Conservatives vs Liberals

[F3SS]

If I had a solution, do you think I would ask the question? The one thing I do know is that "nothing" is NOT the solution.

Another liberal problem you've got there. You'd rather do anything than the right thing just so you can say you did something. Aside, it does seem that taxation and larger government are your idea of doing 'something'.

[F3SS]

Keep repeating that mantra, it will save you from reality

Convince me otherwise. You're only justifying my reasoning.

[Guest]

Neither one of you will acknowledge my concerns. Once more, why should I take stock in a 100 year forecast when a ten day forecast is rarely accurate and is your solution amount to anything more than bureaucracy and taxation?

Its not a hundred year forcast - its observation of empirical data on an ongoing basis. The prediction has proven accurate so far within the boundaries of the error bars - which is confirmation that the predictions are going to come true.

However Climate change is just one tiny example of how Conservatives are actively promoting denial of science in general. In the field of economics the Republicans have followed policies which have driven work abroad - and then lambasted the poor for not working - this is a form of denial of consequences.

Br Cornelius

[Guest]

Another liberal problem you've got there. You'd rather do anything than the right thing just so you can say you did something. Aside, it does seem that taxation and larger government are your idea of doing 'something'.

The idea is to analyse the evidence, consider the options and choose the best option of those available.

Your do nothing attitude would still have you with slavery, women not having the vote, homosexuality been illegal, people starving to death when they lost their jobs and even more people dying from curable diseases. All of these things would be inevitable with a do nothing attitude such as your own. Progress in the Civil field has been driven forward by your hated Liberals.

Br Cornelius

[F3SS]

Bull crap. The argument is that in 100 years we're all going to drown or fry because the global temperature will be 2 degrees higher than today. We can do something but not just any thing.

So does your solution amount to more than taxation and bureaucracy? You're not just going to steal more money from my paycheck just to say that you're doing something.

[F3SS]

and there's a huge difference between classic liberals and liberals as they are today. The truer description is progressives.

[Guest]

Bull crap. The argument is that in 100 years we're all going to drown or fry because the global temperature will be 2 degrees higher than today. We can do something but not just any thing.

So does your solution amount to more than taxation and bureaucracy? You're not just going to steal more money from my paycheck just to say that you're doing something.

My solution involves divesting from fossil fuels and investing in sustainable energy. After an initial cost penalty which the government helps absorb, the net cost of energy declines because renewables are free after the initial investment, apart from a nominal maintenance budget. Governments are obliged to forcast the future and make strategic decisions about future needs in order to make the future both sustainable and viable. A do nothing attitude would inevitably lead to a rising energy cost base as we have to combat the effects of climate change and pay for an ever dwindling finite resource (oil/gas).

Remember that the current recession was triggered by a quadrupling of the price of oil. The slow/none recovery is because oil prices have stayed at record highs. this is because oil production plateaued about 7 years ago whilst demand continued to rise (simple supply side economics). there are no easy to reach supplies of oil which will make oil prices decline back to pre-recession levels so an energy dependent economy has been hobbled. We have a small window of opportunity to do something about this before many more economic activities become cost prohibitive and the economy contracts even more. Such things as Fracking is a very short term bonanza which is only viable because of the high oil prices. it cost about 4 times as much to frack a gallon of oil out of the ground as it does to extract a gallon from Saudi where its imply gushes from the ground via a handful of wells. It would take many tens of thousands of well to achieve the same level of production from Fracking.

Br Cornelius

Edited April 22, 2014 by Guest

[Guest]

and there's a huge difference between classic liberals and liberals as they are today. The truer description is progressives.

The Liberals of today are what the classic Liberals allowed to evolve. They have the same mindset and the same approach to life - they simply live in different times with different imperatives.

Br Cornelius

[F3SS]

My solution involves divesting from fossil fuels and investing in sustainable energy.

That's all well and good. However, it is being forced at a high expense and high failure rate because the technology simply isn't available to provide clean energy efficiently and cost effectively 'en mass. I'm ok with clean energy but we have plenty of fossil fuels left and that buys us plenty of time to figure out a more effective path than crushing everybody with taxes and poorly executed research and development. Within this 100 years and far sooner, I presume, there will be great advancements made in clean energy. My issue is what I just stated. Advancements are being forced to quickly and haphazardly.

After an initial cost penalty which the government helps absorb,

You mean we absorb.

the net cost of energy declines because renewables are free after the initial investment, apart from a nominal maintenance budget.

So, not free. They may become cheaper, but never free.

Governments are obliged to forcast the future and make strategic decisions about future needs in order to make the future both sustainable and viable.

Of course they are. They are not obliged to gamble and p***s away hundreds of billions of dollars on tech that isn't ready yet. Research all you need and spend what that costs but don't do it just for the sake of it simply to play politics. Demanding a solution right now is not feasible. Relax. It'll come about at a natural pace but just not today. Keep up the research. Just quit screwing with what we have and what we know works. There's plenty more fossil fuels for us all for a good while.

A do nothing attitude would inevitably lead to a rising energy cost base as we have to combat the effects of climate change and pay for an ever dwindling finite resource (oil/gas).

Remember that the current recession was triggered by a quadrupling of the price of oil. The slow/none recovery is because oil prices have stayed at record highs. this is because oil production plateaued about 7 years ago whilst demand continued to rise (simple supply side economics). there are no easy to reach supplies of oil which will make oil prices decline back to pre-recession levels so an energy dependent economy has been hobbled. We have a small window of opportunity to do something about this before many more economic activities become cost prohibitive and the economy contracts even more. Such things as Fracking is a very short term bonanza which is only viable because of the high oil prices. it cost about 4 times as much to frack a gallon of oil out of the ground as it does to extract a gallon from Saudi where its imply gushes from the ground via a handful of wells. It would take many tens of thousands of well to achieve the same level of production from Fracking.

America is sitting on plenty of resources. Imagine if we started tapping into them 7 years ago. We'd probably be extracting or close to it by now and energy prices would be falling. Considering that we could have plenty of fossil fuels right under our feet the window of opportunity is closing only because nobody can get to them.

[Agent0range]

Bull crap. The argument is that in 100 years we're all going to drown or fry because the global temperature will be 2 degrees higher than today. We can do something but not just any thing.

So does your solution amount to more than taxation and bureaucracy? You're not just going to steal more money from my paycheck just to say that you're doing something.

You keep saying the same BS over and over while tax rates are still at 50 year lows. What taxation are you talking about?!?!

[F3SS]

You keep saying the same BS over and over while tax rates are still at 50 year lows. What taxation are you talking about?!?!

No. I keep asking the same thing over and over to no avail. Don't dodge. My question is simple. Do you have any more of a clue what to do about the perceived problem other than impose taxes? Further, would you believe that putting more of your money in the hands of more bureaucrats would be a smart and worthy thing to do to help matters?

Rates are regardless and implying I should be quiet because rates are low is asinine. You're not just going to take money out of my pocket because you think I've got room to give. That's taxation without proper representation.

[Yamato]

sorry Yamato I keep forgetting money behaves differently in your hands if the rabble but you in office as opposed to punching a clock.

Yeah, power AND money - suddenly makes money alright. What a deal.

[MiskatonicGrad]

since it appears the liberals think belief in climate change is a sure sign of intelligence, I do believe the climate of the planet is changing which it has done numerous times in the past(so really no great leap of logic there).

but I have a hard time believing we caused or can reverse said changes. we have been hearing about climate change since the 70's and still scientists are out there taking grant money going to the far corners of the globe to prove the climate is changing. why? if they were in charge of making the light bulb we would still be living in the dark. read national geographic it seems every other month there is an article on the PROOF of global warming. great just what we need! how about we call them scientists home and get them working on how we can have safe viable clean renewable energy. So that when the proverbial poop hits the fan we don't have to worry if we can keep warm or cool which ever way the planet decides to go.

to get back to the OP I remember studies done around 2000 that gave hard numbers that right leaning voters had more education then left leaning. I'll have to dig around and find them but they were probably bunk anyway.

[rodentraiser]

I wish like heck people would just lose the words 'conservative' and 'liberal'. I am not either. And I don't walk the middle of the road. I walk first one side and then the other, depending on what the issue is. Trying to define people as conservatives or liberals is why problems never get solved. There's nothing more irritating for me than to give an opinion and instead of getting back an intelligent rebuttal or a thoughtful debate, I just get called a name. I've been accused of being both a bleeding heart liberal and people-hating conservative. I know I can believe what I want, so why do I have to be limited to one choice or the other all the time?

[No Censorship]

I wish like heck people would just lose the words 'conservative' and 'liberal'. I am not either. And I don't walk the middle of the road. I walk first one side and then the other, depending on what the issue is. Trying to define people as conservatives or liberals is why problems never get solved. There's nothing more irritating for me than to give an opinion and instead of getting back an intelligent rebuttal or a thoughtful debate, I just get called a name. I've been accused of being both a bleeding heart liberal and people-hating conservative. I know I can believe what I want, so why do I have to be limited to one choice or the other all the time?

Many or most Americans are like you in that regard. My political beliefs range from Code Pink to the Tea Party in that I believe in peace under a Constitution. I fully support a strong defense and think that we should support our military more than we do, but I think that war should be a *very* last resort because of the huge costs (not just monetary) involved in undertaking them. I also think that we should sharply reverse course when it comes to the soft police state we find ourselves in now. There's no reason to search housewives and toddlers at airports, for instance. This would have been unthinkable in the past. We could make a long list of such contemporary abuses. We have to draw a line in the sand, and by "we", I mean freedom-loving Americans from the far left to the far right.

[Guest]

America is sitting on plenty of resources. Imagine if we started tapping into them 7 years ago. We'd probably be extracting or close to it by now and energy prices would be falling. Considering that we could have plenty of fossil fuels right under our feet the window of opportunity is closing only because nobody can get to them.

Oil has remain at record highs because the peak oil experience is a reality. The American economy doesn't work with Oil at current prices. No matter how much you invest in new oil - its price will remain at stubbornly high levels because all the easy to access oil is gone. This means that many economic activities are not possible at prices which people can afford - which leads to a contraction of the economy. Many people are having to make hard decisions about whether to put gas in the cars or food on the table or to heat their energy inefficient houses. This is all the reality now. The Fracking bubble has already peaked and the extremely short production cycles (1-5 years per Frack) means that supply will start to decline very soon - it is only the fact that to many wells were sunk initially which has helped depress gas prices.

As for your comments about Alternatives. You are spouting ill informed bull****. Windpower is already cost competitive with coal and approach cost competitiveness with gas in many situations. There is still huge capacity for expansion and once built it costs a fraction of sinking more Fracking wells. This is why the clever money is investing heavily in renewables and out of fossil fuels. The economics simply no longer support fossil fuels as the energy of the future. As for solar - it has about quartered in price over the last decade as a consequence of supply and demand economics and innovation.

It makes perfect economic sense to develop the alternatives sector over and above investing in fossil fuels.

Br Cornelius

[Guest]

since it appears the liberals think belief in climate change is a sure sign of intelligence, I do believe the climate of the planet is changing which it has done numerous times in the past(so really no great leap of logic there).

but I have a hard time believing we caused or can reverse said changes. we have been hearing about climate change since the 70's and still scientists are out there taking grant money going to the far corners of the globe to prove the climate is changing. why? if they were in charge of making the light bulb we would still be living in the dark. read national geographic it seems every other month there is an article on the PROOF of global warming. great just what we need! how about we call them scientists home and get them working on how we can have safe viable clean renewable energy. So that when the proverbial poop hits the fan we don't have to worry if we can keep warm or cool which ever way the planet decides to go.

to get back to the OP I remember studies done around 2000 that gave hard numbers that right leaning voters had more education then left leaning. I'll have to dig around and find them but they were probably bunk anyway.

It simply means that the fossil fuel industry has been highly effective in discrediting the science.

The same people managed to delay any effective control of Tobacco for over three decades using the same tactics - do you believe the propaganda that Tobacco doesn't cause cancer anymore ? It is now universally accepted that Tobacco causes cancer - but the science was firmly in place over 40 years ago. How could it be that the war on Tobacco was only seriously engaged about a decade ago.

Same people - same tactics - it always is when there is serious money on the line. If you want to see how the two are related read this report and understanding that it is the same Think Tanks who denied Tobacco-cancer who deny Climate change;

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/Global/usa/report/Dealing%20in%20Doubt%202013%20-%20Greenpeace%20report%20on%20Climate%20Change%20Denial%20Machine.pdf

If you want to be a sucker to these people because it fits your ideology thats up to you - but don't kid yourself that there is any real debate about the reality of climate change within the scientific community and don't try to convince yourself your opinion is based on sound science.

Br Cornelius

Edited April 23, 2014 by Guest

[Agent0range]

since it appears the liberals think belief in climate change is a sure sign of intelligence, I do believe the climate of the planet is changing which it has done numerous times in the past(so really no great leap of logic there).

but I have a hard time believing we caused or can reverse said changes. we have been hearing about climate change since the 70's and still scientists are out there taking grant money going to the far corners of the globe to prove the climate is changing. why? if they were in charge of making the light bulb we would still be living in the dark. read national geographic it seems every other month there is an article on the PROOF of global warming. great just what we need! how about we call them scientists home and get them working on how we can have safe viable clean renewable energy. So that when the proverbial poop hits the fan we don't have to worry if we can keep warm or cool which ever way the planet decides to go.

to get back to the OP I remember studies done around 2000 that gave hard numbers that right leaning voters had more education then left leaning. I'll have to dig around and find them but they were probably bunk anyway.

No liberal disagrees with the fact that climate change hasn't happened throughout the history of the earth. But, there wasn't a hole in the ozone layer for billions of years either. Climate change occurs in natural cycles, but humans are accelerating the process and making the ramifications of it worse.

The earth can be compared to the human body. Your body will naturally deteriorate and die. But, if you drink heavily, smoke, do drugs, don't eat the right foods, it will deteriorate much more quickly than someone who treats their body well. All scientists agree that humans are not the sole factor in climate change, but a contributing factor. It truly is baffling how some people don't think that we contribute negatively to climate change.

