Thread: I yelled at my parents tonight...

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 13 of 13
  1. #11  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,639
    Quote Originally Posted by Black Phoenix View Post
    What sometimes bugs me is, they're right to a degree, there ARE problems with the climate on earth that are caused by humans, just not any that are going to wipe us out as a species this century. It's not hard to understand why New Yorkers believe all of the cars they drive are effecting the environment, it's an indisputable fact that they are. You can't stuff that many cars in one spot, drive them 24/7 and not expect something to happen. You'll get your thick smog, land that will never grow anything, and night skies without visible stars (well that has more to do with the lights from the buildings). But then you walk a few hours and come out of New York City (particularly around the Fort Drum area), the smog clears away, there's semi fertile land and you can look up and see stars.
    You're presuming that liberals care about the environment. They don't. They care about control. The problems that they cite are either fictitious or exaggerated, but the solutions are always the same: centralized control of the economy. They don't build cities, but they demand the right to decide who lives where. They don't build factories, power plants or universities, but they dictate where they can be built, what they can make, what fuels them, what they can and can't teach and who they can hire.

    Quote Originally Posted by Black Phoenix View Post
    I don't think it's gonna wipe out the planet, but if the heavy population centers of the country continue sitting in tiny areas, they're probably asking for trouble. This isn't even me saying the government should be out of it. Relocating people from New York City would take government cooperation, especially for those who can't just pick up and move... and lets face it, save for forced deportation, the only real way to move a good number of people out of New York, would be to go into the slums and collect all the people chomping at the bit to get OUT! I'm also not suggesting they fall on government programs, but that the Government work with businesses in other states and across the state, to get jobs and homes ready for these people. This would be an investment to clean up New York and create more tax income by getting all the welfare recipients out of the slums. Who am I kidding though, if the Dems or the Rinos wanted folks out of the slums, they wouldn't district them so they can only go to failing schools.
    This is exactly the kind of program that liberals want. They talk about "sustainable design" for cities, but it's just code for moving people to where they don't want to go by the use of zoning restrictions, mass transit subsidies, manipulation of the tax codes and a million other ways of imposing their will. Remember that the housing projects were their way of moving the urban poor into new, clean, perfectly sustainable housing that would be easy to administer through a central program, and which would replace the unsightly slums that offended their sensibilities when they passed by in their limos. Within a decade, they were high-rise slums, but they were centrally located, and convenient to party block captains when they needed to get the vote out, so they stay in place. They won't move the poor. They won't move the rich, who enjoy the sophisticated pleasures of urban centers. That leaves the middle class, who are gradually being driven out of cities by poor schools, increasing housing costs, job losses, higher taxes and declining services. However, those cities can't function without them, so they have to be kept within commuting distance. But cars on highways and congestion are not aesthetically pleasing, so they have to be coerced into mass transit. Cars also offend the sensibilities of elites who object to people being able to go where they want, when they want, without being hassled. They hate the idea of Americans taking to the roads for vacations. They loathe the thought that we can relocate when their policies force us out of the places where we grew up, and they can't stand the thought of us burning fuels and driving SUVs or trucks.

    This isn't about the environment. If it were, the left would embrace clean coal, nuclear and natural gas, which are proven, clean energy sources. They'd encourage domestic oil drilling and pipelines, which are less risky to the environment than supertankers that have to transit dangerous parts of the world and risk massive spills. They would permit wind farms within sight of their homes, instead of filing lawsuits that put their scenic views over the energy needs of their neighbors. They'd live in the smaller homes that they expect us to live in. They'd fly commercial, instead of on private planes. They'd fire their drivers, scrap their limos and drive the same econoboxes that they demand that we make do with. In short, they'd practice what they preach. But they don't, because it isn't about the environment, it's about controlling their fellow men and women.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    PORCUS MAXIMUS Rockntractor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    oklahoma
    Posts
    41,088
    Quote Originally Posted by JB View Post
    Not entirely sure but I think fracking has been done for about 50 years now. Would have to search on it...don't feel like it.

    I think what set them off was a clip of a guy lighting his water on fire as it came out of the spigot and blaming the methane in the water on fracking. Apparently it's bullshit because the methane was there naturally. Again, verify it. The clip is sick though!!
    The name is new, the process is old.
    How is obama working out for you?
    http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/5d569df9-186a-477b-a665-3ea8a8b9b655_zpse9003e54.jpg
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    Senior Member Dan D. Doty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Pevely, Missouri
    Posts
    2,889
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    You're presuming that liberals care about the environment. They don't. They care about control. The problems that they cite are either fictitious or exaggerated, but the solutions are always the same: centralized control of the economy. They don't build cities, but they demand the right to decide who lives where. They don't build factories, power plants or universities, but they dictate where they can be built, what they can make, what fuels them, what they can and can't teach and who they can hire.



    This is exactly the kind of program that liberals want. They talk about "sustainable design" for cities, but it's just code for moving people to where they don't want to go by the use of zoning restrictions, mass transit subsidies, manipulation of the tax codes and a million other ways of imposing their will. Remember that the housing projects were their way of moving the urban poor into new, clean, perfectly sustainable housing that would be easy to administer through a central program, and which would replace the unsightly slums that offended their sensibilities when they passed by in their limos. Within a decade, they were high-rise slums, but they were centrally located, and convenient to party block captains when they needed to get the vote out, so they stay in place. They won't move the poor. They won't move the rich, who enjoy the sophisticated pleasures of urban centers. That leaves the middle class, who are gradually being driven out of cities by poor schools, increasing housing costs, job losses, higher taxes and declining services. However, those cities can't function without them, so they have to be kept within commuting distance. But cars on highways and congestion are not aesthetically pleasing, so they have to be coerced into mass transit. Cars also offend the sensibilities of elites who object to people being able to go where they want, when they want, without being hassled. They hate the idea of Americans taking to the roads for vacations. They loathe the thought that we can relocate when their policies force us out of the places where we grew up, and they can't stand the thought of us burning fuels and driving SUVs or trucks.

    This isn't about the environment. If it were, the left would embrace clean coal, nuclear and natural gas, which are proven, clean energy sources. They'd encourage domestic oil drilling and pipelines, which are less risky to the environment than supertankers that have to transit dangerous parts of the world and risk massive spills. They would permit wind farms within sight of their homes, instead of filing lawsuits that put their scenic views over the energy needs of their neighbors. They'd live in the smaller homes that they expect us to live in. They'd fly commercial, instead of on private planes. They'd fire their drivers, scrap their limos and drive the same econoboxes that they demand that we make do with. In short, they'd practice what they preach. But they don't, because it isn't about the environment, it's about controlling their fellow men and women.
    Dude, you are on FIRE !!!

    CU's Paranormal Expert.


    Keep your powder dry, your sword sharp and your wits intact.
    Reply With Quote  
     

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