| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
wynsurfer
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 940
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2013 7:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
"21,000 deaths since 9-11". Where? certainly not in this country. The vast majority of these deaths are a direct result of the political instability we have created through waging unnecessary and imoral wars. The "war on terror" is creating terrorists faster than we can kill them.
The so called war on terror, and our millitary presence in the middle east , and asia is primarilly about securing energy contracts for the the energy industry and is funded by the U.S taxpayer. We are a disfunctional "democracy"
As Mr. Bard noted we do have the capacity to become nearly self sufficient in our energy needs, but unfortunately that will never happen because all our natural energy resources will be sold on the global markets for privately held company profits, with the U.S. consumer getting the shaft. Nothing will change.
These companies operate with nearly absolute impunity on a global scale taking whatever they want from whoever they want. We have been seeing the blowback from this for many decades.
Our tax dollars are funding this madness.
The quote by Ben Franklin was great! Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 4303
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2013 9:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Slinky and Stevenbard...
Emotionally, I agree that we have our own supplies of energy and do not need the mid-East. But, nationalizing the oil industry is what it appears you are suggesting. I disagree with that idea.
Maybe tariffs on foreign oil sources that reflect the cost of security? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wynsurfer
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 940
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2013 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nationalizing the industry will never happen. Perhaps some deal could be struck with the oil companies. After all it is a national resource, and should benefit America. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 4303
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2013 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
So...don't buy Mid-east oil. Check which brands do not purchase oil from these sources and buy there.
Many oil companies do not operate in the mid-east. So, you can purchase from those suppliers. Problem is....the independent stations may sell Exxon oil even if branded with another oil company. Several stations in my area claim to sell only non-Mideast oil. You may find the same in your area. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17748
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
From the master of half truths, mrgybe, comes another series of weaseling, lies, and half truths. For the Harvard Study, where mrgybe continues to insist that the New York Times article was
| Quote: | | attempting to confuse legal immigrants with those here illegally. More obfuscation. The Harvard Study's focus was on the contribution of legal immigrants |
He again ignores the quote from the Harvard study:
| Quote: | | the estimate suggests that undocumented immigrants’ net contribution to Medicare is about $2.5 billion |
On DDT, as well as on climate change, he continues to display not merely an ignorance of science, but a contempt for science and scientists. I won't go back and find his claim that DDT did not bioaccumulate in natural systems. Instead, I'll provide this quote and source:
| Quote: | The pesticide manufacturers said that the minute amounts found in the environment couldn't possibly be killing them. However, some experimental work demonstrated that even small amounts of some of the pesticides could affect the survival and reproduction of some species. More important, research demonstrated that, although concentrations were very low in the soil, atmosphere and water, concentrations were higher in plants, higher still in herbivores, and still higher as one moved up the food chain.
The indirect toxicity related to two principles :
(1) Bioconcentration – the tendency for a compound to accumulate in an organisms's tissues (especially in fatty tissues for fat soluble organochlorines such as DDT) and
(2) Biomagnification. – an increase in concentration up the food chain.
(These terms are sloppily used; sometimes "bioaccumulation" is also used to mean either of these, and people often use all of these terms interchangeably.)
Because DDT was (is) persistent, there was abundant opportunity for it to be taken up from the environment by organisms. For example, in the estuarine ecosystem next to Long Island Sound, the following concentrations of DDT were found:
BI390000.gif In water = 3 ppt (0.000003 ppm)
BI390000.gif In zooplankton = 0.04 ppm (bioconcentration and biomagnification from eating plants)
BI390000.gif In minnows = 0.5 ppm (bioconcentration + biomagnification) (Because of the inefficiency of energy transfer, each minnow has to eat lots of zooplankton, and so acquires quite a burden from them.)
BI390000.gif In large fish = 2.0 ppm
BI390000.gif In ospreys (fish eating birds) = 25.0 ppm
Thus, concentrations had increased 10 million times up this progression, largely because of biomagnification (differential uptake and secretion may also be involved). These concentrations were not always directly lethal to the highest order carnivores, but did impair their reproduction. DDT (actually, its breakdown product DDE) reduced the deposition of calcium in eggshells. The birds thus produced thinner shell that cracked more readily during incubation.
The populations of many predatory populations (the highest order carnivores), such as bald eagles and brown pelicans were nearly eliminated. The peregrine falcon disappeared in the eastern US as a result of reproductive failures by the 1960's.
DDT (and DDE, a breakdown products from DDT) also appeared in the fatty tissues of seals and Eskimos, far from any area of use, indicating that, because of its persistence, it was being transported for long distances in the atmosphere and by marine mammals and fishes. It also showed up in human breast milk at remarkably high concentrations -- so high that the milk couldn't legally be sold through interstate commerce if it were cow's milk! DDE is one of the most widespread contaminants in human milk around the world |
http://people.oregonstate.edu/~muirp/pesthist.htm
Concentrations increased 10 million times up the food chain. Mrgybe, who worked in the chemical industry and resists regulations of all kinds, is not merely uneducated and wrong, he is a persistent and serial liar.
