The Political Denial of Science

[wokeupthisam]

That's because most people have the impression that everything is just peachy clean. If you had spent some part of your life back in the 1950's as I did, and you had even then a latent interest in your surroundings, you would remember the pollution problems that were overcome by the realization that our free disposal of waist had to stop. It would be a damn shame if we start back down that same path again due to complacency.

You are either unwilling or unable to understand that the vote on the amendment affirming global warming was a political maneuver on the part of both parties, and has nothing to do with actionable legislation. And before you include de-funding of PBS in your list of Republican sins, consider that during just two years of total democrat control (white house, house, senate) the democrats federal budget deficit spending has amounted to enough money to cover all the following (and yes, this is in inflation-adjusted dollars):

the Louisiana Purchase; Roosevelt's New Deal programs; the Marshall Plan (rebuilding Europe after WWII); the entire Korean War; the entire 'race to the moon' program; the entire Vietnam War; and the Iraq invasion. In TWO YEARS!!! Did you read that? Re-read it if you need to: In TWO YEARS, the sainted democrats with total control of the federal budget, OVERSPENT (that's right, spent in addition to all federal revenues) an amount, in today's dollars, sufficient to pay for all the above! TWO YEARS!! Those are facts, you can check them for yourself with a bit of research and a calculator - and it is GETTING WORSE. A deficit of $14 TRILLION dollars means there IS NO MONEY to address global environmental issues even if both sides could agreed what they are. Do you really think Bernanke and the fed can just print up deficit money forever? Is that how you fund your living - with more and more and more debt - and don't think that is a problem? But the PBS needs federal funding, so like everything else, just throw it all in there, and kick the payment can down the road.. It's time to WAKE UP and face the facts.

Global warming is NOT a republican vs democrat issue. Don't let Al Gore fool you: he stands to profit from cap and trade more than the earth ever will! (And if you still want to vilify republicans in your posts, I'll invite a transparent, factual debate in another thread where we can cover the promises the democrats made in 2008 - and all the 'outrage' topics, like invading foreign gov'ts, from the Bush years - that are completely unaddressed under democrat rule)

[wokeupthisam]

None of it is true? It's all lies? 40% of those who claim to be Republicans in the general population agree to statements saying they accept the basic idea that the world is warming and that human activities are playing a part. 100% of those Republicans who voted on the amendments to a bill designed to strip the EPA of authority to regulate greenhouse gases as a threat to human health, voted against the amendments. One of the amendments required the legislators to agree that global warming is occurring regardless of cause. They couldn't or wouldn't make that statement. Apparently the Republicans in question do not believe any of the above observations are real. Some of them are on record elsewhere stating they doubt it or even to go so far as to claim AGW to be a conspiratorial hoax.

That there are other pressing issues going on in the world has nothing to do with it. In a sense you are correct though, the right-wing conservatives place environmental concern way, way down the list of issues of importance to them. The modern Republican Party has been overtaken by the ideology of the ultra-conservative John Birch Society .

please watch this with a pencil and your best scientific calculator, and tell me where the modern democrats are getting THE MONEY.

EAT THE RICH!

I'll await your financial refutation, line by line, on this thread.

[skierinvermont]

fat jokes ftw

stopped watching after that

[BethesdaWX]

fat jokes ftw

stopped watching after that

I know, truth is painful to listen to.

[WeatherRusty]

You are either unwilling or unable to understand that the vote on the amendment affirming global warming was a political maneuver on the part of both parties, and has nothing to do with actionable legislation. And before you include de-funding of PBS in your list of Republican sins, consider that during just two years of total democrat control (white house, house, senate) the democrats federal budget deficit spending has amounted to enough money to cover all the following (and yes, this is in inflation-adjusted dollars):

the Louisiana Purchase; Roosevelt's New Deal programs; the Marshall Plan (rebuilding Europe after WWII); the entire Korean War; the entire 'race to the moon' program; the entire Vietnam War; and the Iraq invasion. In TWO YEARS!!! Did you read that? Re-read it if you need to: In TWO YEARS, the sainted democrats with total control of the federal budget, OVERSPENT (that's right, spent in addition to all federal revenues) an amount, in today's dollars, sufficient to pay for all the above! TWO YEARS!! Those are facts, you can check them for yourself with a bit of research and a calculator - and it is GETTING WORSE. A deficit of $14 TRILLION dollars means there IS NO MONEY to address global environmental issues even if both sides could agreed what they are. Do you really think Bernanke and the fed can just print up deficit money forever? Is that how you fund your living - with more and more and more debt - and don't think that is a problem? But the PBS needs federal funding, so like everything else, just throw it all in there, and kick the payment can down the road.. It's time to WAKE UP and face the facts.

Global warming is NOT a republican vs democrat issue. Don't let Al Gore fool you: he stands to profit from cap and trade more than the earth ever will! (And if you still want to vilify republicans in your posts, I'll invite a transparent, factual debate in another thread where we can cover the promises the democrats made in 2008 - and all the 'outrage' topics, like invading foreign gov'ts, from the Bush years - that are completely unaddressed under democrat rule)

Of course the amendments were a political maneuver. However, the Republicans as a party have decided to denounce the science of climate change as a fraud, hoax and conspiracy. If you don't realize that then you have not been paying attention to their political statements on the issue. Even John McCane has done an about face. He was for action on climate before he was against it as evidenced by his campaign statements.

I am not one to base my understanding of climate change and global warming on the pronouncements of one individual such as Al Gore. We are not concerned here with differences in politics beyond the impact it has on the public global warming debate. There is no legitimate scientific debate, it exists only on the public and political levels. I have no intention of arguing politics beyond stating fact. The Republicans went on record as denying the universally accepted fact that the Earth has warmed over the period of concern. Period. They could have accepted the 1st of the amendments with no negative repercussions, but they could not for political reasons....wow. Stop playing games and get serious. They look like fools with an agenda. If the Dems. had done the same, they would look like fools.

What we have is a dysfunctional government and it had better stop soon.

[WeatherRusty]

please watch this with a pencil and your best scientific calculator, and tell me where the modern democrats are getting THE MONEY.

EAT THE RICH!

I'll await your financial refutation, line by line, on this thread.

I don't give a crap.

[WeatherRusty]

I know, truth is painful to listen to.

You can't resist can you?

[BethesdaWX]

Of course the amendments were a political maneuver. However, the Republicans as a party have decided to denounce the science of climate change as a fraud, hoax and conspiracy. If you don't realize that then you have not been paying attention to their political statements on the issue. Even John McCane has done an about face. He was for action on climate before he was against it as evidenced by his campaign statements.

I am not one to base my understanding of climate change and global warming on the pronouncements of one individual such as Al Gore. We are not concerned here with differences in politics beyond the impact it has on the public global warming debate. There is no legitimate scientific debate, it exists only on the public and political levels. I have no intention of arguing politics beyond stating fact. The Republicans went on record as denying the universally accepted fact that the Earth has warmed over the period of concern. Period. They could have accepted the 1st of the amendments with no negative repercussions, but they could not for political reasons....wow. Stop playing games and get serious. They look like fools with an agenda. If the Dems. had done the same, they would look like fools.

What we have is a dysfunctional government and it had better stop soon.

Again, posts with no basis. Who says Repubs call AGW a "hoax"? Not them, 40% in office are believers in the AGW theory. If you feel republicans think AGW is a hoax, then fine. We all have opinions. But that doesn't change the fact its a blatant assumption with no basis. I know you're upset and Concerned about AGW, but don't accuse others wrongly over a political issue.

[tacoman25]

That's because most people have the impression that everything is just peachy clean. If you had spent some part of your life back in the 1950's as I did, and you had even then a latent interest in your surroundings, you would remember the pollution problems that were overcome by the realization that our free disposal of waist had to stop. It would be a damn shame if we start back down that same path again due to complacency.

Ok...doesn't excuse the fact that you are putting all the blame on one political party, when in fact the "damning" statements you are making about them reflect the general American public.

[WeatherRusty]

Ok...doesn't excuse the fact that you are putting all the blame on one political party, when in fact the "damning" statements you are making about them reflect the general American public.

No, the statements I am making reflect that portion of the general public who's ideology is represented by the Republicans. I don't care to live my life that way, or have the society I live in dictated by people who are stuck in the past.

[WeatherRusty]

Again, posts with no basis. Who says Repubs call AGW a "hoax"? Not them, 40% in office are believers in the AGW theory. If you feel republicans think AGW is a hoax, then fine. We all have opinions. But that doesn't change the fact its a blatant assumption with no basis. I know you're upset and Concerned about AGW, but don't accuse others wrongly over a political issue.

1) Republican foes in the House of Representatives said Wednesday they were disbanding the chamber's committee on battling global warming, calling it a waste of money.

2) Missouri Republican Blaine Luetkemeyer sponsored a “defund the IPCC amendment” and his Republican cohorts overwhelmed Democrat opposition in a 244-179 vote.

“Mr. Chairman, if the families in my district have been able to tighten their belts, surely the federal government can do the same and stop funding an organization that is fraught with waste and abuse. My amendment simply says that no funds in this bill can go to the IPCC. This would save taxpayers millions of dollars this year and millions of dollars in years to come. In fact, the President has requested an additional $13 million in his fiscal 2012 budget request.

“My constituents should not have to continue to foot the bill for an organization to keep producing corrupt findings that can be used as justification to impose a massive new energy tax on every American.”

3) A spending bill passed by the House of Representatives last week would bring the Department of Energy's (DOE's) entire science program to a screeching halt and wreak havoc on research funded by other agencies and by private industry

4) House Republican aides have insisted that they won’t back a bill that is wiped clean of all of their policy declarations, such as defunding Planned Parenthood, restricting the amount of money used to implement health care reform, and stripping the Environmental Protection Agency’s capacity to regulate power plants.

[skierinvermont]

I know, truth is painful to listen to.

It's actually total garbage and just played games to obscure the fact that increased taxes on income over 250k can and will significantly help close the budget deficit.

[WeatherRusty]

You are either unwilling or unable to understand that the vote on the amendment affirming global warming was a political maneuver on the part of both parties, and has nothing to do with actionable legislation. And before you include de-funding of PBS in your list of Republican sins, consider that during just two years of total democrat control (white house, house, senate) the democrats federal budget deficit spending has amounted to enough money to cover all the following (and yes, this is in inflation-adjusted dollars):

the Louisiana Purchase; Roosevelt's New Deal programs; the Marshall Plan (rebuilding Europe after WWII); the entire Korean War; the entire 'race to the moon' program; the entire Vietnam War; and the Iraq invasion. In TWO YEARS!!! Did you read that? Re-read it if you need to: In TWO YEARS, the sainted democrats with total control of the federal budget, OVERSPENT (that's right, spent in addition to all federal revenues) an amount, in today's dollars, sufficient to pay for all the above! TWO YEARS!! Those are facts, you can check them for yourself with a bit of research and a calculator - and it is GETTING WORSE. A deficit of $14 TRILLION dollars means there IS NO MONEY to address global environmental issues even if both sides could agreed what they are. Do you really think Bernanke and the fed can just print up deficit money forever? Is that how you fund your living - with more and more and more debt - and don't think that is a problem? But the PBS needs federal funding, so like everything else, just throw it all in there, and kick the payment can down the road.. It's time to WAKE UP and face the facts.

Global warming is NOT a republican vs democrat issue. Don't let Al Gore fool you: he stands to profit from cap and trade more than the earth ever will! (And if you still want to vilify republicans in your posts, I'll invite a transparent, factual debate in another thread where we can cover the promises the democrats made in 2008 - and all the 'outrage' topics, like invading foreign gov'ts, from the Bush years - that are completely unaddressed under democrat rule)

I wish to revisit this post. Do you have a viable alternative? Would you have allowed the financial system to collapse such as what occurred during the great depression? Do you believe free market enterprise could have avoided a collapse of the economy if the government had not stepped in? You think what we have just gone through has been bad, the unemployment rate during the great depression was about 25%. Is that what you think would have been a better alternative to bailing out institutions to big to fail, or an attempt to stimulate growth and free up cash.

Has anyone ever considered that the economic system we live under may be fundamentally flawed and doomed to failure? We have a system which is dependent on never ending continuous growth. This is fundamentally an unsustainable system which is doomed to fail in that nothing can grow indefinably. We have lived under this "religious" belief that we can continue to prosper, while growing our population exponentially, depleting natural resources at increasing rates, over burdening our ability to provide food and water all the while doing sever damage to the natural environment.

You can reduce discretionary spending all you want, taking away environmental protections, entitlement programs, needed health coverage etc. and you will still be left with a stunning federal deficit and people more in need than ever. We are going down the crapper faster than most realize. I don't care whether Dems or Repubs are in charge. They can blame each other all they want and nothing can or will be fixed, because the laws of nature are beginning to catch up with our reality,,,,or should I say fantasy.

[tacoman25]

No, the statements I am making reflect that portion of the general public who's ideology is represented by the Republicans. I don't care to live my life that way, or have the society I live in dictated by people who are stuck in the past.

The majority of Americans are not Republican. Yet the majority of Americans overwhelmingly put the environment way down on their list of priorities. Most people think it's important, but not nearly as important as the economy, education, healthcare, etc. So it is inaccurate of you to portray that as simply a Republican mindset. As this thread demonstrates, you repeatedly insist on making this a black/white political issue, when it's much more complex than that.

Those that put the environment at the forefront are actually in the small minority. That's just reality.

[Jesse]

The majority of Americans are not Republican. Yet the majority of Americans overwhelmingly put the environment way down on their list of priorities. Most people think it's important, but not nearly as important as the economy, education, healthcare, etc. So it is inaccurate of you to portray that as simply a Republican mindset. As this thread demonstrates, you repeatedly insist on making this a black/white political issue, when it's much more complex than that.

Those that put the environment at the forefront are actually in the small minority. That's just reality.

I never understood that. The environment is kind of all encompassing, it's the world we live in. All of that other stuff is created by us (kind of fleeting and transitory in the grand scheme of things), and would be pretty meaningless if the environment around us failed. It should be at the top of everyone's list IMO for that reason alone. Everyone seems to make this division in their mind though, like the environment is some separate entity we can live without, as long as we have a strong economy, strong defense, low unemployment rate blah blah blah blah blah ad nauseum.

In the end, it all boils down to the unfortunate fact that most people are complete morons.

[BethesdaWX]

It's actually total garbage and just played games to obscure the fact that increased taxes on income over 250k can and will significantly help close the budget deficit.

"all the money is with the rich"....are you friggin kidding me dude? As demonstrated, it'd get us through only 1 year of gov't expenses if all the "rich folk" money, corporrations, oil, etc were spent.

I'm "poor", yet I know how much BS that is. The gov't spends just as much per yr.

Everyone should be taxed equally, equal rights, you get what you earn.........those who bust their ass through school, college, work....and then those who drop out of school...and do nothin......and yet we "distribute the wealth"?

Do you know how f**king ridiculous that is?

[BethesdaWX]

1) Republican foes in the House of Representatives said Wednesday they were disbanding the chamber's committee on battling global warming, calling it a waste of money.

2) Missouri Republican Blaine Luetkemeyer sponsored a “defund the IPCC amendment” and his Republican cohorts overwhelmed Democrat opposition in a 244-179 vote.

“Mr. Chairman, if the families in my district have been able to tighten their belts, surely the federal government can do the same and stop funding an organization that is fraught with waste and abuse. My amendment simply says that no funds in this bill can go to the IPCC. This would save taxpayers millions of dollars this year and millions of dollars in years to come. In fact, the President has requested an additional $13 million in his fiscal 2012 budget request.

“My constituents should not have to continue to foot the bill for an organization to keep producing corrupt findings that can be used as justification to impose a massive new energy tax on every American.”

3) A spending bill passed by the House of Representatives last week would bring the Department of Energy's (DOE's) entire science program to a screeching halt and wreak havoc on research funded by other agencies and by private industry

4) House Republican aides have insisted that they won’t back a bill that is wiped clean of all of their policy declarations, such as defunding Planned Parenthood, restricting the amount of money used to implement health care reform, and stripping the Environmental Protection Agency’s capacity to regulate power plants.

What does have to do with whether they are denying the Earth has warmed?

AGW is a seperate hypothesis that is a waste of money at the moment..

[tacoman25]

I never understood that. The environment is kind of all encompassing, it's the world we live in. All of that other stuff is created by us (kind of fleeting and transitory in the grand scheme of things), and would be pretty meaningless if the environment around us failed. It should be at the top of everyone's list IMO for that reason alone. Everyone seems to make this division in their mind though, like the environment is some separate entity we can live without, as long as we have a strong economy, strong defense, low unemployment rate blah blah blah blah blah ad nauseum.

In the end, it all boils down to the unfortunate fact that most people are complete morons.

Yeah, I have mixed feelings on this. I mean, protecting the environment is important to me, but I think some people/organizations go too far. There has to be a reasonable compromise between completely disregarding the environment and completely disregarding other, very important aspects of our civilization. If our educational system falls apart, or if we neglect our national defense, or if the economy completely collapses...those are all huge things with very real ramifications. Historically, those types of collapses have happened many times before around the world, so I think people see them as a more realistic threat than environmental issues.

[skierinvermont]

"all the money is with the rich"....are you friggin kidding me dude? As demonstrated, it'd get us through only 1 year of gov't expenses if all the "rich folk" money, corporrations, oil, etc were spent.

I'm "poor", yet I know how much BS that is. The gov't spends just as much per yr.

Everyone should be taxed equally, equal rights, you get what you earn.........those who bust their ass through school, college, work....and then those who drop out of school...and do nothin......and yet we "distribute the wealth"?

Do you know how f**king ridiculous that is?

Nobody is suggesting that we take all the rich folk money to pay the ENTIRE budget .. which is why the entire video is just stupid. What has been suggested is that rich people pay a slightly higher tax rate (IE what they were paying BEFORE Bush gave the rich a tax break. This would help close the budget DEFICIT which is much smaller than the ENTIRE BUDGET which is what the stupid movie is about.

Some statistics:

-The top 1% have 34.6% of the total net worth

-The top 1% have 42.7% of the total financial wealth

-The top 5% have 62% of the total net worth (the richest 5% own the large majority of America's wealth)

-The top 5% have 72% of the total financial wealth

-The top 1% have 23% of the income

ALL of these numbers are dramatically higher than they have been for the last century in the United States, and are dramatically higher than in any other western nation.

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

[tacoman25]

Nobody is suggesting that we take all the rich folk money to pay the ENTIRE budget .. which is why the entire video is just stupid. What has been suggested is that rich people pay a slightly higher tax rate (IE what they were paying BEFORE Bush gave the rich a tax break. This would help close the budget DEFICIT which is much smaller than the ENTIRE BUDGET which is what the stupid movie is about.

Some statistics:

-The top 1% have 34.6% of the total net worth

-The top 1% have 42.7% of the total financial wealth

-The top 5% have 62% of the total net worth (the richest 5% own the majority of America's wealth)

-The top 5% have 72% of the total financial wealth

-The top 1% have 23% of the income

ALL of these numbers are dramatically higher than they have been for the last century in the United States, and are dramatically higher than in any other western nation.

I think it's worth pointing out that taxes used to be a bit higher for almost everyone, not just the rich.

But I do agree that it makes sense to implement tax increases for the top 5%, especially since the gap between rich/poor continues to grow.

[skierinvermont]

I think it's worth pointing out that taxes used to be a bit higher for almost everyone, not just the rich.

But I do agree that it makes sense to implement tax increases for the top 5%, especially since the gap between rich/poor continues to grow.

Actually, the effective tax rate on income under 69,000 (the majority of Americans) has barely changed since the late 80s. In the late 80s the effective tax rate was 15%. It remained constant at 15% until 2001, when Bush dropped it to 14% (technically he kept it at 15% but created a new tax bracket for income under 17k which was only taxed at 10%, producing an effective tax rate on income under 69k of 14%).

In contrast, the effective tax rate on income over 379k has fallen 4.6% since the early 90s (from 39.6% to 35%).

So since 1993 change in marginal tax rate:

income under 69K: -1% (15% to 14%)

income between 69k and 379k: -3%

income over 379k: -4.6%

Marginal tax rates have decreased the most by far for income over 379k. They have barely changed by 1% for the majority of Americans.

And if we go back farther in time to the early 80s and 1970s.. income over 379k was taxed at 50%+... OMG SOCIALISM!@#!@@!!@!

All figures are INFLATION ADJUSTED and for MARRIED FILING JOINTLY.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html

[skierinvermont]

sorry shouldn't have said "actually" because you are right there has been a slight decrease in tax rates for most Americans, but I just wanted to emphasize the fact that marginal tax rates have decreased much more for the wealthy (at the same time when the u.s. income and wealth gini coefficients are going through the roof).

[tacoman25]

Actually, the effective tax rate on income under 69,000 (the majority of Americans) has barely changed since the late 80s. In the late 80s the effective tax rate was 15%. It remained constant at 15% until 2001, when Bush dropped it to 14% (technically he kept it at 15% but created a new tax bracket for income under 17k which was only taxed at 10%, producing an effective tax rate on income under 69k of 14%).

In contrast, the effective tax rate on income over 379k has fallen 4.6% since the early 90s (from 39.6% to 35%).

So since 1993 change in marginal tax rate:

income under 69K: -1% (15% to 14%)

income between 69k and 379k: -3%

income over 379k: -4.6%

Marginal tax rates have decreased the most by far for income over 379k. They have barely changed by 1% for the majority of Americans.

And if we go back farther in time to the early 80s and 1970s.. income over 379k was taxed at 50%+... OMG SOCIALISM!@#!@@!!@!

All figures are INFLATION ADJUSTED and for MARRIED FILING JOINTLY.

http://www.taxfounda...s/show/151.html

Like I said, they have dropped a little bit for everyone. A little bit more for the wealthy (which I don't agree with), but it's not a huge difference.

Compared to the starting percentages, taxes for the rich dropped 12% (39.6 to 35), and taxes under 69K dropped 7% (15 to 14).

EDIT: To illustrate my point, say you were getting taxed 50% but then it was dropped to 45%. While I was getting taxed 10% but then it dropped to 5%. Both of us, would have seen a 5% decrease, but that 5% would represent a much larger portion of my previously taxed income...50%.

[WeatherRusty]

What does have to do with whether they are denying the Earth has warmed?

AGW is a seperate hypothesis that is a waste of money at the moment..

They deny the Earth has warmed.

They seek to defund or eliminate the EPA.

They have voted to halt all funding of the IPCC.

They are targeting the NASA budget specifically to impact satellite monitoring of climate.

They have eliminated the House Committee on Global Warming.

------------

Do you detect a pattern here?

They are much like you, except they have power in their hands to enact policy. Their goal is to crush out of existence the science of climate change as Republican Senator Inhofe has stated "once and for all". Inhofe is the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

Inhofe in 2006:

I'd like to welcome everyone to today's Senate Environment and Public Works Committee roundtable on the interrelationship between greenhouse gas emissions and technology. As you all know, I do not believe that man is responsible for the modest warming over the last few decades, and I have said that attempts to ration energy in our country based on the supposed threat of global warming constitutes the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people. If you watched the FOX News special last Sunday, you know I have not changed my mind.

This is the individual driving the witch hunts on climate scientists along with Virginia AG Cucinelli.

Witch Hunt

[tacoman25]

They deny the Earth has warmed.

They seek to defund or eliminate the EPA.

They have voted to halt all funding of the IPCC.

They are targeting the NASA budget specifically to impact satellite monitoring of climate.

They have eliminated the House Committee on Global Warming.

------------

Do you detect a pattern here?

They are much like you, except they have power in their hands to enact policy. Their goal is to crush out of existence the science of climate change as Republican Senator Inhofe has stated "once and for all". Inhofe is the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

Inhofe in 2006:

I'd like to welcome everyone to today's Senate Environment and Public Works Committee roundtable on the interrelationship between greenhouse gas emissions and technology. As you all know, I do not believe that man is responsible for the modest warming over the last few decades, and I have said that attempts to ration energy in our country based on the supposed threat of global warming constitutes the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people. If you watched the FOX News special last Sunday, you know I have not changed my mind.

This is the individual driving the witch hunts on climate scientists along with Virginia AG Cucinelli.

Witch Hunt

A lot of education programs have been cut as well. I suppose the government wants to eliminate public education, because they don't believe education is important for the country?

You don't seem to understand that the government is cutting funding for TONS of programs right now. You are trying to single out just the ones that are related to climate and jump to the conclusion that all these cuts represent a hatred for AGW science. The fact that some prominent Republicans are anti-AGW does not mean that every action is an attempt to shut down science. Of course both sides are going to look to cut programs that they find a lower priority.

[BethesdaWX]

Nobody is suggesting that we take all the rich folk money to pay the ENTIRE budget .. which is why the entire video is just stupid. What has been suggested is that rich people pay a slightly higher tax rate (IE what they were paying BEFORE Bush gave the rich a tax break. This would help close the budget DEFICIT which is much smaller than the ENTIRE BUDGET which is what the stupid movie is about.

Some statistics:

-The top 1% have 34.6% of the total net worth

-The top 1% have 42.7% of the total financial wealth

-The top 5% have 62% of the total net worth (the richest 5% own the large majority of America's wealth)

-The top 5% have 72% of the total financial wealth

-The top 1% have 23% of the income

ALL of these numbers are dramatically higher than they have been for the last century in the United States, and are dramatically higher than in any other western nation.

http://sociology.ucs...wer/wealth.html

I'm speaking more of:

1) The spending. Take money from people....ok thats fine......but the government budget is so huge, and we keep spending so much.....whats it gonna do? Soon the rich will be paying 75% of all the taxes, nd taxes for our future offspring will be enourmous. Inflation, etc.

2) If the USA loses its position if the "worlds reserve currency" (the US dollar), and we cannot keep printing and making payments in it.....we're doomed. Look at what happened to Britian Many Decades ago.

3) Spreading the Wealth, what is done with the money...

[BethesdaWX]

They deny the Earth has warmed.

They seek to defund or eliminate the EPA.

They have voted to halt all funding of the IPCC.

They are targeting the NASA budget specifically to impact satellite monitoring of climate.

They have eliminated the House Committee on Global Warming.

------------

Do you detect a pattern here?

They are much like you, except they have power in their hands to enact policy. Their goal is to crush out of existence the science of climate change as Republican Senator Inhofe has stated "once and for all". Inhofe is the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

Inhofe in 2006:

I'd like to welcome everyone to today's Senate Environment and Public Works Committee roundtable on the interrelationship between greenhouse gas emissions and technology. As you all know, I do not believe that man is responsible for the modest warming over the last few decades, and I have said that attempts to ration energy in our country based on the supposed threat of global warming constitutes the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people. If you watched the FOX News special last Sunday, you know I have not changed my mind.

This is the individual driving the witch hunts on climate scientists along with Virginia AG Cucinelli.

Witch Hunt

What the frick dude

No one denied the Earth has warmed, even Inhofe, the Biggest Conspiracy Theorist in the USA...has not denied the earth has warmed.

There is a difference between shooting down Global Warming (AGW) Sh*t, and denying the Earth has warmed. rejecting the Amendments was 100% political, 0% science.

Why are you arguing that the republicans deny the earth has warmed? I don't get the argument...what are you doing dude?

[WeatherRusty]

A lot of education programs have been cut as well. I suppose the government wants to eliminate public education, because they don't believe education is important for the country?

You don't seem to understand that the government is cutting funding for TONS of programs right now. You are trying to single out just the ones that are related to climate and jump to the conclusion that all these cuts represent a hatred for AGW science. The fact that some prominent Republicans are anti-AGW does not mean that every action is an attempt to shut down science. Of course both sides are going to look to cut programs that they find a lower priority.

I don't understand? What do you think I am? An idiot? I haven't been living in a cave you know. You don't seem to understand the agenda these people have held for basically decades. Learn more about the science and the politics surrounding AGW before you accuse me of being naive. The people behind the attacks on climate science have been at this for literally decades, and they have been extremely successful in promoting doubt, claims of hoax, conspiracy, faulty science with it all culminating in the fabrication of "climategate" and the chance of a lifetime to take advantage of political positioning coupled with a down economy and national dept/deficit to gut the science they so deplore.

Corporate interests, conservative ideologues, those who fear government, those who look at environmentalism with disdain (John Birch Society) etc. employ conservative think tanks (Marshall Institute, Hartland Institute etc.) to devise and plot against climate science, it's scientists and the public at large to bring about their desired end, the unfettered ability to conduct business as they see fit.

[WeatherRusty]

What the frick dude

No one denied the Earth has warmed, even Inhofe, the Biggest Conspiracy Theorist in the USA...has not denied the earth has warmed.

There is a difference between shooting down Global Warming (AGW) Sh*t, and denying the Earth has warmed. rejecting the Amendments was 100% political, 0% science.

Why are you arguing that the republicans deny the earth has warmed? I don't get the argument...what are you doing dude?

I am not arguing. They said it, not me. Ok, have it your way then. They are not ignorant, they are liars. Which do you prefer?

[tacoman25]

I don't understand? What do you think I am? An idiot? I haven't been living in a cave you know. You don't seem to understand the agenda these people have held for basically decades. Learn more about the science and the politics surrounding AGW before you accuse me of being naive. The people behind the attacks on climate science have been at this for literally decades, and they have been extremely successful in promoting doubt, claims of hoax, conspiracy, faulty science with it all culminating in the fabrication of "climategate" and the chance of a lifetime to take advantage of political positioning coupled with a down economy and national dept/deficit to gut the science they so deplore.

Corporate interests, conservative ideologues, those who fear government, those who look at environmentalism with disdain (John Birch Society) etc. employ conservative think tanks (Marshall Institute, Hartland Institute etc.) to devise and plot against climate science, it's scientists and the public at large to bring about their desired end, the unfettered ability to conduct business as they see fit.

This is exactly what you are promoting, Rusty. Conspiracy theories. You are making claims that a whole political party is out to destroy science, based on some pretty flimsy, cherry-picked evidence.

AGW has always been a politically divisive issue, for many reasons. Again, you are viewing the world through black/white glasses, which I do think is naive. In your universe, everything revolves around this issue, which means that politics do too...but that's just not reality. There are some other pretty big factors here you seem to be overlooking.