Page 167 of 182 FirstFirst ... 67117157165166167168169177 ... LastLast
Results 1,661 to 1,670 of 1814

Thread: OT: Politics

  1. #1661
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,869
    On or about December 1, 2017, STONE texted Person 2, *And if you turned over anything to the FBI you*re a fool.* Later that day, Person 2 texted STONE, *You need to amend your testimony before I testify on the 15th.* STONE responded, *If you testify you*re a fool. Because of tromp I could never get away with a certain [sic] my Fifth Amendment rights but you can. I guarantee you you are the one who gets indicted for perjury if you*re stupid enough to testify.*
    Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.
    I work for the company building the Paragon...once we figure out a name

  2. #1662
    Insider Unfated33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    760
    I don't think Bannon was the contact, as there are text messages that state that Bannon won't return Stone's calls. Could be Manafort, I guess.

  3. #1663
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,869
    Brazen to try and pass another tax cut for the wealthy with the nation's finances what they are.

    https://thehill.com/policy/finance/4...the-estate-tax
    Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.
    I work for the company building the Paragon...once we figure out a name

  4. #1664
    Quote Originally Posted by PBSteve View Post
    Brazen to try and pass another tax cut for the wealthy with the nation's finances what they are.

    https://thehill.com/policy/finance/4...the-estate-tax
    virtue signaling to the doner class.

    keep the poor voting for you with fear, keep the rich paying you for tax cuts. why stop now? its worked so well.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  5. #1665
    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncn...7cK47eyc3HWcMA

    anyone who thought the foxconn deal was real was either lying to your face about it, or too stupid to realize how blatant a scam it was.

    #1, the LCD business is circling the toilet, a simple google search could have provided this to anyone
    #2, they dont need any additional capacity, again, google
    #3, there is no way such an industry can support a USA assembly plant

    literally 30 seconds on google to see this didn't pass the sniff test.

    republicans are either too stupid to care .... OR they are you lying to your face.

    it really is that simple.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  6. #1666
    Insider PBSteve's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    2,869
    If there was still any confusion, Turtle McConnell has confirmed that voter participation in our democracy is bad for Republicans and the GoP will fight it.

    Wouldn't want everyone to have a day off work to go vote, especially people who can't afford to.
    Comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.
    I work for the company building the Paragon...once we figure out a name

  7. #1667
    file under: in almost every possible way factually incorrect



    they are either too stupid to know they are wrong, or they are lying to your face.

    in reality, wind and solar are actually price competitive with fossil fuels, and other countries are using them as majority power sources.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

  8. #1668
    Insider
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,154
    Supports Inception Designs
    There is a power choreography problem, and there is a storage problem, but we're well below the point of diminishing returns on solar installs. Cost, yes, no argument there for the marginal install case, but that doesn't mean it's a fully viable replacement technology. We should do more of it, but also continue to develop alternative base load.

    Obviously you aren't going to fully replace base load with wind, but it's much better to have flexible base load at low cost and carbon consumption (ng turbine) so that you can gracefully meet demand conditions.

    The single biggest factor in reducing carbon output in America has been fracking causing reduction in coal base load.

    At any rate there is zero chance the world writ large meets carbon emission targets so it's not unreasonable to write the benefit of lowering carbon emission to zero, in the full knowledge that some other geoengineering solution will be deployed if and when things get bad. I don't relish this position, but it's been obvious for a decade at the very least and implicitly part of the public discussion since at least "freakonomics".

    Obviously that's less ideal than global action twenty years ago to convert to nuclear, which is the only reasonable alternate history for agw, but it's over now. If fossil fuels bring more people out of poverty more rapidly (global scale) they can absolutely be net positive.

    Now, if the argument is that incentives for new industries in the Midwest is good from a demand side economics perspective, I absolutely agree.

  9. #1669
    Insider
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    1,154
    Supports Inception Designs
    The GOP problem is also best explained by Lawrence Lessig. They're greedy first, racist scum second, though both can be true.

  10. #1670
    Quote Originally Posted by Lurker27 View Post
    There is a power choreography problem, and there is a storage problem, but we're well below the point of diminishing returns on solar installs. Cost, yes, no argument there for the marginal install case, but that doesn't mean it's a fully viable replacement technology. We should do more of it, but also continue to develop alternative base load.

    Obviously you aren't going to fully replace base load with wind, but it's much better to have flexible base load at low cost and carbon consumption (ng turbine) so that you can gracefully meet demand conditions.

    The single biggest factor in reducing carbon output in America has been fracking causing reduction in coal base load.

    At any rate there is zero chance the world writ large meets carbon emission targets so it's not unreasonable to write the benefit of lowering carbon emission to zero, in the full knowledge that some other geoengineering solution will be deployed if and when things get bad. I don't relish this position, but it's been obvious for a decade at the very least and implicitly part of the public discussion since at least "freakonomics".

    Obviously that's less ideal than global action twenty years ago to convert to nuclear, which is the only reasonable alternate history for agw, but it's over now. If fossil fuels bring more people out of poverty more rapidly (global scale) they can absolutely be net positive.

    Now, if the argument is that incentives for new industries in the Midwest is good from a demand side economics perspective, I absolutely agree.
    you wont find nuanced power/engineering discussion with them, why bother? its not a discussion in good faith. THE DONT CARE.

    tucker is wrong, full stop, no ifs ands or buts about it. hes wrong. either on purpose, or hes too stupid to know hes wrong.

    its that simple.
    social conservatism: the mortal fear that someone, somewhere, might be having fun.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •