Page #1
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 ...#239
New Comment Rating: 2 Similar topics: 1.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 2.A Forum Topic 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II 4.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF,, ANY STUFF III 5.NEW MONGO STUFF, OLD MONGO STUFF, ANY MONGO STUFF III Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
🤣🤣🤣
DGraff, Phart
has wuhan virus came back or something else worse?
Has your retirement accounts crashed?
Other than fuel prices and a few other things costing a bit more, i would say we are doing ok. and even YOU should be able to understand the high fuel prices are being fueled by those morons in the middle east because they know folks like you will vote against their enemy,Trump because you blame him for it all. He is doing what Reagon shoulda done a long time ago.
Phart, denial doesn’t make it false. This president, this Clown, is absolutely the worst president this country or any country has ever had.
Take your “terrorists”, your “wuhans” and give it a rest.
The actions of your president result from a stable situation, with a nuclear deal
that kept the world safe under Obama, into genocide. That's your ideology.
I predict with 95% certainty, that you will never have a better deal than that, and that Trump will be forced to take a loss, and explain it as a win, maybe even without any deal. Why would the leaders of Iran trust the US to ever keep a deal? Do you still think that the international inspectors come back for Trump?
It will leave you with an Iran with more extreme leadership than the ones who were killed, a people who will never trust the US again to help them resist it and who are now further away from becoming a modern society, because their economy is in shambles. They will need to be kept under even stricter control by their government, to crush their discontent. Iran will arm themselves even heavier at all costs, and they will put all efforts in their nuclear program in upmost secrecy, because that's the only thing that will keep them safe. When they have lots of them they will present that to the world, and ridicule the US.
That’s in Biden’s time. Now it’s at least $4.50/gallon
The Expert View: Criminologists and independent groups, such as the Vera Institute, state that nationwide crime actually began falling in 2022 and 2023. They attribute the ongoing decline to post-pandemic recovery and long-term community violence prevention programs funded by prior federal laws, rather than recent political actions.Vera InstituteCrime Is Down in 2025. Trump Doesn’t Deserve Credit. | Vera InstituteJun 20, 2025 — Fact: Crime and homicide rates declined significantly in 2023 and 2024, continuing a trend into 2025, long predating Trump's second term. Attribution: The decli...U.S. House Judiciary Committee Democrats | (.gov)Crime Is Down Despite Trump, Not Because of Him It's Democratic Investments in ...Violent crime is declining, but it has nothing to do with Donald Trump or congressional. Republicans. Democrats at the federal, state, and local levels made ...The White House (.gov)President Trump Delivers the Largest Drop in Violent Crime in American History – The White House2025 FBI Report: Violent crime plunged 9.3% (largest annual decline on record); murder dropped 18.1%; robbery fell 18.5% (38,500 fewer robberies); **** declined...Time MagazineWhy Crime Rates Are Falling Across the U.S.Jan 24, 2026 — Connor Greene And the report predicted that the rate will drop even further, to four per every 100,000 residents, when the FBI releases nationwide data for juri...CBS NewsViolent crime plummeted in 2025, with murder rate hitting 20Violent crime plummeted in 2025, with murder rate hitting 20-year low, FBI says Updated on: August 14, 2026 / 7:35 PM EDT / CBS News Violent crime rates in the ...The New York TimesPresident Trump Takes Credit for Steep Crime Rate Declines - The New York TimesFBI Data: 2025 violent crime and murder rates reached historic lows, with the murder rate tied with 1955-1956 or lower. President Claims: Trump credited adminis...The Washington PostTrump touts new stats on low crime. But crime has been falling for years. - The Washington PostFBI Data: 2025 violent crime and murder rates fell sharply, marking the largest year-to-year decrease since 1936; murder rate reached 4.1 per 100,000 residents,Department of Justice (.gov)District of Columbia | One Year After Federal Law Enforcement Surge, D.C. Is Safer as Crime Declines Sharply | United States Department of JusticeCrime Impact: Homicides -45%, carjackings -64%, robberies -33%, motor vehicle thefts -53%, illegal firearms seized ~2,000. Prosecution & Enforcement: U.S. Attor...
The Expert View: Criminologists and independent groups, such as the Vera Institute, state that nationwide crime actually began falling in 2022 and 2023.
--------------------------------------- added after 68 seconds
FYI, Biden was the President
Cat., this means people like you are willing to harm or kill the President just because you don't like him., even you should think that is kinda sad.
I believe that he should be removed from office. He's a dangerous, demented, incompetent Clown, but, by legal means.
The solution is to for you and folks like yourself to make your own stand and say we want this legally, and not answer a survey with "yea just bump him off will be fine".
only registered users can see external links
The State Department is ordering diplomats in its international organizations bureau to use the term “super intelligence” instead of “artificial intelligence” in all communications following President Donald Trump’s attempt to rebrand the technology in his address to the U.N. General Assembly this week.
AI isn't there yet, and maybe never will. In computer science, "Superintelligence" (or Artificial General Intelligence / AGI) is a technical term reserved for a hypothetical future stage of AI. It describes a system that vastly exceeds the intellectual capabilities of the human brain across all disciplines, including emotional intelligence and social skills. Applying this label to current generative AI tools, which are powerful, but prone to errors
and lack genuine understanding, is viewed by experts as a fundamental ignorance of scientific nomenclature.
but it is even more worrying how damn irresponsible its creators are.
The need for AI would diminish greatly if Organic Intelligence were better cultivated.
Perhaps you believe that all knowledge should be stored in a persons mind but you know very well that’s impossible
So my question to you is, “If a problem gets solved using AI or the old noodle, what’s wrong with that?”
It is to the point we will need AI to survive because it will solve the no humans will work but want problem.
If the get their education via AI or if they delegate thinking to AI then they'll get dumber and dumber.
But can't you see that that's precisely what trump wants?
only registered users can see external links
He ordered the federal government to facilitate closing the Department of Education.
only registered users can see external links
His FY2026 budget cut non-defense discretionary spending by 23% and continued the process of shutting down the Education Department.
only registered users can see external links
His administration proposed cutting NIH funding by roughly 40%, about $18 billion, and NSF funding by 57%.
only registered users can see external links
More than 7,800 federally funded research grants were terminated or frozen
under his administration in 2025.
only registered users can see external links
He called the press “the enemy of the people”.
only registered users can see external links
His administration has explicitly targeted scientific research it considers ideologically objectionable, including climate and social-science research.
only registered users can see external links
Yes, we can safely conclude that Trump wants to make Americans dumber.
He can make you pay more taxes, if you are dumb enough to not understand
that tariffs are taxes.
it is sick that people think the feds should do anything other than perhaps set a standard as to how well students read,write and do arithmetic before they are allowed to graduate,but as far as anything else,that should be up to the counties and the parents. Farming towns don't need tech they need agriculture and cities don't need as much ag,but more tech.
Elite private schools in the United States that cater to wealthy families lean heavily into rigorous, secular logical reasoning, advanced sciences, biology, economics, and elite academics. They strictly do not teach creationism as science and do not leave out evolution or other religion-challenging topics.
That's because religion is intended to keep the working folks obedient.
The wealthy want their children to USE IT, NOT BELIEVE IT.
As you know, there is more than 1 child in a class, so you cannot have schools listen to the loudest parents who are demanding that the kids are educated the way THEY see it. That's why you need standards, and that is not sick.
You DON'T think that parents should be able to decide everything for THEIR children, because you want the government to meddle in their choices related to trans-gender kids.
Children should have a broad basis, that gives them choices. That should not be limited to where they live and certainly not what the loud-mouth parents of other children make their teachers do. If you don't allow some standards from the government, you have one school teach ONLY creation, the bible, the 10 commandments, and skip everything related to biology, geology, and other science, other schools who only teach gender studies, veganology or whatever the fuck, and only a few moderate schools who actually provide your country with children who are capable of surviving the harsh reality of your extremely individualistic capitalist society. Both extremes are useless to your wealthy, so I would think that you would support some standards for how kids are educated.
And it will probably be kept there by all presidents after him.
Just not for the reason that Trump imagines.
only registered users can see external links
same with jim carry and a couple others,
Do other countries pay any attention to their celeb's when it comes to politics?
only registered users can see external links
--------------------------------------- added after 12 seconds
only registered users can see external links
“ PITBULL [Ignore] 7d ago other posts
Admn. Will ignore her. All of her complaints when to the trash.”
Let me, (CAT52!), ask you. Are you missing a BLOG? 🤣🤣😈
only registered users can see external links
You have to finish a job once you start it, and this guy is encouraging people to jump ship, give up and hide under a rock I guess.
Zohran forces Doordash to pay $131 Million
only registered users can see external links
to the customer, then the customer picks their competition, like Uber Eats, Grubhub, Seamless, Gopuff, Getir, Gorillas, Buyk, Fridge No More or Jokr, or a few friends who
start a new small company together. Yes, fuck them, put them out of business.
That does NOT put people out of work, because the DEMAND is still there.
All those delivery people can just simply go to a BETTER employer.
They cannot do that, when an unscrupulous employer drives competitors
out of the market by being the cheapest, because he is scamming his employees
out of hundreds of millions of dollars.
I want competition that promotes employers treating their employees fairly,
I don't want competition that rewards employers scamming their employees.
DoorDash STOLE over a hundred million dollars from their employees.
Mamdani is forcing them to pay that back to their employees.
You think that you should have the right to kill someone, if they break into your house
to steal your shit. Why then are you OK with employers stealing from employees?
So, would you agree with employees killing their employers?
They're just protecting their property, like you want from a burglar.
Or is it because they wear a suit and tie. If a burglar wears a nice suit and tie,
is it then OK that he steals your shit?
so the employees will probably be looking for more work,
If a employee choses to work somewhere, it is up to them to keep track of their salarys and such.
not happy , go elsewhere
But that is a separate issue from allowing employers to steal from employees.
It's possible to have no protection from getting fired and still punish employers when they steal from their employees.
I just explained to you that when employers can be the cheapest by scamming their employees, they are than able to crush the competition that doesn't. Those employers might have trouble attracting employees, but employers who are a bit more expensive because they don't steal from employees have trouble attracting clients.
It's up to the government to provide a fair competition playing ground, so it's not a race to the bottom.
Stealing is stealing. If you don't want burglars in your home, there are also alternatives to be allowed to kill them, just like there are alternatives for employees who don't want to be robbed. Why allow that crime for one, and punish it with death for the other?
And don't sit there and think, "well we need this service or that product, companys will have to provide", No, you will just do with out. you are owed nothing
If they cannot do that, they have no justification to exist.
If capitalism can only serve a tiny group of people, than the rest of us
should replace it with a system that serves everyone.
only registered users can see external links
So they are already having issues with charging electric cars?
Sheesh,what about in 5 years? The power company are not permited to build new power plants.Solar and wind are going to be important to keep the grid up. But that didn't work in Texas did it?
They make a lot of energy in Texas,but how many folks died over the winter this past 1?
Angel1227!
So a private, for profit, company did not plan on a hard winter so their production of electricity was not sufficient? And this utility, regulated by the states, failed to meet the demands? This state (Texas) governed by Repukers was not regulated correctly so this company spent less on production and got richer because of it? This sounds very much like a Repuker business idea.
I fault the power companys in texas to a point but I also fault the citizens for lack of preparedness.
Face it, sometimes you need regulation, especially for basic facilities like power.
And I then mentioned the issues in texas with electricity.
What everyone is missing here is the fact there is NOT enough electricity being produced to meet CURRENT demand.As Ananas has indicated.So imagine if you will,5-10 years from now,when there is GREATER demand? What a mess we are in for.
Regulation is not the solution. that is how you GOT TO THIS POINT. To many regulations preventing new power plants being built and trying to snuff out coal,a effective energy source.
You think that if they are running short they won’t try to catch up? The regulations you protest are there to protect the people and the environment. But, knowing how you think, fuck that. Let coal continue to pollute. We’ll be dead by the time our grandkids die of poisoned air.
only registered users can see external links
Only 2 under construction according to this chart.
only registered users can see external links
The US shut down how many? lets see
only registered users can see external links
Now, we shut down 39 and we are building 2. Does that sound like regulations are helping any? 2, there are 50 states. So state regulation is not changing anything where it may be either.
If you want coal gone,you need to have a replacement handy before hand.
Nuclear power is not the solution. There are 80 sites in the United States where nuclear waste is stored. Some of it is stored temporary in a location that is not safe long term. The best uranium sites are already running out and it's getting ever more expensive to mine the stuff.
That waste has to be looked after for the next 20,000 to 1M years, before it's safe. Humanity probably kills itself before that or there might be a few survivors that don't know how to keep the waste safe and radiation will finish them off. But who cares, right?
only registered users can see external links
Like nuclear is the only alternative to coal.
I just used nuclear here because MOST tree huggers-liberals,think nuclear is the answer.And it has Ooodles of issues that take Many years to deal with.
Actually, I even prefer fossil fuels over nuclear, even though I'm a tree hugger-liberal. Nuclear might be a bit better on carbon emissions when the reactor is built, but building new ones creates so much emissions, it takes 20 years to recover.
Another problem is that nuclear reactors take ages to start up and stop again, which is not practical as backup for solar and wind. Fossil fuels are at least needed until we have enough geothermal, hydro (incl. wave), biofuel, biogas, hydrogen, chemical storage (formic acid), thermal energy storage, battery storage and whatever I forgot or they think up next.
Then there is off-course the waste and the risk.
Eh so more electric cars will reduce demand?
I know you are not a engineer,but even you should be able to figure out that can't work.
groas violations of human rights, so the US or Europe don't need them as an ally.
If they can't sell us oil ,they will make their money on interest from loans.
We could afford to use fossil fuels if we could finish our pipelines and drill in otherwise useless lands like up north in alaska where there is nothing but woods.
The alaskan pipeline built long ago,was supposed to be such a wildlife disaster,ha,the animals love it,it is warm near the pipeline.
California has MILES of coast line,Why are they not looking into this tech?
only registered users can see external links
Instead of wasting all that coast line for half naked people to lay around and spread covid,there could be power plants there!
NO pollution! No noise that is not already there,and erosion control! WOW,
Kansas,could be using wind and solar to help of course.
Another non polluting power source,
only registered users can see external links
When I build a green house,yep,I will use geothermal to help with temp control.
Every bit you can use of it is better than none at all.
Here are some fun do-it-yourself builds on YouTube.
I had seen them before and it made me regret living next to a stationary ditch.
Maybe there are some ideas you can use:
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
I DO NOT quite understand the amount of AMPS he is getting from that washing machine motor.
only registered users can see external links
How many Chernobyl’s do you know? One in the states, one in Japan, and one in Russia. Here, in Miami-Dade county, FP&L has been operating the local one over 50 yrs. Same in other cities around the state. And no pollution
You don't hear about the Mcquire plant here in NC getting to hot but it did a few years ago. The tree huggers were angry because a type of fish was dieing from getting caught in the cooling system water.So they put a screen over the intake. Worked fine for a while. Until the screen clogged up with little fishes.A employee told me about it.
Here is a long list of potential accidents and how to deal with them
only registered users can see external links
Yea,I know,I got dizzy after 10 minutes of readin!
I can't see a coal plant being any where near as dangerous to operate
They can't even take in water, without sucking up all the fishes
According to the Rainforest Action Network. For decades, climate change has been a global crisis that will impact every single person and living being on this planet. Now, according to the latest UN climate report, we have less than 10 years to cut global emissions in half.
Burning fossil fuels isn’t just bad for the climate, these industries also violate countless fundamental human rights. From frontline communities facing a fossil fuel pipeline on their land to Indigenous people facing fires in the Amazon to worker rights violations on palm oil plantations, the industries fueling climate change are also fueling injustice.
Coal, tar sands, and fracked gas show everything that’s wrong within the fossil fuel industry. These extraction practices are harming people and planet every day, and big banks are fueling this destruction of the planet and negligence of life.
So what’s so bad about coal, tar sands, and fracked gas? Basically everything, from start to the finish these fossil fuels are disastrous. For decades, climate change has been a global crisis that will impact every single person and living being on this planet. Now, according to the latest UN climate report, we have less than 10 years to cut global emissions in half.
Burning fossil fuels isn’t just bad for the climate, these industries also violate countless fundamental human rights. From frontline communities facing a fossil fuel pipeline on their land to Indigenous people facing fires in the Amazon to worker rights violations on palm oil plantations, the industries fueling climate change are also fueling injustice.
Coal, tar sands, and fracked gas show everything that’s wrong within the fossil fuel industry. These extraction practices are harming people and planet every day, and big banks are fueling this destruction of the planet and negligence of life.
So what’s so bad about coal, tar sands, and fracked gas? Basically everything, from start to the finish these fossil fuels are disastrous.
Like I said, “What you don’t see can be more dangerous.”
only registered users can see external links
chernobyl didn just happen and stop.It is still happening today.
Smog will go away at some point.
coal smoke can be filtered.Try filtering radiaton.
So we only would need half that exclusion zone filled with solar panels
and that would cost about 78 Billion Euro's. That would raise our national debt from 56.3% of GDP to 66.2% of GDP.
Jobs for all our unemployed people will pull that debt down soon enough.
Accidents happen. Even if the chance is 1:1M (historically proven it's much higher), when you multiply that risk by the number of nuclear power plants required, something catastrophic will happen at some point. Such catastrophes could cost more than the complete energy transition.
That's not worth it, because nuclear power is only a temporary solution, because the uranium will run out at some point. It's already becoming more and more expensive to mine the stuff.
Even if all those problems didn't exist, it still takes 10 years before any nuclear power plant has compensates his own build. But it first takes 10 years to build any. Then after 20 years, they are just as CO2 effecient as wind and solar. That's too late. We need to lower CO2 emissions ASAP.
Anyone with some money to spare can invest in their own solar panels,
lower their costs and be less dependent on power companies.
It's nice to have air-conditioning in a heat wave, when the government
is telling you not to use power or you can't afford it when power companies are charging you 100x the normal rate.
only registered users can see external links
There are al sorts of natural disasters, but it can also be a terrorist attack or a hacker or just basic human error.
BTW, instead of Kansas I could have picked West Virginia
--------------------------------------- added after 4 minutes
As far as anything else, we have to trust security will prevail. Every thing is a crapshoot. Hopefully we don’t roll snake eyes,
only registered users can see external links
I also don't like nuclear energy and my arguments are in line with the science on climate change. That uranium has to be mined, which also emits CO2.
A nuclear power plant takes a lot of energy to be built and maintained.
Then afterwards we have to keep the waste safe for the next 20,000 years.
On the short term nuclear is about as energy/CO2 efficient as wind power and even less than solar. In the long term nuclear has a horrible energy/CO2 efficiency, because keeping the waste safe also costs energy. Also, building nuclear power plants takes a long time and lots of materials. It takes about 10 years before a nuclear power plant compensates his own build. That's about 1-1.5 years for wind energy and 2 years for solar. However solar is cheaper
on maintenance.
Other than that, I agree with most of what you said.
All energy technology costs money, materials, energy and land to build and maintain. All energy technology has downsides like pollution, mineral shortages, exploitation of people and CO2 emissions. We just need to stop with the worst energy technologies first and expand on the best ones the most.
It doesn't require completely changing our life or have impact on the quality of our life. However climate change already impacts our life and it will only get worse. We can either choose to accept some changes now and prevent total catastrophe later or we can deny the truth until catastrophe proves us wrong.
New Comment Go to top