dre

They are "backed down" all the time in practice. In fact that's mostly whats done in India because solar plants are designated as "must run". The letter is a complaint that Load Centers are not following the rules in certain cases.

At least that's a better link... but did you read it? The reason Load Centers are shutting down solar plants instead of thermal plants is because thermal energy is cheaper due to subsidies. Thermal plants get paid for their power even if its not used... solar plants do not. And that letter? Remember the one that your propaganda site claimed was evidence that "India is abandoning solar energy!!" Well that is REALLY in that letter was a complaint from Kapoor that Load Centers should shut down thermal plants instead of save fuel, and that solar plants should get the same subsidies that coal plants get. ROFLMAO... See how incredibly dishonest that propaganda site is? And how easily you were duped by the bogus headline and claims about the letter?

Well writing about keeping a racial majority could certainly be considered racism if that part is true.

This is whats known as the "lump of labor" fallacy. Its easy to see why someone might believe that an immigrant coming here will take a job away from a Canadian but in reality that's not what happens. If a new person comes to Canada first of all he needs shelter, and increases the demand for housing. He will cause a developer to take out a loan for 200 thousand dollars or more and the money supply will grow by that amount minus the reserve ratio. That 200 thousand will enter the economy through payments by the developer to workers and suppliers, and the government will collect some fees. In addition that new immigrant will increase the demand for other products and services which will cause those providers to need more workers.

The title of the article the propaganda site was.... Indian Government Abandons Costly Solar PowerIts just flatly not true. And then they keep making references to some letter but they don't even link to it. And then they enter into the usual talking points about renewables and start linking to articles around the net on other topics. In some basic searches I made to find the content of that letter the only thing that comes up is that same article from the propaganda site. I'm curious how much of your very strong anti renewable opinion comes from garbage like this? Do you regularly frequent these type of sites?

Well first of all when someone posts a link to a blatant propaganda outlet, it informs you about how that poster gets his information and builds his/her opinions. But it also just makes most readers skim past your posts. As for the claim itself, it seems a little suspect. The Indian government just announced that it was increasing solar deployments and committed 100 billion dollars in investment by 2022. Also... even with the large expansion in solar deployments we have seen there in the last 5 years, the average price of electricity has not increased faster than the rate of inflation. And its only 8 cents US per kwh. In fact... India has the cheapest electricity in the entire world. Also I would EXPECT solar to cost more than the coal industry which has been in development for a century, and has all kinds of externalities. I'm not one of those... I'm a proponent of energy R&D, and I think low emissions is a good goal since nobody is sure what will happen if we keep trying to power the worlds grids with conventional sources and plant designs and energy use quadruples. But I'm a proponent of low emissions coal and gas, nuclear research, solar, wind, storage research, etc. I dont really think or post about the CAGW stuff much.

Ummmm... that's a propaganda site specifically created to spread misinformation about co2 reduction.

Wall Street isn't just banks, its a euphemism for the financial sector in general. Commercial banks, brokers, investment firms, funds, thrifts, trusts. financial insurance companies, shadow banks (investment banks). Wall Street has a scam going where they pay people to go and work in Government. Here's a list of 22 more. Wall Street packs the government full of friendly faces, not to mention making massive contributions to presidential campaigns. But the reality is even more stark... The fact is that Wall Street and the governments financial apparatus are not even really two separate entities anymore. That's why almost all the people that caused the great recession got off literally scott free.

Nuclear is not really CO2 free. But that's just the start of it. The nuclear industry is so heavily subsidized (subsidies often approach the entire value of energy generated by a plant) that you have to look THERE for CO2 emissions as well. In order for the government to pay for much of the fuel cycle, and all the direct and indirect subsidies and accident liability caps, it has to tax other industries and people. These entities all produce CO2 in order by pay these bills. So nobody really knows if nuclear plants reduce CO2 emissions or not. Especially when there's so much potential to greatly reduce the CO2 emissions from new coal and gas plants. For example...

Anything is possible but I find your scenario to be extremely unlikely. Chinese forces are well disciplined, and there's a strong top-down command structure. Its very unlikely they would ever fire the first shot in ANY conflict without a direct order from the government lead CMC.

Abandon thread! Abandon thread! Abandon thread! Cant say I blame you after having your ass handed to you so many times. Id probably run away too!

All countries ignore treaties that they find inconvenient, or they simply absolve themselves of them. See Israel ignoring the Geneva Conventions, or the US unilaterally dissolving the ABM treaty, and every country on earth ignoring their Kyoto commitments, or Russia's adventures in Crimea and Georgia. That's because there's really no such thing as international law. Might makes right, and laws are enforced only when there's a "posse" willing to enforce them, and the posse only rides if its in their own direct interests. The balance of power in the world is changing because of incidents like Iraq and Afghanistan where the west showed it cannot bear the cost of major conflicts, nor can it achieve its goals. So countries like Russia and China are poking at and prodding at the western global security network... testing it... Seeing how far they can bend the rules... But make no mistake about it. China will only go so far... they are completely and utterly dependent on western consumer markets, and its the huge amount of business we do with them that will avoid a major confrontation, not our military or blustering from our leaders or the paper tigers that the UN and NATO have become.

Gender segregation is normal in all kinds of areas of society. I drove nearly 50 miles a few weeks ago to play golf at a nice course in a nearby town and I couldn't play because it was "woman's night". Gender segregation is normal and healthy. Members of both sexes enjoy having a break from each other, and that's why we have gender based clubs, events, etc, etc, etc. Where I personally draw the line is when segregation becomes abusive, or is used to shut women OUT of a part of society. In those kind of cases remedies can be sought through the courts. I also think that unfortunately your place in society is something you have to be proactive about... something that you to fight for. So we should have strong advocacy and support groups for muslim women, and make it very clear to them that we consider them equal to men in every way. Unfortunately this is complicated by a strong anti-muslim sentiment among many Canadians. This alienates them, and discourages them from really becoming equal members of Canadian society.

I did, as usual you just completely ignored them. I made three rational arguments... 1. Other women's reproductive decisions are simply none of your business. 2. A women has complete DEFACTO control over her own body and all the processes that are part of it. If she wants to cut her leg off that's her choice. If she wants to end a pregnancy she can - no matter what the law says. It would even be legal for her to commit suicide. 3. These are personal decisions that need to be made on a case by case basis. By expressing your desire for some kind of ban, what you are really doing is saying that politicians that probably live thousands of miles away and knows absolutely nothing about the case - instead of the women and her family, and her doctor making reproductive decisions. I also made it clear that conservative Christians cause MORE abortions to happen by opposing contraception, and sexual education. So give yourself a big pat on the back for extra dead "babies".

Problem is that lawyers will never allow it, because they are fearful of technologies that could result in less work for them. I STRONGLY suspect that you could replace the whole criminal court system with polygraph tests, and the percentage of correct outcomes would actually go UP. http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92847 Human run trials are so full of bias and emotion and misconduct, that I seriously doubt they exceed the range listed above in accuracy. I obviously have no evidence of that though. I guess the problem with polygraphs is that sociopaths, etc would get off more because they are completely comfortable with what they have done, and can often like without any detectable physiological indicators. Within 50 years ago, you would probably just be able to watch peoples memories on a big screen and know right away who did what and who didn't.

I'm sorry, I misunderstood. I went back and read again and now it makes sense.

This is the worst presidential ticket of my life time. I would take Reagan, GWB1, Al Gore, John Kerry, GWB2, Ron Paul, or Bernie Saunders over either of these crooks by a country mile. Hillary is the ultimate establish candidate and a liar. Shes fundamentally unlikable.. Trump is a liar, ego-maniac, reality TV show personality and business failure, and also fraud and con artist.

I don't think anybody really likes abortion, but most believe its a choice that should be made by a woman and her doctor. We should try to minimize it by encouraging contraception, and with sexual education. But the ironic thing is that you and your fellow Abrahamites protest THOSE things too. And by opposing those things, sky god cultists like yourself actually cause MORE abortions!. Talk about hypocritical. Having a child at the wrong time can ruin the life of the mother, and almost guarantee a crappy life for the child. At the end of the day its just none of your god damn business what other women do with their bodies, and its not mine either. If you don't like abortion then don't have one. If you don't like contraception (which also kills the basic building blocks of human life) then don't use. Have a kid every time you have sex or don't fvck at all.

Of course it will.

And maybe we shouldn't capitulate and sign bad trade deals... Like NAFTA that kept tarrifs on our most important export at the time, or the TPP that will strip us of the right to control patent protection. Our immigration rate is high because our birth rate is low. And that's because birth control and jerking off on the internet are so popular here. If you look at our population growth which is the basis on which quotas are set, its middle of the pack. I agree, lets improve the system as much as we can, but its already pretty good compared with our peers at bringing in skilled and educated immigrants. Is that opinion based on research of the labor market? I don't know if its true or not.

