How the 1960's Cured America

[The Troll]

  Well   I haven't seen any law where you have to hire a union worker to work on your house.  If you build a new house you have to hire a state licenced plumber and a state licenced building contractor if you have to borrow money from a bank to build it and that costs as much as a union worker.  These people don't work for nothing either. 

  But if they are building a tax payer paid for building it will be a union plumber and a union building contractor.  Because they want it done right.  They are not going to hire some scab, halfassed plumber like you. 

[me]

If that energy bill is passed one of the things in it is you can't sell your home unless it meets energy standards which includes hiring union labor to make the required energy saving repairs including caulking, glazing, insulation and things like that.  And don't come back with that "only union people are able to do that type of work right" argument either because I know better.

[The Troll]

If that energy bill is passed one of the things in it is you can't sell your home unless it meets energy standards which includes hiring union labor to make the required energy saving repairs including caulking, glazing, insulation and things like that.  And don't come back with that "only union people are able to do that type of work right" argument either because I know better.

  I got a Thousand dollars, $1,000 that this will never happen in our life time.  Want to bet the money.  We will put the money in the bank and if I die before it happens, you will put $1,000 in my estate.  If it go into effect before I die.  I will give you a $1,000 dollars and kiss your big ass.   Just more Republican fear, gloom, doom and smoke and mirrors.

  You want to bet my Little Sweet ***** Willow.  :girn2:

[Sandy Eggo]

The republicans have done nothing at this point because the dems are still in control of the final say.
Exactly what stimulus plan did Bush have that even made it out of the dem controlled congress?

Try to keep up, will ya? At least pay attention if you want to attempt to discuss something.

http://theunknownzone.us/smf/index.php?topic=15404.0

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0222/Obama-s-healthcare-plan-gets-chilly-GOP-reception

He had to concede just about every point on the plan to appease the Republicans AND add a ton of pork. The rest of the world knows about this. How did you miss it?

  The only one that actually made it was the one the dems wanted that Bush gave in and signed at the end of his term.

Good grief! You can't even keep up w/your Demi-god:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/11/news/economy/bush_stimulus/

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/01_44/b3755032.htm

Ask those in Ky who are not out of work because of those wonderful power saving light bulbs we can't produce  here because of regulations so their plant was shut down.  The light bulbs are more expensive so there is an increased cost to the consumer to light their home.  I have also noticed no difference in my light bill since using them and they are also a hazard if not disposed of properly.  You won't be able to sell a home unless it meets certain "green" standards.  Only certain materials can be used and they have to be installed by union people which increases the cost to home owners and puts people who could do just as good a job out of work plus the home owner who may be able to do just as good or better at the job can't do it himself.  It also puts companies out of work who produce similar products out of work because that product is no longer allowed because it doesn't meet the "green" standard even though it may be proven to work just as good.  Yes, there will be new green jobs but not as many as there will be jobs lost because of the standards and regulations.  *light bulbs.  Using corn for fuel didn't work in the 70's so why should it work now?  It is raising the cost of food to consumers which is a double whammy on top of the cost increase because of the gas prices and was found to be a worse pollutant than gas when it was used before. 

Specious and unproven to be related.

http://www.american.com/archive/2011/april/on-green-energy-renewable-energy-fails-to-green-the-u-k-economy

Blog post by a writer who didn't take the time to make a connection between points w/in the bill to his "sky is falling" prediction based on another country. Apples and oranges. Not to mention he has an agenda, so therefore isn't creditable:

http://www.american.com/author_search?Creator=Kenneth P. Green

http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/mcguintys-green-jobs-plan-could-kill-185000-jobs/

Seriously? WTH does this have to do with Obama's plan?

http://www.environmentaltrends.org/single/article/new-study-adds-uk-to-list-of-green-job-basket-cases.html

I've already cited why Kenneth Green isn't creditable.

Your research skills stink. How can you possibly have an informed opinion, if you don't know how to become informed?

[me]

You use Huffington Post and want to put down my sources???????   

[me]

Explain to me why he isn't a credible source.  Is it because his opinions and research differ from yours?

http://www.aei.org/scholar/112

Biography

Kenneth P. Green, an environmental scientist by training, has studied public policy involving risk, regulation, and the environment for more than 16 years at public policy research institutions across North America. He is the author of numerous policy studies, magazine articles, newspaper columns, encyclopedia and book chapters, and even wrote a textbook for middle-school students entitled Global Warming: Understanding the Debate. Ken has testified before regulatory and legislative bodies at both state and federal levels, and speaks frequently to the public and in the media. Ken has twice served as an expert reviewer for the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and, in addition to his regular studies, is interim director of AEI's Center for Regulatory Studies.

Experience

    * Executive Director, Environmental Literacy Council, 2005-2006
    * Chief Scientist, Director of Centre for Studies in Risk, Regulation, and Environment, Fraser Institute, 2002-2005
    * Chief Scientist, Director of Environmental Program, Reason Foundation, 1994-2002
    * Expert Reviewer, United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group 1, 2001
    * Member, California Departmental Transportation Advisory Committee, 1996-2001
    * Member, California REACH Commission, 1996-99
    * Environmental Program Analyst/Writer, Hughes Aircraft Company Corporate Office, 1990-94

[Sandy Eggo]

Besides the fact that he didn't provide a nexus between his opinions and facts related to the bill?

Hypocritical of you to assume that I discredited him b/c his opinion differs from mine (even though I don't really have an opinion of the UK energy plan) when the only reason you chose him is b/c his opinion mirrors yours. Nevermind that he did a poor job supporting his opinion with relevant facts.

[Sandy Eggo]

You use Huffington Post and want to put down my sources???????   

WTF?

[me]

WTF?

I thought we had a thread for healthcare reform, but I can't find it. Maybe it was one of the other threads that got off topic. At any rate, I thought you may enjoy reading a portion of the transcript from the weekly address.The transcript in it's entirity as well as the video is enclosed in the link.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/08/obama-uses-jobs-report-to_n_254563.html

Looks like a Huffington Post link to me.

[The Troll]

  I got a Thousand dollars, $1,000 that this will never happen in our life time.  Want to bet the money.  We will put the money in the bank and if I die before it happens, you will put $1,000 in my estate.  If it go into effect before I die.  I will give you a $1,000 dollars and kiss your big ass.   Just more Republican fear, gloom, doom and smoke and mirrors.

  You want to bet my Little Sweet ***** Willow.  :girn2:

    You want to put your money where your Night Hawk mouth (BIG) is.  You choose the bank.   Lambie Pie.

[Sandy Eggo]

Looks like a Huffington Post link to me.

from 2009!?! LMAO!

Nevermind the other more recent links I posted to support my position. Please note, they weren't opinion nor biased. The reason I linked you to the thread was to show you that we've already discussed the topic that you seem so bewildered by now. I forgot that you never get the point and tend to hone on on the most irrelevant thing you can find. What about the other link? Got a problem with the CS Monitor too?

2009! If that's the best you can do, I give up.

[Sandy Eggo]

    You want to put your money where your Night Hawk mouth (BIG) is.  You choose the bank.   Lambie Pie.

Good luck with that.

[me]

from 2009!?! LMAO!

Nevermind the other more recent links I posted to support my position. Please note, they weren't opinion nor biased. The reason I linked you to the thread was to show you that we've already discussed the topic that you seem so bewildered by now. I forgot that you never get the point and tend to hone on on the most irrelevant thing you can find. What about the other link? Got a problem with the CS Monitor too?

2009! If that's the best you can do, I give up.

One trouble with what you are posting is it hasn't been implemented yet it's just in the beginning stages.  What I posted is coming from sources where identical, or close to identical, programs which are already in place are not working so what makes your proof any more valid than mine?  What you have is theory not proof.  It's like an engineer submitting plans to a contractor that look good on the paper but when the building is built it doesn't work and isn't practical. 

[Sandy Eggo]

One trouble with what you are posting is it hasn't been implemented yet it's just in the beginning stages.  What I posted is coming from sources where identical, or close to identical, programs which are already in place are not working so what makes your proof any more valid than mine?  What you have is theory not proof.  It's like an engineer submitting plans to a contractor that look good on the paper but when the building is built it doesn't work and isn't practical.

Didn't you say it caused job loss.

What you posted is specious speculation without the benefit of comparison to the actual plan. Have you seen the plan? Read it? If not, how do you know his points are valid? If so, then call me Missouri (show me).

[me]

Didn't you say it caused job loss.

What you posted is specious speculation without the benefit of comparison to the actual plan. Have you seen the plan? Read it? If not, how do you know his points are valid? If so, then call me Missouri (show me).

You just helped me make my point.  It's a plan just as Obama's plans are plans and these are all opinions which we are all entitled to based on many different sources.  Some plans have already been put into reality in different parts of the world so some sources are coming from actual figures as to whats going on within those already implemented plans and not just figures within the plans which have yet to be put into place and have become operational. They are based more on a fact than a speculation.

The report's key finding is that for every job created in the United Kingdom in renewable energy, 3.7 jobs are lost.

http://www.american.com/archive/2011/april/on-green-energy-renewable-energy-fails-to-green-the-u-k-economy