Pages: 1 ... 82 83 [84] 85 86 ... 324   Go Down

Author Topic: Trump II  (Read 205152 times)

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7031
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1660 on: March 21, 2017, 07:41:15 AM »

How Americans Think About Climate Change

Interesting graphs representing what Americans think about climate change...

Quote
Americans overwhelmingly believe that global warming is happening, and that carbon emissions should be scaled back. But fewer are sure that the changes will harm them personally. New data released by Yale researchers gives the most detailed view yet of public opinion on global warming.

Americans want to restrict carbon emissions from coal power plants. The White House and Congress may do the opposite.
National average: 69%

(sorry, can't get the text to format correctly)

Percentage of adults per congressional district who support strict CO2 limits on existing coal-fired power plants
20%      30%      40%      50%      60%      70%      80% 
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2651
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1661 on: March 21, 2017, 09:17:23 AM »

I can't quite believe you are making such an argument, Alan. Do you really think when researches discover that a doubling of CO2 increases the crop yield of wheat or rice, or whatever crop they are studying, they are referring only to the total biomass of the wheat or rice stalk, whilst ignoring any increase, decrease or lack of change in the mass of the edible crop yield?
I've taken a look at a fair amount of the literature on this and it's inconclusive regarding row crops.

[qutoe]It's always the yield of the food crop that features in their results. This is why many greenhouse farmers have been injecting CO2 into their greenhouses over many decades, for increased crop yields and increased profits.[/quote] Greenhouse or hydroponic gardening are not the real world that farmers confront.  I don't think I have ever questioned whether increased CO2 levels enhance greenhouse levels.

[qutoe]At a basic scientific level, where results can be confirmed due to the controlled nature of the environment, whether in a laboratory or a greenhouse, the CO2 fertilization effect can be established with certainty, and with far greater certainty than the degree of any possible change in climate that might be due to current elevated levels of CO2.[/quote] Again, not the real world where farmers add exogenous nitrates and phosphates to the soil to improve yields.

Quote
However, it is true that growing crops in relatively uncontrolled conditions where one cannot always control the temperature, competing weeds and pests, and extreme weather events, then these other factor will influence crop growth whatever the levels of CO2 are. Temperatures which are higher than optimal for growth of a particular crop might partially or even completely negate any increase in crop yield that might have resulted under more ideal conditions, except with water-stressed plant. Under those conditions the benefits of elevated levels of CO2 are the most productive.
thank you for finally acknowledging that nature is indeed different'

Quote
Are you still in denial, Alan?  ;D
No more than you are.
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10915
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1662 on: March 21, 2017, 09:22:10 AM »

...com·mis·sar...

Or, as they were affectionately known as "politcom" (political commissar) ;)

P.S. To tell you the truth, the moment I heard about Trump's appointees, politcoms came to my mind.

PeterAit

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2664
    • Peter Aitken Photographs
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1663 on: March 21, 2017, 09:25:12 AM »

From the Atlantic (a left leaning but accurate media source)


The Atlantic is NOT a left-leaning publication. I have always viewed it as slightly on the conservative side of moderate, but as you say it is accurate, and also presents in-depth, thoughtful, and perceptive articles, which sets it apart from so many right-wing publications that it may seem liberal to some.
Logged
Peter
"Photographic technique should always be a means to an end and never the end itself."

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3257
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1664 on: March 21, 2017, 09:36:13 AM »

Trump's cut to flood map program could trigger insurance rate hikes:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-budget-idUSKBN16R2FT

Yet another debatable plan by Trump.
Guess who's going to pay for the effects in the end ...

Cheers,
Bart
Why would an European concern themselves with such minutiae of government spending in America. 99.99% of Americans could care less about $190M deduction in federal spending for flood maps. It seems like you're just doing another "hit" on Trump.  OK.  We already know you don't like him.  But flood maps????  Well, you are Dutch and know a lot about dikes, so maybe it's a big interest of yours. 

