The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Political Ammunition => Global Warming, Its Myths and Its Truths => Topic started by: SSG Snuggle Bunny on December 04, 2009, 05:27:23 PM
-
Things that make you go, "Hm-m-m-m.."
One thing about “ClimateGate†nagging at the back of my mind is the absence of any discussion by ringleader Phil Jones (or others) of the remarkable, shocking discovery that Jones now claims he had that his precedessor destroyed the raw data in the 1980s.
That is the data that scientists have for years been seeking from Jones under the UK’s freedom of information law. Against numerous such requests he offered equally numerous excuses for refusing access culminating with the September 2009 claim – when it looked like he’d been cornered and had no excuses not to provide it to Prof. Ross McKitrick who met all of his long-stated qualifications – that in fact he’d lost it.
First, it does seem odd that Jones would so firmly and crisply articulate his many, very specific excuses for so many years about why he could not provide something that in fact they had, as he now tells it, lost. His refusals all clearly imply that a belief that he had it.
But where are the emails putting out the word, oh, snap, you guys aren’t gonna believe this?
Among all that has been revealed, there does not appear to be one. Let alone a chain discussing the importance of not at long last actually having the raw, how this loss might relate to the scores of emails they wrote about whether to release the data and how to avoid releasing the data and how they’d rather destroy it (I don’t know, “pretend to have lost itâ€) than give it to the folks who seem to be on to them.
This seems like a big email, and a chain of discussions that would pervade that which has been revealed. It doesn’t.
To the contrary, we have numerous emails from Jones explaining how turning over the raw data is one option, but he’d much rather destroy it than let the intrepid start pawing over it which could only lead, as he admits in one email, to figuring out what CRU et al did to said raw data in order to come up with their alarming claims.
So there is a reasonable conclusion, and it is not that the data was lost or destroyed twenty years ago.
But who knows, maybe Jones wrote James Hansen at NASA, or Gavin Schmidt – for so long a taxpayer-funded activist for Environmental Media Services’ RealClimate.blog and now implicated as a major player in these emails (Capo number 6 according to this analysis). Those should turn up when the courts help NASA figure out how to come into compliance with their legal obligations and provide me similar data and correspondence that they have been, similarly and by chance, refusing me for over two years.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/03/climategate-so-wheres-the-oh-snap-email/
-
The answer to that question is another question. Are their lips still moving? Or their fingers typing?
-
I seem to recall in the emails there is reference that they Should destroy the raw data, which implies that it was still there to be destroyed.
-
There has been a FOIA request to NASA to provide the data they have used on making their climate change predictions. They haven't been very cooperative.
-
And now Phil Jones, as I understand it, has stepped down from his post, pending the outcome of an investigation, and is unavailable for comment......
A tenured academic heading a grant institution does not step down, unless there is a hell of a lot more to this fraud than we are presently aware........
I look forward to more revelations.
doc
-
Is it lying if you really have no idea at all as to whether what you're saying is true?
-
Is it lying if you really have no idea at all as to whether what you're saying is true?
Yes.....
doc
-
There has been a FOIA request to NASA to provide the data they have used on making their climate change predictions. They haven't been very cooperative.
There's been requests by scientists for the raw data used by the CRU that allegedly verifies their theory...and they've refused every time.
Now we know why. They destroyed the raw data because they knew that when it was put under scrutiny it wouldn't hold up and their whole myth of man made global warming would be busted.
-
There's been requests by scientists for the raw data used by the CRU that allegedly verifies their theory...and they've refused every time.
Now we know why. They destroyed the raw data because they knew that when it was put under scrutiny it wouldn't hold up and their whole myth of man made global warming would be busted.
On the academic science board that I moderate, one of the folks grabbed a batch of Fortran code that was contained in the initial data dump.........he ran it through a compiler, and voila! It compiled........so at some point in time we will know what this program actually accomplishes......I suspect that the final verdict is that it "massages" the data, and distorts the end result......his last post indicated that he was going to feed a non-random database of identical two digit numbers (like temperatures) into it, and see what comes out the other end.....we will see....
doc
-
(http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.parcoltop22.61100.ImageFile.jpg)
-
On the academic science board that I moderate, one of the folks grabbed a batch of Fortran code that was contained in the initial data dump.........he ran it through a compiler, and voila! It compiled........so at some point in time we will know what this program actually accomplishes......I suspect that the final verdict is that it "massages" the data, and distorts the end result......his last post indicated that he was going to feed a non-random database of identical two digit numbers (like temperatures) into it, and see what comes out the other end.....we will see....
doc
Like the cat who ate the cheese and waited at the mouse hole... I wait your next post on this matter with baited breath.
-
Since there is silence on the matter, I assume the program ran without evidence of fraud. Pity.