We will leave the questions of following Mike Fick's outing of me, and making emissions from the Port of Oakland, while ignoring the emissions of Exxon's ships, a personal matter, behind. Mrgybe displayed no interest in the actual story. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
coboardhead
Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 4303
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2013 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| This is getting old...reminds me of Junior High. As soon as it gets heated up Timmy Johnson runs to the teacher to tattle. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
keycocker
Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3598
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 10, 2013 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Second the e. motion. Several posters here behave in ways that get detention for our high school kids.
Including an insult with nearly every remark will get you expelled at our school.
I spoke to two sailors at Kanaha who once read this board but left because they were offended at the childish behavior. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
From the NY Times:
| Quote: | The study drew on two nationally representative federal surveys, from the Census Bureau and the Department of Health and Human Services. Researchers included the contributions of legal residents who were not citizens, a group that is eligible for Medicare if certain requirements are met; unauthorized immigrants; and citizens who were born abroad.
It was not clear how much of the surplus was made up of earnings by immigrants in the country illegally, who are ineligible for most government programs.
The Census Bureau, whose data was used for the contributions portion of the study, says it attempts to count all immigrants, including those in the country illegally.
The finding “pokes a hole in the widespread assumption that immigrants drain U.S. health care spending dollars,” said Leah Zallman, an instructor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and the lead author of the study.
The study, which was published on the Web site of the journal Health Affairs on Wednesday, comes as Congress considers legislation that would eventually give legal status to the country’s 11 million unauthorized immigrants. The legislation has sparked a vigorous debate about whether immigrants ultimately contribute more than they receive from the federal budget. One of the sticking points has been whether immigrants should be eligible for government programs, including health benefits, before they qualify for citizenship, but while they are on the path to getting it.
The study was concerned only with Medicare, the federal program that accounts for about a fifth of all American health care expenditures. Experts said that the study’s findings served as a useful reminder that immigrants, at least for now, are extending the life of the beleaguered program, not hastening its demise.
“There’s this strong belief that immigrants are takers,” said Leighton Ku, the director of the Center for Health Policy Research at George Washington University. “This shows they are contributing hugely. Without immigrants, the Medicare trust fund would be in trouble sooner.” The belief prevails, for example, among some opponents of immigration reform.
The study did not grapple with the health care costs of immigrants over their full lifetimes, a calculation that economists say is critical to understanding their long-term impact on the federal budget.
“It’s just a snapshot of a point in time,” said Paul Van de Water, a visiting fellow at the liberal-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. |
The crux of the study suggests that immigrants, both legal and illegal are putting more money into Medicare than the are taking out. Well what a surprise! From the same article: | Quote: | | The median age of Hispanics, whose foreign-born contingent is by far the largest immigrant group, is 27, according to the Brookings Institution. The median age of non-Hispanic whites in the United States is 42. |
Don't you think at some point, almost ALL of these immigrants will be taking more from Medicare than they have put in? It's the same old pyramid scheme, keep the numbers of young people high so they can pay for the aging population's healthcare. However, at some point it will collapse, too many old people and not enough young.
Anyone with half a brain could have come up with the same conclusion as Harvard without studying anything. So what was the purpose of the study???? I have no problem with legal immigration, that's how this country came to be, but if the message from this "study" is that we have to keep importing millions of foreign young people to sustain our old, we could be in deep trouble. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mrgybe
Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 5180
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Has any one credible suggested that legal immigrants should not be eligible for government programs? Or that legal immigrants are a "drain on US health care spending dollars"? These are fictitious controversies created in an attempt to muddy the waters between the net contribution of those here legally and those here illegally. There is no worthwhile data that can correlate the amount of payroll taxes paid by illegal immigrants (clearly some do) and the cost of health services provided to that same population. The NYT commentary is pursuing an agenda, not stating the facts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
swchandler
Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 10588
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Relative to techno900's point about an ever growing number of retirees, or old people, we have to remember that the "baby boomers" are a finite group. While they represent a statically large group compared to subsequent generational groups, when they die the number of retirees will significantly drop over time. So, one must not readily assume a collapse as techno900 and many others suggest. Also, with the millions of younger illegal immigrants working in the US, it can be argued that they are helping to pay for the higher quantity of baby boomers during their retirement years. Moreover, if the millions of illegal immigrants now here are formally accepted as legal residents or citizens, we can surmise that with the higher birth rate normally attributed to their group, that the number of younger tax payers will statistically grow.
Overall, we have to remember that a more positive view can be made for the future. Why must we always assume a fatalistic view about things? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