In any case, since this effects how insurance companies figure out what to charge their customers, let them pay for the research and maps and add it to the cost of the premiums for those people who foolishly choose to live in flood zones.  The bigger point is the government is going broke, well is broke. Why should all taxpayers be hit for maps that only effect certain people and whose cost should be paid for by private industry? 
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3257
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1665 on: March 21, 2017, 09:55:57 AM »

By the way, private industry does a better job then government.  I've looked at the FEMA maps and also their 24K topo maps that have not be updated since the flood. (pun intended)   Now check your smart phone and Google maps.  Those all are updated regularly, extremely accurate, and even have pictures of every main street from street level. All done with private funds supplied by businesses who need the information to sell to their customers.  Same with flood maps.  If government stopped doing all sorts of things that business would like, entrepreneurs would start companies and provide better information at no cost to the government.  Who would you buy a book from to learn about Photoshop and printing?  The government or Schewe?  Government should stick to making war and treaties and leave the rest of us alone.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3257
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1666 on: March 21, 2017, 10:47:57 AM »

This is all part of the swamp Trump and Bannon wants to drain.  The incestuous relationship where elite business and politicians and lobbyists conspire to help each other.  Crony capitalism. The big boys give money to the election campaigns and then get free subsidies like maps, and subsidized payments for electric cars call bought by rich guys who could afford it.  The middle class pays for it.  That's why they are trying to destroy Trump and Bannon.  Not because of Russia or false charges of racism.  But because they want to drain the swamp, get rid of things the way they are that benefits the elite class at the expense of the middle class and poor.  Who went to jail for the 2008 recession and phony business and bank deals?  If Sanders was doing these things, many of you would be supporting what Trump is doing.  If Hillary was elected, the swamp would remain as is as that where the Clintons operate.  Don't you get it?
Logged

BartvanderWolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7334
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1667 on: March 21, 2017, 10:52:02 AM »

Why would an European concern themselves with such minutiae of government spending in America. 99.99% of Americans could care less about $190M deduction in federal spending for flood maps. It seems like you're just doing another "hit" on Trump.  OK.  We already know you don't like him.  But flood maps????  Well, you are Dutch and know a lot about dikes, so maybe it's a big interest of yours.

I was thinking of all the folks who are affected by flooding. It's obvious you don't care about anybody else besides yourself.

Quote
In any case, since this effects how insurance companies figure out what to charge their customers, let them pay for the research and maps and add it to the cost of the premiums for those people who foolishly choose to live in flood zones.

It doesn't occur to you that that data is useful for urban and infrastructure planning? Government could (I'm not saying should) also consider selling the data to commercial parties, instead of the other way around. It could also be more efficient if the effort does not have to be duplicated by competing companies. It also allows others to verify whether Insurance companies are not conning the public parties involved, and create a more level playing field for all.

Quote
The bigger point is the government is going broke, well is broke.

Mainly due to selfish war efforts, inefficiencies, and a (homegrown) financial/banking cricis that also was exported, for the rest of the world to enjoy. Not due to floodmaps.

Quote
Why should all taxpayers be hit for maps that only effect certain people and whose cost should be paid for by private industry?

A very narrow-minded view on how one could solve such things, but that's what you get by only trusting private industry, and never considering a higher level solution. That's part of the problem, the dogmatic view where thinking has stopped.

And indeed, we do (out of necessity) have a lot of experience with water-management, and we sell some of that know-how and experience and how to apply it locally and manage cost. Parts are organized at a government level, and parts in cooperation with private industry. Working together works better than fighting each other every step of the way, or leaving it entirely to private enterprise, is our experience over the centuries.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2651
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1668 on: March 21, 2017, 10:53:55 AM »

Why would an European concern themselves with such minutiae of government spending in America. 99.99% of Americans could care less about $190M deduction in federal spending for flood maps. It seems like you're just doing another "hit" on Trump.  OK.  We already know you don't like him.  But flood maps????  Well, you are Dutch and know a lot about dikes, so maybe it's a big interest of yours. 

In any case, since this effects how insurance companies figure out what to charge their customers, let them pay for the research and maps and add it to the cost of the premiums for those people who foolishly choose to live in flood zones.  The bigger point is the government is going broke, well is broke. Why should all taxpayers be hit for maps that only effect certain people and whose cost should be paid for by private industry?
Alan,

Private casualty insurers do not provide flood insurance (read your policy!!!).  This is covered by Federal insurance that you have to proactively purchase.  If the flood maps are not updated then the there is no way to know if you are living in a flood zone or not!!!!!
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2651
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1669 on: March 21, 2017, 10:57:45 AM »

This is all part of the swamp Trump and Bannon wants to drain.  The incestuous relationship where elite business and politicians and lobbyists conspire to help each other.  Crony capitalism. The big boys give money to the election campaigns and then get free subsidies like maps, and subsidized payments for electric cars call bought by rich guys who could afford it. 
Why then do we have lots of Goldman Sachs and other private equity investors working in the Trump White House.  Do you think that they are looking after middle class people.  Do you think the Paul Ryan health insurance proposal with it's incredible tax cuts to the wealthy looks after middle class people?  And we haven't even gotten to the tax cut proposal yet which according to the President will be massive.  Maybe it will provide more tax breaks to real estate developers.
Logged

BartvanderWolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 7334
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1670 on: March 21, 2017, 01:32:49 PM »

Depending on one's interests, a potentially threatened service:
http://aqicn.org/city/newyork/

The level of detail depends on the type of local measurements.