-
Since there is silence on the matter, I assume the program ran without evidence of fraud. Pity.
It will take some time.......most of the members are scientists that are working for a living, and are doing this in their spare time (and borrowing their employers mainframe time to do it).......I don't expect immediate results......
doc
-
Why would you want to use your bosses mainframe.
You can get a fortran compiler for any platform and since it is native to Unix, it should run great on your mac.
Source code for your fortran compiler for your mac is available here: http://hpc.sourceforge.net/
I assume most of the climate guys are lying through their dentures. I don't know the size of a data set they need to run this program through. But I assume that all the numbers should be the same value just to show how things are massaged. Can't they just create a database of 65s through a for-next loop?
-
Why would you want to use your bosses mainframe.
You can get a fortran compiler for any platform and since it is native to Unix, it should run great on your mac.
Source code for your fortran compiler for your mac is available here: http://hpc.sourceforge.net/
I assume most of the climate guys are lying through their dentures. I don't know the size of a data set they need to run this program through. But I assume that all the numbers should be the same value just to show how things are massaged. Can't they just create a database of 65s through a for-next loop?
I'm not doing it......just relaying information.......these people (on my academic board) tend to be very focused and very busy in their fields.....and (most of them) are pissed as hell that this scam is making real science lose credibility....if their past efforts are any indication, they are likely making certain that every step along the way is appropriately documented, and reviewed by (at least) one other independent party, to avoid the appearance that they are "stacking the deck", unlike the institution where all this is coming from, these folks operate on the world of "real science".....
If you are in such a great hurry for results, the code is out there on the net.....go compile it yourself, and get what you can out of it......
Don't shoot the messenger.....
doc
-
Here's a slightly lengthy but very illuminating analysis:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/08/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero/
-
Here's a slightly lengthy but very illuminating analysis:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/08/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero/
SYNOPSIS:
The ongoing canard of climate cultists is: the scientists may have acted badly but the science is still good.
As one blogger noted:
Well. The thing is, there are only three main records of observed (real-measure) temperature: CRU, GISS (Godard Institute for Space Studies, at NASA -- Hansen's creature) and GHCN, (Global Historical Climate Network, at the NOAA).
Problem one: Both GISS and CRU get their raw data from the GHCN. So, right out of the box, these "independent" measurements which supposedly confirm each other are not looking very independent at all.
So how does the GHNC data stack-up?
It's not fit to wash hogs and the linked article proves it.
-
And NASA is still refusing FOIA requests for their data and methodology.
-
Here's a slightly lengthy but very illuminating analysis:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/08/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero/
I agree, an excellent analysis of one geographic subset of raw data, wihich not only casts doubt on the entire premise, but at best is an indication of intentional fraud.
This analysis should be done on all of the data subsets, and combined into a complete mathematical model, the only "adjustments" or "homoginization"should derive from a relocated station, or from averaging missing data, and be limited to extrapolation of the mean, creating a meaningful margin of error........
"Darwin One" should be tatooed on TNO's backside (complete with graphs)..........
doc
-
"Darwin One" should be tatooed on TNO's backside (complete with graphs)..........
As I can't think of anybody who wants to take chances on what they might have to look at for too damned long if they tattooed TNO's bum.
Probably better to mold "Darwin One" into a boot sole instead... :evillaugh:
-
As I can't think of anybody who wants to take chances on what they might have to look at for too damned long if they tattooed TNO's bum.
Probably better to mold "Darwin One" into a boot sole instead... :evillaugh:
On second thought......I agree....
doc
-
Thanks for that.
Very interesting read on that data. It is interesting to note that where they should have adjusted down for an anomaly, they adjusted up instead. And they wonder where all the skepticism comes from
-
The thing that struck me most was that they barely tried to hide their blatantly improper corrections. No average trend, no questionable "rounding," just outright picking and choosing of which data to ignore, which to homogenize, and which to essentially change at will. Of course, an experienced researcher would catch it (no FOIA request for you!), but for the rest of us, well, "the science is settled!TM"
If I were in any scientific field I would be red hot about this. These arrogant fools have cast doubt on honest, hard work everywhere by the way they perverted the scientific method.
-
I don't like the "Science is settled" argument much either. That dumb Polack Copernicus was wrong about the Heliocentric universe. The science was settled. That goofy wop Columbus was all wrong about the shape of the earth. The science was settled. That Quack Walter Reed went around questioning the science about contagion? Who does Darwin think he is to challenge Genisis? That issue is settled. That Jooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Einstein has the audacity to question Newton? The science is settled.
-
The ongoing canard of climate cultists is: the scientists may have acted badly but the science is still good.
