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.
The cause of ozone depletion is a combination two factors: The primary direct cause is chlorine-containing gasses, including CFCs and related halocarbons. In the presence of UV light, CL gases release chlorine atoms, which catalyze ozone destruction. Greenhouse gases (primarily CO2), deplete the layer indirectly. While there is not direct chemical reaction, the stratospheric ozone layer is extremely temperature sensitive. Increasing evidence indicates that CO2 gasses have altered the atmoshpheric temeprate band, increasing the rate at which the CL / O3 reaction occurs. Model calculations between 1970 - 1992 indicate that in the abscense of increased CO2, the ozone layer depletion would have been lower by a factor between 0.49 (high) and 0.32 (low).
Nice cut and past. To bad it totally contradicts your previous inane post proving you had no idea what you were talking about.
The Republicans cannot afford to have the Economy turn around under Obama and the Democrats. That is why they are resisting so much. A stimulus that actually works will put the party into a very diminished state for perhaps, decades. They are fighting for their political lives, not the American people. If you don't believe that, I am sure John McCain will sell you some ocean front property in Arizona.
Quote for truth. That's what this is all about. Sabotage and set America up to fail because nothing would hurt the GOP more then to have yet another progressive come in and fix their mess proving them wrong yet again. They are actively working to make matters worse because they think that would be best for their political careers. In short they're scum.
Quote for truth. That's what this is all about. Sabotage and set America up to fail because nothing would hurt the GOP more then to have yet another progressive come in and fix their mess proving them wrong yet again. They are actively working to make matters worse because they think that would be best for their political careers. In short they're scum.
The minority party always wants to make the majority look bad so they can swing votes there way. This goes for both parties. To say it's only Republicans makes you look pretty ignorant.
The lessons to take away from Japan is that 1) you MUST clean up the bad debts and shore up the banking system ASAP or else it will just fester and credit will remain tight strangling businesses. 2) doing nothing is the worst thing you can do while the second worst is doing next to nothing; make it BIG, really big, so that you actually effect public opinion and restore confidence.
Certainly agreed, but so few seem to have appreciated those lessons. Already in the second half of 2007, there were calls for getting bad assets out of the system. Buy them, swap them for Treasuries, offer USG guarantees. It isn't (as many seem to think) that these assets are worthless. It's that transparency is so poor that no one can tell what they are worth, so no one can figure out a price at which they'd be willing to buy them. That means there is no market, and in a mark-to-market world, those assets have to be written down. Those first few tens of billions of dollars worth of write-downs should have been a fire alarm. Emergency vehicles should have begun converging on the scene from all over. But instead we got the Hope Now Alliance and assurances that the fundamentals of the economy were strong. That hasn't really done the trick. People seemed worried that if they admitted to the magnitude of the problems as part of trying to address them, people would panic and make the problems worse. Plan-B was to just let the problems get worse more slowly all by themselves while the eventual cost of fixing them rose ever more rapidly. Not a good plan either.
Ditto on the recovery. It needs to be big, soon, broad-based, and on-going. There are now tens of trillions of dollars worth of wealth that have simply disappeared. We can't make that up by next week, but unless we launch a major and committed campaign aimed in that direction, there are more trillions of dollars that could disappear as well. What's left of the Republican Party seems not to care. They'd rather demagogue the issue with their inane partisan platitudes in desperate hopes of wrangling some sort of political advantage from the situation. That won't be written about in such kindly terms in the history books. But we've got something out of the Senate, it will likely be bigger again when it gets out of conference (though it's still hard to say how that will go), and at least it will be a start. Absent another continuing resolution, an omnibus spending bill for the rest of FY2009 is needed in March, and then come the normal bills for FY2010. Many things may yet be added into those, particularly if we get further fracturing among Republicans. It's not the best plan, it's not the best plan we could have had, but it may be as good a plan as was doable under these circumstances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin
We're not really clearing the bad debt out of the system so the system is siezed up waiting for more shoes to drop as yet more bad debt is revealed. That's why banks aren't lending.
While their liquidity situation is better, there are still transparency and confidence issues plus the fact some sectors that could just aren't willing to borrow. You can't lend anything if there's nobody standing on the other side of the window.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oerdin
We need a massive stimulus not of tax cuts (which don't produce much new demand) but of the government spending money to BUY things which will increase factory output. Steel, concrete, bricks, cars, lumber, ships, airplanes. That sort of stuff.
Volume is important, and right behind it is velocity. Tax cuts provide very weak returns on that score in that most taxes are paid by corporations and relatively upscale individuals. These types have time and some incentive to sit on the money while they decide what, if anything, to do with it. You would much rather see money put by whatever means into the hands of people who will turn around and spend it quickly. All the better if the people they are likely to spend it with are themselves likely to spend it quickly. Purchases of real goods, investments in infrastructure and other construction, aid to state governments, even down to food stamps and unemployment benefits. Disinformed right-wingers may call such things "pork" or "welfare" or "political paybacks" or whatever else they like, but the plain and simple fact remains that in addition to being good investments and good policy, these are the sorts of things that return the highest stimulus bang for the buck.
Saganista evrything you said in that last post is 100% right on, the more research I have done the more true that becomes. The problem is that a few groups have really done a good job of rewriting history.
The cause of ozone depletion is a combination two factors: The primary direct cause is chlorine-containing gasses, including CFCs and related halocarbons. In the presence of UV light, CL gases release chlorine atoms, which catalyze ozone destruction. Greenhouse gases (primarily CO2), deplete the layer indirectly. While there is not direct chemical reaction, the stratospheric ozone layer is extremely temperature sensitive. Increasing evidence indicates that CO2 gasses have altered the atmoshpheric temeprate band, increasing the rate at which the CL / O3 reaction occurs. Model calculations between 1970 - 1992 indicate that in the abscense of increased CO2, the ozone layer depletion would have been lower by a factor between 0.49 (high) and 0.32 (low).
1992, huh? Atmospheric CO2 has two effects on rates of ozone depletion, In polar regions it can increase the levels of stratospheric cloud formation which increases the local stratospheric temperature and increases levels of ozone depletion. Everywhere else, the greenhouse effects of CO2 decrease stratospheric temperatures and thus reduce levels of ozone depletion. On balance, increases in atmospheric CO2 inhibit ozone depletion.
Hummers produce no halons or CFC's, and produce no more CO2 than other vehicles with similar engines. There is no reason to believe that the choice of any vehicle will have any signficantly different effect on ozone depletion than any other.
My cut and paste was in response to the statement that CO2 was not responsible for the depletion of the ozone. Did you read it?
Shameless. The post you replied to referred to halons and CFC's, and alluded to the fact that Hummers don't produce any of those. There had been no mention of CO2.
To the contrary, just as with Clinton I believe the GOP will win their war against Obama if for no other reason his views and theirs are not so far apart.
To the contrary, just as with Clinton I believe the GOP will win their war against Obama if for no other reason his views and theirs are not so far apart.
Despite the hype.
According to gallup poll Republicans are out of touch with everyone else.
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.
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.
