In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
I will try to keep it in this thread because I want to keep the discussion on policy and political actions being taken to combat global warming. In Alberta we are typically deniers and Canadian policy is shaped in a pro-oilsands because of the economic benefits. Politicians are very weary of endangering the blue collar six-figure jobs that resource extraction brings and media terms those who disagree with how things are done "eco-terrorists". The Obama administration is very confusing to me in how policies are made and I don't know their specific goal in mind regarding climate change.
I just wanted TLer's thoughts on climate change and it's political consequences because the discussion is very one-sided here.
I will try to keep it in this thread because I want to keep the discussion on policy and political actions being taken to combat global warming. In Alberta we are typically deniers and Canadian policy is shaped in a pro-oilsands because of the economic benefits. Politicians are very weary of endangering the blue collar six-figure jobs that resource extraction brings and media terms those who disagree with how things are done "eco-terrorists". The Obama administration is very confusing to me in how policies are made and I don't know their specific goal in mind regarding climate change.
I just wanted TLer's thoughts on climate change and it's political consequences because the discussion is very one-sided here.
Regarding the denial website: their references are simply other denial websites. I am not going to go through debunking all the claims. Between the other thread here on TL and Google you should be able to get some better info. The main problem with a website like that is that it all sounds really plausible:
1-line claim Paragraph explaining why it's false.
However, the 1-line claim is actually backed by scientific research. As an example, I will simply focus on the hockeystick (I believe it's their point 2). In actual fact, more and more data is showing that the hockeystick is not only right, but probably UNDERestimated. For more about the hockey stick graph, I suggest starting with wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hockey_stick_controversy. Their reference 31 is the paper by the original authors of the hockeystick, but with far more data: same shape. As is the case for the other climate scientists using different data sources.
As for policy: I don't believe we are doing nearly enough to combat global warming, but I am in a country with far greater acute problems, in particular infrastructure, education and health care. On the positive side: 90% of Brazil's power comes from renewable sources, almost all hydroelectric, and most of the cars sold (can) drive on ethanol, produced locally from sugarcane.
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A Florida measure that would allow the use of medical marijuana has cleared its final hurdle and will be on the November ballot.
The state Supreme Court on Monday approved the language for the proposed constitutional amendment.
The justices approved the ballot summary 4-3 just three days after a petition drive reached the required number of signatures to place the measure on the ballot.
The decision is a defeat for Attorney General Pam Bondi, who challenged the ballot language by saying it's misleading.
Channel 9's Greg Warmoth has been following the issue since November when he flew to California to cover it. Now that the final hurdle has been cleared, it's up to the voters in Florida and attorney John Morgan told Warmoth research polling shows that a large majority of Florida voters will vote "yes" on medical marijuana.
Morgan poured $2.8 million into the effort this fall to get the vote on the ballot. In fact, his family and law firm accounted for 83 percent of the legalization effort's entire budget.
I wonder how quickly the marijuana legalization program is going to go. Danglers, Introvert, xDaunt, you are my conservative newssources, is anyone super angry about ganja being legal on your end? Is it a Muslim conspiracy to weaken America's resolve and make it open to Communist infiltration? Because if not seems like the momentum is there for it being moved off the schedule 1 drug list, the only people being viciously opposed would be the special interests who benefit from current laws (DEA? the tobacco companies?)
I don't know anyone who is super opposed to marijuana legalization. Most conservatives are either for legalization, decriminalization, or at least ambivalent to the issue.
Then how come it's not legal everywhere? I think no matter what country you are in, the "political left" is significantly more pro-weed (and smokes more also!) than the "political right".
