Slightly To the Right of Ghengis Khan

Let's pretend we are back in the 1850s, looking at ending slavery (4.00 / 1)

Can you not just imagine the Press-Register printing an editorial about the irrevocable damage to Alabama's farmers if such a step is taken?  Can't you hear the indignation, as they try to hold off all those nasty lib'ruls who place human suffering above crass profit.

In the case of the health care debate, it becomes more obvious, as the arguments continue between those concerned with health care and illness prevention for the people on one side and those fixating on the financial well-being of the insurance business on the other.  There is no conscionable way for Parker Griffith, as a doctor and a Congressman,  to choose this profit driven industry, devoted only to profit making over the health of their policyholders.

In the cap and trade debate, the choice is even more obvious.  The very survival of this planet is at stake, and to choose Alabama coal mines over that survival is not only wrong, but ultimately fatal.  To continue to protest that profit driven corporations have to be protected over the defense of our very survival is simply wrongheaded and indefensible on its face.

A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
Margaret Mead  

---

by: piggieheart @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 09:24:59 AM CDT

Rather than pretending anything in the past, (0.00 / 0)

let’s face the evidence of today which is that the jury is still out in the scientific community as to whether or not “the very survival of this planet is at stake”.

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge...."      Hosea 4:6

---

by: driq @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 10:28:26 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

The jury is still out (4.00 / 1)

in the right wing scientific community.

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 10:46:15 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Right wing scientific community? (0.00 / 0)

A recent study found that only 6% of scientists identify themselves as Republicans.  I'd be willing to bet a significant number of those are scientists who have moved into management.  Face it, folks who love facts and reason do not find a home in the Republican party.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:20:01 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Correction (4.00 / 1)

The 6% of scientific community who identify themselves as republicans say the jury is still out regarding the future of our planet.

The work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives and the dreams shall never die.~Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D. MA)

---

by: Redeye @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:23:25 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I can accept the jury is still out only if you include paid shills in "the scientific community" (4.00 / 1)

But let's think about the consequences if those of us who believe climate change is real are wrong, and vice-versa.

We know from recent experience that a program of massive national investment in new technology pays a handsome return, from moon rockets to microchip spin offs. If we invest in energy efficiency, alternative technologies, and green jobs, and for whatever reason global warming turns out to be much adieu about nothing, we as a nation are left with greater energy independence, whole new industries right here at home, and we deprive unpredictable or extremist foreign governments of influence and leverage. Not a bad outcome. But if climate change deniers are wrong, and we do nothing, we’re left depending on dwindling reservoirs of foreign oil, stuck with a growing, potentially catastrophic environmental disaster, and little or no immediate solutions to any of it.

If the jury is still out, it's obvious that preparing for climate change is the sensible course, rather than leaving our heads stuck in the sand. 

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 11:16:54 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Preparing for (0.00 / 0)

Y2K was the sensible course for many people. The total cost of the work done in preparation for Y2K is estimated at over 300 billion US dollars. Countries that spent very little on tackling the Y2K bug (including Italy and South Korea) experienced as few problems as those that spent much more (such as the United Kingdom and the United States. As it turned out Y2K was a lot of hullaballoo over practically nothing.

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge...."      Hosea 4:6

---

by: driq @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 12:20:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

CF'mon, driq, you must have taken some logic courses, (0.00 / 0)

somewhere along the way.  Re-read what you wrote and tell me it has any relevance.  A mistake was made in preparing for computer breakdown, so what the hell, let's shoot craps with the survival of the planet.  Maybe you and I won't see it, but what ever happened to the survival of the species?

A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
Margaret Mead  

---

by: piggieheart @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 12:33:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Did it ever occur to you (0.00 / 0)

That the few problems experienced in the Y2K switchover were precisely because a lot of work went into fixing the software that would have caused the problems.  And with a great deal of the world's banking and banking software emanating from the US and the UK, it's no wonder we outspent countries like Italy and South Korea. 

Money spent averting a catastrophe is money well spent.  Imagine if the Feds had spent money to bring the levees in New Orleans up to standard before Katrina?  That would have been a damned good investment, wouldn't it?  In either financial or, more precious, human terms.

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 14:07:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion (0.00 / 0)

and to believe whatever they want to believe. It just happens that there are people in this world and in the scientific community that disagree with what others believe and predict.

Since the predictions about a Y2K global meltdown of sorts that caused survivalists to stock up on food, ammunition and various other goods were wrong, money spent to correct a problem that wasn’t there was wasted other than that it helped the economy in a weird way.

The same could be true about global warming and predictions of the destruction of our environment and the end of human life on our planet. I don’t know who is right and neither does anyone else because, as I said, the jury is still out on that. For example, read "Green nonsense - The 'cap and trade' bill would cost much and deliver little" and the suppressed EPA study @ http://post-gazette.com/pg/09186/981471-373.stm.

Everyone who believes in the doomsday predictions now will likely still believe them even after reading that and other information, and I will continue to believe as I do until I see more conclusive evidence.

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge...."      Hosea 4:6

---

by: driq @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 15:18:14 PM CDT

Let's see if I get it. (4.00 / 1)

Maybe there is a calamitous climate warming problem and maybe there isn't.  Most of the world's scientists - by a rather overwhelming majority say there is, but still, maybe there isn't a problem.

If there isn't a problem, or if the problem isn't as bad as most scientists think it is, and we work to fix it, we will spend a lot of money - perhaps unncessarily.  BAD!

If there is a problem and we do nothing, maybe the world will come to an end as we know it.  Maybe this planet will be unable to support any life form above an amoeba and so it will all start over.  Also BAD.  Yes, I can see how there two theories deserve equal weight.

A small group of thoughtful people could change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has.
Margaret Mead  

---

by: piggieheart @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 15:45:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

- NOT! (0.00 / 0)

Work harder and work smarter!

---

by: mooncat @ Mon Jul 13, 2009 at 19:20:08 PM CDT

[ Parent ]