|
Global Warming and what you can do to against it
Dear All,
As you know global warming is endangering the future of life on the planet. It will also affect us; rising sea levels, dwindling water supplies, mass deaths due to heat waves, stoppage of the gulfstream, which brings milder climate to north of Europe, super hurricanes, less food due to droughts are some of the effects. As you also know global warming is produced due to CO2 emissions coming from burning of fossil fuels. So what can every single person do to reduce global warming ? 1) Insulation: Do you know that you can save 50% of heating energy (and money) by insulation ? Especially in the times the financial crisis, you can make the insulation cheaper and save the money when oil, natural gas and coal prices are higher due to higher demand. What needs to be insulated ? Firstly the Roof, since warmer air goes up, then the windows (tripple glass or at least dual glass and shutters for additional insulation at night, and in summer time), then the outer walls. Also small cracks, leaks in weatherstrips etc should be eliminated. An infrared inspection of your house for heat losses would be the best way to find out what else can be done. A wintergarden will help heating your house additionally in winter time. 2) Using rechargable batteries instead of alkaline batteries, and charge them during less demand ours like at night will also save a lot of energy and money. 3) Lightning; the use of Compact fluorescent lamps instead of traditioanl light bulbs will save 80% of energy, the use of very new LED lamps will save even more. 4) Buying local. Most of the energy is spent for transportation of imported goods, especially food. By buying local made food you not only save a lot of energy, but also create more jobs at home. 5) Heating; there are several way to save energy and money by changing the heating method; you can use the free heat of the nature by adding a solar thermal equipment to heat the water for taking showers and also to heat your home. Additionally you can use a heating pump, which funtions like a reverse fridge; it takes the heat of the outside and transfers it to your home. You use much much less energy to do this (electricity to pump a liquid). 6) Your car; by buying a hybrid car you save 30% of fuel, by converting your car to CNG (compressed natural gas) you can save a lot of CO2, since CNG has much less carbon but more hydrogen, which will result in water (CH4 instead of C8H18). CNG will also result in much more energy output per mass. The conversion is not very expensive. It is totally save, since the storage has to resist a certain pressure. Of course there are also other smaller things you have to consider: - Each 60 pounds increases fuel consumption by 10%. - Aggressive driving (speeding, rapid acceleration, and hard braking) wastes gas. It can lower your highway gas mileage 33% and city mileage 5%. - Drive at lowest and constant rpms; 2000 rpm are enough; you can save up to 30%. Even a Porsche can be driven at the 4th gear at 20 mph and at the 6th gear at 50 mph with 2.5 times less fuel consumption. - Avoid high speeds. Driving 75 mph, rather than 65 mph, could cut your fuel economy by 15%. - Use air conditioning only when necessary - Keep tires properly inflated and aligned to improve your gasoline mileage by around 3.3%. - Replace clogged air filters to improve gas mileage by as much as 10% and protect your engine - Combine errands into one trip. Several short trips, each one taken from a cold start, can use twice as much fuel as one trip covering the same distance when the engine is warm. Do not forget that in the first mile your car uses 8 times more fuel, in the second mile 4 times and only after the fourth mile it becomes normal 7) Buying A++ or A+++ equipments. The extra money you pay for this will be back in 1-2 years. It will save a lot of CO2. 8) Try to save also energy at your job; you can do it by insulation, more efficient processes, heat recovery, more efficient pumps/engines, low temperature processses, material saving, water savings, optimization, automatic turning off of unnecessary energy using processes, control if some processes are really necessary (the change of some processes makes other processes sometimes unnecesarry on which nobody has thought about). 9) Solar cells for your own home; at the moment solar cells are very cheap since there is an overproduction. These cells can operate a fridge for example. Regards. |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
".." <sustainable.future115@gmail.com> wrote in message news:8dfdc638-40f5-4ae8-8816-74431f50a8db@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... > Dear All, > As you know global warming is endangering the future of life on the > planet. It will also affect us; > rising sea levels, dwindling water supplies, mass deaths due to heat > waves, stoppage of the gulfstream, which > brings milder climate to north of Europe, super hurricanes, less food > due to droughts are some of the effects. > As you also know global warming is produced due to CO2 emissions > coming from burning of fossil fuels. So what > can every single person do to reduce global warming ? Given the recent revelations concerning the integrity and efficacy of the whole global warming mess, I would say that to ignore the entire "big lie" would be the first and most germane action to take. DaveD |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
"Dave D" <dtdodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in