Conclusions We find that the hemispheric-scale warmth of the past decade for the NH is likely anomalous in the context of not just the past 1,000 years, as suggested in previous work, but longer. This conclusion appears to hold for at least the past 1,300 years (consistent with the recent assessment by ref. 2) from reconstructions that do not use tree-ring proxies, and are therefore not subject to the associated additional caveats. This conclusion can be extended back to at least the past 1,700 years if tree-ring data are used, but with the additional strong caveats noted. When differences in scaling between previous studies are accounted for, the various current and previous estimates of NH mean surface temperature are largely consistent within uncertainties, despite the differences in methodology and mix of proxy data back to approximately A.D. 1000. The reconstructions appear increasingly more sensitive to method and data quality and quantity before A.D. 1600 and, particularly, before approximately A.D. 1000. Conclusions are less definitive for the SH and globe, which we attribute to larger uncertainties arising from the sparser available proxy data in the SH. Given the uncertainties, the SH and global reconstructions are compatible with the possibility of warmth similar to the most recent decade during brief intervals of the past 1,500 years. A targeted effort to recover additional high-quality, long paleoclimate proxy records from the SH could reduce these current existing uncertainties. Similarly, reducing uncertainties for the period before A.D. 1000 for the NH will require additional proxy records of sufficient length that preserve climate signal on the millennial time scale.
Some things stick out: - worrying about a 0.5 C spike over from 1995-2000 (not that large IMO) - let's your mind finish the Hockey stick graph by omitting 2000-2013 - mainly a Northern hemisphere chart - admits similar 5 year spikes may have happened - 1000 years is not long geologically speaking - I see no a -> c reasoning that CO2 is the cause of this
Policy changes limiting CO2 emissions seem like political waste and a burden on the economy to me. Regulate companies for other reasons than carbon emissions but don't waste your time and money on something that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. — A Florida measure that would allow the use of medical marijuana has cleared its final hurdle and will be on the November ballot.
The state Supreme Court on Monday approved the language for the proposed constitutional amendment.
The justices approved the ballot summary 4-3 just three days after a petition drive reached the required number of signatures to place the measure on the ballot.
The decision is a defeat for Attorney General Pam Bondi, who challenged the ballot language by saying it's misleading.
Channel 9's Greg Warmoth has been following the issue since November when he flew to California to cover it. Now that the final hurdle has been cleared, it's up to the voters in Florida and attorney John Morgan told Warmoth research polling shows that a large majority of Florida voters will vote "yes" on medical marijuana.
Morgan poured $2.8 million into the effort this fall to get the vote on the ballot. In fact, his family and law firm accounted for 83 percent of the legalization effort's entire budget.
I wonder how quickly the marijuana legalization program is going to go. Danglers, Introvert, xDaunt, you are my conservative newssources, is anyone super angry about ganja being legal on your end? Is it a Muslim conspiracy to weaken America's resolve and make it open to Communist infiltration? Because if not seems like the momentum is there for it being moved off the schedule 1 drug list, the only people being viciously opposed would be the special interests who benefit from current laws (DEA? the tobacco companies?)
I don't know anyone who is super opposed to marijuana legalization. Most conservatives are either for legalization, decriminalization, or at least ambivalent to the issue.
Then how come it's not legal everywhere? I think no matter what country you are in, the "political left" is significantly more pro-weed (and smokes more also!) than the "political right".
Well first off private interest companies are able to buy out politicians to control their voting.
There are also a significant amount of (older) conservatives who oppose marijuana legislation. We have had PR campaigns about drugs, including marijuana, for a long time, and I'm sure many older conservatives are not going to just drop what they've been told all their lives in a jiffy.
