Why do people always have to call each other idiots? Is it so hard to accept other peoples beliefs, and try to have a discussion, where you don't attack each other personally? A discussion, where you seek to enlighten the counterparty with facts and logical arguments? This is especially true for YouTube, and makes me wonder, whether the anonymity provided by the internet really is that good.
Idiots who still believe this Global Warming Bullshit needs to wake the fuck up! It just shows how easy it is for the government to brainwash people! NO wonder the government is screwing us! People are sooo fucken stupid!
ron paul rejects science, rejects reality. Policy makers like him would put future generations at risk despite the many warning we have from the best science available. It's irrational and self-destructive. No thanks!
@ReduceGHGs You idiot! about 200 scientists have said the global warming is a hoax! People that teach science for a living have been saying this. And Ron Paul being a doctor understand more about science than Al Gore who's probably never even taken that many science class in his class! Global warming is a conspiracy. It's creating fear among ignorant, dumb sheeps like you and through that fear, large corporatiosn are making billions off it! That's what fear does. Same goes with Iraq war!
@ReduceGHGs If you were paying attention to the news and actually reading some of the stuff scientists were saying you would know what i'm talking about! Al Gore was one of the leading man that was fighting global warming! Look at the news, and the videos on youtube, and 300,000 scientists suing Al Gore for misleading the public abou the global warming hoax! People are so stupid they immediately assume the ice caps are melting in North Pole and going crazy! It's not my fault ur not informed!
@ReduceGHGs Global warming is merely a fearmongering scare tactic that corporations has used to make money off of! Many scientists are told to shut up so they can keep making money! NOt anymore though
@ReduceGHGs Read your channel inbox because I can't fit all the info hear to educate your sorry ass! Go read it dumb fuck i'll write it once more to educat a dumb gullible sheep likeyou!
@ReduceGHGs AL Gore even admitted that Global warming was an overexagerration and admit he's wrong! It's people like you, who needs to wake up and realize the government if fooling you and the real problem are the rulign elites, that are screwing u in the ass every night, because you're too stupid and ignorant to find out what's really going on in this world!
@ReduceGHGs Yeah i was definitely uninformed in the past when i believe in that global warming bullshit! I wrote a whole fucken thesis on it and now i know it's full of shit! Research it more dumbass!
@ReduceGHGs It's child not children! Children is plural! You can't even speak English correctly, don't talk Global warming! It's bullshit and it's about times idiots like you find out the truth!
Just stop a moment and think about it...taxpayer money given to tax payers to buy a home...where does that money go...THE BANKS PEOPLE and into the fractional reserve banking system A.K.A. = LEGAL COUNTERFEITING!!! End the FED and let's stop letting them rob us blind. VOTE RON PAUL 2012!!!
Scientific evidence shows the earth is cooling and we are heading to an ice age. Good on Ron Paul for fighting against the global warming hoax being pushed by Al Gore and the illuminati. RON PAUL 2012
@venx006 : EVIDENCE OUT OF YOUR ANUS?? Dear troll, please provide a source.
If you want to throw shit around - you might as well avoid associating it with your favourite candidate - it makes you look stupid - and the candidate look bad. What do you want to achieve?
And when he is asked if he Believes in evolution he states that (and this is commonly taught) That evolution is a theory so there for he does not "believe it" Because if you believe in theories that's pretty much no better than believing santa clause. He didn't say the findings on evolution theory are not credible or anything but that it is still regarded as a theory. Come on people be a little smarter pleeaase?
@AbsoluteClarity880 Does that make it any less ridiculous? That's like saying that because I didn't see or hear the tree fall in the forest, it never fell -- even though it's laying on the ground in front of me.
He said "a hoax ON the environment and global warming" He did not call global warming a hoax listen to what he actually says and the conversation leading up to what he says and what he says after. you all are derpin all over the place. It's making you look really dumb.
@AbsoluteClarity880 Whether he said "on the environment" or "on the people," the implication is the same. He believed it was a made-up scheme that would allow governments more control and give them another way to make money off of their people. He was ignoring the tens of thousands of people in academia and the scientific community who are leaps and bounds smarter than him when he said that.
You can try to spin it and defend your guy all you want. But don't deny that you're in denial.
@chadem311 He does not deny global warming (look up a video where he elaborates) he is only suggesting that it May be over blown on the side of human contribution. And that if we really want to do something about the environment we shouldn't rely on bureaucrats to set the standard because they're only interested in $. He's an old timer he's heard all sides of the story for a long time. He may not be 100% right on the issue but no one is perfect.
@AbsoluteClarity880 : He knows as an MD about scientific rigorous research principle - yet decides to shove them in his anus. Come on - should you really trust somebody like that? What if I had the same approach on medicine: "the link between HIV and AIDS is overblown" and invite non-experts to serve as experts and mislead?
@AbsoluteClarity880 : What is it with the Libertarian issue to believe bureaucrats are wall-street traders? can you explain? where does this syndrom come from? do you also always assume the referee has a vested interest if you do not like the verdict???
I got the impression for a while that Ron Paul was a rational, reasonable person with some extreme policy, some of it good, some of it iffy, a bit of it bad, overall acceptable. When it finally clicked that he was not rational or reasonable, but a nut... I was quite sad. He was the only potential viable candidate. Nice to have a choice.
@at42194 your not voting for him because of what now? The fact Global Warming is a hoax? Really? Do you still global warming is real? You probably think the end of the world is Dec 21 2012 too.... in that case your vote doesn't matter.
There are so many proofs on how global warming is true and if you can't accept it, then you are an idiot. You have no proof what so ever that global warming is a hoax. World ending on that date has no substantial proof. But Global Warming does.
How about you prove to me global warming is a hoax? If you think it is, you are an idiot.
"Global Warming is a hoax." I might be okay with that statement if it were made in 2001. But in 2009, with a near-unanimous scientific consensus on anthropogenic warming, this is a big blow to Ron Paul's respectability.
@chadem311 : especially considering an MD is supposed to have an integrity in terms of scientific topics - did he also get his MD by allowing himself to display such bullshit in his research project? is there any university who would allow it? it is either stupidity or a plain lack of honesty.
@nigelelsass DrPaul believes in CONSERVING THE ENVIRONMENT!so your point weather he believes it is 50%or100% mans fault does not matter because he does believe we should conserve the environment.just because he does not want to fix the problem with more government does not make him an environment hater!He has different solutions to solving the problem of global warming.The argument that he does not believe its 100% mans fault makes him stupid is moot he has solutions to solve it
@MrObveous777 : CORRECTION: he has NO CLEAR POSITION and also NO SOLUTION (except wait&pray). The argument that he has written as MD a research project - yet refuses on scientific matters to obey to the same standards he was held to should make you think.... did he in his MD work also write "I´ve read in a random book...".???
You guys are all missing the point. He's not denying man-made climate change. He's calling the fact that we use it as an excuse to keep dumping money into the toilet a hoax. Why don't you actually listen.
The fact that you're all calling it Climate Change now and not Global Warming is an example of how you're not thinking for yourselves and are just a product of what they're telling you to keep dumping your money away...
Ron Paul is a Hoax not Global Warming. Obama saved the economy and the "hyper-inflation" did not happen. Keep hating tea party corporatism. By the way its 60F outside Mid January in DC area. Global warming a hoax my ass... u got birds falling and dead fish everywhere. Glaciers continue melting.
@justindr660 However science shows that human activity probably does play a role in stimulating the current fluctuations.The question is how much? Rather than taking a “sky is falling” approach, I think there are common-sense steps we can take to cut emissions and preserve our environment. I am, after all, a conservative and seek to conserve not just American traditions and our Constitution, but our natural resources as well.- RON PAUL..there are other ways of solving this!!
more jobs, more business > global warming. These green idiots are killing jobs and feeding our foreign oil addiction and they don't even know it. If the market wants these solar panels and wind turbines people will buy, if they don't then don't force them to pay for that crap in taxes.
@nigelelsass ok green jobs. Just don't erase the coal mining and other energy jobs in this country just so green can catch up. The way these green people make green energy sound, it should be dominating the market. But its not because nobody but the government buys up this green garbage.
@PennySnap : No an energy source should ONLY receive subsidies if it provides a substantial benefit. I am myself from a former coal mining area. You can´t avoid the retirement of coal - it´s like cutting deficit - delaying it makes the transition only more painful. Put on coal a tax which reflects the real cost it induces (mercury, NOx, SOx, etc.); put on gas the real military cost it has - no more "hidden economics"
@nigelelsass subsidies? With what money genius? If green energy is so good it should dominate the market on its own. But it doesn't. Because no moron is going to want solar panels at night. And no idiot is going to want a wind turbine with no wind. All that green garbage is worthless and expensive. Expensive even when we subsidies it, because thats what happens when the government guarantees money. Prices go up.
@PennySnap : Well genius, nuclear received 70 billion for R&D... guess what? this is the energy sector and deployment has a cost... and NO, economically they cannot dominate the market due to the "split incentive" (read about game theory).
Before you say it´s worthless and expensive, you should know that wind can ALWAYS beat nuclear in costs and can in many cases beat coal and natural gas.
@nigelelsass The problem with wind is that it kills thousands of birds and kills extinct birds as well. My point is the government is NOT a good investor and CAN not see all of the pros and cons of an industry. the reason why government is NOT a good investor is because the money it uses to invest is not theirs. I would agree that the American government is corrupt and the only way to stop its corruption is to STOP giving it power.
@MrObveous777 : You obviously do not understand any economic instrument if you believe the governement is a direct investor. I wonder how the discussion can make sense then....
@PennySnap : These are guys llike you who would say "when government guarantees loan for nuclear, that makes it cheaper" but then make the contrary statement for renewables.
PS: investment certainty has always lowered costs - get your economics straight.
@nigelelsass investments from the private sector are the ONLY way to go mainly because Government makes bad investments.. When a renewable energy has MERIT INVESTORS WILL INVEST!...GOVERNMENT on the other hand will spend thousands of tax dollars ON A BET that a renewable energy will work..
@MrObveous777 : DO YOU SERIOUSLY not see the merits of renewable energy and how the benefit is not for investors??? Do you really need it explained on paper???
Nobody asks the government to invest - just to have an enabling framework - all this time I talk about internalizing economic externalities you understood nothing of it ???
Any BTW this is not a "bet it will work" - the demonstration stage is behind us. Do you not know the stages of product life-cycle?
@nigelelsass lol i don't believe i should be spending anything in taxes to subsidize products. Sugar prices doubled when the government started subsidizing that. If I want to use oil and coal thats my choice. Not yours or the governments. Because if I was using that solar trash it would cost way too much and my lights would go out every 5 minutes. Just face the facts, renewable energy is crap. Nobody buys it, thats why the government subsidizes it.
@PennySnap : IF you use oil and gas, that is a HARM to your peers - for both people alive now on the planet and future generations. Reducing their economic potential for you well being is robbery and always will. Polluting is NOT a right.
If nobody buys R-E, I even wonder why german exports are so strong and US ones stagnate - and the US market share in energy systems decline...
@PennySnap : And this is why your country is stagnating - your previous generations (of courageous Americans) - when facing a challenge would have said - we´ll do it. Modern days Americans are like "oh no, that´s not even possible and just imagining doing something differently than we do thing now would hurt my brain". There is a reason why you will decline. It is pretty obvious that failing to imagine a future different from the past is a major handicap.
@nigelelsass oh your a foreigner. Probably from the EU. The reason we are declining is because of all these left-wingers getting the attention of younger people. They want to stop economic growth with garbage like global warming so we can get back to the days when we had to grow our own food & live in crap. Also the socialist school system we have is a failure (just like socialism as a whole) & none of the students are motivated to do better. Ill take economic growth over pollution any day.
@PennySnap : The reason you are declining is clearly due to unwise choices. You really live in the past and this is why Asia will take over. I went to a socialist school system and was motivated to do better than anybody else - and did better than anbybody else. The school system is merit based - not income based. I´ll take economic growth without pollution (as no clear-cut choice has to be made) - and I´ll sell this infrastructure to additional countries.
@PennySnap : "In 2010, $187 BILLION WAS INVESTED IN LARGE AND SMALL SCALE RENEWABLES GENERATING CAPACITY EXCLUDING LARGE HYDRO
compared to $219 billion and $157 billion of gross and net fossil-fuel investment respectively, If the estimated $46 billion of large hydro investment is included in the renewable energy total, then renewables investment is clearly ahead of both gross and net investment in fossil fuel capacity" - what thou you say?
@nigelelsass well why is government spending all this money on energy. Government has no money. They only take from successful private companies and give it to failing companies. This makes no sense economically. Also, public sector jobs don't create wealth, just debt. They produce nothing of value.
@PennySnap : No sense economically to take from companies which do not pay their fair share and are involved in activities which (1) harm the US balance of payment, thus (2) increase the geostrategic risk for the US, (3) do not even contribute 1% to the defense cost (protection of supply route) the create, not even to mention the (4) corruption and lobbying they create.... you really do not see the merit in getting rid of these negative effects??? are you kidding boy?
@PennySnap : You´re right, the US should keep transfering money to Saudi Arabia, digging its deficit to ensure this activity, while granting tax breaks and subsidy for them, and thank them to confisc your democratic system. The US capitol shall be replaced by an Exxon-Saudi mosque/financial institution and US citizen enslaved to their masters they like so much.
@PennySnap : Fine, drill more offshore but it's the equivalent of giving more money to Greece - it just buys a pathetic amount of time - it does not resolve the wasteful use - it does reduce the cost to users - and then what? return to point zero where US domestic production drops anyway. Any country following this US model lacks of mental sanity - luckily more and more are shifting away from your marxist-productivist model (aka only production matters).
@PennySnap : In 2011, PV-generated electricity was as cheap as electricity from diesel genset in most developing countries - after a price drop from 50%. It is widely expected that PV will be as cheap as coal-based power in half of all countries as early as 2015... I am off course not sure you understand the implications of this. Your coal-industry not only will make you look like the bad guys for the whole century - but is also an economic sub-optimal choice for future investments.
@nigelelsass ok then. Why not let the consumer chose what he wants? Whats so wrong about freedom for consumers to buy what they want? The price of this green trash would drop like crazy if it wasnt for all the money they take from government. You see what im saying now? All these green companies live off government money, they don't need average consumers money. So they keep the price as high as they want and government buys their products at whatever price they choose.
@PennySnap : Because reaping the benefits requires an initial investment - just like other tech. The price drop is the result of the large-scale deployment phase which has been government funded. So you are once more wrong. You are DEAD WRONG to say these companies get their money directly from the gvt - and that they keep prices as high as they want - the good return led to more suppliers - more competition - increse in productivity-drop in prices.
@PennySnap : Sorry but I cannot let you make FALSE STATEMENTS - this is not a children playground and companies die if they cannot compete. ONLY IN THE US has the government funded companies directly - because people like you would have opposed creating a better and cleaner instrument of payment on delivery for clean energy. And as the framework is highly uncertain in the US (because you cannot agree) - such solutions are more expensive in the US due to investment uncertainties !!!
@nigelelsass look, this going green stuff is just a way for government to try and create jobs. But public sector jobs aren't real jobs. The climate change crap is over exaggerated. Climate has changed since the beginning of earth, and now we think somehow we have something to do with it. I mean, places in Africa are sitting on tons of coal. But we say "ohhh no, you can't use that. You can only use less efficient solar panels."
@PennySnap : Are companies like Vestas, GE, SolarWorld, etc. public??? They are on the stock market for goodness sake!
Comparing climate change with predictions, scientists say "we are looking at the higher end of the projections" = it is worse than predicted/modelled. This is reality supported by measurments, not a statement from a nobody on the street.
We KNOW that we have to do with it because we MEASURE IT (radiative forcing).
@PennySnap : I travel often to Africa and can say that what you state is a falsehood circulated in the US. First coal is mostly available in South Africa, then countries where there are no users (Namibia, Jungle in RDCongo). There is no electricity grid which is why 80% of populations do not have power. Do you think the grid which is 10-100 miles away or solar panel which can bring power on-site will deploy first? sorry to breal you skewed view.
@PennySnap : you´re right - all these green manufacturing jobs haves really been a plague to Germany and Sweden - and as if would not be enough - are now decimating China by adding clean energy jobs and reducing its air pollution - it´s obviously bad to everybody.
Global warning is most probably not an hoax, but there are people trying to exaggerate its impact and benefit from it. The increase in temperature is extremely tiny and there is no consensus on the severity of the consequences of global warming. The problem built over the years and I don't believe any policies will be able to reverse this. The right course of action would rather be to adapt to climate related changes and if possible implement "low cost" policies to reduce CO2 & methane emissions
I'm sad to see the NWO successfully brainwashed so many people to actually believe in the Global Warming theory.
What's wrong with you people? Do you have the same short term memory of a gold-fish?
Don't you even remember that the people hired to PROVE SCIENTIFICLY that it was a fact, faked their own results which was revealed when their E-mails were HACKED.
Of course, if you spend alot of money on something, it must be true.
Icecaps are melting because of heat/cold periods across centuries.
@puttefnask: My dear frind, the radiative forcing increased at specific wavelenght of man-made GHG, This is the real proof. Everything else is pointless.
You are obviously not a western as we westerners state that nothing is without a cause - therefore your point on heat/cold periods (there is no indication we are in such a case) is void.
@nigelelsass you wanna try something new?don't let the government intervene and let individuals sue in court over property rights see how fast corporations change. Government has been working very hard at solving this problem in the 70's and so far IT HAS NOT WORKED! clean coal- Billions of tax payer money wasted and it is uneconomical and they are still trying to develop it and failing horribly..
@MrObveous777 : Do you have the courage and honesty to answer my question - yes or no? DID YOU or not put words in my mouth which are not from me ???????
@nigelelsass YES I did put words in your mouth as I was over exaggerating to make the point that A) I was not complaining about global warming as YOU said i was(your complete fabrication) B) if anything YOU were complaining because you were making the case for global warming...I do concede to some extent man kind is playing a roll in global warming. I am not presenting the case for global warming but for the good DR.'s solutions. I AM DEFENDING DR.PAUL NOT COMPLAINING!
@MrObveous777 : For global warming to be cause "to some extent" by man-kind would require a long term driver which also leads to warming - there are none know on the long term.
@MrObveous777 : Individuals and even nations have sued corporations in courts and it has FAILED. The world is full of cases in which corporations have not paid for the harm they have caused. Your idea might work on a national level - certainly not on a transnational level. In addition to that - suing DOES NOT PREVENT ANYTHING - it often grants "pity money afterwards - far less than the damage which occurred". Do you call this economically optimum????
@nigelelsass so can I ask you something? If to much government is a complete failure due to corruption (Solyndra, clean coal, Corn subsidies) and often do not help the environment. AND the free market is a failure because of corruption within government failing to rule in favor of citizens how do you propose we fix this solution? more government? also you fail to see how suing prevents corporations from doing bad things the reason why things dont get done is political corruption
@MrObveous777 : I propose MARKET INSTRUMENTS which distort the "laissez-faire" to achieve on effect. Most pro-market solutions defend this - with the exception of market anarchists. Reshuffling the taxation system to achieve an environmental solution DOES NOT need more government and can actually reduce government size when compared to other forms of taxation. WHERE the taxes are is a different discussion than the size of the government.
1) The US has supported "selected solutions" instead of the market deciding on the solutions (e.g. spec. technologies i.e. clean coal, corn ethanol, etc.)
2) The US has supported selected companies
3) Due to US congress and senate, the US has no set the incentive on a clear even playing field for achieving the goal (e.g. reducing emissions)
CONCLUSIONS: market instruments work - but the US has gone instead for "inefficient, ineffective distorted solutions"
@MrObveous777 : 1) Governments has NOT worked on solving GW in the 70´s; 2) Government worked on solving acid rains problem in the late 70´s using cap-and-trade (a market-based approach) and it has worked beyond expectations; 3) What kind of free marketer are you to impose a single solution instead of letting the market unleash its creativity? Like many "so-called" free market proponents you advocate markets - yet seem to trust them less than I do ?!?!?
@nigelelsass the reason why the free market is flawed is because people are not always rational. and the problem with to much government is it often uses its power for political corruption. People are flawed creatures. and so the theory created is as flawed. I am not making the case that the free market is absolutely perfect I am making the case that more government=political corruption. are there exceptions yes but the U.S founders were cautious of giving Govt to much power as am I
@MrObveous777 : I MAKE THE CASE that market instrument which complete the free market to achieve a given goal work, if well designed and implemented in a fair and uniform manner. I studied the models of US NOx cap-and-trade and it has worked. I studied the model of Swedish refunded tax and it has worked. I studied the model of German regulatory approach and it has worked (although it was more expensive than the US and Swedish model).
@nigelelsass Regarding cap and trade it is not utilizing the market.. the only think it does is raise taxes and creates tons of restrictions. restrictions and regulations.. from a free market perspective it kills jobs. Milton Friedman did speak about taxing carbon emissions but not in the way cap and trade proposes. $175(every citizen) a year for cap and trade at its height NO THANK YOU!
@MrObveous777 : I give you just one example in the US: New Jersey participated to the New England regional greenhouse gases initiative - revenues from the fee applied where meant to be returned to consumer on their bill (good idea to lower the base connection rate and increase the per kWh cost)... and what happened? Governor Christie raided the revenue and allocated the money (meant to be returned to consumers) to some %&§!%... I would understand if this were to happen in some 1/3rd world countr
@nigelelsass the CBO's analysis looks solely at the year 2020, before most of the tough restrictions kick in. As the cap is tightened and companies are stripped of initial opportunities to "offset" their emissions, the price of permits will skyrocket beyond the CBO estimate of $28 per ton of carbon. The corporate costs of buying these expensive permits will be passed to consumers.
@nigelelsass I also have a hard time understanding what you say. Are you from the U.S? because honestly you just list things and it is not very coherent... I may be disorganized sir but you your self seem to be just as Incoherent as I am. one last thing I take my time to respond to you because I want to make sure I know what I am talking about and I put a lot of thought into what I write which kind of makes me a bit sad that you don't understand me I put a lot of time in my comments
@ChristianPhysicist No offense but Romney is a very deceptive person. Romney is also a Pseudo capitalist aka corporatist. I would take a socialist over him because I do not want to let capitalism to get a bad rep under him. he would give all his friends at Goldman Sachs a lot of money the banks have donated a lot to his campaign already. and he is probably going to repay the favor once he is in office =\
@ChristianPhysicist I would agree Ron Paul has never caused him to be a hypocrite. But Ron Paul does tell you to look at everyone's records.. I did romney was by far the most inconsistent person running..Ron Paul is also the MOST consistent person running. Ron Paul and would do exactly what he said UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION
@ChristianPhysicist How exactly is Ron Paul wrong on global warming? being ideologically consistent is VERY IMPORTANT. what happens when Mitt changes positions once he gets on stage with Obama? or better yet what happens when he changes positions when he is in the white house? How can you trust someone who has been given tons of money from special interests?believe me if it comes down to repaying these favors to special interests he will through crony capitalism..
@MrObveous777 1) Ron Paul is so wrong on Global warming, he has to change his position, Global warming is human made.
2) Mitt Romney has been consistent with intelligence, he won't do something stupid. I don't really care how many times he has changed his position, I am a moderate.
But listen if Mitt changes his moral positions, he will not get elected, so he won't do it.
3) why in the world do you attack Romney?? We Romney supporters already made up our minds, go focus on Gingrich
@ChristianPhysicist how do you think crony capitalism works? big corps or big businesses give tons of donations to politicians and then in tern these politicians pay them back by regulating competitors out of the market. it was funny listening to Romney talk about being against crony capitalism when he is "cozying up" with special interests it was also funny listening to him dodge a question about taking money from farmers who wanted subsidies =\
@ChristianPhysicist Ron Paul is more right than any one on that stage.he is not pandering 2)every one is fallible including Dr.Paul and may be wrong in some areas but Ron Paul has researched his positions thoroughly and understands them. he really showed this a few debates ago when he said he would be at home reading an economics textbook when all the other nominees would be watching a foot ball game. we need pres that actually READS BOOKS! AND KNOWS WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT
@MrObveous777 : My point is - that there is often a widespread confusion - and critic of good economic approaches - which fail - not because they are not good - but because the US is very prompt to gaming/lobbying (some would call it "more corrupt than the average western democracy").
@nigelelsass If we had a small government no one would lobby because Lobbyists want POWER. if the government has no power then lobbyists would leave government alone because they would not be able to get any more power than they already have. so the ONLY reason they lobby the GOVERNMENT IS because THE GOVERNMENT HAS POWER AND GOVERNMENT CAN GIVE THEM POWER. that is all this is about power over competition..
@MrObveous777 : Ok a side remark: WHY OH WHY do US free marketers advocate the free market - yet do not trust the market and need to depict only old known and existing solutions to acccept the market - even if these solutions are suboptimal ant the market can do better (this is a behavioral pattern I observe over and over again); Does it have something to do with the fact you are stuck with only conservatives being pro market solutions and you have little to no pro-market progressives?
@nigelelsass I can prove to you that the free market works.and you can prove to me that big government works. intervention leads down a path to serfdom. I would much rather have a flawed free market than a flawed big govt. the reason?the power is given to the people not the politicians who become corrupt overtime and write the laws in a way that favors the few over majority. all theory is flawed because people are flawed. when govt has the power they can execute you.simple as that
@MrObveous777 : The problem is that the free market you advocate is a kind of "laissez-faire" which goes toward anarchy. If there is a goal which has to be achieved and the market has no incentive to achieve - it will not be achieved - due to the dogmatic position of certain people. You will not eliminate corruption entirely in this world. You can however ensure that we avoid a path of economic devastation.
@MrObveous777 : By the way - I do not have my heart set on one or the other solution - "the color of the cat doesn´t matter - what matters is its ability to catch mices" (you probably know this quote of Dengxiaoping which justifies the switch to a market based econmomy in China).
@nigelelsass as I would agree it is very objective quote..from what i have learned is that the free market has worked(even though it has flaws)..and big government leads to corruption proven through out history.what I am saying is that there are unintended consequences that occur if big government is implemented so the color may not matter to the mice but the cat being black may get hit by a truck in the middle of the night trying to catch mice. some things are not that simple.
@MrObveous777 : You have by the way a very convoluted way of not accepting that what matters is the final outcome - that might be because you are a more demagogic person.
@nigelelsass That might be because I have ADD =\... I am not demagogic I only see the writing on the wall. and I trust what the founders of my country said when they said to much government leads down "the road to serfdom". as a student of history you should know this is very possible.
@MrObveous777 : Let me be clear - the founders of your country were much much smarter and generous than the average citizen of your country in the present time. While I am for limited government... you should also know from history that failing to address problem which are preventable and obvious has a price - which can often be high.
@nigelelsass in 2006, Americans gave about $295 billion to charity. I would beg to differ as my countrymen and women are the most giving in the world. and I would bet more giving than some of our founders. just think if they had no taxes to pay I bet it would be A LOT MORE!
@MrObveous777 : It is also not a problem limited to your country. In this case your country is stealing the economic future of its own citizen and all in the world. The present attitude of the US is closer to the british torries than of the founding fathers.
@nigelelsass I agree you are right this problem is every ones and our corruption is great that is why I want to cut off the head of the snake(large federal government easily lobbied and corrupted) corporations and big business would not lobby if the government did not have power. they would have to go to each individual state and it would be a lot harder because it would not be on uniformed national scale.
@MrObveous777 : also "...see how fast corporations change." => where is the incentive for them? you off course know that market players are driven by profit. Please explain to me (A) whether you want to internalize the external cost - or (B) how the change is supposed to happen without a price signal. (edit: we are not speaking about the cosmetic sector which sells subjective feelings of well-being - we are mostly talking about the power sector here).
@nigelelsass hmm getting sued for millions of dollars.its all in the information I have sent to you for months on here. you just refuse to read any thing I give you..=]
millions are pity money if you compare this to cases like Chernobyl or Union Carbide - we are talking about billions here - an economic extent of damages which exceeds the capitalization of many companies.
the only reason amaricans place global warming as a HOAX since they are the biggest polluters that result global warming. And they are not willing to moderate or fix their attitude
I like this Ron Paul guy until he called Global Warming is a hoax... Why would you say that Ron? You were my last hopeful from the Republican side. I guess I will have to go back to Obama...
@BeHonezt Well, where I live it has been getting colder and colder each year, but it is also getting hotter and hotter, I believe the weather for each season is just getting more and more extreme.
@BeHonezt Right. Because throwing Americans in Gitmo without charge or trial, bankrupting the US, and destroying civil liberties is alright, as long as he recognizes this Global Warming thing (and uses that to also enact tyrannical legislation controlling people's choices to "save" us from it)?
@BeHonezt look at who funds obamas campaign. It is the same people who funds romneys campaign. And the banks and other big corporations will get what they pay for with Obama.
Ron Paul the jack ass. Why does this guy get so much support. "Global Warming is a hoax" - ORLY, doc? Then how would you explain the ice caps melting across the Earth?
@gold95 Humans and our industries only cause 0.28% of all CO2 emissions produced. The rest are from the environment. Global warming is a scam. When the concept was first introduced, about 90% of scientists disagreed. It doesn't seem that way because the wealthy controls the media and stresses that Global Warming is real and they profit off of the scam by producing so called "eco-friendly" technology and a lot more ways.
Wonderful, Ron Paul! =) Human induced global warming is the biggest hoax and masshysteria in human history. We have to go back to the Catholic Church during the medieval period to find some similar kind of brainwashing. We have to stop these loony, socialist environmentalists before they destroy the western civilisation. China and Russia is laughing and of course they hope the greenies in the west will succeed...
@TheSasss1 I will debate you on that..he is not a nut soley based on this and I think it is illogical to call some one a nut based on one issue with out understanding where he is coming from. Ron Paul predicted the 2008 housing bubble in 2001! and tried to stop it. he also tried to prevent an escalation of terrorism in the U.S in 1998 by trying to stop the U.S from bombing Iraq and Afghanistan. NO ONE LISTENED!
@nigelelsass It's a fact. Most CO2 is emissions are over emphasized in the media. Even the founder of the weather channel admits Global Warming is false. Global Warming is a money making scam.
Ah a true Republican! Just give me money and I will be okay!
nrdify 22 hours ago
Why do people always have to call each other idiots? Is it so hard to accept other peoples beliefs, and try to have a discussion, where you don't attack each other personally? A discussion, where you seek to enlighten the counterparty with facts and logical arguments? This is especially true for YouTube, and makes me wonder, whether the anonymity provided by the internet really is that good.
Toucanfan 3 days ago
Idiots who still believe this Global Warming Bullshit needs to wake the fuck up! It just shows how easy it is for the government to brainwash people! NO wonder the government is screwing us! People are sooo fucken stupid!
MMAExpertKnower 6 days ago
ron paul rejects science, rejects reality. Policy makers like him would put future generations at risk despite the many warning we have from the best science available. It's irrational and self-destructive. No thanks!
ReduceGHGs 1 week ago
@ReduceGHGs You idiot! about 200 scientists have said the global warming is a hoax! People that teach science for a living have been saying this. And Ron Paul being a doctor understand more about science than Al Gore who's probably never even taken that many science class in his class! Global warming is a conspiracy. It's creating fear among ignorant, dumb sheeps like you and through that fear, large corporatiosn are making billions off it! That's what fear does. Same goes with Iraq war!
MMAExpertKnower 6 days ago
@MMAExpertKnower .
You start with "You idiot!" It became clear you were looking at your reflection.
EVERY respected scientific institution agrees on this. Where is your evidence other than your baseless belief?
Gore has nothing to do with the science, silly.
ReduceGHGs 6 days ago
@ReduceGHGs If you were paying attention to the news and actually reading some of the stuff scientists were saying you would know what i'm talking about! Al Gore was one of the leading man that was fighting global warming! Look at the news, and the videos on youtube, and 300,000 scientists suing Al Gore for misleading the public abou the global warming hoax! People are so stupid they immediately assume the ice caps are melting in North Pole and going crazy! It's not my fault ur not informed!
MMAExpertKnower 6 days ago
@MMAExpertKnower .
Your "argument" is naive, uninformed, and a bit childish.
I recommend getting informed BEFORE babbling about what you don't know.
Google: NAS pfd Global Warming 2008 Edition
ReduceGHGs 6 days ago
@ReduceGHGs Global warming is merely a fearmongering scare tactic that corporations has used to make money off of! Many scientists are told to shut up so they can keep making money! NOt anymore though
MMAExpertKnower 6 days ago
@ReduceGHGs Read your channel inbox because I can't fit all the info hear to educate your sorry ass! Go read it dumb fuck i'll write it once more to educat a dumb gullible sheep likeyou!
MMAExpertKnower 6 days ago
@ReduceGHGs AL Gore even admitted that Global warming was an overexagerration and admit he's wrong! It's people like you, who needs to wake up and realize the government if fooling you and the real problem are the rulign elites, that are screwing u in the ass every night, because you're too stupid and ignorant to find out what's really going on in this world!
MMAExpertKnower 6 days ago
@ReduceGHGs Yeah i was definitely uninformed in the past when i believe in that global warming bullshit! I wrote a whole fucken thesis on it and now i know it's full of shit! Research it more dumbass!
MMAExpertKnower 6 days ago
@MMAExpertKnower
children!
ReduceGHGs 6 days ago
@ReduceGHGs It's child not children! Children is plural! You can't even speak English correctly, don't talk Global warming! It's bullshit and it's about times idiots like you find out the truth!
MMAExpertKnower 6 days ago
Just stop a moment and think about it...taxpayer money given to tax payers to buy a home...where does that money go...THE BANKS PEOPLE and into the fractional reserve banking system A.K.A. = LEGAL COUNTERFEITING!!! End the FED and let's stop letting them rob us blind. VOTE RON PAUL 2012!!!
azgecko77 1 week ago
big Paul supporter but he has been all over the place on global warming.
TheBaames 2 weeks ago
You've got to love the Paulbots defending this crackpot scientific understanding Paul has got.
FACT:
The Earth warmed by 400% more than the average for a cyclical heat period.
FACT:
The Earth's heat and CO2 releases are closely correlated in every time period.
FACT:
Warming in areas such as China has increased greatly compared to other comparable areas where huge amounts of CO2 are released.
No, there sure is no relation between CO2 and global warming. You paulbots are hilarious.
JarlaxleArtemisful 2 weeks ago 2
Scientific evidence shows the earth is cooling and we are heading to an ice age. Good on Ron Paul for fighting against the global warming hoax being pushed by Al Gore and the illuminati. RON PAUL 2012
venx006 3 weeks ago
@venx006 : EVIDENCE OUT OF YOUR ANUS?? Dear troll, please provide a source.
If you want to throw shit around - you might as well avoid associating it with your favourite candidate - it makes you look stupid - and the candidate look bad. What do you want to achieve?
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
And when he is asked if he Believes in evolution he states that (and this is commonly taught) That evolution is a theory so there for he does not "believe it" Because if you believe in theories that's pretty much no better than believing santa clause. He didn't say the findings on evolution theory are not credible or anything but that it is still regarded as a theory. Come on people be a little smarter pleeaase?
AbsoluteClarity880 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
chadem311 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@AbsoluteClarity880 Does that make it any less ridiculous? That's like saying that because I didn't see or hear the tree fall in the forest, it never fell -- even though it's laying on the ground in front of me.
chadem311 3 weeks ago
He said "a hoax ON the environment and global warming" He did not call global warming a hoax listen to what he actually says and the conversation leading up to what he says and what he says after. you all are derpin all over the place. It's making you look really dumb.
AbsoluteClarity880 3 weeks ago
@AbsoluteClarity880 Whether he said "on the environment" or "on the people," the implication is the same. He believed it was a made-up scheme that would allow governments more control and give them another way to make money off of their people. He was ignoring the tens of thousands of people in academia and the scientific community who are leaps and bounds smarter than him when he said that.
You can try to spin it and defend your guy all you want. But don't deny that you're in denial.
chadem311 3 weeks ago
@chadem311 He does not deny global warming (look up a video where he elaborates) he is only suggesting that it May be over blown on the side of human contribution. And that if we really want to do something about the environment we shouldn't rely on bureaucrats to set the standard because they're only interested in $. He's an old timer he's heard all sides of the story for a long time. He may not be 100% right on the issue but no one is perfect.
AbsoluteClarity880 3 weeks ago
@AbsoluteClarity880 : He knows as an MD about scientific rigorous research principle - yet decides to shove them in his anus. Come on - should you really trust somebody like that? What if I had the same approach on medicine: "the link between HIV and AIDS is overblown" and invite non-experts to serve as experts and mislead?
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
@AbsoluteClarity880 : What is it with the Libertarian issue to believe bureaucrats are wall-street traders? can you explain? where does this syndrom come from? do you also always assume the referee has a vested interest if you do not like the verdict???
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
So Ron Paul's a nut. First Evolution denial, then Global Warming. Looks like there's no viable Republican Candidate.
Ryakki 3 weeks ago
@Ryakki Was there ever one to begin with?
RichardZERO 3 weeks ago
@RichardZERO
I got the impression for a while that Ron Paul was a rational, reasonable person with some extreme policy, some of it good, some of it iffy, a bit of it bad, overall acceptable. When it finally clicked that he was not rational or reasonable, but a nut... I was quite sad. He was the only potential viable candidate. Nice to have a choice.
Ryakki 3 weeks ago
WOW
I was going to vote for ron paul, and then
I saw this video.
at42194 3 weeks ago
@at42194 your not voting for him because of what now? The fact Global Warming is a hoax? Really? Do you still global warming is real? You probably think the end of the world is Dec 21 2012 too.... in that case your vote doesn't matter.
XgriouX1 3 weeks ago
@XgriouX1
There are so many proofs on how global warming is true and if you can't accept it, then you are an idiot. You have no proof what so ever that global warming is a hoax. World ending on that date has no substantial proof. But Global Warming does.
How about you prove to me global warming is a hoax? If you think it is, you are an idiot.
at42194 3 weeks ago
"Global Warming is a hoax." I might be okay with that statement if it were made in 2001. But in 2009, with a near-unanimous scientific consensus on anthropogenic warming, this is a big blow to Ron Paul's respectability.
chadem311 4 weeks ago
@chadem311 : especially considering an MD is supposed to have an integrity in terms of scientific topics - did he also get his MD by allowing himself to display such bullshit in his research project? is there any university who would allow it? it is either stupidity or a plain lack of honesty.
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
Ron Paul. My next president.. :)
MrDrawingguy 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nigelelsass DrPaul believes in CONSERVING THE ENVIRONMENT!so your point weather he believes it is 50%or100% mans fault does not matter because he does believe we should conserve the environment.just because he does not want to fix the problem with more government does not make him an environment hater!He has different solutions to solving the problem of global warming.The argument that he does not believe its 100% mans fault makes him stupid is moot he has solutions to solve it
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : CORRECTION: he has NO CLEAR POSITION and also NO SOLUTION (except wait&pray). The argument that he has written as MD a research project - yet refuses on scientific matters to obey to the same standards he was held to should make you think.... did he in his MD work also write "I´ve read in a random book...".???
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
MrObveous777 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrObveous777 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrObveous777 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrObveous777 1 month ago
You guys are all missing the point. He's not denying man-made climate change. He's calling the fact that we use it as an excuse to keep dumping money into the toilet a hoax. Why don't you actually listen.
The fact that you're all calling it Climate Change now and not Global Warming is an example of how you're not thinking for yourselves and are just a product of what they're telling you to keep dumping your money away...
Ryanhdchya 1 month ago
Ron Paul is a Hoax not Global Warming. Obama saved the economy and the "hyper-inflation" did not happen. Keep hating tea party corporatism. By the way its 60F outside Mid January in DC area. Global warming a hoax my ass... u got birds falling and dead fish everywhere. Glaciers continue melting.
info305 1 month ago
Science is hoax. That's why rednecks go to family reunions to pick up chicks.
justindr660 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@justindr660 However science shows that human activity probably does play a role in stimulating the current fluctuations.The question is how much? Rather than taking a “sky is falling” approach, I think there are common-sense steps we can take to cut emissions and preserve our environment. I am, after all, a conservative and seek to conserve not just American traditions and our Constitution, but our natural resources as well.- RON PAUL..there are other ways of solving this!!
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@justindr660 Ron Paul never said science was a hoax idiot..
MrObveous777 1 month ago
more jobs, more business > global warming. These green idiots are killing jobs and feeding our foreign oil addiction and they don't even know it. If the market wants these solar panels and wind turbines people will buy, if they don't then don't force them to pay for that crap in taxes.
PennySnap 1 month ago
Comment removed
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass ok green jobs. Just don't erase the coal mining and other energy jobs in this country just so green can catch up. The way these green people make green energy sound, it should be dominating the market. But its not because nobody but the government buys up this green garbage.
PennySnap 1 month ago
@PennySnap : No an energy source should ONLY receive subsidies if it provides a substantial benefit. I am myself from a former coal mining area. You can´t avoid the retirement of coal - it´s like cutting deficit - delaying it makes the transition only more painful. Put on coal a tax which reflects the real cost it induces (mercury, NOx, SOx, etc.); put on gas the real military cost it has - no more "hidden economics"
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass subsidies? With what money genius? If green energy is so good it should dominate the market on its own. But it doesn't. Because no moron is going to want solar panels at night. And no idiot is going to want a wind turbine with no wind. All that green garbage is worthless and expensive. Expensive even when we subsidies it, because thats what happens when the government guarantees money. Prices go up.
PennySnap 1 month ago
@PennySnap : Well genius, nuclear received 70 billion for R&D... guess what? this is the energy sector and deployment has a cost... and NO, economically they cannot dominate the market due to the "split incentive" (read about game theory).
Before you say it´s worthless and expensive, you should know that wind can ALWAYS beat nuclear in costs and can in many cases beat coal and natural gas.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass The problem with wind is that it kills thousands of birds and kills extinct birds as well. My point is the government is NOT a good investor and CAN not see all of the pros and cons of an industry. the reason why government is NOT a good investor is because the money it uses to invest is not theirs. I would agree that the American government is corrupt and the only way to stop its corruption is to STOP giving it power.
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : BOGUS ARGUMENT REPEATED
Wind kills around 100,000 birds per year - glass panes tens of millions - so your point is ????
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
@MrObveous777 : You obviously do not understand any economic instrument if you believe the governement is a direct investor. I wonder how the discussion can make sense then....
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
@PennySnap : These are guys llike you who would say "when government guarantees loan for nuclear, that makes it cheaper" but then make the contrary statement for renewables.
PS: investment certainty has always lowered costs - get your economics straight.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrObveous777 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nigelelsass investments from the private sector are the ONLY way to go mainly because Government makes bad investments.. When a renewable energy has MERIT INVESTORS WILL INVEST!...GOVERNMENT on the other hand will spend thousands of tax dollars ON A BET that a renewable energy will work..
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : DO YOU SERIOUSLY not see the merits of renewable energy and how the benefit is not for investors??? Do you really need it explained on paper???
Nobody asks the government to invest - just to have an enabling framework - all this time I talk about internalizing economic externalities you understood nothing of it ???
Any BTW this is not a "bet it will work" - the demonstration stage is behind us. Do you not know the stages of product life-cycle?
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
@nigelelsass lol i don't believe i should be spending anything in taxes to subsidize products. Sugar prices doubled when the government started subsidizing that. If I want to use oil and coal thats my choice. Not yours or the governments. Because if I was using that solar trash it would cost way too much and my lights would go out every 5 minutes. Just face the facts, renewable energy is crap. Nobody buys it, thats why the government subsidizes it.
PennySnap 1 month ago
@PennySnap : IF you use oil and gas, that is a HARM to your peers - for both people alive now on the planet and future generations. Reducing their economic potential for you well being is robbery and always will. Polluting is NOT a right.
If nobody buys R-E, I even wonder why german exports are so strong and US ones stagnate - and the US market share in energy systems decline...
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
@PennySnap : And this is why your country is stagnating - your previous generations (of courageous Americans) - when facing a challenge would have said - we´ll do it. Modern days Americans are like "oh no, that´s not even possible and just imagining doing something differently than we do thing now would hurt my brain". There is a reason why you will decline. It is pretty obvious that failing to imagine a future different from the past is a major handicap.
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
@nigelelsass oh your a foreigner. Probably from the EU. The reason we are declining is because of all these left-wingers getting the attention of younger people. They want to stop economic growth with garbage like global warming so we can get back to the days when we had to grow our own food & live in crap. Also the socialist school system we have is a failure (just like socialism as a whole) & none of the students are motivated to do better. Ill take economic growth over pollution any day.
PennySnap 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
PennySnap 4 weeks ago
@PennySnap : The reason you are declining is clearly due to unwise choices. You really live in the past and this is why Asia will take over. I went to a socialist school system and was motivated to do better than anybody else - and did better than anbybody else. The school system is merit based - not income based. I´ll take economic growth without pollution (as no clear-cut choice has to be made) - and I´ll sell this infrastructure to additional countries.
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
@PennySnap : "In 2010, $187 BILLION WAS INVESTED IN LARGE AND SMALL SCALE RENEWABLES GENERATING CAPACITY EXCLUDING LARGE HYDRO
compared to $219 billion and $157 billion of gross and net fossil-fuel investment respectively, If the estimated $46 billion of large hydro investment is included in the renewable energy total, then renewables investment is clearly ahead of both gross and net investment in fossil fuel capacity" - what thou you say?
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
@nigelelsass well why is government spending all this money on energy. Government has no money. They only take from successful private companies and give it to failing companies. This makes no sense economically. Also, public sector jobs don't create wealth, just debt. They produce nothing of value.
PennySnap 3 weeks ago
@PennySnap : No sense economically to take from companies which do not pay their fair share and are involved in activities which (1) harm the US balance of payment, thus (2) increase the geostrategic risk for the US, (3) do not even contribute 1% to the defense cost (protection of supply route) the create, not even to mention the (4) corruption and lobbying they create.... you really do not see the merit in getting rid of these negative effects??? are you kidding boy?
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
@PennySnap : You´re right, the US should keep transfering money to Saudi Arabia, digging its deficit to ensure this activity, while granting tax breaks and subsidy for them, and thank them to confisc your democratic system. The US capitol shall be replaced by an Exxon-Saudi mosque/financial institution and US citizen enslaved to their masters they like so much.
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
@nigelelsass no. We should just drill offshore and use our own oil. But all these green idiots don't care about the economy.
PennySnap 3 weeks ago
@PennySnap : Fine, drill more offshore but it's the equivalent of giving more money to Greece - it just buys a pathetic amount of time - it does not resolve the wasteful use - it does reduce the cost to users - and then what? return to point zero where US domestic production drops anyway. Any country following this US model lacks of mental sanity - luckily more and more are shifting away from your marxist-productivist model (aka only production matters).
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
@PennySnap : In 2011, PV-generated electricity was as cheap as electricity from diesel genset in most developing countries - after a price drop from 50%. It is widely expected that PV will be as cheap as coal-based power in half of all countries as early as 2015... I am off course not sure you understand the implications of this. Your coal-industry not only will make you look like the bad guys for the whole century - but is also an economic sub-optimal choice for future investments.
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
@nigelelsass ok then. Why not let the consumer chose what he wants? Whats so wrong about freedom for consumers to buy what they want? The price of this green trash would drop like crazy if it wasnt for all the money they take from government. You see what im saying now? All these green companies live off government money, they don't need average consumers money. So they keep the price as high as they want and government buys their products at whatever price they choose.
PennySnap 3 weeks ago
@PennySnap : Because reaping the benefits requires an initial investment - just like other tech. The price drop is the result of the large-scale deployment phase which has been government funded. So you are once more wrong. You are DEAD WRONG to say these companies get their money directly from the gvt - and that they keep prices as high as they want - the good return led to more suppliers - more competition - increse in productivity-drop in prices.
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
@PennySnap : Sorry but I cannot let you make FALSE STATEMENTS - this is not a children playground and companies die if they cannot compete. ONLY IN THE US has the government funded companies directly - because people like you would have opposed creating a better and cleaner instrument of payment on delivery for clean energy. And as the framework is highly uncertain in the US (because you cannot agree) - such solutions are more expensive in the US due to investment uncertainties !!!
nigelelsass 3 weeks ago
@nigelelsass look, this going green stuff is just a way for government to try and create jobs. But public sector jobs aren't real jobs. The climate change crap is over exaggerated. Climate has changed since the beginning of earth, and now we think somehow we have something to do with it. I mean, places in Africa are sitting on tons of coal. But we say "ohhh no, you can't use that. You can only use less efficient solar panels."
PennySnap 3 weeks ago
@PennySnap : Are companies like Vestas, GE, SolarWorld, etc. public??? They are on the stock market for goodness sake!
Comparing climate change with predictions, scientists say "we are looking at the higher end of the projections" = it is worse than predicted/modelled. This is reality supported by measurments, not a statement from a nobody on the street.
We KNOW that we have to do with it because we MEASURE IT (radiative forcing).
nigelelsass 2 weeks ago
@PennySnap : I travel often to Africa and can say that what you state is a falsehood circulated in the US. First coal is mostly available in South Africa, then countries where there are no users (Namibia, Jungle in RDCongo). There is no electricity grid which is why 80% of populations do not have power. Do you think the grid which is 10-100 miles away or solar panel which can bring power on-site will deploy first? sorry to breal you skewed view.
nigelelsass 2 weeks ago
Comment removed
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
Comment removed
nigelelsass 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nigelelsass i mean, id take economic growth over trying to stop pollution. Economic growth is key to beating China.
PennySnap 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@PennySnap : you´re right - all these green manufacturing jobs haves really been a plague to Germany and Sweden - and as if would not be enough - are now decimating China by adding clean energy jobs and reducing its air pollution - it´s obviously bad to everybody.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
Global warning is most probably not an hoax, but there are people trying to exaggerate its impact and benefit from it. The increase in temperature is extremely tiny and there is no consensus on the severity of the consequences of global warming. The problem built over the years and I don't believe any policies will be able to reverse this. The right course of action would rather be to adapt to climate related changes and if possible implement "low cost" policies to reduce CO2 & methane emissions
cnxtrans 1 month ago
/watch?v=hCc5Gk1nops
Ron Paul things global warming is hoax
ClearPee 1 month ago
I'm sad to see the NWO successfully brainwashed so many people to actually believe in the Global Warming theory.
What's wrong with you people? Do you have the same short term memory of a gold-fish?
Don't you even remember that the people hired to PROVE SCIENTIFICLY that it was a fact, faked their own results which was revealed when their E-mails were HACKED.
Of course, if you spend alot of money on something, it must be true.
Icecaps are melting because of heat/cold periods across centuries.
puttefnask 1 month ago
@puttefnask: My dear frind, the radiative forcing increased at specific wavelenght of man-made GHG, This is the real proof. Everything else is pointless.
You are obviously not a western as we westerners state that nothing is without a cause - therefore your point on heat/cold periods (there is no indication we are in such a case) is void.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@puttefnask Please give me the prove
ClearPee 1 month ago
@puttefnask : what´s wrong with us? spectral absorption physics in high school! I am sorry - do not hate us for our education.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass you wanna try something new?don't let the government intervene and let individuals sue in court over property rights see how fast corporations change. Government has been working very hard at solving this problem in the 70's and so far IT HAS NOT WORKED! clean coal- Billions of tax payer money wasted and it is uneconomical and they are still trying to develop it and failing horribly..
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : Do you have the courage and honesty to answer my question - yes or no? DID YOU or not put words in my mouth which are not from me ???????
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass YES I did put words in your mouth as I was over exaggerating to make the point that A) I was not complaining about global warming as YOU said i was(your complete fabrication) B) if anything YOU were complaining because you were making the case for global warming...I do concede to some extent man kind is playing a roll in global warming. I am not presenting the case for global warming but for the good DR.'s solutions. I AM DEFENDING DR.PAUL NOT COMPLAINING!
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : For global warming to be cause "to some extent" by man-kind would require a long term driver which also leads to warming - there are none know on the long term.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : Individuals and even nations have sued corporations in courts and it has FAILED. The world is full of cases in which corporations have not paid for the harm they have caused. Your idea might work on a national level - certainly not on a transnational level. In addition to that - suing DOES NOT PREVENT ANYTHING - it often grants "pity money afterwards - far less than the damage which occurred". Do you call this economically optimum????
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass so can I ask you something? If to much government is a complete failure due to corruption (Solyndra, clean coal, Corn subsidies) and often do not help the environment. AND the free market is a failure because of corruption within government failing to rule in favor of citizens how do you propose we fix this solution? more government? also you fail to see how suing prevents corporations from doing bad things the reason why things dont get done is political corruption
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : I propose MARKET INSTRUMENTS which distort the "laissez-faire" to achieve on effect. Most pro-market solutions defend this - with the exception of market anarchists. Reshuffling the taxation system to achieve an environmental solution DOES NOT need more government and can actually reduce government size when compared to other forms of taxation. WHERE the taxes are is a different discussion than the size of the government.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : Overall:
1) The US has supported "selected solutions" instead of the market deciding on the solutions (e.g. spec. technologies i.e. clean coal, corn ethanol, etc.)
2) The US has supported selected companies
3) Due to US congress and senate, the US has no set the incentive on a clear even playing field for achieving the goal (e.g. reducing emissions)
CONCLUSIONS: market instruments work - but the US has gone instead for "inefficient, ineffective distorted solutions"
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : 1) Governments has NOT worked on solving GW in the 70´s; 2) Government worked on solving acid rains problem in the late 70´s using cap-and-trade (a market-based approach) and it has worked beyond expectations; 3) What kind of free marketer are you to impose a single solution instead of letting the market unleash its creativity? Like many "so-called" free market proponents you advocate markets - yet seem to trust them less than I do ?!?!?
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass the reason why the free market is flawed is because people are not always rational. and the problem with to much government is it often uses its power for political corruption. People are flawed creatures. and so the theory created is as flawed. I am not making the case that the free market is absolutely perfect I am making the case that more government=political corruption. are there exceptions yes but the U.S founders were cautious of giving Govt to much power as am I
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : I MAKE THE CASE that market instrument which complete the free market to achieve a given goal work, if well designed and implemented in a fair and uniform manner. I studied the models of US NOx cap-and-trade and it has worked. I studied the model of Swedish refunded tax and it has worked. I studied the model of German regulatory approach and it has worked (although it was more expensive than the US and Swedish model).
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass Regarding cap and trade it is not utilizing the market.. the only think it does is raise taxes and creates tons of restrictions. restrictions and regulations.. from a free market perspective it kills jobs. Milton Friedman did speak about taxing carbon emissions but not in the way cap and trade proposes. $175(every citizen) a year for cap and trade at its height NO THANK YOU!
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : I give you just one example in the US: New Jersey participated to the New England regional greenhouse gases initiative - revenues from the fee applied where meant to be returned to consumer on their bill (good idea to lower the base connection rate and increase the per kWh cost)... and what happened? Governor Christie raided the revenue and allocated the money (meant to be returned to consumers) to some %&§!%... I would understand if this were to happen in some 1/3rd world countr
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass the CBO's analysis looks solely at the year 2020, before most of the tough restrictions kick in. As the cap is tightened and companies are stripped of initial opportunities to "offset" their emissions, the price of permits will skyrocket beyond the CBO estimate of $28 per ton of carbon. The corporate costs of buying these expensive permits will be passed to consumers.
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@nigelelsass I also have a hard time understanding what you say. Are you from the U.S? because honestly you just list things and it is not very coherent... I may be disorganized sir but you your self seem to be just as Incoherent as I am. one last thing I take my time to respond to you because I want to make sure I know what I am talking about and I put a lot of thought into what I write which kind of makes me a bit sad that you don't understand me I put a lot of time in my comments
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@nigelelsass I don't like Chris Cristie...whats your point?
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 well you should vote for Mitt Romney
ChristianPhysicist 1 month ago
@ChristianPhysicist No offense but Romney is a very deceptive person. Romney is also a Pseudo capitalist aka corporatist. I would take a socialist over him because I do not want to let capitalism to get a bad rep under him. he would give all his friends at Goldman Sachs a lot of money the banks have donated a lot to his campaign already. and he is probably going to repay the favor once he is in office =\
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 Ron Paul never caused him of being a hypocrite
ChristianPhysicist 1 month ago
@ChristianPhysicist I would agree Ron Paul has never caused him to be a hypocrite. But Ron Paul does tell you to look at everyone's records.. I did romney was by far the most inconsistent person running..Ron Paul is also the MOST consistent person running. Ron Paul and would do exactly what he said UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 Do I care that Romney has changed his positions?? NO
Ron Paul may be the most consistent person on earth, but that doesn't prove that he is right.
Global warming is an example, Ron Paul is wrong on global warming.
Mitt Romney accepts Global warming, and no he has not flip-flopped on this issue. Democrats misunderstood him on a statement he made.
watch?v=YIDESZWAlz8
ChristianPhysicist 1 month ago
@ChristianPhysicist How exactly is Ron Paul wrong on global warming? being ideologically consistent is VERY IMPORTANT. what happens when Mitt changes positions once he gets on stage with Obama? or better yet what happens when he changes positions when he is in the white house? How can you trust someone who has been given tons of money from special interests?believe me if it comes down to repaying these favors to special interests he will through crony capitalism..
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 1) Ron Paul is so wrong on Global warming, he has to change his position, Global warming is human made.
2) Mitt Romney has been consistent with intelligence, he won't do something stupid. I don't really care how many times he has changed his position, I am a moderate.
But listen if Mitt changes his moral positions, he will not get elected, so he won't do it.
3) why in the world do you attack Romney?? We Romney supporters already made up our minds, go focus on Gingrich
ChristianPhysicist 1 month ago
@ChristianPhysicist how do you think crony capitalism works? big corps or big businesses give tons of donations to politicians and then in tern these politicians pay them back by regulating competitors out of the market. it was funny listening to Romney talk about being against crony capitalism when he is "cozying up" with special interests it was also funny listening to him dodge a question about taking money from farmers who wanted subsidies =\
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@ChristianPhysicist Ron Paul is more right than any one on that stage.he is not pandering 2)every one is fallible including Dr.Paul and may be wrong in some areas but Ron Paul has researched his positions thoroughly and understands them. he really showed this a few debates ago when he said he would be at home reading an economics textbook when all the other nominees would be watching a foot ball game. we need pres that actually READS BOOKS! AND KNOWS WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 Can you cite peer-reviewed papers that support Ron Paul's proposals on the economy??
ChristianPhysicist 1 month ago
@ChristianPhysicist look up Ron Paul was right morning joe he was on the news and was given credit..
MrObveous777 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrObveous777 Look at the real reason why Ron Paul lost in South Carolina, most Evangelicals do not support him
watch?v=QFYkKwOAtpM
ChristianPhysicist 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : My point is - that there is often a widespread confusion - and critic of good economic approaches - which fail - not because they are not good - but because the US is very prompt to gaming/lobbying (some would call it "more corrupt than the average western democracy").
nigelelsass 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@nigelelsass If we had a small government no one would lobby because Lobbyists want POWER. if the government has no power then lobbyists would leave government alone because they would not be able to get any more power than they already have. so the ONLY reason they lobby the GOVERNMENT IS because THE GOVERNMENT HAS POWER AND GOVERNMENT CAN GIVE THEM POWER. that is all this is about power over competition..
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : Ok a side remark: WHY OH WHY do US free marketers advocate the free market - yet do not trust the market and need to depict only old known and existing solutions to acccept the market - even if these solutions are suboptimal ant the market can do better (this is a behavioral pattern I observe over and over again); Does it have something to do with the fact you are stuck with only conservatives being pro market solutions and you have little to no pro-market progressives?
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass I can prove to you that the free market works.and you can prove to me that big government works. intervention leads down a path to serfdom. I would much rather have a flawed free market than a flawed big govt. the reason?the power is given to the people not the politicians who become corrupt overtime and write the laws in a way that favors the few over majority. all theory is flawed because people are flawed. when govt has the power they can execute you.simple as that
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : The problem is that the free market you advocate is a kind of "laissez-faire" which goes toward anarchy. If there is a goal which has to be achieved and the market has no incentive to achieve - it will not be achieved - due to the dogmatic position of certain people. You will not eliminate corruption entirely in this world. You can however ensure that we avoid a path of economic devastation.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : By the way - I do not have my heart set on one or the other solution - "the color of the cat doesn´t matter - what matters is its ability to catch mices" (you probably know this quote of Dengxiaoping which justifies the switch to a market based econmomy in China).
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass as I would agree it is very objective quote..from what i have learned is that the free market has worked(even though it has flaws)..and big government leads to corruption proven through out history.what I am saying is that there are unintended consequences that occur if big government is implemented so the color may not matter to the mice but the cat being black may get hit by a truck in the middle of the night trying to catch mice. some things are not that simple.
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : some things are simple - some policies which are simple can be implemented and be successful.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : You have by the way a very convoluted way of not accepting that what matters is the final outcome - that might be because you are a more demagogic person.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass That might be because I have ADD =\... I am not demagogic I only see the writing on the wall. and I trust what the founders of my country said when they said to much government leads down "the road to serfdom". as a student of history you should know this is very possible.
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : Let me be clear - the founders of your country were much much smarter and generous than the average citizen of your country in the present time. While I am for limited government... you should also know from history that failing to address problem which are preventable and obvious has a price - which can often be high.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrObveous777 1 month ago
Comment removed
MrObveous777 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nigelelsass in 2006, Americans gave about $295 billion to charity. I would beg to differ as my countrymen and women are the most giving in the world. and I would bet more giving than some of our founders. just think if they had no taxes to pay I bet it would be A LOT MORE!
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : It is also not a problem limited to your country. In this case your country is stealing the economic future of its own citizen and all in the world. The present attitude of the US is closer to the british torries than of the founding fathers.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass I agree you are right this problem is every ones and our corruption is great that is why I want to cut off the head of the snake(large federal government easily lobbied and corrupted) corporations and big business would not lobby if the government did not have power. they would have to go to each individual state and it would be a lot harder because it would not be on uniformed national scale.
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@MrObveous777 : also "...see how fast corporations change." => where is the incentive for them? you off course know that market players are driven by profit. Please explain to me (A) whether you want to internalize the external cost - or (B) how the change is supposed to happen without a price signal. (edit: we are not speaking about the cosmetic sector which sells subjective feelings of well-being - we are mostly talking about the power sector here).
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass hmm getting sued for millions of dollars.its all in the information I have sent to you for months on here. you just refuse to read any thing I give you..=]
MrObveous777 1 month ago
millions are pity money if you compare this to cases like Chernobyl or Union Carbide - we are talking about billions here - an economic extent of damages which exceeds the capitalization of many companies.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
the only reason amaricans place global warming as a HOAX since they are the biggest polluters that result global warming. And they are not willing to moderate or fix their attitude
shintsu01 1 month ago
I like this Ron Paul guy until he called Global Warming is a hoax... Why would you say that Ron? You were my last hopeful from the Republican side. I guess I will have to go back to Obama...
BeHonezt 2 months ago
Comment removed
MrObveous777 1 month ago
@BeHonezt Well, where I live it has been getting colder and colder each year, but it is also getting hotter and hotter, I believe the weather for each season is just getting more and more extreme.
bc0wful 1 month ago
@BeHonezt Right. Because throwing Americans in Gitmo without charge or trial, bankrupting the US, and destroying civil liberties is alright, as long as he recognizes this Global Warming thing (and uses that to also enact tyrannical legislation controlling people's choices to "save" us from it)?
mtanousable 1 month ago
@BeHonezt look at who funds obamas campaign. It is the same people who funds romneys campaign. And the banks and other big corporations will get what they pay for with Obama.
Terje1337 1 month ago
Ron Paul the jack ass. Why does this guy get so much support. "Global Warming is a hoax" - ORLY, doc? Then how would you explain the ice caps melting across the Earth?
Just another jackass republican.
Kenedamick 2 months ago
Didn't he say on Bill Maher's show that he believes there are credible scientists ON BOTH SIDES of this issue?? O.o
So... did he just flip-flop on GW in only a year?
whoo689 2 months ago
Can someone point to me int he clip where Ron Paul said it was a hoax?
gold95 2 months ago
Global cooling is coming.. 100% for sure...google "global cooling" in Wiki LOL
gold95 2 months ago
@gold95 Humans and our industries only cause 0.28% of all CO2 emissions produced. The rest are from the environment. Global warming is a scam. When the concept was first introduced, about 90% of scientists disagreed. It doesn't seem that way because the wealthy controls the media and stresses that Global Warming is real and they profit off of the scam by producing so called "eco-friendly" technology and a lot more ways.
jbeatles99 2 months ago
@jbeatles99 : LIAR - there are 4 ways to prove you make a lie:
* C-istopes from fossil fuels are different
* statistics indicate clearly the fossil fuels we use
* CO2 increase are correlated with the industrial revolution and scale-up of industrial activities
* O2 levels have decreased while forest coverage also decreased, pointing to O2 levels from increased combustion of carbon to CO2
nigelelsass 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wonderful, Ron Paul! =) Human induced global warming is the biggest hoax and masshysteria in human history. We have to go back to the Catholic Church during the medieval period to find some similar kind of brainwashing. We have to stop these loony, socialist environmentalists before they destroy the western civilisation. China and Russia is laughing and of course they hope the greenies in the west will succeed...
capitano11ful 2 months ago
hahahaha!!!! Ron Paul is a nut!
TheSasss1 2 months ago
@TheSasss1 I will debate you on that..he is not a nut soley based on this and I think it is illogical to call some one a nut based on one issue with out understanding where he is coming from. Ron Paul predicted the 2008 housing bubble in 2001! and tried to stop it. he also tried to prevent an escalation of terrorism in the U.S in 1998 by trying to stop the U.S from bombing Iraq and Afghanistan. NO ONE LISTENED!
MrObveous777 2 months ago
@TheSasss1 I know, he is crazy. He wants to end the wars, protect your rights, stop spending and balance the budget... real crazy stuff..
gold95 2 months ago
@gold95 We need it. It's not crazy stuff reform must happen.
jbeatles99 2 months ago
@jbeatles99 What are you talking about?
gold95 2 months ago
@gold95 I'm saying that we humans only produce 0.28% of CO2 in the air and Global Warming has to be a scam. Many business profit off of it.
jbeatles99 2 months ago
@jbeatles99 Oopps wrong person never mind
jbeatles99 2 months ago
@jbeatles99 It may be a scam, BUT I would not dismiss what we do to the planet. Pollution does have an effect. We see that from dying fish etc.
gold95 2 months ago
@jbeatles99 : Did you find the 0.28% in the depth of your rectum???? you might want to provide a more reliable and somehow less shitty source.
nigelelsass 1 month ago
@nigelelsass It's a fact. Most CO2 is emissions are over emphasized in the media. Even the founder of the weather channel admits Global Warming is false. Global Warming is a money making scam.
jbeatles99 1 month ago