Page #1
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 ...#210|
Started by #610414 [Ignore] 14,May,20 02:51
New Comment Rating: 3 Similar topics: 1.Food stuff 2.STUFF, JUST STUFF 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 4.A Forum Topic 5.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
He shows the secret to flying!
only registered users can see external links
It's disturbing that there's a man sitting in the oval office who lacks all basic human decency!
JustWill, member #491031. Goodbye, JustWill, be well and take care.
This member does not exist
Main Page
(this member nick was JustWill, the account was recently deleted by the user)
Well, that’s one. The one that caused all the initial problems because his nose was so high in the air, he needed oxygen cylinders to breathe. Good riddance. 🖕😈
Just wondering...
Unlike phart, she didn't appear to be a cultist or an addict.
Fact: your trumpgod pardoned fraudsters.
Fact: you approve it.
Trumps does things i don't like, to many handouts to farmers, tariffs on goods we can't buy made in the US and etc. but even if he was the terrible person you label him to be, he was still the lesser of the 2 evils to pick from.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Trump set to pardon reality TV stars Todd and Julie Chrisley of fraud and tax evasion convictions
Thiefs stick together.
According to FBOP records, Todd Chrisley will be released on June 11, 2032, two years sooner than his original sentence. Julie Chrisley's sentence was reduced by 14 months and will be released in March. 23, 2028. Back in September, her request for a reduced sentence was rejected by U.S. District Judge Eleanor L. Ross.
AI Overview
Learn more
Martha Stewart was “filled with joy” after being released ...
Martha Stewart was sentenced to five months in federal prison. She served her time at the Alderson Federal Prison Camp in West Virginia. Additionally, she was ordered to serve five months of home confinement and two years of probation.
The sentence stemmed from her conviction for lying to federal investigators and obstruction of justice in relation to her sale of ImClone stock. While initially charged with insider trading, she was ultimately convicted on the obstruction and perjury charges.
but o j simpson can knife his wife and boyfreind and get away with it scot free then write a book about how he did it.. eh, why is that right?
the sun shines on me alot.
heres the thing.
those of us that do happen to think for our selves sometime are in alignment with those others disagree with. not my fault. even if i did have a opinion that was not in alignment for the most part with Trump, it wouldn't make any difference,i would be considered a radical.
killers should get stiffer sentences than someone that is accused of fraud.
According to your logic, any person committing fraud should be pardoned.
Right?
Distance himself from maga?
Are you not aware that being in a cult simply fucks your brain up and genders it unable to take any independent decisions?
His adherence to the cult tells him that he should stick with maga even if he has to die.
He's like a heroine addict.
Exactly like this.
You're telling him to stop using drugs.
He can't.
He's an addict.
you think a fraudster should serve a life sentence but yet a killer should walk.
of course you support abortion ,killing before born so it is logical you would just consider murder a late term abortion.
and yes i do believe leo has a warped sense of what justice is.
puttting a person in jail for 12 years for getting illegal loans for 12 years, and a woman for 7, and murderers walk after a much shorter sentence or some leo type lawyer gets them off because of a undotted i, that is wrong.
You're an addict to a cult.
When they tell you "a fraudster must be pardoned because your trumpgod wants that" you'll NEVER even question that.
Never.
You accept everything your cult leader says.
"I would like to see you prove that what would she say to the court"
Actually I do have the proof. The pic was sent on a text msg. You know the type. If you forget, the recipient, my daughter showed me how the sender's cell phone number appears in the text heading.
I wasn't going to make waves because of WOODY'S legal problem but, they took care of that.
only registered users can see external links
driving a bus full of people is a great responsibility and only those with skill, experience and training should be doing it.regardless of race or anything else.
TO SAVE AND MAKE MORE MONEY.
Sri Lanka has one of the highest road traffic fatality rates in South Asia. According to the World Health Organization, the country records approximately 3,000 road traffic deaths annually.
When comparing accident rates per kilometers traveled, privately owned buses in Sri Lanka exhibit higher fatality rates than publicly owned buses operated by the Sri Lanka Transport Board (SLTB).
- Private Buses: 0.31 fatalities
- SLTB (Public) Buses: 0.14 fatalities
This indicates that private buses had more than double the fatality rate per kilometer compared to public buses.
Several factors contribute to the higher accident rates of private buses:
- Driver Behavior: Private bus drivers often engage in aggressive driving practices,
such as illegal overtaking and picking up passengers outside designated stops.
- Working Conditions: Studies indicate that poor working conditions, including long hours and low pay, are associated with higher crash rates among private bus drivers.
- Vehicle Maintenance: Private buses may not adhere to the same maintenance standards as public buses, leading to a higher likelihood of mechanical failures
Did YOU not research this topic enough, because you just want your BIAS confirmed?
Or did this article inform you incorrectly, because they want you to have that BIAS?
Another good example is your Air Traffic Controllers. The ones hired directly by the government are of the better or best quality. The ones that are outsourced through a private company are very much inferior. That's what has been causing the crashes, incidents and near incidents lately.
We discussed that topic not so long ago. I even shared this letter:
THE REGULATIONS. You as a voter have influence on those regulations.
What you are referring to, are laws under the capitalist system, where the government BUYS IN services from PRIVATE companies. That's not comparing public vs private services. That's a system for transferring public money (taxes) to private profits.
Public transportation means government owned busses, that are managed, repaired and driven by government employees. That means that any surplus money from that system is going back into the treasury, instead of into the pockets of owners and shareholders. That means there are also no owners and shareholders with a profit incentive to maximize the prize for the users and minimize expenses on safety and quality, reducing your safety and comfort. The only incentive that the government has
is to balance tax expenses vs price vs quality, on which you as voter have an influence.
This wage floor was established through a series of executive actions initiated by President Joe Biden."
Don't forget that you're talking to someone who lives in a country that had lots of public utilities, a few decades ago. I've seen almost all of them getting privatized,
and with no exception, the services became worse and/or much more expensive.
We had busses going to the smallest villages, for very cheap. They have now canceled many connections and the price has gone up much faster than inflation.
The trains still have the same frequency, and they have added some connections, but it's damn expensive. They also have lower punctuality and a higher cancellation rate.
We have one of the highest prices for natural gas and electricity in Europe, while we have the most free power market of Europe. Countries that have more publicly owned systems have much lower prices. very strange for a country that has the only natural gas field in Europe and which is mostly coastline, where the wind always blows, providing cheap wind energy. Also, the privatized power grid didn't invest enough, so now we cannot build new houses, because the power grid is totally overburdened.
I spoke often about our healthcare, which has gone up in price massively, since we got private health insurance. Only the US has a more expensive system. Dental care was immediately cut, when they privatized the system, and every year they cut some more things that the insurance used to pay for.
We had fantastic postal services, before they privatized it. Back then, working for the post office was a good job, with a good retirement. My grandfather worked for the postal services for most of his life. Now they have 'self employed' workers, who need to pay for their own van. They need to work like slaves, to make a little money.
That means that they deliver the packages in your paper recycling bin or just drop it on your porch and leave. They also speak less Dutch every year. I don't mind speaking English with immigrants, but they don't speak English either.
So why would you privatize those things that are only intended as "public good"?
That just funnels tax-dollars away from "public good" to wealthy people.
That of course requires an actual democracy. If politicians are corrupt, they personally benefit from the choices they make, which takes away from their goal to create added value for the country, state or area they serve. However, they still need your votes to be allowed to make those choices, which requires well informed voters to vote out the corrupt ones, who prioritize personally benefiting, over creating added value for the country, state or area they serve.
The question is then; why do your elected officials need to take millions
in donations, for them to decide to cut expenses for citizens and cut taxes
for big corporations and the wealthy? If that was creating added value for
the country, state or area they serve, they wouldn't need bribes, to do that.
I also don't think mandatory voting is a good idea.
There's now a huge number of people who think that both parties suck. Others they feel that they haven't informed themselves enough to make a choice. Do you really want those people to vote?
The winner takes all system keeps your politics limited to two parties.
That's a big problem, because both parties feel safe from competition.
In a parliamentary system, you could safely vote for the Green Party,
the Libertarian Party, the Constitution Party, or an independent, that one of the big parties could chose to work together with, without giving away votes to a big opposition party.
I'm not saying that is Kryptonite to corruption, but it helps.
You wouldn't be forced to vote for the "lesser evil" anymore.
And it vastly reduces the division and partiality.
In any case, your first priority is to prevent the complete destruction of your government by Trump. What's the use of voting, when the people you elect don't have any power left, over what's important for your life?
If everything is privatized, do your leaders even still control the military,
the secret services and the police? Or do the 'donors' control that too?
You cannot vote for the billionaires, who control everything.
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