Nobody with a shred of scientific intregity could say conclusions are valid when the data used to get to them is compromised or lost. The essence of scientific proof is that results can be and have been replicated from the basic raw data by other scientist acting completely independently, not that you can pick it up after smoothing, outlier-discarding, and (In this case) upward-biasing algorithms have been applied to it. The whole 'Fake but honest' circling of the wagons being done in the grant-sucking so-called science community is a complete travesty and prostitution of their foundational principles.
-
If I were in any scientific field I would be red hot about this. These arrogant fools have cast doubt on honest, hard work everywhere by the way they perverted the scientific method.
Trust me, legitimate science professionals from all over the world are incensed about this......and are making their voices heard in professional journals and symposiums almost daily......this is not going to end well for the discipline of "Climate Science", unfortunately they are a small voice compared to the "politicians" that perpetrated this fraud, and the media that enables them.
doc
-
Nobody with a shred of scientific integrity could say conclusions are valid when the data used to get to them is compromised or lost. The essence of scientific proof is that results can be and have been replicated from the basic raw data by other scientist acting completely independently, not that you can pick it up after smoothing, outlier-discarding, and (In this case) upward-biasing algorithms have been applied to it. The whole 'Fake but honest' circling of the wagons being done in the grant-sucking so-called "climate" science community is a complete travesty and prostitution of their foundational principles.
Minor correction above........there are many "legitimate" scientific fields of endeavor that wouldn't even consider applying the methodology these charlatans have demonstrated, grant money or not........
doc
-
Trust me, legitimate science professionals from all over the world are incensed about this......and are making their voices heard in professional journals and symposiums almost daily......this is not going to end well for the discipline of "Climate Science", unfortunately they are a small voice compared to the "politicians" that perpetrated this fraud, and the media that enables them.
doc
We should proceed apace!
Just in case.
Now give me my--ur..THE--12 trillion dollars I require to save you from yourself.
-
To put this entire Carbon Dioxide argument in perspective, particularly since the messiah is threatening the citizenry with the wrath of the EPA, Carbon Dioxide comprises .03% (three hundredths of one percent) of the tropospheric gas mix, and 96% of that amount is naturally occurring, leaving, arguably, only 4% of the Carbon Dioxide that "might" be caused by all of the humans, mammals, power plants, industrial facilities, and motor vehicles on the planet today. They are therefore arguing about 0.0001% of the atmosphere in total..........at any particular point in time there is a thousand times more "dust" in the atmosphere than the CO2 that "might" be generated by human activities.
This is the reason that when this matter is discussed by either the media, or politicians, they will nearly always referr to the level in terms of "parts per million", as it allows them to use larger, and therefore more dramatic numbers in order to scare the uninitiated.........
doc
-
To put this entire Carbon Dioxide argument in perspective, particularly since the messiah is threatening the citizenry with the wrath of the EPA, Carbon Dioxide comprises .03% (three hundredths of one percent) of the tropospheric gas mix, and 96% of that amount is naturally occurring, leaving, arguably, only 4% of the Carbon Dioxide that "might" be caused by all of the humans, mammals, power plants, industrial facilities, and motor vehicles on the planet today.
This is the reason that when this matter is discussed by either the media, or politicians, they will nearly always referr to the level in terms of "parts per million", as it allows them to use larger, and therefore more dramatic numbers in order to scare the uninitiated.........
doc
Why do you hate polar bears?
-
To put this entire Carbon Dioxide argument in perspective, particularly since the messiah is threatening the citizenry with the wrath of the EPA, Carbon Dioxide comprises .03% (three hundredths of one percent) of the tropospheric gas mix, and 96% of that amount is naturally occurring, leaving, arguably, only 4% of the Carbon Dioxide that "might" be caused by all of the humans, mammals, power plants, industrial facilities, and motor vehicles on the planet today.
This is the reason that when this matter is discussed by either the media, or politicians, they will nearly always referr to the level in terms of "parts per million", as it allows them to use larger, and therefore more dramatic numbers in order to scare the uninitiated.........
doc
Doc - facts don't belong in this discussion.
-
Minor correction above........there are many "legitimate" scientific fields of endeavor that wouldn't even consider applying the methodology these charlatans have demonstrated, grant money or not........
doc
Actually doc, I said it that way for a reason. Every limelight/grant-seeking science 'Professional' from the noted attention-whore Michio Kaku on down the food chain to the totally unknown seems to want to think their belief in global warming should shut everyone up even though their educational and professional credentials have not one damned thing to do with climatology, from nuclear physicists to software engineers. They know less of the climatological science than I do, and apparently have a lot less devotion to its methods when their own grants or even stupid opinions are at stake.
-
Why do you hate polar bears?
They are a threat to "progress", unless eliminated, how could we possibly build safe, affordable, low-income housing for poor "brown" people in the arctic........
doc
-
Actually doc, I said it that way for a reason. Every limelight/grant-seeking science 'Professional' from the noted attention-whore Michio Kaku on down the food chain to the totally unknown seems to want to think their belief in global warming should shut everyone up even though their educational and professional credentials have not one damned thing to do with climatology, from nuclear physicists to software engineers. They know less of the climatological science than I do, and apparently have a lot less devotion to its methods when their own grants or even stupid opinions are at stake.
While I would agree that a number in the science community have jumped on the AGW bandwagon, a large majority have not, and are still quietly confining their studies to their particular disciplines.......I would be hesitant to paint the science community with too broad a brush.........many have privately thought this entire AGW concept was BS from the beginning, however, they have had to basically keep their mouths shut to avoid the wrath of their institutions/employers, who actually pay for the work that they do in their (non climate related) fields.
doc
-
if this was at all about science, the entire community would be up in arms over the CRU falsification of numbers.
-
if this was at all about science, the entire community would be up in arms over the CRU falsification of numbers.
Exactly. MSM science writers are all taking the 'Fake but accurate' ball and running with it.
-
Exactly. MSM science writers are all taking the 'Fake but accurate' ball and running with it.
It almost worked for Dan Rather.
-
Exactly. MSM science writers are all taking the 'Fake but accurate' ball and running with it.
An oxymoron at worst.......
doc
-
Oppressive taxes...curtailment of civil liberties...lying to the public
You could almost call them agents of a dictatorship if they were doing anything such as--say--suppression of the free media.
Oh...wait:
UN Security Stops Journalist’s Questions About ClimateGateby Mike Flynn
A Stanford Professor has used United Nation security officers to silence a journalist asking him “inconvenient questions†during a press briefing at the climate change conference in Copenhagen.
Professor Stephen Schneider’s assistant requested armed UN security officers who held film maker Phelim McAleer, ordered him to stop filming and prevented further questioning after the press conference where the Stanford academic was launching a book.
McAleer, a veteran journalist and film maker, has recently made a documentary “Not Evil Just Wrong’ which takes a sceptical look at the science and politics behind Global Warming concerns.
He asked Professor Schneider about his opinions on Climategate – where leaked emails have revealed that a senior British professor deleted data and encouraged colleagues to do likewise if it contradicted their belief in Global Warming.
Professor Phil Jones, the head of Britain’s Climate Research Unit, has temporarily stood down pending an investigation into the scandal.
Professor Schneider, who is a senior member of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said he would not comment on emails that may have been incomplete or edited.
During some testy exchanges with McAleer, UN officials and Professor Schneider’s assistants twice tried to cut short McAleer’s question.
However as the press conference drew to a close Professor Schneider’s assistant called armed UN security guards to the room. They held McAleer and aggressively ordered cameraman Ian Foster to stop filming. The guard threatened to take away the camera and expel the film crew from the conference if they did not obey his instructions to stop filming Professor Schneider.
The guard demanded to look at the film crews press credentials and refused to allow them to film until Professor Schneider left the room.
McAleer said he was disappointed by Professor Schneider’s behaviour.
“It was a press conference. Climategate is a major story – it goes to the heart of the Global Warming debate by calling into question the scientific data and the integrity of many scientists involved.â€
“These questions should be answered. The attempts by UN officials and Professor Schneider’s assistant to remove my microphone were hamfisted but events took a more sinister turn when they called an armed UN security officer to silence a journalist.â€
Two officers corralled the film crew and one officer can be seen on tape threatening the cameraman. The Guard can also be heard warning that if the crew did not stop filming their would seize the equipment and the journalists expelled from the conference.
McAleer says he has made an official complaint about the incident.
“I have met Mr Christopher Ankerson the UN’s head of security for the conference and he has confirmed it was Professor Schneider’s staff who asked the security guards to come corral us at the press conference. Mr Ankerson could not say what grounds the security guard had for ordering us to stop filming.â€
“This is a blatant attempt to stop journalists doing journalism and asking hard questions. It is not the job of armed UN security officers to stop legitimate journalists asking legitimate questions of senior members of the UN’s IPCC.â€
Professor Schneider was interviewed for McAleer’s “Not Evil Just Wrong†documentary but lawyers later wrote to McAleer saying he was withdrawing permission for the interview to be used.
McAleer, who is from Ireland, has gained quite a reputation for asking difficult questions of those who have been promoting the idea of man-made Global Warming.
His microphone was cut off after he asked former vice-president Al Gore about the British court case which found that An Inconvenient Truth had a nine significant errors and exaggerations. Almost 500,000 people have watched the incident on youtube.
http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/11/un-security-stops-journalists-questions-about-climategate/#more-44722
-
Exactly. MSM science writers are all taking the 'Fake but accurate' ball and running with it.
