quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Seems when it's profits at say $120/bbl. or when it comes to direct govt. subsidies to the oil cos....nobody gives a flying fuck about the poor.
Seems when it comes to regulating (limiting) solar rooftops and their ability to reduce fossil fuel elec. consumption, nobody gives a shit about the poor, women and children. (Buffet & the Koch bros.)
The only 'care' the capitalist has for the poor, the women and the children, is how much of a profit center they are or, their parents, charities or the govt. can help them be.
I mean come on kinkroids, you've got to know...all of that snow in Mass. last winter and the flooding going on now, is a vast left-wing conspiracy.
Look, there are countless Billion$ in profits to be made off burning carbon, so fuck the world and get over it. [They] ARE going to burn the fucking carbon.

Tax cuts are not subsidies.

That's a fair comment if you're talking about tax cuts generally, but any tax relief that is granted to one part of a sector over another is a subisidy.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
could you explain how this contradicts anthropogenically-induced global warming theory?

Anthropogenically-induced Global Warming is Man causing the Global Warming.

Unless Man is causing the fluctuations in the sun, the climate change caused by the sun (which has a very high correlation) can't be "anthropogenically-induced."

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
could you explain how this contradicts anthropogenically-induced global warming theory?

Though I'm not Kirata, I think I might be able to answer this one:

Anthropogenically-induced Global Warming is Man causing the Global Warming.

Unless Man is causing the fluctuations in the sun, the climate change caused by the sun (which has a very high correlation) can't be "anthropogenically-induced."

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Here you go:

"It is worth stressing that most scientists believe long term global warming hasn’t gone away. Any global cooling caused by this natural phenomenon would ultimately be temporary, and if projections are correct, the long term warming caused by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases would eventually swamp this solar-driven cooling."

See http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/paulhudson/entries/6d50a6bd-779a-32d6-bfca-06e4484d6835

Well, let's look at this from the perspective of Poker. I'm holding hard science, research reported by the Royal and Italian Astronomical Societies. You've got a quote from a BBC "weather presenter" in which the operative words are "believe" and "if". Do you really want to bet that hand?

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Seems when it's profits at say $120/bbl. or when it comes to direct govt. subsidies to the oil cos....nobody gives a flying fuck about the poor.
Seems when it comes to regulating (limiting) solar rooftops and their ability to reduce fossil fuel elec. consumption, nobody gives a shit about the poor, women and children. (Buffet & the Koch bros.)
The only 'care' the capitalist has for the poor, the women and the children, is how much of a profit center they are or, their parents, charities or the govt. can help them be.
I mean come on kinkroids, you've got to know...all of that snow in Mass. last winter and the flooding going on now, is a vast left-wing conspiracy.
Look, there are countless Billion$ in profits to be made off burning carbon, so fuck the world and get over it. [They] ARE going to burn the fucking carbon.

Tax cuts are not subsidies.

Where are solar rooftop installations being limited by regulation?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

FR

I can't see how this relates to global warming. From what I can make out, this will create a blip - something of a freeze over the space of a few years. Global warming is about the long term trend. I can't see anything for climate-denying extremists to get excited about here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

Forgive me if, like Peon, I choose to get my science from actual scientists as opposed to babbling science deniers on forums like this.

Who do you think is publishing this research? Me? Climate predictions are based on models. Not "a" model, because nobody can agree. Instead, there are about 19 if I remember correctly. But the only difference between them is how badly they've been wrong. When your theory's predictions fail, but you continue to insist that the theory is right anyway, you're no longer a scientist. You're a priest.

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Seems when it's profits at say $120/bbl. or when it comes to direct govt. subsidies to the oil cos....nobody gives a flying fuck about the poor.
Seems when it comes to regulating (limiting) solar rooftops and their ability to reduce fossil fuel elec. consumption, nobody gives a shit about the poor, women and children. (Buffet & the Koch bros.)
The only 'care' the capitalist has for the poor, the women and the children, is how much of a profit center they are or, their parents, charities or the govt. can help them be.
I mean come on kinkroids, you've got to know...all of that snow in Mass. last winter and the flooding going on now, is a vast left-wing conspiracy.
Look, there are countless Billion$ in profits to be made off burning carbon, so fuck the world and get over it. [They] ARE going to burn the fucking carbon.

Tax cuts are not subsidies.

That's a fair comment if you're talking about tax cuts generally, but any tax relief that is granted to one part of a sector over another is a subisidy.

Not really. And, most of the so-called subsidies are tax breaks that every business can also take, you're really only talking about a couple that only apply to one part of a sector because of a specific part of the business (ie. tax reductions for drilling/mining consumables). Is an Earned Income Tax Credit a "subsidy" because it only applies to one group of people? Is it a subsidy that not all businesses are penalized with a tax for spending "too much" on health care for it's employees? According to your definition, the mortgage interest deduction is a subsidy, which it is not.

It's a subsidy if you get more back than you paid in. If Exxon paid in $50B in taxes for FY2014, and received $55B in refunds, I'd likely be with you that they got a $5B subsidy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117

I'd gladly make that into a bet if you're interested, you can set the parameters of the bet if you want, whether it be 5 years or 15 years, I won't be going anywhere and I'm 100% confident of what will happen in the next two decades, so why not put your money where your mouth is :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

When your theory's predictions fail, but you continue to insist that the theory is right anyway, you're no longer a scientist. You're a priest.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117

I'd gladly make that into a bet if you're interested, you can set the parameters of the bet if you want, whether it be 5 years or 15 years, I won't be going anywhere and I'm 100% confident of what will happen in the next two decades, so why not put your money where your mouth is :)

Do you have any women?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
could you explain how this contradicts anthropogenically-induced global warming theory?

Though I'm not Kirata, I think I might be able to answer this one:

Anthropogenically-induced Global Warming is Man causing the Global Warming.
Unless Man is causing the fluctuations in the sun, the climate change caused by the sun (which has a very high correlation) can't be "anthropogenically-induced."

So ... all that's been called anthropogenically-induced global warming to date - that's understood to be rubbish, on account of it's actually all down to sun-spots? Or, is it a case of, we don't have to care about AGW because solar activity will counteract it all?
Really DS: give a silly answer, don't be surprised if you get asked a silly question in response!
From I can make out from the burgeoning number of news articles on this, it seems that a 'mini ice age' could occur 'in 2030'. That's how they generally put it - '*in* 2030.' That implies that it doesn't last more than a year.
To me, this debate is a bit like lots of people watching a 110 metre hurdles race at the Olympics. Most, if asked 'What direction are they going in?' will say, 'Why, along the track, towards the finishing line, of course!' .... While a few will be saying, 'Up, of course! Every five paces, they jump up in the air. Up is the important thing happening in this race!'

quote:

Researchers, saying they understand solar cycles better than ever, predict that the sun's normal activity will decrease by 60 percent around 2030 -- triggering the "mini ice age" that could last for a decade.


[Bold Mine]

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Seems when it's profits at say $120/bbl. or when it comes to direct govt. subsidies to the oil cos....nobody gives a flying fuck about the poor.
Seems when it comes to regulating (limiting) solar rooftops and their ability to reduce fossil fuel elec. consumption, nobody gives a shit about the poor, women and children. (Buffet & the Koch bros.)
The only 'care' the capitalist has for the poor, the women and the children, is how much of a profit center they are or, their parents, charities or the govt. can help them be.
I mean come on kinkroids, you've got to know...all of that snow in Mass. last winter and the flooding going on now, is a vast left-wing conspiracy.
Look, there are countless Billion$ in profits to be made off burning carbon, so fuck the world and get over it. [They] ARE going to burn the fucking carbon.

Tax cuts are not subsidies.
Where are solar rooftop installations being limited by regulation?

NVEnergy just got a bill passedthat tacked on more fees once Vegas/NV hit the cap. Buffet and the Koch Bros. are seeking limiting legislation on solar energy in many parts of the country. NVEnergy tacked on the fees rather than limit the solar one could use to offset buying from the grid.
This is despite the fact that NVEnergy itself has built min-solar farms in the city.
The Legislature seems to have sided with NV Energy. On May 17, it passed a solar bill that failed to raise the cap but gave Nevada’s regulatory Public Utilities Commission the ability to levy new fees on net metering customers who come online after the cap is hit. The new fees seem intended to protect NV Energy’s income from what the company has characterized as an unfair subsidy at the expense of nonsolar ratepayers.
Furthermore:
While NV Energy, owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, battles to keep the cap in place, it’s also fighting on another front. A consortium of casinos and businesses is looking to leave NV Energy’s grid and start generating their own power, saying they’re being placed at a competitive disadvantage because they’re paying more for energy than their business rivals in nearby states. The state Public Utilities Commission has said it would charge hefty fees — $27 million in the case of Las Vegas data center Switch — to let industrial ratepayers leave the system.
HERE

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
I don't recall mentioning tax cuts. There are direct tax credits and payments. Any deduction is a cut and may not be called a subsidy but money is fungible so.....?

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: crazyml
Actually - Yeah, really really.
As in, those special tax breaks are subsidies. They really are!
Sure, a tax break that is available to anyone isn't, that's why I made it clear that I was talking about any relief that is granted to one part of a sector over another.
If Oil company lobbyist is able to obtain a special "Oil research re-investment" tax break, what he's doing is getting his industry a subsidy.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)