100%. They disagree on what amount of the changes are caused by humans, as well as other issues. They disagree on the numbers, not the complete theory. That said, there are those that disagree with the theory, sure. There's hardly any theory that was fully accepted by the scientific community. Why are the scientists that believe in it, who are just as credited as the ones that don't, labeled greenies? Are they somehow less intelligent or capable than the ones that disagree? I doubt it. I think its more like, the ones you agree with are the "intelligent" ones and the ones you disagree with are the "loonies".

Not to mention if YOU don't have to prove anything, then neither does anyone else.

If you are willing to take the risk, then you go for it. But if it turns out that we could have done something, and we didn't, then people like you will be the reason future generations look back on us and call us insane. And you also forget that a lot of change IS brought on by force and sometimes that change is for the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
We should want to make clean energy anyways. Its being responsible.

I agree 100%.

But why sudden mad rush that is has to be done immediately NOW? Why not let science and technology and innovation grow and expand over the next 10-15-20 years and s-l-o-w-l-y work it's way into our lives and life styles? Why does it have to be rammed down our throats now? If you follow what the die-hard greenies are saying then we only havd a few years to change things or we're all history. Funny too, because 20 years ago they said the same thing and we're all still here fat and happy!

Tell me what kind of dire things would happen if we changed our national grid over to renewable energy sources? The grid has to be upgraded anyways, why NOT use a cleaner system to do it? What of the billions lost every year due to our current faulty system? I honestly don't see the big issue there.

To the first sentence, tell me - why does wind and solar electric utility cost more than regular electricity? If it's so geat why does the government have to give HUGE tax subsidies to support it? That, by the way, comes from OUR (yours and mine) taxes! So it is already costing you and me more! That's not how a truly innovative and wanted product works in a free economy. If a product is sooooo much in demand people will buy it and it will survive on its own. If not, the market has spoken and the product will go away.

To the second point, improving/upgrading an infrastructure isn't the same as switching to a new source. I put in a new oil burner and water heater in my home last year. That's an upgrade. Had I switched to gas or wood that would have been a change. Big difference.

And to your not seeing the big issue, come to New York city in the summer. It's been a disgrace that for the last 10 years or so NYC (and LA and some others) have had to endure rolling blackouts because there is not enough electricity now! It's not a matter of old power lines or needing better distribution. There just isn't enough! How will getting rid of oil or coal power plants and replacing them with solar or wind give us just as much power now, and more for a growing technological civilization? Answer: It can't.

Personally. my hope is on fusion reaction. But I fear the politcs of nuclear energy will get in the way. :(

And you also forget that a lot of change IS brought on by force and sometimes that change is for the better.

Ah, there we go. FORCE people to change whether it's really needed now or not.

Let's take a simple case: The compact flourescent bulb (cfb).

Did you know that not a single cfb bulb is made in the U.S.?! Nope, not a one. They all are made overseas, mostly in China. So for starters whatever "global climate" you might be saving when you put one in your home is all lost given the energy and emission needed to ship it half way around the world to you!

Then, did you know the cfb contains mercury? Yup. It contains enough mercury to be considered toxic to humans. So when you break a cfb bulb in your home you have just contaminated you home with mercury! It contains enough mercury for the EPA to consider a break a "toxic spill"! Mercury is a danger to everyone but especially pregnant women and small children. You can't just sweep it up. You need a special approach. And I wouldn't be surprised if mercury testing would become a requirement when buying/selling a home!

And, even if you don't break a cfb when it finally burns out you can't just toss it in the trash. Everyone still does it but it's suppose to go to special disposal sites that (supposedly) remove the mercury dust before trashing it. It contains enough mercury for the EPA to consider that "toxic dumping"! Just imagine, you get arrested for toxic dump for having thrown out a dead light bulb! At the very least, just tossing it out you are putting mercury back into your precious global environment.

Please, always remember two things:

1) For every action there is an opposite reaction.

2) For every action there is an unintended consequence (The Law of Unintended Consequences).

Edited by MasterPo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theGhost_and_theDarkness

The it happening "NOW" isn't the plan. The plan is to incorporate it in over the next couple of decades. Slowly getting more and more as we go along. Its not like we're going to shut all the power off in America for a year. Its like any new system that gets introduced, it works slowly in the background, taking over the old systems. We already have the technology to do it. Its just that there aren't enough people agreeing to start the change now. Starting a change in no way means that the change will be dramatically sudden.

There will always be taxes. Better they be going to something good, right? Why not argue for lowering some of the more useless taxes? Maybe then we might "break even" and not have to pay that much more.

Batteries aren't supposed to be thrown out either, are they? They can contain mercury, lead, alkilis, manganese dioxide, and cadmium and can be equally as dangerous. Every time you throw a battery in the trash, you are dumping toxic waste. There are even places that are taking rather drastic measures to reduce the numbers of batteries dumped. People are still using them, though. This refers to button batteries, lithium, rechargeable, and vehicle batteries btw. Many other household things contain dangerous heavy metals and chemicals and are also "dumped". Not just cfb's. That should be up to the individual to educate themselves on the dangers of what's in their home and how to properly dispose of it.

Chances are, if you are found with any such product in your trash, the most you will suffer is the refusal by the garbage service to pick up your trash, and maybe even a lecture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo
The it happening "NOW" isn't the plan. The plan is to incorporate it in over the next couple of decades. Slowly getting more and more as we go along.

I agree.

However, that's not what is being said. That is not the message of Al Gore, the greenies and global warmers.

They are saying that we must do all those things NOW because in 10-20 years we'll be gone if we don't. They don't want slow, steady, evoultionary type change - they want revolutionry change today!

There will always be taxes. Better they be going to something good, right? Why not argue for lowering some of the more useless taxes? Maybe then we might "break even" and not have to pay that much more.

I'm going to attribute that comment to you being young, idealistic and inexperienced.

Taxes are never for the good of people! No tax in history has ever been a "good tax". No tax has ever gone to help someone, to elevate them or benefit them. No one can ever point to a tax and say "Because of this-or-that tax I am better off today than I was yesterday" or "My life wouldn't be as good as it is without that tax being passed". There is not a single example of government, American or any where else, every being efficient and cost-effective with taxes. Those are oximoronic when it comes to government.

Let me put it another way: In 2006 (the lasy year full data is available) according to the Congressional Budget Office the United States federal government brought in 2.4 trillion dollars in income taxes paid to it ($2,407,000,000,000 to be exact). And that's only Federal, not including taxes people paid to their states and/or citys.

(here the link to read it yourself: http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=8116&type=0)

You don't think that's enough????

Take a kidney while you're at it.

If your avatar picture is of you I'm presuming you have barely started to work (if at all). Wait a few years, see how hard you work and how little you get at the end of it all in your paycheck. No one ever says they wish they paid more taxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theGhost_and_theDarkness

Actually, they ARE talking about a gradual change. I've sat down and read through all the speeches. They talk about STARTING now, and, hopefully, in 10 years we will have the majority of the U.S. converted to renewable energy.

I never said all taxes were good. But they're an inevitability. If our government can't use the money wisely, then I suggest you take it out on them as a whole. Other countries have used their taxes for good, actually. You make the assumption that, because America seems to be one way, other countries must also be that way. There are several countries that use their tax money for decent things and don't waste any of it. And, by the way go through the history books and find me a civilized country that didn't have some form of taxes.

That money goes to build roads, fund schools, pays police and fire departments, border protection, funding our military, etc. If you can't consider any of those things good, then I suggest you think of a world where they didn't exist. It costs ALOT of money to get this stuff done. And I'm sorry if none of it is performed to your expectations, but it'd be alot worse if it wasn't performed at all. And sure, some states don't have state taxes, but that's because they have other ways to get the amount of money necessary. People still pay, just in different ways.

I've lived on my own since I was 16, I've worked and I've paid taxes. I've paid ALOT of taxes. And yes, I AM old enough to have worked for a bit, but thanks for the indirect compliment on how young I look. And sure, I complain about the dumber ones, but I most certainly don't call all of them useless and pointless. Certainly our tax system could use work, but I wouldn't go as far as to say we need to get rid of taxes altogether. That would cause alot of problems.

Edited by Sweetsalem82103

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MasterPo

I'm not going to argue with you over taxes. If you believe governments (the U.S. and the world over) are fair and efficient with taxation, if you believe that 2.4 trillion dollars in income tax revenue is ok, if you think it's right that between my Federal-State-FICA-Medicare taxes I should loose 35% (it was 40%+ when I worked in NYC itself) of my pay before I even see it, and all that money is being well spent for the betterment of mankind, then I can't change your mind.

I'm not a zero-taxer. Many of the things you listed are very reasonable and expected of government (you and I can't build dams and interstate roads ourselves). But don't you think the numbers I've sighted (with the source) is enough?! If money solved all problems don't you think we'd have Eutopia by now?

And to the point of global wamring, why is the #1 task of the greenies and global warmists to raise taxes? If you and they are right that solar and wind and cfb's and everything else will better us, make new jobs and new industries why doesn't that pay for itself? Why do we need new and higher taxes as step-1?

But I will say this: If you do believe what you say about the good and benefitial use of taxes and the efficiency of governments to spend your money than why don't you pay more now? Open your check book and write out a check payable to "U.S. Treasury Department" and mail it in. I guarantee they will take it. And if you're right it will go to help someone in need. Don't you want to help people in need? Then write a check now and help government help people for their good.

:sk

Edited by MasterPo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.