Conclusions We find that the hemispheric-scale warmth of the past decade for the NH is likely anomalous in the context of not just the past 1,000 years, as suggested in previous work, but longer. This conclusion appears to hold for at least the past 1,300 years (consistent with the recent assessment by ref. 2) from reconstructions that do not use tree-ring proxies, and are therefore not subject to the associated additional caveats. This conclusion can be extended back to at least the past 1,700 years if tree-ring data are used, but with the additional strong caveats noted. When differences in scaling between previous studies are accounted for, the various current and previous estimates of NH mean surface temperature are largely consistent within uncertainties, despite the differences in methodology and mix of proxy data back to approximately A.D. 1000. The reconstructions appear increasingly more sensitive to method and data quality and quantity before A.D. 1600 and, particularly, before approximately A.D. 1000. Conclusions are less definitive for the SH and globe, which we attribute to larger uncertainties arising from the sparser available proxy data in the SH. Given the uncertainties, the SH and global reconstructions are compatible with the possibility of warmth similar to the most recent decade during brief intervals of the past 1,500 years. A targeted effort to recover additional high-quality, long paleoclimate proxy records from the SH could reduce these current existing uncertainties. Similarly, reducing uncertainties for the period before A.D. 1000 for the NH will require additional proxy records of sufficient length that preserve climate signal on the millennial time scale.
Some things stick out: - worrying about a 0.5 C spike over from 1995-2000 (not that large IMO) - let's your mind finish the Hockey stick graph by omitting 2000-2013 - mainly a Northern hemisphere chart - admits similar 5 year spikes may have happened - 1000 years is not long geologically speaking - I see no a -> c reasoning that CO2 is the cause of this
Policy changes limiting CO2 emissions seem like political waste and a burden on the economy to me. Regulate companies for other reasons than carbon emissions but don't waste your time and money on something that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
How about SO2 emissions? Realistically they have a very measurable and harmful impact, but are often less discussed. There are many lakes in your country that have become dead due to acidification caused by acid rain.
It's easy for xDaunt to forget that not all conservatives are like those in Colorado/ the West. To this day, marijuana is highly stigmatized in the South, with many of those states carrying out some of harshest small time possession punishments in the country.
On February 06 2014 05:31 farvacola wrote: It's easy for xDaunt to forget that not all conservatives are like those in Colorado/ the West. To this day, marijuana is highly stigmatized in the South, with many of those states carrying out some of harshest small time possession punishments in the country.
It's also an easy way to keep minority populations in jail
Conclusions We find that the hemispheric-scale warmth of the past decade for the NH is likely anomalous in the context of not just the past 1,000 years, as suggested in previous work, but longer. This conclusion appears to hold for at least the past 1,300 years (consistent with the recent assessment by ref. 2) from reconstructions that do not use tree-ring proxies, and are therefore not subject to the associated additional caveats. This conclusion can be extended back to at least the past 1,700 years if tree-ring data are used, but with the additional strong caveats noted. When differences in scaling between previous studies are accounted for, the various current and previous estimates of NH mean surface temperature are largely consistent within uncertainties, despite the differences in methodology and mix of proxy data back to approximately A.D. 1000. The reconstructions appear increasingly more sensitive to method and data quality and quantity before A.D. 1600 and, particularly, before approximately A.D. 1000. Conclusions are less definitive for the SH and globe, which we attribute to larger uncertainties arising from the sparser available proxy data in the SH. Given the uncertainties, the SH and global reconstructions are compatible with the possibility of warmth similar to the most recent decade during brief intervals of the past 1,500 years. A targeted effort to recover additional high-quality, long paleoclimate proxy records from the SH could reduce these current existing uncertainties. Similarly, reducing uncertainties for the period before A.D. 1000 for the NH will require additional proxy records of sufficient length that preserve climate signal on the millennial time scale.
Some things stick out: - worrying about a 0.5 C spike over from 1995-2000 (not that large IMO) - let's your mind finish the Hockey stick graph by omitting 2000-2013 - mainly a Northern hemisphere chart - admits similar 5 year spikes may have happened - 1000 years is not long geologically speaking - I see no a -> c reasoning that CO2 is the cause of this
Policy changes limiting CO2 emissions seem like political waste and a burden on the economy to me. Regulate companies for other reasons than carbon emissions but don't waste your time and money on something that doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.