Airborne Pollution is usually local, CO2 is more of an atmospheric issue (unless measured indoors with poor ventilation).

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7031
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1671 on: March 21, 2017, 02:19:03 PM »

The Atlantic is NOT a left-leaning publication. I have always viewed it as slightly on the conservative side of moderate, but as you say it is accurate, and also presents in-depth, thoughtful, and perceptive articles, which sets it apart from so many right-wing publications that it may seem liberal to some.

Well, according to Media Bias/Fact Check, The Atlantic has a "LEFT-CENTER BIAS" (the same let-center bias as PBS News Hour).

That's the irony of the right claiming that the "liberal biased media" is the enemy of the people. But they are happy to allow a right biased media like Fox be the primary source of information to help them form their opinions. Here's the MB/FC RIGHT BIAS assessment of Fox...

Quote
RIGHT BIAS

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.

Factual Reporting: MIXED

Notes: Fox News Channel, also known as Fox News, is an American basic cable and satellite news television channel that is owned by the Fox Entertainment Group subsidiary of 21st Century Fox (Wikipedia). Fox News Channel has been accused of biased reporting and promoting the Republican Party and has been deemed the least accurate cable news source according to Politifact.

And this is what MB/FC said of PBS

Quote
LEFT-CENTER BIAS

These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias.  They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes.  These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation.

Factual Reporting: HIGH

Notes: The PBS NewsHour is an American daily evening television news program that is broadcast on the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), airing seven nights a week on more than 300 of the public broadcaster’s member stations. As the nation’s first hour-long nightly news broadcast, the program is known for its in-depth coverage of issues and current events (Wikipedia). PBS produces high quality journalism that is sourced and factual. They have a left-center bias in reporting.

And given the massive embarrassment that Fox just endured by having The Judge (Andrew Napolitano) claim that the British spied on Trump for Obama and induced Trump and Spicer to go on TV and reference the Fox reporting as "proof" of the allegation, I'm hoping Fox and Trump have learned a lesson. With Fox I suspect so since the judge has been sidelined indefinitely. In the case of the President, there is no such method of sidelining a president short of impeachment. And given Comey's testimony yesterday, that might not be too far off :~)

That's the irony I find so frustrating...the right seems so limited in their sources of news that when one of the right biased media is so wrong, that it's almost impossible to get them to to accept the actual reality of the facts.

The New Yorker (left biased) had this article WHY FACTS DON’T CHANGE OUR MINDS

Quote
In a new book, “The Enigma of Reason” (Harvard), the cognitive scientists Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber take a stab at answering this question....

Stripped of a lot of what might be called cognitive-science-ese, Mercier and Sperber’s argument runs, more or less, as follows: Humans’ biggest advantage over other species is our ability to coöperate. Coöperation is difficult to establish and almost as difficult to sustain. For any individual, freeloading is always the best course of action. Reason developed not to enable us to solve abstract, logical problems or even to help us draw conclusions from unfamiliar data; rather, it developed to resolve the problems posed by living in collaborative groups.

“Reason is an adaptation to the hypersocial niche humans have evolved for themselves,” Mercier and Sperber write. Habits of mind that seem weird or goofy or just plain dumb from an “intellectualist” point of view prove shrewd when seen from a social “interactionist” perspective.

Consider what’s become known as “confirmation bias,” the tendency people have to embrace information that supports their beliefs and reject information that contradicts them.

If reason is designed to generate sound judgments, then it’s hard to conceive of a more serious design flaw than confirmation bias. Imagine, Mercier and Sperber suggest, a mouse that thinks the way we do. Such a mouse, “bent on confirming its belief that there are no cats around,” would soon be dinner. To the extent that confirmation bias leads people to dismiss evidence of new or underappreciated threats—the human equivalent of the cat around the corner—it’s a trait that should have been selected against. The fact that both we and it survive, Mercier and Sperber argue, proves that it must have some adaptive function, and that function, they maintain, is related to our “hypersociability.”