Love your "oxymoron" ;)
The real planetary polluters are the money lovers.
-
Love your "oxymoron" ;)
The real planetary polluters are the money lovers.
Here we go again......I love money (not to the detrement of all else however) how does that make me a "polluter"........I might mistakenly jump to the conclusion from your statement that you are anti-capitalist.........would that be a correct or incorrect assumption?
The argument that consumption of resources (that we earn money to actually pay for) makes us somehow "bad" or "polluters", kinda runs counter to the economic basis of our society........is that your premise? Or am I misinterpreting?
doc
-
Here we go again......I love money (not to the detrement of all else however) how does that make me a "polluter"........I might mistakenly jump to the conclusion from your statement that you are anti-capitalist.........would that be a correct or incorrect assumption?
The argument that consumption of resources (that we earn money to actually pay for) makes us somehow "bad" or "polluters", kinda runs counter to the economic basis of our society........is that your premise? Or am I misinterpreting?
doc
Was going to post the same...
-
Was going to post the same...
Yeah, I sorta asked her the same question over in a thread on the "Herbal Remedies" subforum......and didn't get an answer there either......
doc
-
Yeah, I sorta asked her the same question over in a thread on the "Herbal Remedies" subforum......and didn't get an answer there either......
doc
I have yet to get an answer from TNO or that other A-what'shisname... nor do I expect to.
-
I have yet to get an answer from TNO or that other A-what'shisname... nor do I expect to.
"Patriot Lady" is different than those two......she isn't a liberal troll (at least I don't think so), in the other thread that I engaged her in, I got several impressions, none of them political per se, I don't think English is her first language, she is perhaps Chinese (my DIL is Chinese, and the writing style is similar), and she is a practitioner of oriental medicine. This is the thread......bottom of page 2
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,17915.15.html
If she did immigrate from China......she may have brought some of the politics with her...........just a guess.......
To those people who spent a sizable portion of their lives in a "one-party" political system, ours must seem somewhat incomprehensible......
doc
-
Here we go again......I love money (not to the detriment of all else however) how does that make me a "polluter"........I might mistakenly jump to the conclusion from your statement that you are anti-capitalist.........would that be a correct or incorrect assumption?
The argument that consumption of resources (that we earn money to actually pay for) makes us somehow "bad" or "polluters", kinda runs counter to the economic basis of our society........is that your premise? Or am I misinterpreting?
doc
Yup- we're on again :)
As I stated in the post re: Rockefeller- I am not against Capitalism at all. I do think it is pretty apparent that capitalism is the best social system in existence-HOWVER, it should entail good moral values! The global warming scenario is literally being forced down our throats and there is no room for debate! I should say that they do not allow debate! I am sure that you are aware that in the 70's, they were screaming that we had global cooling and that according to their estimates, half of us should not be here now.
Sorry- in our present society- most are in it for the money. There is big money to be made from this well oiled, global warming machine and they will not stop to listen to anyone that may oppose them.
I am sure that you are an honest and upright individual but most are not. The new $$$$ trend of Capitalism is why we are on the brink of financial ruin in this country. I do think that Marx may be right on this one! Capitalist's will exploit the poor if they do not have a moral compass.
The bubble had to burst at some point!
-
Yup- we're on again :)
As I stated in the post re: Rockefeller- I am not against Capitalism at all. I do think it is pretty apparent that capitalism is the best social system in existence-HOWVER, it should entail good moral values! The global warming scenario is literally being forced down our throats and there is no room for debate! I should say that they do not allow debate! I am sure that you are aware that in the 70's, they were screaming that we had global cooling and that according to their estimates, half of us should not be here now.
Sorry- in our present society- most are in it for the money. There is big money to be made from this well oiled, global warming machine and they will not stop to listen to anyone that may oppose them.
I am sure that you are an honest and upright individual but most are not. The new $$$$ trend of Capitalism is why we are on the brink of financial ruin in this country. I do think that Marx may be right on this one! Capitalist's will exploit the poor if they do not have a moral compass.
The bubble had to burst at some point!
I don't really disagree with anything that you have stated, other than your (implied) comment that capitalism must have a "moral" component......Capitalism is an economic system, whose primary goal is the production of profit revenues.........as a system, it does not care whether the participants in the process are rich or poor.......
Where capitalism and "politics" become immeshed, is where governments attempt to distort capitalism in order to either exploit the rich or poor, or protect the rich or poor.........the economic engine of capitalism doesn't care about the participants......only the results......
I would be remiss if I did not add that under our particular brand of capitalism, the only manner in which the "poor" are exploited is if they allow themselves to be exploited.......no one is forcing them to buy goods with their meager resources at gun point, and no one is forcing them to work in a "sweatshop".......if they choose to do either it is the result of their own ignorance or sloth.......and capitalism, as a system, can be blamed for neither......
doc
-
Thanks! Good one! I do understand "sloth" but what about the ones in the middle. We work really hard and are still beholding to the Capitalists and what they deem appropriate???
It is as if we are fighting out of a paper bag-- or in "rock and hard place" scenario. They are steering the ship in the direction that they deem fit and many do not have that moral compass. SIGH
-
Thanks! Good one! I do understand "sloth" but what about the ones in the middle. We work really hard and are still beholding to the Capitalists and what they deem appropriate???
It is as if we are fighting out of a paper bag-- or in "rock and hard place" scenario. They are steering the ship in the direction that they deem fit and many do not have that moral compass. SIGH
As with every economic system whether capitalist or "communist (collective)" the ones with the money (or power), get to tell the rest what to do.......been that way since man walked upright.......what's the problem?
doc
-
Thanks! Good one! I do understand "sloth" but what about the ones in the middle. We work really hard and are still beholding to the Capitalists and what they deem appropriate???
It is as if we are fighting out of a paper bag-- or in "rock and hard place" scenario. They are steering the ship in the direction that they deem fit and many do not have that moral compass. SIGH
I'm beholden to no one but myself. If you chose to be, that's your decision. But don't knock the system that made this country great. No offense, but it's NOT "the other person's fault." I may be overstating a response here, but there is no paper back, no rock and hard spot, no beholden to "capitalists." There's just freedom or tyranny.
-
I do think that Marx may be right on this one! Capitalist's will exploit the poor if they do not have a moral compass.
I know, one of those asshole Capitalist's has me working at a job that pays for my 1800 sf home, cars, vacations, ect.. What a pig.
-
Thanks! Good one! I do understand "sloth" but what about the ones in the middle. We work really hard and are still beholding to the Capitalists and what they deem appropriate???
It is as if we are fighting out of a paper bag-- or in "rock and hard place" scenario. They are steering the ship in the direction that they deem fit and many do not have that moral compass. SIGH
Who are these "Capitalists" you're so on about?
-
As with every economic system whether capitalist or "communist (collective)" the ones with the money (or power), get to tell the rest what to do.......been that way since man walked upright.......what's the problem?
doc
The problem is the exorbedent inequality in this country caused by amoral capitalists. The following article is one example.
I can also site the pay increases in DC and that Federal pay has increased since the economic meltdown- this is absolutely inexusable! With the economic breakdown, we can only hope that DC would stand with us-- remembering that they caused the disaster. They are telling us to tighten our purses and we are the ones that are loosing jobs or having hours cut. Congress still gets their perks and a new 2% raise for 2010.
I do not know about you but all of this gets me fuming! I might be a dreamer but all of this is totally out of proportion---nothing good will come of it. Also- when the US dollar goes, we go too. They won't because they have their money safely tucked away.
Face it-- Capitalists are money hungry mongruls!
Wall Streeters aren't the only ones raking in big bonuses during tough economic times.
Hospital presidents and CEOs also collect fat bonuses and "incentive payments," even as health-care systems cry poverty, claiming they struggle to break even against government cutbacks, tightwad insurers and skyrocketing costs.
While warning of layoffs and slashed patient services, many hospitals shower their top execs and department heads with bonuses and perks. They include housing allowances, chauffeurs, first-class air travel, tuition for their kids and country-club memberships.
The filings for the city's biggest and most prestigious private, tax-exempt hospitals show at least a dozen CEOs get compensation of $1 million and up. Some also cash in early on million-dollar pre-retirement payouts while on the job.
Dr. Herbert Pardes, who runs the New York-Presbyterian Hospital and its health-care system -- the city's largest private hospital network -- received a $1 million bonus in 2008 on top of his $1.67 million salary.
The hospital has a "pay for performance" philosophy but says even though Pardes met his goals, his bonus was smaller than 2007's to "reflect the current external environment."
But Pardes' compensation totaled $9.8 million in 2008 because he vested in a retirement plan that will pay $6.8 million when he leaves in 2011. He also received a $93,500 housing allowance and the use of a car and driver.
The $4.2 million 2008 compensation for Steven Safyer, CEO of Montefiore Medical Center in The Bronx, another major teaching hospital, included a $1.2 million salary, a $452,789 bonus, a $6,000 college scholarship for his child and $2.1 million in pre-retirement cash.
A $1.2 million bonus went to Miguel Fuentes Jr., CEO of the 958-bed Bronx-Lebanon Hospital. His $4.8 million package included $878,024 in salary and an $858,000 pre-retirement payout. He's also set to get $1.8 million in retirement cash next year.
Execs cleaned up even at struggling hospitals. Despite years of losses, 513-bed Lenox Hill Hospital on the Upper East Side gave CEO Gladys George an early-retirement payment of $752,469 on top of her relatively modest $522,206 salary.
Her salary still dwarfs that of Alvin Aviles, who makes $291,000 as CEO of the city's $6.3 billion Health and Hospitals Corp., the nation's largest public system with 39,000 employees at 11 hospitals, four nursing homes and many treatment centers.
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/sickening_bonuses_8pL0AI56MMF7wcPa3ibFDM#ixzz0ZoFr1bRY
-
The problem is the exorbedent inequality in this country caused by amoral capitalists. The following article is one example.
I can also site the pay increases in DC and that Federal pay has increased since the economic meltdown- this is absolutely inexusable! With the economic breakdown, we can only hope that DC would stand with us-- remembering that they caused the disaster. They are telling us to tighten our purses and we are the ones that are loosing jobs or having hours cut. Congress still gets their perks and a new 2% raise for 2010.
I do not know about you but all of this gets me fuming! I might be a dreamer but all of this is totally out of proportion---nothing good will come of it. Also- when the US dollar goes, we go too. They won't because they have their money safely tucked away.
Face it-- Capitalists are money hungry mongruls!
Equating anything that happens in DC with capitalism is your first mistake. DC has NOTHING to do with capitalism.
Who are the "amoral capitalists?" None in your article that I saw.
-
Equating anything that happens in DC with capitalism is your first mistake. DC has NOTHING to do with capitalism.
Who are the "amoral capitalists?" None in your article that I saw.
cap⋅i⋅tal⋅ist /ˈkæpɪtlɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kap-i-tl-ist] Show IPA
–noun 1. a person who has capital, esp. extensive capital, invested in business enterprises.
Doctors invest in the hospitals etc. Congress also invests- look at Rangel- great example! Pelosi owns a vineyard in the Napa Valley-- on and on
They also reinvest. I am not really business savvy- I simply detest what I am seeing in this country.
-
cap⋅i⋅tal⋅ist  /ˈkæpɪtlɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kap-i-tl-ist] Show IPA
–noun 1. a person who has capital, esp. extensive capital, invested in business enterprises.
Doctors invest in the hospitals etc. Congress also invests- look at Rangel- great example! Pelosi owns a vineyard in the Napa Valley-- on and on
They also reinvest. I am not really business savvy- I simply detest what I am seeing in this country.
You're misapplying the definition if you apply it to the gov't. The money DC is playing with is not their own and has been gathered by way of extorsion, thread and theft. That is not capitalism.
Beyond that, sure, individuals are capitalists, and what is wrong with that if done legally? Pelosi, et al, are hypocritical beyond reproach in that their "success" is often driving by the laws they themselves create. That's at best, insider trading.
Does it bother you that Bill Gates is worth Billions? Almost 90% of millionaires are self made. I'm all for it - it means there's a chance I could do it as well. Capitalism is the best system anyone has ever seen. Remember, the founders believed we were created equal... not that we lived equal. We'll just have to agree to disagree.
-
cap⋅i⋅tal⋅ist  /ˈkæpɪtlɪst/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [kap-i-tl-ist] Show IPA
–noun 1. a person who has capital, esp. extensive capital, invested in business enterprises.
Doctors invest in the hospitals etc. Congress also invests- look at Rangel- great example! Pelosi owns a vineyard in the Napa Valley-- on and on
They also reinvest. I am not really business savvy- I simply detest what I am seeing in this country.
Holey Moses!
Actually, thanks for the definition; which I trust you happened to actually read. You are (or, rather, anyone is) a "capitalist" if you/they are: (a) someone with a pension, (b) someone with a 401(k), (c) someone with an IRA, (d) someone with a KEOGH, (e) someone with a savings account, (f) someone with a brokerage account, (g) someone who owns real estate, including folks who own their own home (whether or not it's encumbered with a mortgage), (h) someone who owns her or his own business, or ....
Quite frankly, that means that most ordinary Americans - excluding the slackers over at DU - are capitalists. Welcome to the dark side, everyone.
-
Capitalism works because it is a system entirely based on equality. The starting point is that all men are equal, regardless of social standing, race, gender, or anything else you can think of. The only requirement for success is that you engage in trade with your fellow man, and the possibilities for that trade are nearly endless. You can devote yourself to a profession and offer your services in exchange for what you value, or you can apply your mind to a problem and offer your solution for the same. Whether you'd like to be a manual laborer or a brain surgeon, your personal outcome is based entirely on what you value and how you engage in trade for those values.
And so, naturally, we see inequality in each man's personal outcome. Some men are more ambitious than others; this is simply a statement of fact. Some men value time with their families over time spent studying a profession. Some men value the creation of wealth over having a family at all. To say that we should see equality, across the board, is tantamount to saying we should control men's livelihoods, their dreams, and their goals. If that's your stance, then PM me. I'd be more than happy to burn some frequent flyer miles sending you to the paradise of your choice. Cuba, N. Korea, China, take your pick.
Where capitalism fails is where government begins to interfere with it. Witness welfare, for one. The idea was that all men should have their fundamental needs met, regardless of any effort they put forth for them. But no one ever stopped to define how those fundamental needs should be met. Should we prepare a bowl of gruel, three times a day, so that these poor men can eat? Should we build them a 10'X10' room to live in until they can provide for themselves? No, instead, it was decided that we should just give men money, because they need it. Nevermind where that money comes from, and the work that was required to produce it. We'll suspend the rules of capitalism based on great need. And then, shockingly, we come to find that these poor men still have no motivation to work or produce in order to provide for themselves. Instead, we've created an actual welfare state within a "capitalist" system. Why should anyone be surprised? These poor men were not motivated in the first place to provide for themselves, so why should it be any different when someone else is providing for them? We've forgotten that need should be a motivation to achieve, not a reason to steal from others. We've denied human nature itself.
Witness, as well, the fiasco in the financial industry. Huge banks and corporations made awful, awful decisions regarding risk and reward. We can detail the history that may have prompted those decisions, but I'd rather look at the final outcome. Instead of simply acknowledging their plight and waving goodbye as they went under, we propped them up, funneling hundreds of billions of dollars into their operations. And why? Because they needed it. Because they're "too big to fail." Because think of the poor people who would lose money if they went under. Complete and utter garbage. Think of the poor people who don't have the chance to step into these bloated behemoths' places.
Capitalism, properly allowed to operate, is the only system that benefits all men, at the expense of none. This mixed-economy, trollish, mockery of capitalism we currently have is responsible for the opposite. It benefits the lazy and incompetent at the expense of the producers. It rewards poor decisions and lack of ambition and punishes the opposite. You can thank government interference for each and every gripe you have about capitalism, and you can thank your own misguided notion that men's economic standing should be "more equal" for giving rise to that government interference. All men start on equal footing in a purely capitalist society. There is nothing more moral than that, and there is hardly a worse evil than the idea that men should be robbed so that others can receive something they never lifted a finger for. Witness the oppressive, tyrannical society prevalent in any "people's state" you can think of. Witness the fact that America went from new-born babe to economic superpower nearly overnight. Witness the fact that China began turning its economy around by relaxing government intervention and allowing for "a little more capitalism here and there." The evidence is all around you, PatriotLady, and yet you continue to rail against the only system that's ever been proven to actually improve men's lives. And your complaints are against the forced perversions of that system, as if capitalism is responsible for any of your woes.
-
The problem is the exorbedent inequality in this country caused by amoral capitalists. The following article is one example.
I can also site the pay increases in DC and that Federal pay has increased since the economic meltdown- this is absolutely inexusable! With the economic breakdown, we can only hope that DC would stand with us-- remembering that they caused the disaster. They are telling us to tighten our purses and we are the ones that are loosing jobs or having hours cut. Congress still gets their perks and a new 2% raise for 2010.
I do not know about you but all of this gets me fuming! I might be a dreamer but all of this is totally out of proportion---nothing good will come of it. Also- when the US dollar goes, we go too. They won't because they have their money safely tucked away.
Face it-- Capitalists are money hungry mongruls!
Friend, this is a reason to remove government interference in the economy. You've just highlighted the ways in which government perverts the operation of capitalism, rewarding losers who simply know how to manipulate the government and its interference, and then applied your criticism to capitalism itself. Stop it.
-
Chump, teh stoopid is strong with the Lady.
-
Chump, teh stoopid is strong with the Lady.
I'm not impressed with the logic of blaming capitalism for things imposed on it by the government, but at this point I think PL has an open mind, and she's at least acknowledging that no other system can compare to capitalism. At the very least, the sort of complaints she brings up should be met and answered every single time they're mentioned. Every time, without fail, lest any lurkers mistakenly think they have merit.
-
I'm not impressed with the logic of blaming capitalism for things imposed on it by the government, but at this point I think PL has an open mind, and she's at least acknowledging that no other system can compare to capitalism. At the very least, the sort of complaints she brings up should be met and answered every single time they're mentioned. Every time, without fail, lest any lurkers mistakenly think they have merit.
Chump, have you seen this thread?
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,37697.msg406809.html#msg406809
and this one?
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,37863.0.html
Nope, WS is dead on. Teh stooopid is strong with the lady.
-
:thatsright: