Shady

Here's a perfect example of just how "efficient" government is... Obama stimulus spending: $246,436 per new job

Yes, that's the proper role of government. To uphold the law, and provide for national defense/security. Did you type that with a straight face? Not true. In many cases the government has decided long ago, without the private sector being given the chance, to take responsibility and provide for certain services. You present a false choice. As if a service can only be provided by government. Just because government is doing it now, and just because government sucked up the "responsibility" of providing said service long ago, doesn't mean it can be done as efficiently (if not more) by non-government entities. At the end of the day, it seems that your argument consists of roads, roads, and roads. That's your response to private sector job creation by the government? Money taken by the government, out of the private sector, then given back to the private sector, to actually build the road. The government only acts as a middle-man. Nothing more. And the demand for the creation and construction of new roads is a demand created by the expansion of the private sector, through business and/or residential enterprises.

Good point. Have they never heard of net-meeting? Or at the very least, hold the conference at a location that doesn't require everyone to fly there.

The government built? Where did they get the money to build them? The private sector. So characterizing the government "building" roads with billions of dollars pulled from the private sector is ridiculous.

Complete nonsense. Why? Its already been done, several times, in the 20's, in the 60's, in the 80's, and even this decade. During Reagan's terms, the across the board 35% income tax rate on all tax brackets led to an increase in revenue to the government in almost every year, except a couple, which were the bottom of the late 70's/early 80's recession. Link This is completely wrong. Tax revenue shouldn't be looked at as government income, but more as government inheritance. Income is earned. The government doesn't earn any income. Their revenue is based only on the work and income of other people, the taxpayers. So to phrase it in a way that suggests government is cutting their own "income" is incorrect.

I wasn't referring to our government. I was referring to the scientists and elites, who preach to us on living a certain lifestyle, while they continue to live like kings. Like I said, apparently it's just us serfs who have to conform to their ideals. We're suppose to do as they say, not as they do.

I say 'yes' as well. I have to admit that I was already somewhat skeptical. This hasn't helpd for obvious reasons.

Niice dodge. Nice try. But how about the utter hypocrisy by the global-warming truebelievers? They're so concerned about the environment that they roll out in 1200+ limousines and 140+ private jets. While at the same time, they're preaching to everyone else, about how the rest of us serfs need to curtail our environmentally destructive behavior, like driving to work for our jobs, or using the air-conditioning in the summer when it's hot. They can go fuck themselves. What complete assholes. All of them.

Must be nice... Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar wedges Copenhagen is preparing for the climate change summit that will produce as much carbon dioxide as a town the size of Middlesbrough. Link Once again, the true believers show us all exactly what they're all about. I gotta admit though, it sounds like a heckuva party!

I'll ask eyeball again... How does that help?

Here's an interesting take from somebody who knows. Swiss ban on minarets was a vote for tolerance and inclusion What if the Swiss voters were asked in a referendum to ban the building of an equilateral cross with its arms bent at right angles as a symbol of the belief of a small minority? Or imagine a referendum on building towers topped with a hammer and sickle – another symbol dear to the hearts of a very small minority in Switzerland. Political ideas have symbols: A swastika, a hammer and sickle, a minaret, a crescent with a star in the middle (usually on top of a minaret) all represent a collectivist political theory of supremacy by one group over all others. Link

Yes, it's a horribly thought-through idea. Mostly symbolism over substance.

In otherwords, August, take your dissenting views elsewhere. They're not welcome here. You shouldn't be expressing them, because you're not an "expert." Funny how these people never apply this rule to themselves, when say, posting on the war in Afghanistan. Apparently you don't need to be a military or foreign policy expert to comment on those things.

No it hasn't. Not his books.

Exactly. You see how ridiculous it gets? How we'd pretty much have to stop trading with every country in the world? That's why I criticized the idea in the first place, and spoke against it. Some of their standards have no lower to fall, and these places are still ruled by dictators. In fact, economic strife often leads to these types of dictatorial regimes. So I'm not sure how making things worse, will make things better. You may want to re-think that initiative before putting tens of thousands of Canadians on the unemployment line, destroying families, and depriving our country of even more resources for healthcare and education. All for your noble goals which you yourself only suspect might work. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Oops, almost forgot my new stuff. Researcher: NASA hiding climate data The fight over global warming science is about to cross the Atlantic with a U.S. researcher poised to sue NASA, demanding release of the same kind of climate data that has landed a leading British center in hot water over charges it skewed its data. Link And... UK University to probe integrity of climate data LONDON (AP) - A British university said Thursday it would investigate whether scientists at its prestigious Climatic Research Unit fudged data on global warming. Link Looks like the house of cards is falling.

Absolutley. Let me know when you guys finally find something that sticks, and doesn't need to be manipulated to fit a desired outcome. Until then, deny away.

So we don't hold all human-rights abusing countries to the same standard? So we stop trading with China, and Cuba, and basically all of the Middle East, probably Russia, and much of Central and South America, and also most of Africa. So we lower our standard of living, and general health and welfare, while these human-rights abusing countries continue to be ruled by human rights abusers. Great strategy! *thumbs up*

Well Cuba certainly falls under that category. So no more trade with Cuba? Does that include vacations too?

It's the true believers who are now the deniers. You deny false data. You deny data manipulation. You deny the concerted effort of silencing dissenting views. You deny it all, when it's all right in front of you to see.

Just more complete nonsense. Post after post. Grand generalizations, out-of-this-world hyperbole, wrapped up in an overly dramatic Shakespearian soliloquy.

As usual, complete nonsense.

So, do you then support a Canadian trade embargo on Cuba?

Building trade walls and imposing tariffs is the last thing we need to do, especially when we're just coming out of a bad recession. Unless of course your goal is to create an even worse one.

Very well said.