Global Warming: The New Religion

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

That did not answer my question. You said they were failures. How are they failures?

[Learstang]

Renrich, we may have the most dynamic and largest economy in the world but we need to look at it a little more closely and see where the money is going, because it sure as Hell isn’t going to the middle class. Middle class wages have remained stagnant, at best, under this 52 months of GDP growth you mention. GDP growth doesn’t really mean that much to the vast majority of people if they gain nothing from it. I do think the economy is in shambles, and as one who’s unemployed I know firsthand just how swimmingly things are going, and I’ve been around the block once or twice (don’t think you’re lecturing some leftwing kid just out of college). It’s interesting that you mention the 80’s, as that’s when Reagan was in power, intent on deregulating everything, including the Savings and Loans. An unregulated free-market system is a recipe for disaster (see Depression, Great). I don’t propose, nor do most progressives, a state-controlled command economy like the Soviet Union had (we saw how well that worked out). What most of us propose is a regulated free-market system, where the people are protected from the worst depredations of laissez-faire economics (see Barons, Robber; Labour, Child, etc.). Call that paternalistic, if you must, but it’s the way that makes the most sense for the most people. What regulations are for is not to create bureaucracy or undue burdens on business, but to make sure that they behave in a responsible manner to society, just as we have criminal laws to regulate individual citizens’ behaviour (you don’t propose getting rid of criminal laws, do you?). The problem with this economy is that we privatise gain (look at the huge bonuses the Fortune 500 CEO’s receive) and we socialise loss, as with the S&L crisis. We don’t get to see the profits these companies make, but we sure see our money being used to prop them up when they overextend themselves, such as Lockheed back in the 70’s and the mortgage companies today. I know firsthand a little bit about companies overextending themselves in the absence of regulations, having worked for the late, lamented Enron. I agree that the responsibility for high oil and gasoline prices can’t just be left on Bush’s doorstep, but I know damn well that if this had happened under the Clinton administration, it would all be Bill’s fault, even though for 6 years of his presidency he didn’t control the legislative branch, just the opposite of Bush’s situation. My problem with Bush is he seems to think that drilling everywhere in the U.S. is the solution, when mandating (yes – MANDATING) higher gas mileage standards for our vehicles and promoting conservation would be much more effective.

[freebird]

Originally Posted by renrich

The simple answer to the question about socialism versus whatever you want to call our form of government is that the less socialism the more freedom and the more dynamic the economy is. The US has the most dynamic economy in the world and also the largest. In the meantime we are also supporting the largest and most effective military in the world. Chris, in the countries you mentioned, what would their budgets and or tax code look like if they continued to spend on social programs but spent as much on defense as we do. This takes place in spite of the US becoming more socialistic every year.

The opposite to "pure socialism" would be "pure capitalism"

I consider myself a conservative, but a "progressive" and I believe a moderate.

Ren if you were to "roll back" all of the socialism creeping in, what would your country be like? Eliminate all social programs, end all govenment regulations, revoke all laws that ban discrimination?

If the elderly or the handicapped or mentally challenged have nowhere to go, what do they do? Beg on the street? or just starve to death?

Why should I have to pay for some handicapped kid or veteran who has lost a leg? let him go out and get a job. Or be more careful in the first place!

Banks should certainly be free from all of the FEC & antitrust red-tape, they would be much more profitable. If I put my money in a bank and the manager embezzles all of the funds, it's hardly the governments business, I should have been more careful.

Why should the government get involved in product safety standards? If the manufacturer has a poor product then market forces will eliminate him from the marketplace. If my kids eat twinkies with mercury in them or if a Widget explodes and blows out my kid's eye, well that's my problem = BUYER BEWARE

Why should the government meddle in the affairs of the Widget-making factory? If a worker is injured - he's fired. Bring in workers from Mexico or wherever to work for $2 an hour. Don't make the employer fill out pesky forms to require green cards etc. If the factory owner wants to pour his industrial waste into the river that's his business. If you don't like pollution then don't pollute, that's your free choice. If I choose to that's my choice.

If I own a rental property it should be my choice to what kind of people I want to live there, the government shouldn't be sticking it's nose into my business. If I want to advertise "No Muslims" or "No colored" need apply - well that's my business.

Shall we eliminate all of these "Socialist programs"?

