So, why are conservatives so liberal in their energy use?

Lots of wood burning stoves in that part of the country. The further north you go the more likely you are to find people who rely soley on wood for not just heating, but for hot water. They have these woodburners installed outside the home they feed huge logs into. Also, industry is almost nonexistant. They raise cows, make cheese, and run ski resorts.

We know many people native to that state who had to leave to find work. Although it relies very heavily on tourism and has a fairly decent culinary school, even Vermonters who obtain degrees from NE Culinary are forced to leave the state to find work. Most of it is very rural or just plain wilderness. It is very pretty, but unless you ski or are into mountian climbing there is nothing to do.

My brother attended Lyndon State College for a year but came home and got his degree from RIC because it was so isolated and boring. The college students partied. That's what they did......they drank and smoked copious amounts of dope and after 2 semesters he knew Vermond was not the place for him.

http://wvgazette.com/News/200901130763

Well it looks like the incoming administration thinks the so-called "alarmists" might be on something.....

The high tomorrow here will be -2

I'll be sure to tell the homeless people I'll be working with this afternoon that the incoming administration is doing "whatever they can" to address global warming. I'm sure foremost on their minds will be how horribly warm it is. They are predicting six to eight inches of warm sunshine this afternoon to keep them warm.

Well hopefully the incoming administration will deal with homelessness better and until then will fund programs to help.

Well, which is it? Will the incoming administration ban coal burning power plants or feed the hungry?

My prediction is power plants will be modernized and new cleaner ones built, and feed the hungry.

Working hand in hand with some republicans.

I would tend to doubt that either scenario would be satisfactory. How long did you say it was since you were at the DMV?

The Berger plant has weeks to decide: install multi-million dollar scrubber or shut down. The Berger plant is outside Shadyside, OH and was built during the 1950's.

Bad time to be out of a job...

I'd say it is more likely the coal-fired plants will shut down and the homeless will eat more of this:

Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy – where a lack of spending leads to lost jobs which leads to even less spending; where an inability to lend and borrow stops growth and leads to even less credit.

Government has never created any jobs and investment creates wealth. Until you accept that, we will never agree on anything.

ohio county wrote:Government has never created any jobs and investment creates wealth. Until you accept that, we will never agree on anything.

In other words, "Until you accept what I say, we are at an impasse."

bmd wrote:

ohio county wrote:Government has never created any jobs and investment creates wealth. Until you accept that, we will never agree on anything.

In other words, "Until you accept what I say, we are at an impasse."

Infortunately, OC's statement is facts that history has proven time and again. I've ask you a couple of times and each time you've run scared so I'll try again.

If all it took to end poverty and improve the economic situtaions was to increase spending, why is there poverty?

The "alarmist" you speak of Sherm realize that no matter how much we conserve, as a nation, our energy needs are going to increase. That is a simple fact.

And unfortunately, alternative sources are not available and viable to meet those needs yet. We as a nation are going to have to either build coal fired plants (which by the way you supported when it was the government funding them-you said it would help West Virginia's economy) or nuclear one.

In other words, "Until you accept what I say, we are at an impasse."

No, that's not it.

Only government can break the vicious cycles that are crippling our economy

Why I can agree with that ....... but they have to start dismantelling all the wealth distribution and give-away programs they have installed over the past 50 years ..... and firing the employees that were hired to run them ........ and start putting criminals in jails instead of AAA Motels, ...... and only paying a day's wages for a day's work, ..... etc., etc.



.

Aaron wrote:If all it took to end poverty and improve the economic situtaions was to increase spending, why is there poverty?

Where did I ever say that?

Be that as it may, let's look at the flip side of such a premise: if all it took to end poverty and improve economic situations was to have free markets, where has that happened, and why do free markets still have poverty?

BTW, Aaron, I don't believe that you ever answered a previous version of this question:

How many shades do you see in the third row of this image?
(the one below all the pretty colors)

Perhaps if you learn the proper way to ask...

bmd wrote:

Aaron wrote:If all it took to end poverty and improve the economic situtaions was to increase spending, why is there poverty?

Where did I ever say that?

You didn't say it. Stephanie referenced an economist who did and I ask you to refute it. Twice.

You still haven't. Perhaps it is because you can't???

bmd wrote:Be that as it may, let's look at the flip side of such a premise: if all it took to end poverty and improve economic situations was to have free markets, where has that happened, and why do free markets still have poverty?

Hell, that's easy. In a free market society, by and large, nothing is actually free in a free market society and each individual earns what they get.

There are many reasons for poverty, one of them being laziness and another being poor decision making. I'm sure that not even I could think of all the reasons there are poverty.

Any particular reason you deleted your post BMD?

As someone with regular computer-related drama, I can appreciate why posts are regularly deleted.

Obviously poverty cannot be eradicated. "The poor we will always have with us." The issue is whether we can and should help those who are in a state of poverty, and how that help should be given. I do not have any issue at all with the moral responsibility of those with much to share with those with little; however, it being a moral responsibility, I do not see the government as generally an enforcer of morals. Obviously I'm glad there are laws against murder, but laws that would require generosity I believe are by and large misguided.

The thing about socialism is that it is the equal sharing of misery (I forgot who said that but they are quite correct). Unemployment rates in France and Scandinavia are quite high and they have the advantage over the US in having a history of socialism. The US system is, for better or worse, driven by personal gain. If we want doctors who know what they are doing, we are going to have to pay them well or no one will choose that path.

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
Winston Churchill

Aaron wrote:Any particular reason you deleted your post BMD?

What post?

Aaron wrote:

bmd wrote:

Aaron wrote:If all it took to end poverty and improve the economic situtaions was to increase spending, why is there poverty?

Where did I ever say that?

You didn't say it. Stephanie referenced an economist who did and I ask you to refute it. Twice.

You still haven't. Perhaps it is because you can't???

So, now I'm responsible for what everyone else says?

Nice (high school) debating tactic.

Aaron wrote:

bmd wrote:Be that as it may, let's look at the flip side of such a premise: if all it took to end poverty and improve economic situations was to have free markets, where has that happened, and why do free markets still have poverty?

Hell, that's easy. In a free market society, by and large, nothing is actually free in a free market society and each individual earns what they get.

There are many reasons for poverty, one of them being laziness and another being poor decision making. I'm sure that not even I could think of all the reasons there are poverty.

Nice non-answer.

bmd wrote:

Aaron wrote:Any particular reason you deleted your post BMD?

What post?

The one you responded to above.

http://lynnsamuels.com/

Looks like there may yet be charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

In respone to a potential democratic witch hunt, GWB should issue blanket pardons before he leaves office.