Mercier and Sperber prefer the term “myside bias.” Humans, they point out, aren’t randomly credulous. Presented with someone else’s argument, we’re quite adept at spotting the weaknesses. Almost invariably, the positions we’re blind about are our own.

The final paragraph, in mentioning all three books that were referenced said:
Quote
The Enigma of Reason,” “The Knowledge Illusion,” and “Denying to the Grave” were all written before the November election. And yet they anticipate Kellyanne Conway and the rise of “alternative facts.” These days, it can feel as if the entire country has been given over to a vast psychological experiment being run either by no one or by Steve Bannon. Rational agents would be able to think their way to a solution. But, on this matter, the literature is not reassuring.

So yeah, The Atlantic is a bit Left-Center biased...but that's ok, the left tends to get their news and information from multiple places and sources so can filter out any bias. Unfortunately the right doesn't tend to rely on multiple sources and are getting most news and info from limited sources that can often be both biased and incorrect but the right doesn't get the advantage of multiple sources of news. Of course, the right will dispute that because it doesn't fit with their world view due to confirmation bias.

To the right, the left is wrong and only the right can be right.
Logged

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7031
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1672 on: March 21, 2017, 02:50:54 PM »



EEEEEK!
The thought of Trump NAKED is a very, VERY scary thought!

How long will the GOP stand by and let this clown ruin the country?
Logged

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10915
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1673 on: March 21, 2017, 02:51:46 PM »

... To the right, the left is wrong and only the right can be right.

And vice versa, Jeff.

What you posted above (quotes) is fair and square, except it is applicable to both sides of the debate, not just the right.

Slobodan Blagojevic

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 10915
  • When everybody thinks the same... nobody thinks.
    • My website
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1674 on: March 21, 2017, 02:55:59 PM »

... How long will the GOP stand by and let this clown ruin the country?

Here is where are I am confused... initially, it looked like Trump hijacked the GOP. But today, it looks like GOP hijacked Trump. So far, he's been enacting a typical GOP playbook, and very little of what he was saying during the campaign that made him sound (then) as a not-so-traditional Republican.

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7031
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1675 on: March 21, 2017, 03:26:57 PM »

Here is where are I am confused... initially, it looked like Trump hijacked the GOP. But today, it looks like GOP hijacked Trump.

It's pretty clear to me...Trump is not a politician and is being manipulated by the GOP on one hand and Bannon/Miller on the other hand. He doesn't have a friggin' clue how to govern because his only experience is running a relatively small, closely held corp where he was emperor and could do anything he wanted. Given the reality of being President, he's flailing about and getting outplayed by everybody including Fox News :~(

In any event, he's highly unlikely to fulfill enough of his promises to satisfy the people who voted for him and the GOP will face a midterm backlash not unlike the backlash the Democrats faced in 2010.

From Trumpgret on Reddit



Trump voter James Walker, 31, from Nashville, says: "This is the first step: showing up and being honest."
Logged

Alan Goldhammer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2651
    • A Goldhammer Photography
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1676 on: March 21, 2017, 03:47:06 PM »

Here is where are I am confused... initially, it looked like Trump hijacked the GOP. But today, it looks like GOP hijacked Trump. So far, he's been enacting a typical GOP playbook, and very little of what he was saying during the campaign that made him sound (then) as a not-so-traditional Republican.
I don't think we really know the answer yet.  He has kept some of his promises through executive orders but he continues to make promises he can't possibly keep.  Last night he was on the road again this time to Kentucky where he again railed against Obama care in a state where 10% of the populace have Obamacare policies and the level of uninsured went from over 20% to 7%; what happens to all these folks?  He said how his new policies were going to put all the coal miners back to work.  Don't know what they will be doing instead of mining coal as automation of mining and the switch to natural gas among the utilities have consigned manual coal mining into a death spiral.  We still don't know if the GOP Congress can pass a replacement to Obamacare and tax reform is even on the table yet.  We do have a proposed budget that like every other President's proposed budget is DOA in Congress (one of the great pleasures I used to have when I was not among the 94 million American out of work was doing the budget analysis for HHS every January and I can tell you that through Clinton, Bush 2, and Obama that none of their sweeping proposals were ever accepted by Congress).  He did manage to nominate a candidate for the Supreme Court who appears quite competent so I guess that's a plus.
Logged

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 7031
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1677 on: March 21, 2017, 03:54:58 PM »

The Telegraph (Right-Center Bias) mentioned this...