I think "Pure Capitalism" would be just as unworkable as "Pure Socialism", {where everybody is paid the same, and only those who feel like it would show up to work.}

[renrich]

Chris, "failure" is a poor choice of words on my part. I should have said that relative to the US form of government, more socialistic governments IMO are not as successful or as likely to provide an environment where the citizens enjoy the maximum amount of freedom and opportunity to get ahead. You could say that the government of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela is not a failure because he still governs. Most other communist governments have failed in that those countries no longer have that system but rather a form of socialism. Of course, the terms, socialism and communism have many gradations but they certainly have some things in common. I believe that there is no perfect form of government because of man and his frailties. However the US form is probably the best that has been devised. There is no question however that we in the US are gradually moving into a more socialistic form of government. There are even greater or lesser opportunities for freedom and opportunity between the several states of the US. No one could deny that there is less government interference in Texas than there is in California. Right now, the dimocrat party is basically the party of the "public sector." The GOP represents the "private sector." The public is growing and the private is shrinking. If this trend continues,taxes will increase and the overall standard of living will not continue to improve and may even decline. We will grow less and less able to defend ourselves and our interests because our military will be starved of funding in favor of public programs. If, for instance, we have socilised medicine, we will have a bigger shortage of doctors than we already have. Good and timely medical care will be hard to find. Some dimocrats have already said they want to nationalise the oil companies. That will result in smaller supplies of petroleum and higher prices. FDR will turn out to be prophetic when he said that the communist system in the USSR will become more like us and we will become more like them.

[freebird]

The debate Socialism vs. Capitalism continues on the political thread...

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/pol...tml#post380688

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by renrich

Chris, "failure" is a poor choice of words on my part. I should have said that relative to the US form of government, more socialistic governments IMO are not as successful or as likely to provide an environment where the citizens enjoy the maximum amount of freedom and opportunity to get ahead.

You see that is relatively speaking. The people over here flourish and are just as successful as in the United States.

Here you can own your own business, you can live as you want, you can do as you want. It is no different as is the United States (except that the gun laws are more strict). Sure you pay higher taxes, but you get something in return for it.

It is basically another form of Capitalism that just believes in taking care of its citizens. That is not a bad thing is it?

The people over here love life just as much and are no less "Free" than someone who lives in the United States. For instance the government here will help you build your own business and help you stay on your feet. The people over here have the same oportunities and the same chances. Only two real differences: Taxes and Gun Laws.

Please dont take me wrong. I don't care for Socialism to come to the United States either, but I really get the feeling that most Americans do not understand Socialism. They all try and throw it into Communism and that it most certainly is not! They are simply afraid of what they do not understand.

Basically what I am getting at renrich, is that I dont think you realize how it truely is over here, nor do you really care to know. You have already made a judgement and sorry but it is not the truth.

I do not wish to offend you, and that is not my intentions here. I am just trying to clear this stigmatism that Socialism (as it is in Western Europe) is evil bad communism and that people have no freedoms. It is not so.

[renrich]

Chris, I appreciate your attempt to enlighten me about my perhaps ignorant and incorrect ideas about Europeans and their way of life and government. I have a brother who has been an expat for the last 20 years in Saudi Arabia, Holland and now Italy. I have heard him talk about life in Europe. I have no doubt that you, your relatives and friends are happy with your life there. Really it is basically what type of life you are used to living. To me, I believe that I know better how to allocate my income than the government does. Of course there are government agencies here who will help one start a business. There are also government agencies that will help buy a home. I used to build FHA and VA homes. There are strings attached to that help naturally. I think that one thing Europeans fail to realise about Americans is how close we are in time to frontier days when government was practically non existent. My grandfather was in a para military group that fought battles against Indians and Mexicans. I was born less than 100 years after the Alamo fell. I remember quite well being on a farm with no indoor plumbing and having to heat water over a woodstove to take a weekly bath. My mother taught school in a one room school house and drove a horse and buggy to that school. The reason I bring this up is that many of us in the US were brought up believing that if we did not take care of ourselves and our kin, we could not depend on someone else. I still believe that way and I don't want to pay high taxes to a government for services I can provide for myself or seek out from some private enterprise. I don't have a quarrel with anyone from any other country about their form of government, as long as it does not conflict with the interests of the US. I will not force my ideas about government on them and I expect them to give me the same courtesy!

[Njaco]

Njaco, I can’t “prove” 100% that people are responsible for what’s happening with the climate, any more than you can “prove” 100% the existence of God. That’s not the point of science; scientific hypotheses are tested by observation and if the observations support the hypothesis then a consensus is reached about certain hypotheses, which then become “theories”, like gravity, for example. When there is a general consensus (it doesn’t have to be a complete consensus – that’s probably impossible to attain), then the “theory” becomes accepted. I can’t prove the existence of gravity to you either, 100%, but I can pretty well guarantee you that if you step off that 20-storey building, it’s going to be a long way to the bottom. As far as your money is concerned, when the insurance companies start going under because of the effects of climate change (stronger hurricanes, more tornadoes, coastal flooding), guess who’s going to have to bail them out – you and me. It’s like the old repair shop commercial, you can pay me now or you can pay me later. I’ll admit the George Wallace reference went over my head, you may have to explain it to me, being the ignorant lefty I am.

That sounds dangerous, that gravity thing. Wonder why the liberals haven't started to try to save the world because of it. When can we expect gravity credits? Or a 300lb person will be charged a higher fee than a 150lb person because of their larger gravity foorprint. Lets raise permit fees on people who live near fault lines because of what earthquakes MIGHT do about gravity. Or pass laws that lighter than air machines get energy credits or must be able to lift to a height of 100 feet. Where can I buy a pair of gravity-friendly sneakers - you know, the ones that have radon in the souls?

I think that is what you missed in reading this thread. I, myself don't deny GW, but I'm not about to have anybody, especially the government take my money because of - as you put it - "theories" and "hypothesis ". You said it best, "it doesn’t have to be a complete consensus – that’s probably impossible to attain)," and I'm not about to pay for this incomplete consensus. That is ridiculus. GW is real but mankind isn't the root cause of it all and I'm not paying for it.

The George Wallace refernece was in reply to your post that the liberals are right. Like George Wallace was right. Or even better, like Ray Nagin was right (NO will be chocolate again) or even Marion Barry - now theres a great liberal politician. Wait, gotta check my money in the freezer, make sure its not too cold.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by renrich

To me, I believe that I know better how to allocate my income than the government does.

And that is why I actually am on the same side as you in the socialism vs. capitalism.

I just dont think that socialism is the evil thing ath most Americans make it out to be, especially when they refer to it is as communism.

[Matt308]

I don't view the political realities of Europe as evil. But I do view it as a slippery slope that I do not wish my country to emulate.

[renrich]

Chris, I don't view socialism as evil except that many US politicians want our country to become even more socialistic than it already is. Example on a local level: LA town council putting moratorium on fast food places in a certain area because the people who live there are too fat. What business do they have telling people they are too fat or that they shouldn't eat fast food. To me that is government run amok. I don't know what one calls it but if the founding fathers knew about it they would turn over in their grave. Guess what will happen when and if we get socialised medicine? The next thing will be since obese people are provably health risks, there will be more actions taken like the LA town council or even more draconion. They will use as the excuse that since obesity is likely to make people sick, in order to keep from having to spend tax money for medical services for those that are obese, we need to put all obese people on diets. On the other hand, since I work hard at staying fit, healthy and with my weight under control, why should the government be able to take my tax money and spend it treating some person who does not use any common sense about diet and exercise. I say let people learn to deal with the consequences of their actions. Life should not be a no risk situation and we can't have everything perfect. I think that a lot of Europeans are comfortable with their brand of government, however socialistic it is and I say more power to them. Just don't say we should have it here because it is OK over there.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by renrich

Just don't say we should have it here because it is OK over there.

I agree, nore have I ever said we should have it. Like I said, I think we have the right system for our country. It is not perfect and should be refined but it is fine.

[renrich]

Yep, Chris, and we may have to wait awhile for the perfect system because the systems are run by people and none of us are perfect. That, to me is the biggest weakness of more socialistic systems and the weakness of our system too. Human nature wiil take over every time. If all people would always do what is best for the common good and be absolutely unselfish then we would not even need government and laws. Everyone would work hard and do the best they could and since everyone was pitching in there would be plenty of material things to spread around and nobody would be a slacker. The problem is that if there is no penalty for being a slacker, such as not having a roof or not having any food or clothing, some people just naturally won't put out. And if everyone is going to pretty much get the same amount of whatever, then there is no incentive to excel. That is human nature and that is why communism doesn't work. IMO, our liberal politicians keep forgetting about human nature or else they never understood it to begin with.

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

Originally Posted by renrich

Yep, Chris, and we may have to wait awhile for the perfect system because the systems are run by people and none of us are perfect. That, to me is the biggest weakness of more socialistic systems and the weakness of our system too. Human nature wiil take over every time. If all people would always do what is best for the common good and be absolutely unselfish then we would not even need government and laws. Everyone would work hard and do the best they could and since everyone was pitching in there would be plenty of material things to spread around and nobody would be a slacker. The problem is that if there is no penalty for being a slacker, such as not having a roof or not having any food or clothing, some people just naturally won't put out. And if everyone is going to pretty much get the same amount of whatever, then there is no incentive to excel. That is human nature and that is why communism doesn't work. IMO, our liberal politicians keep forgetting about human nature or else they never understood it to begin with.

I agree with you for the most part.

[pbfoot]

Originally Posted by renrich

, our politicians keep forgetting about human nature or else they never understood it to begin with.

but they do understand and thats how they achieve elected office