How about SO2 emissions? Realistically they have a very measurable and harmful impact, but are often less discussed. There are many lakes in your country that have become dead due to acidification caused by acid rain.
SO2 emissions are declining, regulation isn't all bad. Investing in technology and subsidizing solutions until they become economical is a much better idea than gutting industries providing needs or useless cap and trade political schemes.
I don't know nearly enough to 'know' how real climate change is but my biggest doubt about it is that were dealing with a phenomena that takes place over tens of thousands of years. We don't have data going back far enough to say that this rise in temperature is unusual.
(Reuters) - President Barack Obama's healthcare law will reduce American workforce participation by the equivalent of 2 million full-time jobs in 2017, the Congressional Budget Office said on Tuesday, prompting Republicans to paint the law as bad medicine for the U.S. economy.
In its latest U.S. fiscal outlook, the nonpartisan CBO said the health law would lead some workers, particularly those with lower incomes, to limit their hours to avoid losing federal subsidies that Obamacare provides to help pay for health insurance and other healthcare costs.
On February 05 2014 12:54 zlefin wrote: re: Danglars, would it have to be a conservative with a plan to fix the country? I could make a plan to fix the country, then you could vote for me Sadly, actual plans to fix everything, tend to be unpopular, so I don't expect to be able to win.
We divide these fixes into topics. I have ideas to fix problems in these areas, and maybe I have enough people agreeing on most of them to elect me as their representative to enact these changes.
17 trillion dollars of debt, over 100 trillion dollars of unfunded liabilities. Is this a problem worth addressing? Can we, in effect, pay of the interest as we go and raise revenues to meet shortfalls? Or, How would you address this problem? Is curtailing of discretionary spending a good idea, and how should that be pursued?
How should budgets be pursued with an opposing party? How much is open to compromise, how much if any is worth a partial government shutdown to pursue?
States have legalized marijuana use in contravention of federal law. Is selective enforcement a solution, is repeal of existing federal law a solution, is greater enforcement-assertion of federal authority-a solution?
The PPACA promised to give hope to those trying to obtain insurance with pre-existing conditions, a plan to lower or subsidize insurance costs for everyone, a plan to combat coverage costs internally through a mandate, increase the minimum standard of insurance, as well as other taxes and regulations. Is it successful, do we amend it, do we repeal it, and if repealed do we pass other legislation? What other legislation should we pass, if so, and what big problems would it solve and how?
Existing immigration law is being routinely violated, and the size of the illegal aliens is such that deportation is a fantasy. Is existing immigration law a problem in language, a problem in enforcement, and what new laws or new appropriations should occur? Should changes in enforcement and law occur simultaneously for citizenship (or other statuses)? Should no changes be enacted, but legalization or amnesty be pursued?
Should the US be involved in the conflicts in Syria? How much, if any, assistance should be given to the nations we have previously invaded to repel terrorists or support their governments? America is routinely behind other OECD countries in various metrics of education. Is it fixable, what is the source, what is the solution?
Several more important topics exist
When you say, zlefin, "a plan to fix the country" it really is multiple plans on a variety of issues. Some positions of a candidate might be unpopular. Sometimes a candidate may take up a position to win an election, but not really believe it. Sometimes a candidate will publicly state his position and never fight for it against those holding other positions. That's the credibility crisis, and that's the problem with saying "a plan."
It takes an especially articulate candidate to win support to an unpopular position, something that has been lacking in a Republican candidate for over 30 years. If its to the tune of, "sorry guys, we can't afford all the cake and candy, we must stop robbing the next generation," it just might awaken some dormant paternal/maternal instinct. Do not pick the lavish vacation today, sacrifice now to give that kid a brighter future. If it even makes more sense, persuading someone through dialogue that supply depot on 10 is better than supply depot on 6 to get an army fast.
responding anyway cuz I feel like it. with the usual caveats, and in order:
Yes it should be addressed. People get less time in retirement, with enough notice of when they'll be allowed to retire that they can still plan with it well. Fixing the pay-in pay-out ratio can be done fine. Set it to automatically scale well, instead of these tiny piddling increases in retirement age. Also see about developing transition plans from full work to part work or easier work rather than full retirement. Assess an option for one year off plan to achieve life goals while going back to work after. These problems are due to core spending, and have to be fixed by adjusting core spending, rather than discretionary. Also massive cuts to the needlessly bloated and poorly setup military budget.
