Pliny

"The chief and, in a sense, the only condition one needs in order to reach a centralized power in a democratic society is to love equality or to make men believe you do. Thus, the art of Despotism, which was formerly so complicated, is now quite simple: it is reduced, as it were, to a single principle." - Alexis de Tocqueville

What does this mean? It does not mean we need to find new sources of energy. It is very vague but he has something in mind for us, I'm sure. I don't find him specific in whatever he says and I find those kinds of general statements threatening. Of course, the west, while the third world is catching up, is going to have to make the most important "choices". And of course he is being his usually divisive self by saying: So what is the thing he has in mind that wealthy countries are suppose to do while developing nations are rising out of poverty? He is not simply saying, "we need to find new ways of producing energy". Obama's vision is entirely the redistribution of wealth. It comes through in most of what he says, couched in generalities and vague platitudes. Once in awhile, in a candid moment, he lets slip a direct statement - that we need to redistribute the wealth. Even waldo noted "the socialism Obama espouses in those statements". But, of course, all he said was, "we need to find new ways of producing energy." Someone has their head in the sand.

Who would ever admit to having a job that is not needed anymore or work towards that goal? We don't need make work projects that serve to just increase the dirty laundry bill. We could set ourselves to reaching greater goals like getting to Alpha Centauri. It just requires printing up a few trillion dollars. Let's ask the fed?

The point is, waldo... the painting he creates in everyone's mind is not one of hope and change but scarcity, want, sacrifice and dependency, not a very bright future for youth. You and Obama are pretty tight. You seem to have the same vision for everyone. Well, golly gosh. You got the picture. Obama is just making it more real for you. What's the solution? Grab Big Brother by the hand? I wonder who will be first to be deemed expendable? (There you go, waldo)

Undeniably there are efforts to minimize the effects of social problems, I find they are self perpetuating - no one wants to kill their job by resolving the very reason for its existence.

Ah...yes... that same "everything is bull that doesn't fit the model" argument. But still no admission to any failings of the IPCC through a connection to a political or ideological agenda? That's All that I can find wrong with it, waldo. It "ignores any data that doesn't fit the model"....hmmm...you don't work there, do you?

Then you are happy with the status quo. And a managed, engineered economy is a better economy. Well, it lasts for awhile anyway.

Well, If anything the President has proven himself not to be a deep thinker. He makes a statement that "If everyone in the world owned a car and lived in a mansion the planet will boil over." What he says is not untrue and if you imagine it. "Wow! He's right!" Of course, that is what is supposed to happen. We're supposed to think we all need to lower our expectations - excpet him and Al Gore! First of all, that is not a scenario that is about to happen and second of all, all things do not remain constant. If we wished to do that it would take several centuries and I.m certain the error of our ways would be known long before the planet boils over. We can make progress in raising the standard of living of those that impoverished over time and make adjustments as we go. Am I just being inflammatory?

Minimum wage jobs usually take only a day or two to learn essentials. It might take a week to get good at it. Minimum wage employers are not looking for reliable workers per the definition which implies some expected longevity. They want someone to do a task. If they want reliable they will have to pay more. Indeed. A living wage is not an intervention but imposing a living wage is an intervention. It is not any more complex than supply and demand. It's Say's Law. What government, tries to do, according to Keynesian theory, is work everything from aggregate demand. It attempts to ignore the existence of supply. Thus we get things like a minimum wage, a constant, irregardless of the supply of the labour force. Do you think it advisable that government make a law for this to be possible? That's what a minimum wage law is, after all.

It was never a hat I wore, waldo. You have been conjuring up wizardry and hubble-bubble jargon for years. You're the best. What's AR5? Nyuk Nyuk. http://www.stopgreensuicide.com/

This is the best purpose for a minimum wage. These jobs are also learning experiences for people that need to learn a work ethic or attain work experience. I would contend though that no minimum wage be set as it is an intervention and thus distortion in the market. As you say they are not careers but resume building and/or transitional jobs. Of course, proponents of a minimum wage will argue that the price of labour will drop to $1/hr. or even lower. A rather illogical argument since they would never work for that and nor would anyone else. Better to spend your time picking bottles or looking for something else. A person could shine shoes or cut grass and make more than that being self-employed; which is not a bad thing to encourage.

That's the reasoning behind the adoption of a minimum wage and it sounds logical but only if in the economy all other factors remain constant. It would then be a good idea theoretically but isn't in the practical world. We see that the minimum wage should be at $17/hr. today. Obviously, it has not kept up with inflation and has surpassed quite a few other people's wages as well.

There was not much love for Jews in Europe as well as North America so Hitler was able to carry his agenda to a lethal level before there was any indignance shown. The SS St. Louis was turned away from Canada and the US just months before the war. You cannot get men to fight wars, let alone kill adversaries if they can't hate the enemy. The enemy has to be propagandized as inferior dullards with evil and destructive intent. But Hitler had another reason to dislike the Jews - a lot of them were members of the communist party. Hitler thought communism was a Jewish plot that threatened German sovereignty. I think that today the hatred is at least trying to be contained to "extremists" and a whole nation or religion is not being painted with a broad brush. I agree. Thinking in generalities is not healthy. But today I think that we can recognize that no race or group of people is inferior - unless you are a politically correct secular humanist - then Christians are stupid or anyone that believes in a Supreme being is obviously of a lower intellect. Although the Secular humanist would probably never admit to it, I doubt that there is one that hasn't had the thought that true believers of all faiths should perhaps be sacrificed to save the planet from ruinous population levels and incessant wars that we know are all caused by religion.

Gee waldo is the IPCC still around?

Is climate change the result of global warming? I guess the latest is that 90% of all warming goes into the oceans. Let's see, over the last century, the temperature rose 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit, 1.5 degrees is ten percent of 15 - 1.5 = 13.5 or 90% of 15. Did the ocean warm 13.5 degrees over the last century, waldo? I have read that the temperature over the last 15 years has risen minimally, I think it was .11 degrees or something like that. Have the oceans warmed 1.1 degree over the last 15 years? Can you check those figures for me?

I would never suggest that of someone on these medications. They shouldn't get off them unless supervised by a knowledgeable physician.I would suggest that they not start taking them without being fully and correctly informed. Correctly informed means notbeing told they have a chemical imbalance, for one. They don't have an "illness" as there is no physiological marker to indicate one. He has a disease that has a physical marker that can be identified. Someone with a subjectively other-determined problem in behavior has no such marker. What do you mean by people like me?Because it can be observed that Parkinson's is a malfunction of the brain. There is a physiological marker. There is none for "mental illness" and it is grasping at straws to extend it to that. True. But you can't apply my logic about mental illness to Parkinson's disease because Parkinson's disease is an "illness" and mental illness is not an illness. Why? Because you say so? Didn't you feel much better after taking them. Or did you not like them? No. Sometimes. Per the definition of an "illness" there is a physiological marker, since mental illness has no physiological marker it doesn't fit the definition and can't be called one. There is no easy test and no hard test that detects mental illness. There is only a subjective evaluation.All physiological and biological tests should be done to see if there is a physiological or biological cause for aberrant behavior. If one can't be found then does it make sense to numb the mind? There is no correction of a physiological or biological abnormality by prescribing psycho-pharmaceuticals on a subjective evaluation. One might do better with a placebo according to some clinical tests. Or talking to a friend or counsellor would be less risky as regards side effects. And of course, finding Jesus helps. I feel it does.The argument I am making is that they can cause permanent damage, are too freely prescribed, and patients are misinformed about them. It is to some of them. They don't like the side-effects they experience. The tics and such. What bizarre acts of unmotivated random senseless violence with an ending in suicide have no evidence of psychopharmaceuticals? I am not closed minded to explanations that may lead to correction or an ability to predict or understand a subject.One thing you have to do if you wnat to make headway in understanding is strip out the false data. You don't seem to attach greed to this subject as much as you do to Wall Street. Pharmaceutical companies are flogging these drugs to the medical profession and raking in billions. Meanwhile, they are making out of court settlements to keep problems out of the media as much as possible. Things are often not as esoteric as they are made out to be by men. Chuckle! Good to end off on a humourous note. Have a glorious day!

What's with the destabilization of countries in the mid-east? They lose their dictators and then are continually in turmoil or in Syria's case civil war.

It used to be that there was a vast difference between anthropogenic global warming and weather. Proponents of AGW were quick to point that out but since it has changed to Climate Change, and global warming has cooled somewhat, weather seems to be the big topic. Another little piece of wisdom that painfully points to the past.

Yes, Hitler's Germany had them. What was wrong with them was that they excluded application to the rest of mankind who were held to be scientifically and genetically inferior to the Aryan race. It was tacitly understood they were somewhat less than human which infers that they were expendable. Portraying anyone or any group as less than human makes it easier to condemn them, can you imagine what would happen if they offerred resistance to their superiors? It would be justifiable to make war on them, kill them, enslave them, experiment on them or send them to Death camps. Of course, Hitler posed a threat to the rest of the world who decided he needed to be taught a lesson in ethical behavior.

Progressivism in action.

Ok. I clicked on the link. I won't spoil it for others and say whether or not I was right or close or way off. How did Britain ever survive without a minimum wage until 1999? As with any great innovation from government there is an initial benefit to a few without any consideration of effects on the overall economy in the long term. And of course, the ill effects of a minimum wage have to constantly be countered wit inflationary monetary policies. So you see why the minimum wage never seems to keep pace. The correction necessary to counter its overall effect on the economy of having a minimum wage is greater than it can be increased itself.

I haven't clicked on the link yet but I imagine it would be around $28/hr.

I said that? Wow. Things will be done by magic for free? Government too, knows it doesn't get its taxes from poor people. It may get its votes if there are lots of poor people, dependent upon them, you know a dependent permanent underclass. Teachers, nurses, doctors, lawyers, accountants, you know the permanent underclass that get a public education and public healthcare. The rich would not settle for that kind of mediocrity. You are saying that none of them have a conscience. You are saying they don't think about their current actions as affecting their future? On the contrary, they have more to lose than you do. They think very much about the future. The definitioin is not a distraction. Business is a part of a community, It provides jobs to the community, it provides needed goods and services to the community, if it is not in harmony with a community it moves. Single-industry towns die when they move away. They are an essential and integral part of a community. They are comprised of people, people that make up the community. Crony capitalism requires government as a partner to exist. I am no advocate of that. I am for capitalism not fascism.I don't know, after all this time, how you could so misconstrue my stand. I'm not the one that would support government bailouts of Wall Street or failing mismanaged businesses. I am not the one that wants government to provide subsidies and tax loopholes to corporations or limit a particular market to a monopoly or cartel. So where could you possibly even consider I would be an advocate of crony capitalism? Either you haven't been paying attention or you are simply on a mission.

Bailouts are emergency measures with out time to sell bonds. The federal reserve buys the bond from the government and that is part of conventional government borrowing and why a "fiat currency" was so popular with governments and why electronic ledgers are even more popular - they can immediately create "money" out of thin air.A commodity backed currency would never allow them to respond to Katrina or Sandy with billions of dollars. The people would have had to have done it all themselves with charity and donations. Many contributed to private relief charities and it was appreciated. Many asked where, when and how much government money would arrive. It's no skin off their necks to provide cash. Just takes a vote in congress. You chose to work there. You chose to stay there. You thought it would last a lifetime - there has to be some resp[onsiblity for your life. Otherwise, kimmy when they come for you you could just say you had nothing to do with it so they should leave you alone. It behooves all of us to have a clue about who is in control of our lives because if it isn't the person it is someone else. In the case of the assemblyman union worker he left his life in the hands of the union and ultimately the auto manufacturer. Correct. The whole economy needed a correction that no one wanted to go through. In the case of a bailout, under an honest money system the public would privately fund the bailout with real money if they were convinced it was necessary and the amount of funding would be dependent upon how much they believed in a bailout.Yes taxpayer dollars fund bailouts. There aren't any other kind of dollars. They pay back the bond the Federal Reserve bought from the government. The taxpayers now owe $17 trillion in those debts to the federal reserve and other bond holders. Of course. I know you do. However, regurgitating what you have read in refutation of my "assumptions" is not a display of any understanding of my assumptions nor of the subject. What we know now, if we follow the mainstream, is exactly what you say. Greedy Wall Street is to blame and we need more regulation and maybe someone should go to jail but maybe not. Let's think about it for awhile longer. Hey how about those Leafs? Who are "you people"?The fact is that they read an ad one day or a friend or neighbour said he was buying a house and he wasn't putting anything down and it was a government backed mortgage from Fannie Mae so it was all government approved stuff and he should get in on it while the getting is good. Those heady days before the bust were pretty exciting. I know I just made that up. But how do you see the mortgage brokers making themselves busy? Ushering people in off the street, door-to-door sales? Just how did word get around that mortgages were so easy to get? It had to be actually happening in reality but in your world people were being herded into mortgage broker offices, shown a house and told to sign on the dotted lines. I don't think they had to look anywhere for customers, they were lined up at the door and they wanted in. Boy, Barney Frank must be just seething at what those bankers did to those poor people. Saying yes to anyone who can fog a mirror. As he bought up mortgages left and right. Let's see, he was a congressman, right? And head of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac at the time of the crash? Sounds like a government stamp of approval to me. I don't think you read what I wrote because I think I said so much. The future became irrelevant. No one thought of the future. As I said, it is the consequences that must be faced in the future that holds greed at bay.Criminals do think only of short-term gain and long term consequences are generally ignored. Yes and maybe Dick Fuld is a criminal. Maybe all of Wall Street is a hotbed of criminals. Do you think we should support it with bailouts? In order for your accusation to hold water you would have to prove that Dick Fuld had it in mind to intentionally harm Lehman Bros. or at least had no intention of correctly managing it and was only there for his own personal gain. There is also another instance where people will risk long term consequences for short term gain the creation of "mob mentality", kind of a mass hysteria. Could this be the case? After all, it seems no one realized what was going on except for a few. It had to collapse before a problem was recognized. Nancy, Barney and Chris Dodd thought all was well? They kind of liked there being so many happy people in new homes.

Thanks for thinking of us, jb Hope the fourth is a good one for you!