Powered by Outside

does anybody else know the truth about global warming

PB Forum :: Social / Political Issues
does anybody else know the truth about global warming
Author Message
flag bonfire
Posted: Sep 7, 2011 at 12:21 Quote
Correct.

Thus wars over resources are going to be frequent and rampant.
flag AMBikerJJ8
Posted: Sep 8, 2011 at 9:42 Quote
Slash the military budget....AND EMPLOY THE KILLERS IN A USEFUL JOB!!! We spend our money on destruction when we could spend it on clean energy, public transportation, elimination (or at least reduction) of poverty, etc. Yes, a lot of people are employed by the "defense" industry, and that's exactly why we need to get them out of their useless and destructive jobs and into something useful for humanity. There's a HUGE labor pool out there, and we DO have the money to pay them...TAX THE RICH!
flag bonfire
Posted: Sep 8, 2011 at 9:46 Quote
You are retarded.
flag gibson19
Posted: Sep 8, 2011 at 10:09 Quote
You are sorely mistaken about how the military works

Very few of people in the military go overseas, and of those who do, even fewer of them actually kill people. My buddy in the air force right now, works on planes. So ya, he's helping pilots fly over iraq and stuff. BUT he's also learning how to work on planes and when his contract is up with the military he has a promising outlook in the aviation sector. The real killers are politicians. Slash their budget, they are the ones who decide where our troops go and who they kill. It's funny how people always blame CEO's for everything about the company, but when it comes to the government, the CEO is the president and congress is his board of directors. When they decide to do something that f*cks everyone, we go after the low level employees (soldiers, other government employees like the TSA). When really we should be raising hell at the upper management.

Also, laying off 1 million people is gonna make unemployment wayyyy worse. People can't find jobs as is. Just because there are more people in the labor force doesn't mean there are more jobs.

As for public transportation, that's a pipe dream for most of america. Sure I can take a bus to my college, but thats because its a college run bus and I live close. Whereas my parents commute 30 minutes to work. There is no amount of public transportation that would make that work.

I agree we're in way too many wars, but still.
flag bonfire
Posted: Sep 8, 2011 at 10:14 Quote
10% of the military is the pointy end of the spear, in a traditional military.

Congress are never going to pass a tax the rich deal, because they, themselves are among the rich. It doesn't work.
flag gibson19
Posted: Sep 8, 2011 at 10:27 Quote
You also don't want to piss off rich people too much either. They are the ones that own business. Tax them too much and they'll move to hong kong where the highest income tax bracket is 15 percent.
flag harriieee
Posted: Sep 8, 2011 at 10:36 Quote
I still don't buy the argument that you need an ultra-rich caste to have a financially successful country. The past thirty years of Reaganomics has shown the drastic limits of trickle-down theory. Scandinavian countries' tax brackets go up to 80% and most would agree that they are some of the best-managed states in the world.
flag bonfire
Posted: Sep 8, 2011 at 11:56 Quote
I would get the f*ck out of somewhere if they taxed me 80%.

The rich need to be taxed, it needs to happen. Gibby, they aren't going to leave, they are home grown Americans, they are not going to move, nor pay taxes to China.
flag gibson19
Posted: Sep 8, 2011 at 12:19 Quote
Some will. I won't say they all will, but I know I would.

If you are gonna tax the rich. Do it through a flat rate tax. Its the best way to eliminate loopholes, not to mention avoid double taxation on business owners.
flag ajsngklsagkjsdag
Posted: Sep 9, 2011 at 15:49 Quote
bigquotesWhereas my parents commute 30 minutes to work. There is no amount of public transportation that would make that work.


You're saying that a 30 minute commute can't be replaced by public transportation?

I commute for an hour and twenty minutes to my school every day with public transit, and it actually turns out to be just as fast as driving because of the traffic in rush hour.

My mom stopped driving and started using transit when she got her new job downtown so that she could avoid the traffic, which is also an hours commute.

We both actually kind of like it, saves a bunch of money and isnt too difficult once you figure your root out.
flag ezekiel
Posted: Sep 9, 2011 at 17:05 Quote
That's in a metropolitan area where public transportation thrives and makes perfect sense because of traffic congestion. For those of us who don't live in a metropolitan areas (the majority of Canada and the United States), were not faced with the same conditions.

For instance, my drive to work is about 15 minutes with a home trip taking about 20. To put in perspective, it would take me about 5-7 minutes to walk to the nearest bus stop 2 blocks away... and that's why public transportation is a pipe dream for the majority of areas. People will make other sacrifices to keep their personal transportation on the road until they absolutely positively have no other choice but to take a bus.
flag ajsngklsagkjsdag
Posted: Sep 9, 2011 at 17:10 Quote
Yet its a fraction of the cost of running a vehicle, you dont have to pay for parking anywhere, reduces greenhouse emissions.

BTW we live in the suburbs.

Also, most of the US lives in urban areas.

The transit here is also overflowing with people, and is on a pretty steep trend to have more users than the transit company can handle.
flag ezekiel
Posted: Sep 9, 2011 at 17:29 Quote
ledzeppie wrote:
Yet its a fraction of the cost of running a vehicle, you dont have to pay for parking anywhere, reduces greenhouse emissions..

The cost of running a vehicle is a fact of life, its something a lot of people grow up with and get used to. Like I said, just make a sacrifice somewhere else. I don't pay for parking anywhere I go already. Most people, myself included, will choose convenience over the environment any day of the week.

As for living in the suburbs, the suburbs are what make it a metropolitan area. I also know that the majority of Americans live in urban areas, however an urban area isn't necessarily a metropolitan area.
flag ajsngklsagkjsdag
Posted: Sep 9, 2011 at 17:38 Quote
bigquotesPeople will make other sacrifices to keep their personal transportation on the road until they absolutely positively have no other choice but to take a bus.


This is already proving to be wrong in Vancouver. Lots of people giving up their cars for transit, for a variety of reasons.

58% of the US lives in urbanized areas with a population of over 200,000. Im sure that transit could work there. Bellingham WA has a population of 201,140. Ive been to Bellingham, and I can tell you that transit can easily work there with proper investment.

Public transit is far from a pipe dream if even 15% of the population can use it.

I think the only thing wrong with public transit is that its shittily executed in some areas. With proper execution people will use it. You cant just throw a few busses into a city and call it transit.

Also on a international level: "Internationally, 25 percent of respondents in the 17-nation (National Geographic) survey report using public transportation daily, and 41 percent report using it at least once a week"

 


Copyright © 2000 - 2024. Pinkbike.com. All rights reserved.
dv56 0.212136
Mobile Version of Website