You're making the assumption that there isn't 9 people in the pool that meet your criteria. That may or may not be true, but its no necessarily true. And the funny thing is, its you and Argus that are up in arms about this, but both of you constantly ramble on about the courts ignore the law anyways and just "do whatever they feel like". So I kinda wonder why you even care about legal acumen if you feel that way. But hey! Lets get down to the real point. What you guys are REALLY worried about is that bilingual judges will be on average less conservative and more liberal. At least thats a salient and fair point, you should have just come out and said it. IN ANY CASE, this is much to do about nothing, because the Liberals can appoint whoever they want. They could only appoint judges that are over 6 feet tall and have brown hair and green eyes, if thats what they wanted to do. And when the Conservatives take back over in a term or two, they will get to appoint whoever they want as well. Trudeau will get a couple of appointments during his tenure, and we will end up with a couple of bilingual judges out of 9. OH MY GOD THE SKY IS FALLING. We dont have a merit system NOW anyways. Its not like the pool is analyzed to find the very most qualified justice. Some politicians and their rich friends, and some lobbiests get together and decide based on whatever criteria want to.

You need to stop aptly demonstrating why we need basic courses on macro economics and monetary policy in highschool. In an economy thats based almost 75% on consumer spending, where do you expect new demand to come from if the population is not growing? Santa clause gonna drop it down our chimney? Will the Easter Bunny bring it? We let in the right ammount of immigrants to keep the population growing by roughly the rate of inflation. This is an important part of how we achieve wage and price stability. In an economy with a stagnant population demand for ALL GOODS AND SERVICES is weak. It doesn't put people to work it puts them OUT of work. It can also cause deflation... if mortgages are being paid back without new ones being taken out, the money supply will shrink and you lose more and more control of price and wage stability. This shrinkage in the money supply is what made the great depression "great". To illustrate this visit a town with a growing population. See that new strip mall, full of stores and workers and shoppers? See that new subdivision with all those homes going up? Now go to a town with a stagnant population. See the empty houses? See the rock bottom real-estate prices? See the closed businesses? Nobody with even a passing knowledge of economics will EVER do what your advocating. All modern economies are doing more or less the exact same thing, for the exact reasons Iv explained to you. Population Growth Canada 1.04 Israel 1.81 Mexico 1.24 Philipenes 1.72 UK .75 US .75 Without population we would join a small handful of countries in the world with contraction. Moldova Micronesia Lithuania Serbia Latvia Portugal Romania Serbia Greece Want have them as our economic piers? This whole idea is just a big misguided fantasy. If we want to have a static population we need to shrink the services sector and get real productive, real fast. Germany does it... only .06 population growth and 4.2% unemployment rate. But they are a different kind of economy. In 2014 they had the highest trade surplus in the world, and were the largest capital exporter, and third largest exporter overall. Vehicles, machineries, chemical goods, electronic products, electrical equipments, pharmaceuticals, transport equipments, basic metals, food products, and rubber and plastics. Exports are 44% of their GDP compared to our 30%. Canada has lower productivity than 13 other western nations.

Its true that recent immigrants have a higher unemployment rate, and its also expected and understandable. But when you compare "Total Population", VS "Born In Canada" you can see that as a whole immigration has almost no effect on the unemployment rate what-so-ever. One tenth of one percent.

Odds are you could build an extremely talented and competent court from that pool. But again... I don't think the requirement is good idea either, in fact I don't even think it should be LEGAL to exclude candidates that only speak english for that one reason. I was just challenging this objectively incorrect statement "you have a 98% probability that whoever is chosen on that basis is an inferior judge in terms of legal knowledge and acumen". I already explained why but you could also read some basic online literature about statistics and pool/sample size, and the chances of obtaining a given attribute from a certain size pool. The relationship between the two is not linear. Interesting enough, when this requirement is challenged in the courts (and it will be because the people being excluded are all freaking lawyers) an almost completely English speaking bench will make the final decision. I think the whole thing is stupid. If Mr Trudeau wants language diversity in the courts, then he should appoint bilingual judges during his term, which he can already do. Everyone knows that once the Conservatives get back in they will toss the liberal selection process anyways and appoint the judges that they want. This is all a waste of time by Mr Trudeau.

Heres a graph showing inflation adjusted concrete and steel prices... Even with inflation costs have more than doubled just since 1980. Never mind 1950. You have some good points about labor costs. Especially the "on tool time" point. I really feel that in both the industries I work in.