'This tweet didn't age well': Kellyanne Conway mocked for message about FBI probes as Trump inquiry confirmed

Quote
Kellyanne Conway has faced ridicule on social media for a tweet she posted five months ago that poked fun at Hillary Clinton's email saga.

The senior adviser to Donald Trump took a swipe at the Democratic presidential nominee on Twitter shortly before the election when James Comey, the FBI director, announced new emails were being investigated.

The new trove, which was found on the laptop of the husband of Huma Abedin, a top Clinton aide, revived the scandal three months after the FBI announced after an 11 month inquiry that criminal charges were not warranted.



So, let that sink in...the FBI is investigating Donald Trump's Presidential campaign for possible collusion with the Russians on impacting the 2016 election. So, ok...I guess there's only one overall Trump investigation by the FBI but that one investigation is sweeping up a lot of people...
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3257
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1678 on: March 21, 2017, 05:56:46 PM »

I was thinking of all the folks who are affected by flooding. It's obvious you don't care about anybody else besides yourself.

It doesn't occur to you that that data is useful for urban and infrastructure planning? Government could (I'm not saying should) also consider selling the data to commercial parties, instead of the other way around. It could also be more efficient if the effort does not have to be duplicated by competing companies. It also allows others to verify whether Insurance companies are not conning the public parties involved, and create a more level playing field for all.

Mainly due to selfish war efforts, inefficiencies, and a (homegrown) financial/banking cricis that also was exported, for the rest of the world to enjoy. Not due to floodmaps.

A very narrow-minded view on how one could solve such things, but that's what you get by only trusting private industry, and never considering a higher level solution. That's part of the problem, the dogmatic view where thinking has stopped.

And indeed, we do (out of necessity) have a lot of experience with water-management, and we sell some of that know-how and experience and how to apply it locally and manage cost. Parts are organized at a government level, and parts in cooperation with private industry. Working together works better than fighting each other every step of the way, or leaving it entirely to private enterprise, is our experience over the centuries.

Cheers,
Bart
I appreciate that your country requires national involvement as it truly is an existential situation in the Netherlands.  The problem in America with the government subsidizing insurance, is that it's rich people that are mainly supported.  Beach and river locations are prime real estate fetching the highest price from the richest people around.  By subsiding, the government encourages people to build in flood zones.  Also since they will always get bailed out in case of flood, it encourages building without taking better measures for protecting their homes.  Why should the public bail out rich people when the next Hurricane comes through?  They can afford the insurance on their own.  Flood program is $24 billion in debt.  Additionally, government subsidization distorts the marketplace and raises the price of real estate.  Middle class people and the poor are subsidizing the rich.  How's that fair?  How is that selfish on my part?

I do agree with your alternate suggestion that if the government has to do the surveys anyway for urban planning, military etc.,  then the insurance companies and others should reimburse the government if it uses the data and maps.
Logged

Alan Klein

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 3257
    • Flicker photos
Re: Trump II
« Reply #1679 on: March 21, 2017, 06:13:07 PM »

Why then do we have lots of Goldman Sachs and other private equity investors working in the Trump White House.  Do you think that they are looking after middle class people.  Do you think the Paul Ryan health insurance proposal with it's incredible tax cuts to the wealthy looks after middle class people?  And we haven't even gotten to the tax cut proposal yet which according to the President will be massive.  Maybe it will provide more tax breaks to real estate developers.
AG: Trump's Cabinet Secretaries are going to follow his ideas like any President's cabinet.  He's the Boss.  Treasury Secretary Mnuchin told G20 to forget climate control and protectionism is not off the table.  Those are Trump's ideas.  Regarding Goldman Sachs, we want people who have experience and know how to execute whether they have been generals or CEO's.  He doesn't hire college professors and other "thinkers" who don't know how to negotiate and will be walked on.  They have had to have proved their mettle. 

If anything is going to get the economy moving it's reducing taxes for businesses.  The increase in jobs and pay increase will help all workers.  Kennedy, Reagan and Clinton did it.  With the economy getting better, the lower business tax will be offset by increasing tax revenues from overall increased business.  That happened under Reagan. I didn't check the others. 
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 82 83 [84] 85 86 ... 324   Go Up