Opposing party? Get out of the attitude of opposing parties, alot of the problem is due to parties acting as antagonists rather than cooperating for the good of the country. Even with different views, you can still cooperate well. And shutdown down government is very bad.
Following the federal law as written is the solution to that marijuana issue. If federal law were followed as written, Marijuana would be moved to about a schedule 3 substance, and then there would be no problems with some states legalizing it.
Keep it for now, see it how it works out once we've gotten more of the kinks out of it. Focus for now on tweaking it to try and make it work better. Wait til around 2018 to reassess whether the program is really working or should be scrapped for something else. Opening up more transparency in medical costing, one of the problems is that doesn't work at all like a market, many states are already passing laws to address that, particularly by requiring information about prices to be available. Keep making and experimenting with those laws and see how they work out.
There are many possible paths that could work. Too many fail to consider how immigration can be used to fix things like social security. People come because they can make money, undercutting their ability to make money works better, because it removes their motivation to come here. Go after the employers of them rather than the illegals themselves, if they can't make any money here they'll self-deport. Employers also tend to have actual assets of significant value, and have a lot more to lose, and are higher profile. Provide sufficient alternatives that it's just not worth the risk to hire illegals rather than legals, which shouldn't be hard given the unemployment numbers in the country.
Yes, but with better long-term plans and exit strategies than are being apparently used. Right now the best plan is to force a reasonable settlement for some partial goals so that syria can focus on the really nasty terrorist rebels. This will require pressure on both Syrian gov't, and the rebels we're supporting to accept a deal. If rebels will not agree to that, say we can't support them anymore. Moderate help to other governments seems reasonable, we have a lot of money to throw around, we should use it. Money is also easier than American lives, and in other parts of the world american money can hire an awful lot of people. For the amount of money we spent in afghanistan we could have literally hired about a third of the country.
An overhaul of the education system to fix alot of known issues. There are academics who know alot about how to fix these things, they're just not listened to enough. The other problem of course is that education is rather a state matter, so it's hard to fix at the federal level which I mostly look at. Devising better curricula is trivial, given the vast amount of wasted knowledge they teach.
the immediate impact of global warming is basically a lot of droughts and storms, and water wars. it will fuck over the less developed parts of the world the most. africa and south asia
As far as I'm aware there have actually been fewer extreme weather events since the 50s. The example of category 5 tornadoes spring to mind. Same with hurricanes. Since we started having reliable measurements, we haven't seen an increase. I believe this includes droughts as well, but I'll have to check again.
Either way, I'm not about to let anyone use the green movement so they can grab more power (since that is always the goal of government). Technology gets more efficient with time, no need to stifle entire economies for it. It's ignorant to say that without a heavy hand of government that we would run on essentially the same polluting processes in 50 years that we do today. They will still be around, but they will be improving. Don't need to overregulate.
(regardless of whether or not they actually have an effect worth being concerned about)
On February 06 2014 09:15 oneofthem wrote: the immediate impact of global warming is basically a lot of droughts and storms, and water wars. it will fuck over the less developed parts of the world the most. africa and south asia
I thought we had another 2 years to save the earth before it cooks? At least, that's what I heard Gore say back in 2006 (a decade). How imminent is humanity's death if my allies get their way and prevent gov't regulation on CO2 emissions?
EPT
To this day, marijuana is highly stigmatized in the South, with many of those states carrying out some of harshest small time possession punishments in the country. 