[RavenHawk]

to get back to the OP I remember studies done around 2000 that gave hard numbers that right leaning voters had more education then left leaning. I'll have to dig around and find them but they were probably bunk anyway.

There's another study out that shows the more educated a person is, the more likely they are to become a victim of a scam. For me, this is proof enough of the Liberal claim that their mind is more "advanced". But as usual, there is more to it. Liberals only think in one dimension. That is why they are easily fooled. There is more than IQ that determines one's intelligence. There are other things like EQ (basically street smarts), which Conservatives have a huge supply of. Like any thing else, there is nothing that can prevent any one person from falling victim to a scam but EQ coupled with IQ and a few another things gives the person the awareness to see and think for themselves. That's why I like to use things like Evolution and Climate Change to highlight that point.

[Michelle]

But, there wasn't a hole in the ozone layer for billions of years either.

We have no way of knowing this, because the ozone wasn't discovered or studied until the 1770's.

[Agent0range]

There's another study out that shows the more educated a person is, the more likely they are to become a victim of a scam. For me, this is proof enough of the Liberal claim that their mind is more "advanced". But as usual, there is more to it. Liberals only think in one dimension. That is why they are easily fooled. There is more than IQ that determines one's intelligence. There are other things like EQ (basically street smarts), which Conservatives have a huge supply of. Like any thing else, there is nothing that can prevent any one person from falling victim to a scam but EQ coupled with IQ and a few another things gives the person the awareness to see and think for themselves. That's why I like to use things like Evolution and Climate Change to highlight that point.

So you talk about a study and fail to link it? We'll just take your word for it I suppose! You say liberals are more likely to fall victim to a scam. Have you forgotten that many conservative views are based off of the biggest scam of all?!?! RELIGION!

[RavenHawk]

No liberal disagrees with the fact that climate change hasn't happened throughout the history of the earth. But, there wasn't a hole in the ozone layer for billions of years either. Climate change occurs in natural cycles, but humans are accelerating the process and making the ramifications of it worse.

The earth can be compared to the human body. Your body will naturally deteriorate and die. But, if you drink heavily, smoke, do drugs, don't eat the right foods, it will deteriorate much more quickly than someone who treats their body well. All scientists agree that humans are not the sole factor in climate change, but a contributing factor. It truly is baffling how some people don't think that we contribute negatively to climate change.

No Conservative disagrees that Man is affecting climate. But there is a big difference between Man causing climate change and Man affecting the climate. Those two problems require two different solutions. If we pick the wrong one, we could do ourselves more harm, but more than likely, we'll just end up spinning our wheels and throw trillions down the drain while convincing ourselves that we did something. Gaia is a pretty complex life form. We don't know how she will react to things like a hole in the ozone. In order for things to thrive on a planetary system, things must balance out. Man's way of thinking is that there is nothing after breaching the ozone. To Mother Earth, it's just a matter of bouncing back. If Man is going to survive the future, he needs to adapt to NOW.

If the body has a broken arm, you put the arm in a cast and let the body heal itself. You don't induce coma and place the body in the ICU. You also don't do nothing and let the body lie there with only a shaiman chanting over it.

[Michelle]

The 'God Gap' Between Republicans and Democrats Closed: Values Voters on the Left

http://www.politicsd...-closed-values/

Religious Democrats liken it to gays coming out of the closet. They've been afraid of being ostracized by their peers. Clearly an accepting group of people Democrats have been.

Edited April 23, 2014 by Michelle

[RavenHawk]

So you talk about a study and fail to link it? We'll just take your word for it I suppose! You say liberals are more likely to fall victim to a scam. Have you forgotten that many conservative views are based off of the biggest scam of all?!?! RELIGION!

I didn't fail to link it. It was just a tidbit I read somewhere. I don't record a link to everything I read, do you? If you don't believe me, that's fine. You can search for yourself.

The truly intelligent person knows the importance of religion. To claim that religion is a scam is in itself the actual scam. Just as it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that Man causes climate change, GOD does not exist. The whole point is that you believe what you will and you must live with the consequences.

[Myles]

This study was clearly an attack on conservatives. Grouping people into one of 2 groups is horribly wrong. I think I lean towards being a "conservative", but I agree with much of what most "liberals" push. I grew up going to a catholic grade school, but I don't go to a catholic church. I have a few guns, but I also support some gun restrictions. I don't own an electric car, but I support the technology. I have no issues with anyone because of their race. I don't live in the south but I do live outside city limits on 7.5 acres of land and have chickens. I don't hunt, but I like venison. I am in favor of government assistance, but I think it's out of control at this point. I don't mind higher taxes if neccesary, but I'd rather see it through a national sales tax. I believe in global warming but do not support ALL of the restrictions put on industries.

What am I?

Edited April 23, 2014 by Myles