U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Old 10-12-2010, 10:05 AM
Location: San Diego North County
4,799 posts, read 7,339,122 times
Reputation: 2998


Originally Posted by Taboo2 View Post
All lies. Texas Oil wants to buy this election. Apparently the Mormons did such a fine job with Yes on 8, that anyone from another state can show up and throw a few million bucks at the airwaves and BUY an election with lies and bull.

The truth is out there.... NO on 23 - Stop the Dirty Energy Prop

I know for a fact that this will save jobs. Because I own a Green Company.
You mean, it will save YOUR job and to hell with everyone else.

Proposition 23 Is Needed to Save Jobs | Fox & Hounds Daily

Our View: Prop. 23: Save economy from further chill | jobs, california, prop - Editorials - Appeal-Democrat


Major Study shows Prop 23 will save thousands of jobs (http://www.pacificresearch.org/blog/sid.major-study-shows-prop-23-will-save-thousands-of-jobs - broken link)

Respected economist Ben Zycher recently completed this study for the Pacific Research Institute. It shows the massive numbers of jobs we stand to gain if Proposition 23 passes in November, or how many we stand to lose if it doesn't.

In a nutshell: Based upon official estimates of the reduction in state energy use attendant upon implementation of AB32, Proposition 23 would increase California employment by over half a million in 2012, and over 1.3 million in 2020. (Total employment in 2009 was about 16.2 million.) Not a trivial benefit from suspending a law the original justification for which was -- I am not kidding -- "California has to be a leader," a shallow rationale even by the standards of political sloganeering. The California unemployment rate stands at 12.4 percent; it will be interesting to see if the voters in this deep-blue state will choose to turn away from a regulatory juggernaut promising massive costs and, literally, no benefits".

Old 10-12-2010, 10:46 AM
56 posts, read 89,330 times
Reputation: 59
Respected economist Ben Zycher recently completed this study for the Pacific Research Institute
Biased, PRI is Conservative.

Figures can lie, liers can figure.
Old 10-12-2010, 11:43 AM
4,814 posts, read 8,115,900 times
Reputation: 2721
Why do people think Global Warming isn't real? It is real, just look at all the crazy weather we've been having over the last year.
Old 10-12-2010, 12:44 PM
Location: Prague
1,965 posts, read 2,661,599 times
Reputation: 2495
My thoughts on Global Warming are a mixed bag. I do believe natural cycles can also contribute. The earth has gotten hot and cold many times in it's past, long before humans. HOWEVER, I also believe man can cause it. My position is that this is a little too important to get wrong, so why not error on the side of caution? The price for being wrong is too great to take a chance. Maybe the people saying it's purely natural are right, or maybe they are wrong. I prefer not to take a chance. If the global warming debunkers are wrong, somehow listening to them say "I made a mistake, oops" isn't going to cut it. I mean really, by the time they know they are wrong isn't it too late? If so, why risk it?

Unfortunately for all of us, any time an issue is as charged as this one, it gets real political. That means people in the center like myself have to listen to endless misinformation and delusional talk from both the right and left. I support a move towards green. It should be deliberate and planned, but definite. Those who just "know" it isn't real are taking a chance I don't think is wise to take. Those on the extremes of the green movement who think we can revamp our entire energy infrastructure overnight are also out there in outer space somewhere.

Bottom line, why take a chance? It's not like if we move to a greener future and later find out there is a natural explanation for the warming we'll be screwed. However, if we don't move and later find out is it real, we really are screwed. I'm a nughead and that's my nughead view of things.
Old 10-12-2010, 02:29 PM
Location: Eureka CA
6,970 posts, read 9,347,815 times
Reputation: 10000
All you need to know about Prop 23 is that Valero and the other big oil companies are financing the opposition.
Old 10-12-2010, 04:37 PM
1,476 posts, read 1,583,502 times
Reputation: 699
Vote YES on Prop. 23. It will put a hold on AB32, which will cost 10 - 12 billion year to the construction industry and which was recently reported in the San Francisco Chronicle to have been based on a faulty method of "scientific research." The research behind AB32 was off by 340% with regard to Diesel Emissions; deaths from particulate matter was over estimated by 200%. Jerry Brown is Against Prop. 23. Meg Whitman is wisely For Prop. 23, which will hold off implementing AB32, allowing for another year to study it; a good idea, especially considering the recent findings of over-inflated numbers supporting AB32. So, voting YES on Prop. 23 is a wise choice.
Old 10-12-2010, 05:15 PM
Location: San Francisco, CA aka Frisco
106 posts, read 229,598 times
Reputation: 80
Originally Posted by jimhcom View Post
Rant, rave, and ***** all you want, but the truth is the average person is sick of envoironmental wackos and you are about to find that out.
Caring about the environment is not the same as a tree hugging liberal idiot.
Old 10-12-2010, 06:33 PM
Location: Prague
1,965 posts, read 2,661,599 times
Reputation: 2495
Originally Posted by 415 Native View Post
Caring about the environment is not the same as a tree hugging liberal idiot.
Well said. I'm an extremist centrist lol, I care about the environment, and I'd rather be labeled a male gigolo before being labeled a far left liberal. Or for that matter a far right person. Kinda why I call myself an extremist centrist. My version of the Pauli Exclusion Principle is that bias and intellect cannot occupy the same space at the same time. The further one goes to the left or right, the greater the bias, and the less intellect. Only way I can explain otherwise intelligent people saying some of the dumbest things at times.
Old 10-12-2010, 06:43 PM
434 posts, read 664,320 times
Reputation: 509
There is no proven science behind the global warming theory. Just a bunch of anecdotal stuff about polar bears and how warm it was last week.

Scientists are jumping off the global warming bandwagon in droves. But the warming industry continues to plod along - an unholy alliance between those getting government grants to study (invent) the problem and those companies wanting to make a buck even if off a lie.
Old 10-12-2010, 06:43 PM
735 posts, read 975,578 times
Reputation: 344
The Earth will do just fine with or without humans. Global Warming is only believed by the people buying it, not those selling global warming.

Here's a little secret; global warming is not real. Global Warming is for children.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Loading data...
Based on 2000-2013 data
Loading data...

Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 - Top