SkyDekker
-
Content
21,691 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
96 -
Feedback
0% -
Country
Canada
Everything posted by SkyDekker
-
You may want to re-read that quote. Even that person didn't predict a disaster by 2000.
-
So you want other people to be 100% correct, or you ridicule them. But shrug when it turns out you are only half right. Priceless.
-
Of course you are the same person who complained about the terrible treatment Manafort received.
-
Your president had no problem doing business with these people. You have no problem supporting people who made money off this terrorist organization. Would appear your glee is based more on the prospect of people getting killed than anything else.
-
It is an easy statement to make, but I think that means something different to each person who says it. I agree that rich people should not get better treatment, but there is no doubt they will be able to afford better lawyers. Few people will advocate for significantly increased funds for public defenders. As much as I agree with equal treatment under the law, motivation and intent play a big part in sentencing. Stealing a loaf of bread to feed your child is different from stealing millions from tax payers.
-
I agree. Evolution of car sharing.
-
If American Conservatives have taught me one thing, it is that those who are too poor to afford something are simply too lazy to work for it.
-
No-one knows <insert topic here> better than Trump
SkyDekker replied to kallend's topic in Speakers Corner
I think you have summed up the current state of American society quite well. Entertainment over substance, always. -
Oh absolutely. I was focusing on the positive side of a tax cut: some people are going to have more money. Downside is the country will have less money. Unless you believe in "judo math" at which point reductions in revenue lead to increases in revenue.
-
I think a lot depends on the rest of the conversation that took place. This was indeed a land lease sale that took place under Obama's Administration. However, the ruling greatly impacts the ability to open up a lot more land to exploration, which is something the current Administration is pushing for.
-
That deregulation also led to some plane crashes. The Tax cuts made rich people richer and didn't do much else. But, thankfully you are getting patents.
-
No-one knows <insert topic here> better than Trump
SkyDekker replied to kallend's topic in Speakers Corner
Do you think mocking should be a frequent tactic used by the president of the United States? -
Must be the American version......or maybe the San Fran Version.....no rainbow in my back bacon.
-
Boon for the Canadian pork industry. Thank you Trump!
-
For your accusations to make sense all the insurance companies have to be in on it. Or is your suggestion only some insurance companies increased premiums because of Climate Change, but other insurance companies don't believe in it?
-
Climate change is a conspiracy by insurance companies to charge higher premiums? And all of the insurance companies are in on this? And all of them are convinced that abandoning underwriting and use of actuarial data leads to better profits while abandoning any capitalist market principles? That is a lot of hoax don't you think? I mean, there are probably simpler answers than that one, don't you think?
-
If the Democrats control the FBI and CIA and all, why does Hillary get investigated to begin with?
-
Because the Trump base is generally too stupid to know better and that is who that message is aimed at.
-
You started it by posting a portion of a fluff piece of a denier without adding your own opinion.
-
Odd, since you started this whole weaseling of a thread about what wouldn't be possible in the future. You went from physics preventing improvement. Then you went to economics not making it feasible. Then you went to it not being feasible at a price you are willing to pay. You'll take any position as long as you don't have to change your opinion.
-
This. Just create enough negative stories and people start believing that if there is smoke there must be a fire.
-
it isn't an article, it is an opinion piece. I can't help but think of all the useful tools who cannot tell the difference.
-
Article says that there can be no more innovation due to physics, which we have already seen is bullshit. Then it says that for current technology hydrocarbons are cheaper to produce. It compares what a $1 investment would produce in energy. That is an odd way to look ta it, since that also would mean that production costs are being kept steady in the future. IE. no advancement in technology, no advancement in production. Lastly, it completely ignores the cost of burning fossil fuels. Other than deniers, most people recognize the damage the burning of hydrocarbons does to the environment. Ignoring those costs is intellectually dishonest in a cost comparison. Your piece is agenda driven, not science driven. The fact the author makes the majority of his income from venture investment in oilfield technology should be a decent indicator.
-
Except you just said it isn't feasible due to physics. You are weaseling.
-
I don't see that gap in renewables. Solar panels under concentrated sunlight have already gotten to 86% efficiency. There really is no reason to believe that with further development this could not become common. What efficiency do you think fossil fuels have?
