Climate Change Report

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

Why, have something against Ron Paul?

What you are saying is... because it's Ron Paul, you are not behind it. You would be behind it if .. Reid was for it? or Obama?

How about if McCain was for it? Or Cruz?

---

No Jarvan. If you weren't aware, Ron Paul left Congress. I would indeed support it if John McCain or Ted Cruz did. They never would.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warriorbird

I'd certainly support it if somebody other than Ron Paul actually made a play for subsidy removal.

---

Wait, so you like the idea of eliminating subsidies... but because Ron Paul supported it, you are against it?

eta: nm, read your above post. So, would you support Rand Paul's battle to eliminate them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

Wait, so you like the idea of eliminating subsidies... but because Ron Paul supported it, you are against it?

eta: nm, read your above post. So, would you support Rand Paul's battle to eliminate them?

---

Yes I would. I thought it was one of the admirable things about him. He walked the walk. He was an actual conservative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warriorbird

Yes I would. I thought it was one of the admirable things about him. He walked the walk. He was an actual conservative.

---

Libertarian actually. But close enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

Libertarian actually. But close enough.

---

Are they mutually exclusive labels? It's a good question. I don't know of many left leaning libertarians in politics. I suppose libertarian and liberal are indeed incompatible. Maybe not conservative and libertarian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cwolff

Are they mutually exclusive labels? It's a good question. I don't know of many left leaning libertarians in politics. I suppose libertarian and liberal are indeed incompatible. Maybe not conservative and libertarian.

---

RE: left libertarians Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich are both out of office. I don't know that there've been any other ones in recent times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warriorbird

Mike Gravel and Dennis Kucinich are both out of office. I don't know that there've been any other ones in recent times.

---

Don't know Gravel but I grew up with Kucinich. He had a crazy relationship with Cleveland. From boy mayor fighting the muny light battles (which in hindsight he was right about) to gerrymandering this crazy reptilian looking district. That guy was a trip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Latrinsorm

I don't expect you to believe anything. If you honestly want to know how good the model is, I expect you to look at the model.You've conflated two very different things here: making a profit relative to coal and making a profit at all. The first does not occur because as we agree the two break even. This necessarily implies that the second does occur, because no one would make coal plants if they ran at a loss, therefore coal plants run at a profit, therefore solar plants (which break even with coal plants) run at a profit. How much earlier than 20 years depends on exactly how profitable coal plants are.Surely we agree that barriers to entry are real, and surely we agree that measured competition in the marketplace is a good thing. To create as much competition as possible, we want the barriers to entry to be as low as possible. It's not a question of profit vs. loss, it's a question of start-up capital. The GM dealership example is not analogous because GM entered the market many years ago.This is an incorrect application of the Laffer Curve. It does not say that taxes higher than the global average reduce tax revenue, but that taxes higher than the optimal tax rate do. American history demonstrates that we are far below that optimal tax rate.

---

I will look at your models when I get home, right now I don't have the time. I will be honest with you, whether real or not (I believe not) the debate over man made climate change is not the actual debate for me. The argument for me is that we are actually expecting a good outcome from man once again thinking they can perfect human nature.

Time and time again we attempt this and almost always results in us killing one another. On this matter my stand is to let the planet do what it has always done, cure itself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jarvan

Libertarian actually. But close enough.

---

Didn't support same sex marriage, pro-life, pro-death penalty (while in Congress): not libertarian.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cwolff

Are they mutually exclusive labels? It's a good question. I don't know of many left leaning libertarians in politics. I suppose libertarian and liberal are indeed incompatible. Maybe not conservative and libertarian.

---

Like any other label, it depends on how you define it. If you take Thondalar's strict definition of libertarian, everything is mutually exclusive with it. That test we took a long time ago defines libertarian as radical capitalist, which is by definition mutually exclusive with conservatives of all stripes and is equidistant from what the test calls left wing (radical socialist) and right wing (conservative capitalist).

Economically conservative and socially liberal is a tough sell on the national stage, and here's a sweet graph showing the states:

http://andrewgelman.com/wp-content/u...on.soc.all.png
(click for source)

Quadrant 2 would be the libertarian, and the best case you could make would be Minnesota, and it's not a great one.

Quadrant 4 is interesting too: economically liberal and socially conservative, what our test called pro-government and what other people call communist: West Virginia, Kentucky, and Montana! Commies.

You'd get shot showing this graph in WV, KY and MT.