news:4b308481@news.acsalaska.net: > > ".." <sustainable.future115@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:8dfdc638-40f5-4ae8-8816-74431f50a8db@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com.. > . >> Dear All, >> As you know global warming is endangering the future of life on the >> planet. It will also affect us; >> rising sea levels, dwindling water supplies, mass deaths due to heat >> waves, stoppage of the gulfstream, which >> brings milder climate to north of Europe, super hurricanes, less food >> due to droughts are some of the effects. >> As you also know global warming is produced due to CO2 emissions >> coming from burning of fossil fuels. So what >> can every single person do to reduce global warming ? > > Given the recent revelations concerning the integrity and efficacy of > the whole global warming mess, I would say that to ignore the entire > "big lie" would be the first and most germane action to take. > > DaveD > > > AGW/climate change is the latest method of the Marxists grab for power. It's all about "redistribution of wealth". In Copenhagen,they're squabbling about who gets how much of the "wealthy nations"(the US) money. -- Jim Yanik jyanik at localnet dot com |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
On 12/22/09 7:21 AM, in article Xns9CE955438DA5Ajyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44, "Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote: > "Dave D" <dtdodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in > news:4b308481@news.acsalaska.net: > >> >> ".." <sustainable.future115@gmail.com> wrote in message >> news:8dfdc638-40f5-4ae8-8816-74431f50a8db@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com.. >> . >>> Dear All, >>> As you know global warming is endangering the future of life on the >>> planet. It will also affect us; >>> rising sea levels, dwindling water supplies, mass deaths due to heat >>> waves, stoppage of the gulfstream, which >>> brings milder climate to north of Europe, super hurricanes, less food >>> due to droughts are some of the effects. >>> As you also know global warming is produced due to CO2 emissions >>> coming from burning of fossil fuels. So what >>> can every single person do to reduce global warming ? >> >> Given the recent revelations concerning the integrity and efficacy of >> the whole global warming mess, I would say that to ignore the entire >> "big lie" would be the first and most germane action to take. >> >> DaveD >> >> >> > > AGW/climate change is the latest method of the Marxists grab for power. > It's all about "redistribution of wealth". > In Copenhagen,they're squabbling about who gets how much of the "wealthy > nations"(the US) money. Here all this time I thought China already had all the US' money... |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
"E. Meyer" <e.p.meyer@verizon.net> wrote in
news:C756300C.14EAA%e.p.meyer@verizon.net: > > > > On 12/22/09 7:21 AM, in article > Xns9CE955438DA5Ajyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44, "Jim Yanik" ><jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote: > >> "Dave D" <dtdodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in >> news:4b308481@news.acsalaska.net: >> >>> >>> ".." <sustainable.future115@gmail.com> wrote in message >>> news:8dfdc638-40f5-4ae8-8816-74431f50a8db@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com.. >>> . >>>> Dear All, >>>> As you know global warming is endangering the future of life on the >>>> planet. It will also affect us; >>>> rising sea levels, dwindling water supplies, mass deaths due to heat >>>> waves, stoppage of the gulfstream, which >>>> brings milder climate to north of Europe, super hurricanes, less food >>>> due to droughts are some of the effects. >>>> As you also know global warming is produced due to CO2 emissions >>>> coming from burning of fossil fuels. So what >>>> can every single person do to reduce global warming ? >>> >>> Given the recent revelations concerning the integrity and efficacy of >>> the whole global warming mess, I would say that to ignore the entire >>> "big lie" would be the first and most germane action to take. >>> >>> DaveD >>> >>> >>> >> >> AGW/climate change is the latest method of the Marxists grab for power. >> It's all about "redistribution of wealth". >> In Copenhagen,they're squabbling about who gets how much of the "wealthy >> nations"(the US) money. > > Here all this time I thought China already had all the US' money... > > Note Hillary is already talking about $100 billion USD for the -first- year of the "progressives" world redistribution of (US)wealth.(just a start...) That money has to come from *us*. Through more taxes on energy. Obama has already said he'd like to see gas prices go to $10/gal,....but slowly.(So the frog doesn't jump out of the pot.) That cuts your freedom to travel,and seriously affects your lifestyle. He's said he wants to bankrupt the coal industry. 50% of US electric is generated by coal.Obama has also said that he would not permit new nuclear plants "without a safe storage site",and defunded Yucca Mountain,the only such site in the near future.(and nothing else in the works...) Wind and solar is not able to make up the difference,so there's your reduction in standard of living coming at ya. The US then becomes a Third World nation. -- Jim Yanik jyanik at localnet dot com |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote in
news:Xns9CE96F733248jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44 : > The US then becomes a Third World nation. > > > No no no. It will become a "developing" nation. You can't say "third world" anymore because it's too close to the truth. Euphemisms are the way of the future. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
Jim Yanik wrote:
> "E. Meyer" <e.p.meyer@verizon.net> wrote in > news:C756300C.14EAA%e.p.meyer@verizon.net: > >> >> >> On 12/22/09 7:21 AM, in article >> Xns9CE955438DA5Ajyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44, "Jim Yanik" >> <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote: >> >>> "Dave D" <dtdodson@acsalaska.net> wrote in >>> news:4b308481@news.acsalaska.net: >>> >>>> ".." <sustainable.future115@gmail.com> wrote in message >>>> news:8dfdc638-40f5-4ae8-8816-74431f50a8db@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com.. >>>> . >>>>> Dear All, >>>>> As you know global warming is endangering the future of life on the >>>>> planet. It will also affect us; >>>>> rising sea levels, dwindling water supplies, mass deaths due to heat >>>>> waves, stoppage of the gulfstream, which >>>>> brings milder climate to north of Europe, super hurricanes, less food >>>>> due to droughts are some of the effects. >>>>> As you also know global warming is produced due to CO2 emissions >>>>> coming from burning of fossil fuels. So what >>>>> can every single person do to reduce global warming ? >>>> Given the recent revelations concerning the integrity and efficacy of >>>> the whole global warming mess, I would say that to ignore the entire >>>> "big lie" would be the first and most germane action to take. >>>> >>>> DaveD >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> AGW/climate change is the latest method of the Marxists grab for power. >>> It's all about "redistribution of wealth". >>> In Copenhagen,they're squabbling about who gets how much of the "wealthy >>> nations"(the US) money. >> Here all this time I thought China already had all the US' money... >> >> > > Note Hillary is already talking about $100 billion USD for the -first- year > of the "progressives" world redistribution of (US)wealth.(just a start...) > That money has to come from *us*. > Through more taxes on energy. > Obama has already said he'd like to see gas prices go to $10/gal,....but > slowly.(So the frog doesn't jump out of the pot.) > That cuts your freedom to travel,and seriously affects your lifestyle. > He's said he wants to bankrupt the coal industry. 50% of US electric is > generated by coal.Obama has also said that he would not permit new nuclear > plants "without a safe storage site",and defunded Yucca Mountain,the only > such site in the near future.(and nothing else in the works...) > Wind and solar is not able to make up the difference,so there's your > reduction in standard of living coming at ya. > The US then becomes a Third World nation. We're almost there, (third world status), and are broke to boot. I so glad that I'm not one day younger than I am so that all you young squirts will hafta deal with the mess... JT (Learning Chinese Just In case..) |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
Tegger wrote:
> Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote in > news:Xns9CE96F733248jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44 : > > >> The US then becomes a Third World nation. >> >> >> > > > > No no no. > > It will become a "developing" nation. > > You can't say "third world" anymore because it's too close to the truth. > Euphemisms are the way of the future. Heh heh... "The Mouse That Roared." Collect that foreign aid I say! JT |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
".." <sustainable.future115@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8dfdc638-40f5-4ae8-8816-74431f50a8db@m3g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... > Dear All, > As you know global warming is endangering the future of life on the > planet. It will also affect us; As we know? Not really. > As you also know global warming is produced due to CO2 emissions > coming from burning of fossil fuels. As we also don't know. That includes you, Cool Aid drinker. > So what > can every single person do to reduce global warming ? Not much really, except adapt to it if and when it really comes. Just as our predecessors did way before the Industrial Revolution. > Regards. Regardless. |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
On Tue, 22 Dec 2009 17:47:50 -0600, Grumpy AuContraire
<GrumpyOne@GrumpyvilleNOT.com> wrote: >Tegger wrote: >> Jim Yanik <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote in >> news:Xns9CE96F733248jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44 : >> >> >>> The US then becomes a Third World nation. >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> No no no. >> >> It will become a "developing" nation. >> >> You can't say "third world" anymore because it's too close to the truth. >> Euphemisms are the way of the future. > > >Heh heh... "The Mouse That Roared." > >Collect that foreign aid I say! > >JT The reason neither party ever stops foreign aid is because it has always been a transfer of wealth from working people to corporations. Foreign aid always requires the receiver to purchase goods from US based corporations. So the taxpayer dollars go directly to the already wealthy. Plus, of course, it sometimes does help some folks on the other side. |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
dgk <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in
news:8a64j5p4b0hm79fpdsbf08l4lp5fv7ldel@4ax.com: > > The reason neither party ever stops foreign aid is because it has > always been a transfer of wealth from working people to corporations. > Foreign aid always requires the receiver to purchase goods from US > based corporations. So the taxpayer dollars go directly to the already > wealthy. Plus, of course, it sometimes does help some folks on the > other side. > The people see virtually /nothing/ of /any/ foreign aid. Foreign aid goes the foreign /governments/. That's why foreign governments clamor so loudly for it, especially the corrupt governments that run all third-world countries. The more corrupt and bad they are, the more they scream for aid dollars. That the money eventually goes to "corporations" is meaningless. Corporate bodies (such as the one you work for) produce just about everything the world has that's of any value. We're rich partly because of the concept of the limited-liability corporate entity. You want an excellent illustration of why third-world countries are poor? Cameroon provides it. <http://reason.com/archives/2006/03/01/why-poor-countries-are-poor> Read the whole thing, all 4 pages. It's real eye-opener. And Cameroon is the norm, not the excption. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
"dgk" <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote:
> The reason neither party ever stops foreign aid is because it has > always been a transfer of wealth from working people to corporations. > Foreign aid always requires the receiver to purchase goods from US > based corporations. So the taxpayer dollars go directly to the already > wealthy. Plus, of course, it sometimes does help some folks on the > other side. While that may be more or less true, it's even more common that the foreign aid $s are also used to repay loans to western banks that gambled wrong on some foreign projects. I recall one particularly big international loan crisis at around 1990 when some major banks were heavily exposed to loans that should have been written off as bad ones but the bnks kept them on their books so as not to scare their investors. Eventually the government came to the rescue with major donation to the World Bank and IMF, plus debt forgiveness (Poland got two of those) which is just another term for our government paying off those bad loans to the banks. |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:55:00 +0000 (UTC), Tegger <invalid@invalid.inv>
wrote: >dgk <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in >news:8a64j5p4b0hm79fpdsbf08l4lp5fv7ldel@4ax.com : > > >> >> The reason neither party ever stops foreign aid is because it has >> always been a transfer of wealth from working people to corporations. >> Foreign aid always requires the receiver to purchase goods from US >> based corporations. So the taxpayer dollars go directly to the already >> wealthy. Plus, of course, it sometimes does help some folks on the >> other side. >> > > > >The people see virtually /nothing/ of /any/ foreign aid. > >Foreign aid goes the foreign /governments/. That's why foreign governments >clamor so loudly for it, especially the corrupt governments that run all >third-world countries. The more corrupt and bad they are, the more they >scream for aid dollars. > >That the money eventually goes to "corporations" is meaningless. Corporate >bodies (such as the one you work for) produce just about everything the >world has that's of any value. > >We're rich partly because of the concept of the limited-liability corporate >entity. > >You want an excellent illustration of why third-world countries are poor? >Cameroon provides it. ><http://reason.com/archives/2006/03/01/why-poor-countries-are-poor> > >Read the whole thing, all 4 pages. It's real eye-opener. And Cameroon is >the norm, not the excption. Everything is a corporation but actually I work for a non-profit. I could make more money working for a big bank but I don't want to. So Tegger, how come no one stops foreign aid? Republicans should be screaming to stop giving our hard earned money to those losers. But it never happens, does it? Because the wealthy in this countrly make money from it. That's also why we have wars. We aren't fighting over WMDs or "freedom" or "democracy". Read up on a true American hero - Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler. He won the Medal of Honor twice, in two different wars. He fought in many wars. You won't see any monuments for him though. I'll summerize his beliefs: The wealthy in America realize they can get a larger return on their investment abroad than they can at home. The soldiers go over to protect the investments. He was right. And the next time you hear right wingers talking about "strict contructionist judges", just think about how corporations twisted the 14 amendment to be about freedom for corporations: http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/ The Reason article was interesting but I have to wonder who supplies the arms that keep the President in power. I can guess who's making money there. Here, one of my favoirte sites: http://www.truthout.org/ |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
dgk <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in
news:pgt6j5diqa1ahegk6h6qu058gh2b2jh7nf@4ax.com: > > Everything is a corporation but actually I work for a non-profit. I > could make more money working for a big bank but I don't want to. Most governments are corporations too. > > So Tegger, how come no one stops foreign aid? Ever heard of"rent seeking"? Combine that with governmental inertia and you have an unstoppable machine. It's the exact same thing that makes /any/ government program so hard to kill once established. > Republicans should be > screaming to stop giving our hard earned money to those losers. But it > never happens, does it? Because the wealthy in this countrly make > money from it. /Everybody involved/ makes money from it, from the lowliest receptionist or warehouse worker to the president of the NGO or government department. It's the exact same thing that makes /any/ government program so hard to kill once established. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
On 12/24/2009 07:40 AM, Tegger wrote:
> dgk<dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in > news:pgt6j5diqa1ahegk6h6qu058gh2b2jh7nf@4ax.com: > > >> >> Everything is a corporation but actually I work for a non-profit. I >> could make more money working for a big bank but I don't want to. > > > > Most governments are corporations too. > > >> >> So Tegger, how come no one stops foreign aid? > > > > Ever heard of"rent seeking"? wow, go to the top of the class!!! > Combine that with governmental inertia and you > have an unstoppable machine. You'll enjoy this: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/113092ee-c...44feabdc0.html > > It's the exact same thing that makes /any/ government program so hard to > kill once established. > > > > >> Republicans should be >> screaming to stop giving our hard earned money to those losers. But it >> never happens, does it? Because the wealthy in this countrly make >> money from it. > > > > /Everybody involved/ makes money from it, from the lowliest receptionist or > warehouse worker to the president of the NGO or government department. > > It's the exact same thing that makes /any/ government program so hard to > kill once established. > > > |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
Tegger wrote:
> dgk <dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in > news:pgt6j5diqa1ahegk6h6qu058gh2b2jh7nf@4ax.com: > > >> Everything is a corporation but actually I work for a non-profit. I >> could make more money working for a big bank but I don't want to. > > > > Most governments are corporations too. > > >> So Tegger, how come no one stops foreign aid? > > > > Ever heard of"rent seeking"? Combine that with governmental inertia and you > have an unstoppable machine. > > It's the exact same thing that makes /any/ government program so hard to > kill once established. > > > > >> Republicans should be >> screaming to stop giving our hard earned money to those losers. But it >> never happens, does it? Because the wealthy in this countrly make >> money from it. > > > > /Everybody involved/ makes money from it, from the lowliest receptionist or > warehouse worker to the president of the NGO or government department. > > It's the exact same thing that makes /any/ government program so hard to > kill once established. I think that it can be safely stated that no government has ever created wealth but corporations certainly have. That "wealth" then filters on down in many different directions only to be diluted by a tax system operated by the government. And yes, create a program, DEA for example and try to kill the beast... Never happen! JT |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
jim beam wrote:
> On 12/24/2009 07:40 AM, Tegger wrote: >> dgk<dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in >> news:pgt6j5diqa1ahegk6h6qu058gh2b2jh7nf@4ax.com: >> >> >>> >>> Everything is a corporation but actually I work for a non-profit. I >>> could make more money working for a big bank but I don't want to. >> >> >> >> Most governments are corporations too. >> >> >>> >>> So Tegger, how come no one stops foreign aid? >> >> >> >> Ever heard of"rent seeking"? > > wow, go to the top of the class!!! > > >> Combine that with governmental inertia and you >> have an unstoppable machine. > > You'll enjoy this: > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/113092ee-c...44feabdc0.html > > Good read. I have often wondered just what it takes to penetrate the barrier that separates the super powerful and the rest of us... JT |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
jim beam <me@privacy.net> wrote in
news:Vuedndf7fOQxC67WnZ2dnUVZ_rdi4p2d@speakeasy.ne t: > On 12/24/2009 07:40 AM, Tegger wrote: >> dgk<dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in >> news:pgt6j5diqa1ahegk6h6qu058gh2b2jh7nf@4ax.com: >> >> >>> >>> Everything is a corporation but actually I work for a non-profit. I >>> could make more money working for a big bank but I don't want to. >> >> >> >> Most governments are corporations too. >> >> >>> >>> So Tegger, how come no one stops foreign aid? >> >> >> >> Ever heard of"rent seeking"? > > wow, go to the top of the class!!! > > >> Combine that with governmental inertia and you >> have an unstoppable machine. > > You'll enjoy this: > http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/113092ee-c...44feabdc0.html Interesting article, and I largely agree with it, except for John Kay's final conclusions. Nobody can practice "rent seeking" unless government employees help them do it. "Rent seeking" is by definition a manipulation of state power. Specifically, it's the manipulation of the state's power to control the economy, its participants and its financial output. The other day in the Wall Street Journal, there was a very interesting article having to with, of all things, catfish. <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126144983541901133.html> It seems that in 2002 American catfish producers were upset at the fact that importers were bringing in Vietnamese catfish at a lower price than domestic catfish sold for. So they successfully lobbied the federal government to change the law so that Vietnemese catfish could no longer be labelled as "catfish". This failed to have an impact on sales, so in 2003 they lobbied (successfully again) to have a high tariff imposed on the Vietnamese product. That didn't help either. Their next step was to play the "safety" card, but when the FDA ruled that there was no evidence that Vietnamese catfish posed any risk to the public, the US catfish lobby got legislators to put an amendment into to the 2008 Farm Bill that transferred jurisdiction over catfish from the FDA (the seafood regulator) to the USDA (which normally has nothing to do with seafood), in the hopes that they might find more sympathetic regulators in the USDA. What's happening right now is that the industry lobby is trying to get the USDA to REDEFINE Vietnamese catfish to be a CATFISH again (reversing its 2002 efforts). Why? I'm not sure. But what /is/ certain is that the lobby is /still/ trying to get government workers to ban foreign catfish for "safety" reasons, thus providing the government-enforced subsidy that US catfish producers lust for. The important point here is simply that unless you have government employees willing and able to use their power to control the economy, "rent seeking" is /impossible/ no matter how big and rich a private company is. -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
Grumpy AuContraire <GrumpyOne@GrumpyvilleNOT.com> wrote in
news:6eWdnaVIp7vWQ67WnZ2dnUVZ_shi4p2d@giganews.com : > jim beam wrote: >> On 12/24/2009 07:40 AM, Tegger wrote: >>> dgk<dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in >> >> >>> Combine that with governmental inertia and you >>> have an unstoppable machine. >> >> You'll enjoy this: >> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/113092ee-c...44feabdc0.html >> >> > > > Good read. > > I have often wondered just what it takes to penetrate the barrier that > separates the super powerful and the rest of us... > It's simple (and at the same time nearly impossible): Remove power from the people who work for the state. "Rent seeking" is quite simply impossible without a state power apparatus to carry it out under force of arms. And that apparatus means people no smarter or more knowledgeable than you or me, only wielding power that you and I do not. See this book for an excellent and eye-opening read: <http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Robber-Barons-Burton-Folsom/dp/0963020315> And if you truly care about this matter, you'll go through the many cases of iniquity and rent-seeking outlined on the Institute for Justice's Website: <http://www.ij.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=552&Item id=281> -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
On 12/26/2009 03:29 PM, Tegger wrote:
> jim beam<me@privacy.net> wrote in > news:Vuedndf7fOQxC67WnZ2dnUVZ_rdi4p2d@speakeasy.ne t: > >> On 12/24/2009 07:40 AM, Tegger wrote: >>> dgk<dgk@somewhere.com> wrote in >>> news:pgt6j5diqa1ahegk6h6qu058gh2b2jh7nf@4ax.com: >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Everything is a corporation but actually I work for a non-profit. I >>>> could make more money working for a big bank but I don't want to. >>> >>> >>> >>> Most governments are corporations too. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> So Tegger, how come no one stops foreign aid? >>> >>> >>> >>> Ever heard of"rent seeking"? >> >> wow, go to the top of the class!!! >> >> >>> Combine that with governmental inertia and you >>> have an unstoppable machine. >> >> You'll enjoy this: >> http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/113092ee-c...44feabdc0.html > > > > Interesting article, and I largely agree with it, except for John Kay's > final conclusions. > > Nobody can practice "rent seeking" unless government employees help them > do it. "Rent seeking" is by definition a manipulation of state power. > Specifically, it's the manipulation of the state's power to control the > economy, its participants and its financial output. > > The other day in the Wall Street Journal, there was a very interesting > article having to with, of all things, catfish. > <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126144983541901133.html> > > It seems that in 2002 American catfish producers were upset at the fact > that importers were bringing in Vietnamese catfish at a lower price than > domestic catfish sold for. So they successfully lobbied the federal > government to change the law so that Vietnemese catfish could no longer > be labelled as "catfish". > > This failed to have an impact on sales, so in 2003 they lobbied > (successfully again) to have a high tariff imposed on the Vietnamese > product. That didn't help either. > > Their next step was to play the "safety" card, but when the FDA ruled > that there was no evidence that Vietnamese catfish posed any risk to the > public, the US catfish lobby got legislators to put an amendment into to > the 2008 Farm Bill that transferred jurisdiction over catfish from the > FDA (the seafood regulator) to the USDA (which normally has nothing to > do with seafood), in the hopes that they might find more sympathetic > regulators in the USDA. > > What's happening right now is that the industry lobby is trying to get > the USDA to REDEFINE Vietnamese catfish to be a CATFISH again (reversing > its 2002 efforts). Why? I'm not sure. But what /is/ certain is that the > lobby is /still/ trying to get government workers to ban foreign catfish > for "safety" reasons, thus providing the government-enforced subsidy > that US catfish producers lust for. > > The important point here is simply that unless you have government > employees willing and able to use their power to control the economy, > "rent seeking" is /impossible/ no matter how big and rich a private > company is. one of the ones i like is mercury in tuna. usda acceptable mercury content keeps being raised as these fish become more and more polluted, and yet, the same tuna in the came cans, if opened in a fda lab, because of it's mercury content, would be classified as toxic waste. why the disparity? so that it doesn't "kill the industry"! there's no disputing mercury toxicity. it's simply " the consumer" - just as long as the few people that own the multi-million dollar tuna industry keep coughing up their campaign contributions! |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
jim beam <me@privacy.net> wrote in news:y_udnVRpII_
4AqvWnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@speakeasy.net: > On 12/26/2009 03:29 PM, Tegger wrote: >> >> The important point here is simply that unless you have government >> employees willing and able to use their power to control the economy, >> "rent seeking" is /impossible/ no matter how big and rich a private >> company is. > > one of the ones i like is mercury in tuna. usda acceptable mercury > content keeps being raised as these fish become more and more polluted, > and yet, the same tuna in the came cans, if opened in a fda lab, because > of it's mercury content, would be classified as toxic waste. why the > disparity? so that it doesn't "kill the industry"! > > there's no disputing mercury toxicity. it's simply " the consumer" > - just as long as the few people that own the multi-million dollar tuna > industry keep coughing up their campaign contributions! > > Aha, so /that's/ the "safety angle the catfish lobbyists are trying to pull: Mercury. Since fish is always high in mercury, but land-based food is not, the FDA and the USDA could have widely divergent allowable-mercury levels. If the catfish lobby succeeds in having the USDA regulate the Vietnamese variety of catfish (and only that kind), the USDA would have to create a new category for that product. And guess who would "help" the USDA formulate the regulations? The catfish lobby, that's who! And they'd make certain the Vietnamese fish was found to contain too much mercury to be "safe", even though if it contained no more mercury than any other fish, domestic or foreign. Thus the US catfish lobby would use US government power to ensure protection from foreign competitors, even as US consumers pay for that protection in higher prices. "Rent seeking" triumphs again! -- Tegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
On 12/27/2009 11:28 AM, Tegger wrote:
> jim beam<me@privacy.net> wrote in news:y_udnVRpII_ > 4AqvWnZ2dnUVZ_hCdnZ2d@speakeasy.net: > >> On 12/26/2009 03:29 PM, Tegger wrote: > >>> >>> The important point here is simply that unless you have government >>> employees willing and able to use their power to control the economy, >>> "rent seeking" is /impossible/ no matter how big and rich a private >>> company is. >> >> one of the ones i like is mercury in tuna. usda acceptable mercury >> content keeps being raised as these fish become more and more polluted, >> and yet, the same tuna in the came cans, if opened in a fda lab, because >> of it's mercury content, would be classified as toxic waste. why the >> disparity? so that it doesn't "kill the industry"! >> >> there's no disputing mercury toxicity. it's simply " the consumer" >> - just as long as the few people that own the multi-million dollar tuna >> industry keep coughing up their campaign contributions! >> >> > > > > Aha, so /that's/ the "safety angle the catfish lobbyists > are trying to pull: Mercury. > > Since fish is always high in mercury, but land-based food is not, the FDA > and the USDA could have widely divergent allowable-mercury levels. > > If the catfish lobby succeeds in having the USDA regulate the Vietnamese > variety of catfish (and only that kind), the USDA would have to create a > new category for that product. And guess who would "help" the USDA > formulate the regulations? The catfish lobby, that's who! And they'd make > certain the Vietnamese fish was found to contain too much mercury to be > "safe", even though if it contained no more mercury than any other fish, > domestic or foreign. > > Thus the US catfish lobby would use US government power to ensure > protection from foreign competitors, even as US consumers pay for that > protection in higher prices. "Rent seeking" triumphs again! > > > no idea how the vietnamese raise catfish, but fwiu, mercury is mostly an ocean fish problem, particularly predatory ocean fish like tuna. catfish are mostly freshwater [right?] and one of the few fish capable of being farmed on a vegetarian diet. both mitigate against mercury. don't talk to me about the logic or efficiency of farmed predatory fish like salmon - they need to be fed other fish. and i absolutely fail to see the point of having to catch three times the poundage of other fish, simply to "farm" one pound of salmon. which gets us back to catfish - one of the few logical fish to farm. we should encourage foreigners to raise it and stop depleting the oceans, not try to suppress it. |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
On Dec 27, 12:09 pm, jim beam <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
> On 12/27/2009 11:28 AM, Tegger wrote: > > > > > jim beam<m...@privacy.net> wrote in news:y_udnVRpII_ > > 4AqvWnZ2dnUVZ_hCdn...@speakeasy.net: > > >> On 12/26/2009 03:29 PM, Tegger wrote: > > >>> The important point here is simply that unless you have government > >>> employees willing and able to use their power to control the economy, > >>> "rent seeking" is /impossible/ no matter how big and rich a private > >>> company is. > > >> one of the ones i like is mercury in tuna. usda acceptable mercury > >> content keeps being raised as these fish become more and more polluted, > >> and yet, the same tuna in the came cans, if opened in a fda lab, because > >> of it's mercury content, would be classified as toxic waste. why the > >> disparity? so that it doesn't "kill the industry"! > > >> there's no disputing mercury toxicity. it's simply " the consumer" > >> - just as long as the few people that own the multi-million dollar tuna > >> industry keep coughing up their campaign contributions! > > > Aha, so /that's/ the "safety angle the catfish lobbyists > > are trying to pull: Mercury. > > > Since fish is always high in mercury, but land-based food is not, the FDA > > and the USDA could have widely divergent allowable-mercury levels. > > > If the catfish lobby succeeds in having the USDA regulate the Vietnamese > > variety of catfish (and only that kind), the USDA would have to create a > > new category for that product. And guess who would "help" the USDA > > formulate the regulations? The catfish lobby, that's who! And they'd make > > certain the Vietnamese fish was found to contain too much mercury to be > > "safe", even though if it contained no more mercury than any other fish, > > domestic or foreign. > > > Thus the US catfish lobby would use US government power to ensure > > protection from foreign competitors, even as US consumers pay for that > > protection in higher prices. "Rent seeking" triumphs again! > > no idea how the vietnamese raise catfish, but fwiu, mercury is mostly an > ocean fish problem, particularly predatory ocean fish like tuna. > catfish are mostly freshwater [right?] and one of the few fish capable > of being farmed on a vegetarian diet. both mitigate against mercury. > > don't talk to me about the logic or efficiency of farmed predatory fish > like salmon - they need to be fed other fish. and i absolutely fail to > see the point of having to catch three times the poundage of other fish, > simply to "farm" one pound of salmon. > > which gets us back to catfish - one of the few logical fish to farm. we > should encourage foreigners to raise it and stop depleting the oceans, > not try to suppress it. I was just passing by and know how the Vietnamese raise Tilapia, because I saw the US AID project in the Mekong Delta. They made a few rice paddies into fish farms, and stocked with baby Tilapia. The obvious question was, "What do they eat, since a rice paddy is enclosed?" The answer became obvious as one of the villagers climbed a ladder to one of the small shacks over the paddy, and soon small brown objects began falling into a whirling swarm of jumping fish. The AID rep. said, "That's why the GIs call them 'shitfish.'" |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
On 12/27/2009 01:10 PM, billzz wrote:
> On Dec 27, 12:09�pm, jim beam<m...@privacy.net> wrote: >> On 12/27/2009 11:28 AM, Tegger wrote: >> >> >> >>> jim beam<m...@privacy.net> �wrote in news:y_udnVRpII_ >>> 4AqvWnZ2dnUVZ_hCdn...@speakeasy.net: >> >>>> On 12/26/2009 03:29 PM, Tegger wrote: >> >>>>> The important point here is simply that unless you have government >>>>> employees willing and able to use their power to control the economy, >>>>> "rent seeking" is /impossible/ no matter how big and rich a private >>>>> company is. >> >>>> one of the ones i like is mercury in tuna. �usda acceptable mercury >>>> content keeps being raised as these fish become more and more polluted, >>>> and yet, the same tuna in the came cans, if opened in a fda lab, because >>>> of it's mercury content, would be classified as toxic waste. �why the >>>> disparity? �so that it doesn't "kill the industry"! >> >>>> there's no disputing mercury toxicity. �it's simply " the consumer" >>>> - just as long as the few people that own the multi-million dollar tuna >>>> industry keep coughing up their campaign contributions! >> >>> Aha, so /that's/ the "safety angle the catfish lobbyists >>> are trying to pull: Mercury. >> >>> Since fish is always high in mercury, but land-based food is not, the FDA >>> and the USDA could have widely divergent allowable-mercury levels. >> >>> If the catfish lobby succeeds in having the USDA regulate the Vietnamese >>> variety of catfish (and only that kind), the USDA would have to create a >>> new category for that product. And guess who would "help" the USDA >>> formulate the regulations? The catfish lobby, that's who! And they'd make >>> certain the Vietnamese fish was found to contain too much mercury to be >>> "safe", even though if it contained no more mercury than any other fish, >>> domestic or foreign. >> >>> Thus the US catfish lobby would use US government power to ensure >>> protection from foreign competitors, even as US consumers pay for that >>> protection in higher prices. "Rent seeking" triumphs again! >> >> no idea how the vietnamese raise catfish, but fwiu, mercury is mostly an >> ocean fish problem, particularly predatory ocean fish like tuna. >> catfish are mostly freshwater [right?] and one of the few fish capable >> of being farmed on a vegetarian diet. �both mitigate against mercury. >> >> don't talk to me about the logic or efficiency of farmed predatory fish >> like salmon - they need to be fed other fish. �and i absolutely fail to >> see the point of having to catch three times the poundage of other fish, >> simply to "farm" one pound of salmon. >> >> which gets us back to catfish - one of the few logical fish to farm. �we >> should encourage foreigners to raise it and stop depleting the oceans, >> not try to suppress it. > > I was just passing by and know how the Vietnamese raise Tilapia, > because I saw the US AID project in the Mekong Delta. They made a few > rice paddies into fish farms, and stocked with baby Tilapia. The > obvious question was, "What do they eat, since a rice paddy is > enclosed?" The answer became obvious as one of the villagers climbed > a ladder to one of the small shacks over the paddy, and soon small > brown objects began falling into a whirling swarm of jumping fish. > The AID rep. said, "That's why the GIs call them 'shitfish.'" that seems perfectly efficient to me! |
Re: Global Warming and what you can do to against it
"billzz" <billzz@wildblue.net> wrote in message
news:ef188206-ad21-4ff8-aa00-1c2f32dd9ad1@m26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com... > I was just passing by and know how the Vietnamese raise Tilapia, > because I saw the US AID project in the Mekong Delta. They made a few > rice paddies into fish farms, and stocked with baby Tilapia. The > obvious question was, "What do they eat, since a rice paddy is > enclosed?" The answer became obvious as one of the villagers climbed > a ladder to one of the small shacks over the paddy, and soon small > brown objects began falling into a whirling swarm of jumping fish. > The AID rep. said, "That's why the GIs call them 'shitfish.'" Holy sh*t, and I used to order tilapia at Applebees! Not anymore. |
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:01 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands