Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Thursday, August 29, 2019

The Environmental Protection Agency is set to announce Thursday that it will loosen federal rules on methane, a powerful greenhouse gas linked to climate change, according to two officials briefed on the decision.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Tell me folks aren't evil. Yeah right.

#1 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 08:33 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I wonder how much Trump is being paid off?

#2 | Posted by Zed at 2019-08-29 10:33 AM | Reply

Lets see those tax returns...

OCU

#3 | Posted by OCUser at 2019-08-29 11:12 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You can always stop using energy at any time.

It's up to you.

#4 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-29 11:47 AM | Reply

"You can always stop using energy at any time."

What does that have to do with anything? Are you capable walking and chewing gum at the same time?

#5 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 12:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#4 That is exceptionally stupid. Congratulations.

#6 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-08-29 12:33 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Not to worry. If Warren is elected, we'll dream of methane harvesting gear being trailered in and out of Hereford Texas.

Soy burgers may get there first.

#7 | Posted by LesWit at 2019-08-29 03:09 PM | Reply

You can always stop using energy at any time.

It's up to you.

#4 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM

Shocking, argumentum ad absurdum from our most absurd poster!

#8 | Posted by jpw at 2019-08-29 03:21 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Everyone is free to reduce their personal carbon footprint as much as they like all the way to zero and beyond.

#9 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-29 03:35 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Trump Administration to Reverse Limits on Methane

Does this mean unlimited posting by Goatman?

#10 | Posted by moder8 at 2019-08-29 03:37 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Advertisement

Advertisement

Creepy little 16 year-old arrives in New York to lecture America.

"Greta Thunberg, Climate Activist, Arrives in N.Y. With a Message for Trump"

#11 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-08-29 03:41 PM | Reply

This will be a big saver for maintenance costs in the oil and gas industry.Price of NG in N.A is in the dumper anyway.Trump loves clean air and clean water.

#12 | Posted by Scotty at 2019-08-29 03:46 PM | Reply

argumentum ad absurdum
#8 | POSTED BY JPW

JPW refuses to help save the planet. shocking.

#13 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-29 03:53 PM | Reply

What does that have to do with anything?
#5 | POSTED BY DANNI

You can lower your energy consumption as much as you want.

But you don't want to sacrifice the comforts and conveniences that consume all that energy.

Instead, you just roll coal and whine that it's other peoples fault. #Poser

#14 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-29 03:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Not surprised since we now have to accomodate the Great Gasbag in office.

hat tip to Joy Beher

#15 | Posted by RightisTrite at 2019-08-29 04:09 PM | Reply

FTA

"Ben Ratner, a senior director at the advocacy group Environmental Defense Fund, said in an interview that rolling back the regulations could reward bad actors in the industry. Given that many major players had embraced limits on methane, Ratner said, it made little sense for Trump officials to ease such restrictions."

The big boys embraced the current restrictions and methane has enough value that drillers and transporters are already financially incentivized to minimize leaks.

why make it easier for bad actors?

#16 | Posted by eberly at 2019-08-29 04:17 PM | Reply

Why would anyone want to move backwards in the war against global climate change. I don't even believe this decision was made to please energy companies or anyone else, it's just to insult people who believe in global climate change.

#17 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 06:33 PM | Reply

war against global climate change

Climate's been changing since earth was a planet.
I can confidently predict that in the war against nature, nature will win as it always does.

#18 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 06:51 PM | Reply

"You can lower your energy consumption as much as you want.
But you don't want to sacrifice the comforts and conveniences that consume all that energy."

Idiotic post. We aren't exactly enduring a shortage of energy in this country, we have plenty of energy supply. This is about allowing jerks like you to think this is a brilliant plan to accomplish something, But what? As Everly said, they are selling methane and making profits, why would anyone want to put it into our atmosphere unnecessarily. Everyday, I become more convinced that you are simply a troll. The other day I suggested we get a troll flag, you were one of the people I would definitely flag with it, probably every day. Keep on trolling it if floats your boat.

#19 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 06:59 PM | Reply

"Climate's been changing since earth was a planet. "

But it has never had 7.53 billion people before. To pretend that having that many people on earth using all sorts of energy for all sorts of reasons isn't having an affect is sort of dumb. We need to do everything we can to insure that our children and grandchildren have a chance for a decent life.

#20 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 07:03 PM | Reply

But it has never had 7.53 billion people before.

You missed the point. Climate changes with or without human existence.

We need to do everything we can to insure that our children and grandchildren have a chance for a decent life.

To late. Future generations are saddled with the massive debts of past generations.

#21 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 07:12 PM | Reply

"To late. Future generations are saddled with the massive debts from supply side economics."

FTFY

And dealing with the environment, you don't know that there is nothing we can do about it, we do know that if we don't try we won'g succeed.

#22 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 07:17 PM | Reply

Climate changes with or without human existence.

Doesn't mean every change is natural, or that we aren't changing it more than it otherwise would.

#23 | Posted by JOE at 2019-08-29 07:19 PM | Reply

And dealing with the environment, you don't know that there is nothing we can do about it, we do know that if we don't try we won'g succeed.
#22 | POSTED BY DANNI

I think it the height of arrogance to think humans can change the course of natural forces.
Of the two directions between getting hotter or colder, I'll take hotter any day.

If it's been getting colder, as some sources say, the effects on the food supply would be catastrophic.
If earth is getting warmer, it's good for plant growth of which we are dependent.

#24 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 07:29 PM | Reply

You can always stop using energy at any time.

It's up to you.

#4 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Wait ARE you goatman? That was his original argument - you can't criticize polluters unless you produce zero pollution. It's called a tu quoque argument and you'd fail junior high debate class for it.

#25 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 07:33 PM | Reply

I think it the height of arrogance to think humans can change the course of natural forces.

#24 | Posted by Ray

You are the height of ignorance.
Humans created a hole in the ozone layer and then human GOVERNMENT REGULATION fixed it.

Idiot.

#26 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 07:34 PM | Reply

Climate's been changing since earth was a planet.
I can confidently predict that in the war against nature, nature will win as it always does.

#18 | Posted by Ray

Yeah dummy. The war against nature is humans poisoning and heating the planet. Nature will win by killing a bunch of humans. Especially if morons like you are in charge.

#27 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 07:35 PM | Reply

Doesn't mean every change is natural, or that we aren't changing it more than it otherwise would.
#23 | POSTED BY JOE

Humans are as much a part of the ecosystem as all other life forms.

All oxygen breathing lifeforms emit CO2. We have no idea how much other lifeforms emit CO2.
It's an incalculable quantity.

#28 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 07:36 PM | Reply

" think it the height of arrogance to think humans can change the course of natural forces.

#24 | Posted by Ray

You are the height of ignorance.
Humans created a hole in the ozone layer and then human GOVERNMENT REGULATION fixed it.
Idiot.

POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY "

The hole in the ozone was not caused by natural forces. It was caused by man and fixed by man. Childish name calling does not change that fact.

#29 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 07:38 PM | Reply

Oh cool.

With that in mind, toxic waste is natural because humans create it.

#30 | Posted by JOE at 2019-08-29 07:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Was @28.

#31 | Posted by JOE at 2019-08-29 07:39 PM | Reply

Yeah dummy. The war against nature is humans poisoning and heating the planet. Nature will win by killing a bunch of humans. Especially if morons like you are in charge.
#27 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

If true, that's a failure of politics.

Don't look at me. I shun politics.

#32 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 07:39 PM | Reply

"Wait ARE you goatman? That was his original argument - you can't criticize polluters unless you produce zero pollution. It's called a tu quoque argument and you'd fail junior high debate class for it.

POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY"

I have never made that claim. Why do you lie so much? Remember, I taught you what tu quoque meant a couple of weeks ago when you kept misusing it. Funny to see you lecture someone on it.

#33 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 07:41 PM | Reply

#25 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Energy conservation is a good thing. It's responsible, ethical, and earth friendly. But you're just another selfish consumer, spoiled by the luxury of modern conveniences that consume massive amounts of energy.

You're also a hysterical screecher, who lashes out in fits of rage, believing that you, and you alone have all the answers.

Find a nice quiet hobby or something. This is just too much for you to handle.

#34 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-29 07:42 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

The hole in the ozone was not caused by natural forces. It was caused by man and fixed by man. Childish name calling does not change that fact.
#29 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

The last time I looked, it's gotten smaller, but the ozone hole is still there.

Ozone is generated by sunlight. The hole appears every spring in the Antarctic.

When it was discovered, they had no history. It could have been there for millions of years for all we know.

#35 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 07:48 PM | Reply

"Creepy little 16 year-old arrives in New York to lecture America.
#11 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN"

Creepy old man in California stalks 16 year old girl's every move.

#36 | Posted by montecore at 2019-08-29 07:50 PM | Reply

"Ozone is generated by sunlight. The hole appears every spring in the Antarctic.
When it was discovered, they had no history. It could have been there for millions of years for all we know.

POSTED BY RAY AT 2019-08-29 07:48 PM "

That is incorrect. Examination of ice strata proves it is a very recent event.

Furthermore, our knowledge of chemistry proves that CFCs deplete ozone. Since the ban on CFCs, a notable change in the ozone layer has been well documented

#37 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 07:57 PM | Reply

Clarification: "Ozone is generated by sunlight." is not incorrect. THe rest is.

#38 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 07:58 PM | Reply

"The hole in the ozone was not caused by natural forces. It was caused by man and fixed by man. Childish name calling does not change that fact.
#29 | POSTED BY GOATMAN"

Sort of indicates that Global Climate Change, which is obfiously occurring, may be reversible or at least have the worst aspects of it diminished by actions we should be taking right now.

#39 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 08:05 PM | Reply

Examination of ice strata proves it is a very recent event.

Then I would question if it has been there during the 12,000 years since earth has been warming.

I assume you do know that the layer grows thicker towards the equator. What's the long term history on that?

#40 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 08:07 PM | Reply

Sort of indicates that Global Climate Change, which is obfiously occurring, may be reversible or at least have the worst aspects of it diminished by actions we should be taking right now.

#39 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2019-08-29 08:05 PM "

It's a whole lot easier to replace CFCs than it is to replace fossil fuels especially since the former has almost been done completely, with the exception being contained CFCs as in my old pick up truck's AC.

#41 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 08:15 PM | Reply

on't look at me. I shun politics.

#32 | Posted by Ray

Haha you realize this is a political site right?

How many times do you SHUN here every day?

Do you shun sugar while you wolf down a box of donuts?

#42 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 08:18 PM | Reply

I have never made that claim. Why do you lie so much? Remember, I taught you what tu quoque meant a couple of weeks ago when you kept misusing it. Funny to see you lecture someone on it.

#33 | Posted by goatman

Yes you did. Years ago. It stuck with me because it was so incredibly stupid. When I learned what tu quoque meant it clicked. That's the exact argument you used - I use oil so I can't say we should use less oil.

#43 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 08:19 PM | Reply

"It's a whole lot easier to replace CFCs than it is to replace fossil fuels especially since the former has almost been done completely, with the exception being contained CFCs as in my old pick up truck's AC."

I don't doubt it at all but the progress which has already been made on alternative energy leads me to believe (hope) that it can be done. What is the alternative plan? Should we allow people making billions off of fossil fuels to buy our politicians and slow down progress and change?
Seems to me we are at a time when we need to demand better from our leaders. We need them to be working for us, not for the fossil fuel industry. When they get the EPA to allow methane to be released into the atmosphere when it can be prevented it tells me the profiteers own our government under Trump.

#44 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 08:21 PM | Reply

The hole in the ozone was not caused by natural forces. It was caused by man and fixed by man. Childish name calling does not change that fact.

#29 | Posted by goatman

The recent drastic rapid C02 spike was caused by man too stupid.

#45 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 08:21 PM | Reply

Seems to me we are at a time when we need to demand better from our leaders. We need them to be working for us, not for the fossil fuel industry. When they get the EPA to allow methane to be released into the atmosphere when it can be prevented it tells me the profiteers own our government under Trump.

#44 | Posted by danni

Too late. These morons would rather burn down their own house than let a democratic fireman put it out.
If they admit they are wrong about climate change it calls all their dogma into question - what else might they be wrong about? Trickle down economics? Gun regulations? Can't risk it. Better stick with - man can't change the climate.

#46 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 08:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

How many times do you SHUN here every day?
#42 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Happy talk with liberals always gives me a warm feeling.

#47 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 08:24 PM | Reply

"Should we allow people making billions off of fossil fuels to buy our politicians and slow down progress and change?"

WHen the cost of alternative energy becomes competitive with fossil fuels, that's what people will buy. You make it sound like oil, coal, peat, shale companies simply want to pollute the world. No, they sell it because it is the best return on investment, both for the corporations and for the end users like you and me.

#48 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 08:25 PM | Reply

If they admit they are wrong about climate change it calls all their dogma into question

Nobody questions climate change.

#49 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 08:27 PM | Reply

Nobody questions climate change.

#49 | Posted by Ray

You morons question if man can change the climate. Quit playing sematics games. Goat doesnt need any understudies.

#50 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 08:29 PM | Reply

"These morons would rather burn down their own house than let a democratic fireman put it out.

#46 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY "

Are you pretending that democrats aren't owned by big oil, too? LOL

www.opensecrets.org

#51 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 08:29 PM | Reply

I question what these ------- have to gain by defending the release of additional methane into the air. Ray, fill your house with methane and see what happens. It's natural, after all.

#52 | Posted by JOE at 2019-08-29 08:32 PM | Reply

"It's a whole lot easier to replace CFCs than it is to replace fossil fuels especially since the former has almost been done completely, with the exception being contained CFCs as in my old pick up truck's AC."

It's already there. Some countries aren't going to allow combustion engine cars to be sold in just a couple of years. In some countries electric companies are paying consumers to use more electricity because they are producing more than what can be needed. We are right now, at the point of descending energy costs because of alternative energy, the only thing that we need to fear now is that the billionaires who own fossil fuel industries will somehow own the alternative energy sources as well. I'll say it, we should socialize alternative energy production or personalize it so that each homeowner can own the source of his/her electricity which powers their home and their cars. Here in Florida, FPL is fighting that idea tooth and nail but I think eventually we are going to have personalized energy sources without the FPL middle man profiting off of it.

#53 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 08:33 PM | Reply

"I question what these ------- have to gain by defending the release of additional methane into the air. Ray, fill your house with methane and see what happens. It's natural, after all."

They don't know either but that's what they are told to think and they obey without question.

#54 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 08:35 PM | Reply

You morons question if man can change the climate. Quit playing sematics games. Goat doesnt need any understudies.
#50 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

I'm not the one playing semantics. If you mean climate warming, then say climate warming.

#55 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 08:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Some countries aren't going to allow combustion engine cars to be sold in just a couple of years."

That's a noble cause on paper, but so was turning corn into fuel. Until making an EV and using it for 200,000 miles leaves a smaller carbon footprint and that pesky battery disposal problem is solved, it will be another corn/ethanol debacle. And these issued don't even address long range driving, cost of infrastructure, etc.

#56 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 08:37 PM | Reply

I'm all for alternatives to fossil fuel. We just aren't there yet. It makes no sense to make the planet dirtier for a "cleaner" vehicle.

#57 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 08:38 PM | Reply

They don't know either but that's what they are told to think and they obey without question.
#54 | POSTED BY DANNI

That's a fascinating characterization.

#58 | Posted by Ray at 2019-08-29 08:44 PM | Reply

"You morons question if man can change the climate. Quit playing sematics games. Goat doesnt need any understudies.
#50 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

I'm not the one playing semantics. If you mean climate warming, then say climate warming.

#55 | POSTED BY RAY "

Next to childish name calling, puking out "SEMANTICS!" is her next most popular "argument". And for an added bonus, this post has both!

#59 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 08:46 PM | Reply

"They don't know either but that's what they are told to think and they obey without question.

#54 | POSTED BY DANNI "

And you don't?

#60 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 08:47 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

--If you mean climate warming, then say climate warming.

They don't like to do that, for obvious reasons.

#61 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-08-29 08:49 PM | Reply

Are you pretending that democrats aren't owned by big oil, too? LOL

www.opensecrets.org

#51 | Posted by goatman

There it is! TU QUOQUE aka WHATABOUTISM aka russian propaganda techniques.

If democrats are owned by big oil like republicans, why dont they deny manmade climate change like republicans? Why dont they put pollution lobbyists in charge of the EPA moron?

#62 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 09:06 PM | Reply

--If you mean climate warming, then say climate warming.

They don't like to do that, for obvious reasons.

#61 | Posted by nullifidian

Yeah the reason is your party is so stupid that if it's called global warming then every time it snows they think that proves it's not happening.

#63 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 09:07 PM | Reply

#51 | Posted by goatman
There it is! TU QUOQUE

#62 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY"

Sorry to see you so upset to find out your own party is guilty of what you accuse another of. That's not tu quoque -- that's hypocrisy, or double standard.

#64 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 09:12 PM | Reply

Speaks never read "How to Win Friends and Influence People".

#65 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-29 09:13 PM | Reply

"Why dont they put pollution lobbyists in charge of the EPA moron?

#62 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY"

Childish name calling says a whole lot about your emotional insecurity and and immaturity, not to mention your inability to formulate a reasoned and thought out response than it does my intellect. Learn this.

4.bp.blogspot.com

#66 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 09:16 PM | Reply

--your party

Everything is a matter of political party to partisan party hacks like you, and just 2 parties.

There is in fact a wide spectrum of opinions and forecasts on global warming, but a binary thinker like you thinks there are only 2 possible outcomes: no warming or catastrophic, apocalyptic warming.

#67 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-08-29 09:19 PM | Reply

Sorry to see you so upset to find out your own party is guilty of what you accuse another of. That's not tu quoque -- that's hypocrisy, or double standard.

#64 | Posted by goatman

That's exactly what tu quoque is stupid. Acting like a little guilt on one side is equal to a LOT of guilt on the other side.

A tu quoque argument is - "you're saying I should see a doctor because I have a 105 fever and have been vomiting for days, but you didnt go to the doctor when you had a runny nose did you hypocrite!?"

It relies on the moronic contention that only a flawless critic can make a criticism, and there is no difference between imperfect and terrible. Hence why it would flunk you in junior high debate class.

#68 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 09:30 PM | Reply

There is in fact a wide spectrum of opinions and forecasts on global warming

#67 | Posted by nullifidian

There sure is, but there's only one political party on earth that still denies it's happening - the political party you spend all day arguing in favor of.

#69 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 09:31 PM | Reply

Speaks never read "How to Win Friends and Influence People".

#65 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Sheep4trump never read the progressive agenda. He thinks the best way to help the sick and poor is to spend all day spreading republican talking points

#70 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-08-29 09:32 PM | Reply

--but there's only one political party on earth that still denies it's happening

How can a party deny or affirm anything? A party is just an abstraction, not a single, unified voice. Once again, it is you that are obsessed with political parties and try to stuff all opinions into 2 little partisan boxes.

#71 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-08-29 09:38 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

How can a party deny or affirm anything? A party is just an abstraction, not a single, unified voice.

*cough* SCOTUS appointments.

#72 | Posted by REDIAL at 2019-08-29 09:41 PM | Reply

"Sheep4trump never read the progressive agenda.

#70 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY "

I have. Their agenda is compassion and tolerance and acceptance. Exactly where do you fit in with that agenda? I've seen you wish harm on people. You are one of the most intolerant people on the DR, and the only thing you accept is that with which you agree 100%.

So I guess you aren't much of a proggie, are you?

#73 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-29 09:45 PM | Reply

"And you don't?"

No, I don't. I hope and I base my ideas on the outside possibility that we could fix this mess. What's your alternative, accept failure? That's the defeatist attitude of a coward. I know one thing about myself, I have had huge challenges in my life but I never expected to fail and I never did. I didn't care how bad things got, I always knew I could fix it and make our lives better and I always did. Today, I want that attitude to be realized by millions, we can fix our climate change problems but we can't if we listen to people who keep telling us that the problems don't exist or that they are too big to fix. We need to ignore both types of people, what advantage does it give us to listen to either?

#74 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 09:57 PM | Reply

"...the best way to help the sick and poor..."
#70 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Democrats just let them live on the sidewalk in their own squalor. That's not compassion, helping, or a solution.

But of course, you don't have look at that from your Malibu mansion.

#75 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-29 09:59 PM | Reply

we can fix our climate change problems
#74 | POSTED BY DANNI

Just don't ask Danni to cut back on her massive consumption of energy.

#76 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-29 10:00 PM | Reply

"I have. Their agenda is compassion and tolerance and acceptance. Exactly where do you fit in with that agenda?"

I just wonder what happened in your life to make you reject all of those things. I embrace them, am proud to embrace them, and I'll guarantee you, I'm far happier than you are. I suffered from depression long ago, finally figured out how to cure it. Running, running, running, and openness to people I didn't think I liked. Started having friends. Started enjoying life.

#77 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 10:04 PM | Reply

"Democrats just let them live on the sidewalk in their own squalor. That's not compassion, helping, or a solution."

As opposed to what Republicans are doing about it. You're pathetic.

#78 | Posted by danni at 2019-08-29 10:08 PM | Reply

As opposed to what Republicans are doing about it. You're pathetic.
#78 | POSTED BY DANNI

Conservatives don't run LA, San Fran, or Seattle.

If you have compassion? Read this - www.realclearpolitics.com

#79 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-29 10:11 PM | Reply

Our poorest 20% consume more per capita than the many developed nations. Supply side works.

#80 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-29 10:14 PM | Reply

"Our poorest 20% consume more per capita than the many developed nations"

Link, please.

#81 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-08-29 10:18 PM | Reply

The Ocasio-Cortez Global Warming Rant That Went Totally Off The Rails

townhall.com

#82 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-08-29 10:29 PM | Reply

"Ocasio-Cortez"

*drink*

#83 | Posted by JOE at 2019-08-29 10:35 PM | Reply

*drink*

"Indeed. Let's toast to AOC!

-- Senate co-sponsors of her New Green Scheme

Elizabeth Warren
Corey Booker
Bernie Sanders
Corey Booker
Kirsten Gillibrand

#84 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-08-29 10:45 PM | Reply

Link, please.
#81 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

www.justfacts.com

#85 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-08-29 10:47 PM | Reply

All oxygen breathing lifeforms emit CO2. We have no idea how much other lifeforms emit CO2.
It's an incalculable quantity.

#28 | POSTED BY RAY

This has to be one of the dumbest comments I've ever read on a climate change thread.

Even dumber than "duhh the climate has always cycled!"

#86 | Posted by jpw at 2019-08-29 10:51 PM | Reply

www.justfacts.com

#87 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-29 11:14 PM | Reply

Link, please.
#81 | POSTED BY DANFORTH
www.justfacts.com
#85 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS
www.justfacts.com
#87 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Let me get this straight...

Your point is that America's bottom 20% are doing better than the bottom 20% in most poor, former Eastern Bloc countries despite the tremendous amount of wealth in our country?

Seriously? We are 13th in income for the bottom 10% and 10th for the bottom 20% compared to the developed nations in western Europe and compared to Canada despite all the money our country has.
slate.com

So I have to ask WTF are you talking about?

#88 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-08-30 01:57 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

No what that study shows is that our poorest 20% are consuming at rate higher than the average of such places as the Canada, UK and the socialist paradise of Denmark. Virtually the same as the Netherlands and France.

#89 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-30 04:05 PM | Reply

Our poor are also doing better than the average in Japan, Sweden and Australia.

#90 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-30 04:08 PM | Reply

Our poor are also doing better than the average in Japan, Sweden and Australia.
#90 | Posted by visitor_

Source?

#91 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-08-30 04:18 PM | Reply

Source?
#91 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

You realize you're asking for a picture of his --------.

#92 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-08-30 04:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Funny thing is all 3 of those countries have universal health care

#93 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-08-30 04:21 PM | Reply

See #86

#94 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-30 05:48 PM | Reply

Sorry wrong line:

#85 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS
www.justfacts.com
#87 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

#95 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-30 05:49 PM | Reply

"So I have to ask WTF are you talking about?"

Relax, Jake, it's...Republican Math.

#96 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-08-30 10:24 PM | Reply

""Relax, Jake, it's...Republican Math."

Rule #1: When you don't understand the equation, you can come to ANY CONCLUSION!
Rule #2: 1 + 1 = ...um, well...that depends: what does today's agenda require?

#97 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-08-30 10:27 PM | Reply

Sorry Danforth, from your past postings we all realize that math is hard for you. You get frustrated and then act out with nonsensical posts.

#98 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-30 11:40 PM | Reply

"Sorry Danforth, from your past postings we all realize that math is hard for you. "

Can you taste the stupid when you post something that dumb?

"You get frustrated and then act out with nonsensical posts."'

Feel free to prove how and where your link proved the initial claim; it didn't. Are you frustrated, and acting out with nonsensical links?

#99 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-08-30 11:53 PM | Reply

Did you read the article?

I made the following claim: "Our poorest 20% consume more per capita than the many developed nations"

That's actually the thesis of the linked article.

Other than slinging poo, do you have countering facts?

#100 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-31 12:22 AM | Reply

"...do you have countering facts?"

Who needs countering facts, when "the many developed nations" turns out to be cherry-picked to include just enough "developed nations" to make the claim.

IOW, weasel words: "many" gets to mean whatever the author wants.

#101 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-08-31 11:01 AM | Reply

A second factor: "consume" is based on the pretense all prices are the same. For example, if one of the "many developed nations" gets the exact same prescription, yet pays only 50% of what we pay, that's considered only 50% of the consumption, despite getting the exact same Rx.

IOW, the conclusion is suspect (at best) when consumption rate costs are lower elsewhere.

#102 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-08-31 11:07 AM | Reply

"Sorry Danforth, from your past postings we all realize that math is hard for you."

Gee, Vis...then why did I understand the equation wasn't adjusted for varying consumption rate costs, while you missed it completely?

As I've said before: if you don't understand the equation, you can come to ANY CONCLUSION you want. In this case, the author is either ignorant, or he expects you to be. Lucky for him you fell for it.

#103 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-08-31 11:21 AM | Reply

The results were vetted by a couple guys with Phds and I'll trust that more than the musings of someone that got a B- in algebra for business majors at the community college in your home town.

#104 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-31 02:57 PM | Reply

Appeal to Authority.
Bad choice of logical fallacy.

#105 | Posted by YAV at 2019-08-31 04:12 PM | Reply

"Appeal to Authority.
Bad choice of logical fallacy.

#105 | POSTED BY YAV AT 2019-08-31 04:12 PM "

Shuns doctors advice and goes to barbers for bloodletting

#106 | Posted by goatman at 2019-08-31 04:16 PM | Reply

"The results were vetted by a couple guys with Phds"

Did they adjust for local rates, or does the Phillipino have to get 5 knee replacements to equal one American knee replacement?

" I'll trust that more than the musings of someone that got a B- in algebra for business majors at the community college in your home town."

Riiiiiiiiiight. So how was it that I knew about the need to adjust for local rates and you didn't?

#107 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-08-31 04:22 PM | Reply

You're using appeal to authority incorrectly. When someone is an actual expert in a field, their expert opinion has more gravitas. For example a dispute between a climate scientist and Rush Limbaugh, or a professor in economics and a tax preparer.

#108 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-08-31 07:57 PM | Reply

I'm not using it incorrectly, but good for you for bothering to find out what it means.

You're hanging your hat on them being experts, and not taking into account their motivation, agenda, and bias. We're asked by the article to assume their neutrality and expertise purely to give credibility to their "findings." They didn't cite or link to these expert's actual findings, only a quip from one of them (IIRC).

My argument is that their premise is garbage to begin with. Right-Wingers apparently won't be happy unless the poor in the U.S. are living 10 in a one room corrugated sheet metal cell without electricity or water la the slums of Mumbai.

Ever moving us downward isn't the answer.

Danforth's already did a good job in tearing holes in these "findings." There's no need for me to say anything more.

#109 | Posted by YAV at 2019-08-31 09:46 PM | Reply

"Right-Wingers apparently won't be happy unless the poor in the U.S. are living 10 in a one room corrugated sheet metal cell without electricity or water la the slums of Mumbai."

#109 | POSTED BY YAV

Somewhat melodramatic, wouldn't you say?

#110 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-08-31 09:51 PM | Reply

"You're using appeal to authority incorrectly. When someone is an actual expert in a field, their expert opinion has more gravitas"

If Steven Moore of the WSJ editorial board writes "Tax cuts increase revenue", but his methodology doesn't adjust for inflation, I don't need an expert to tell me he's pissing on my leg and telling me it's raining.

In 2011, after serving over 20 years on health committees, I was elected Trustee to a national Health Plan. At my most recent board meeting, we discussed the fact we could send a family of four to the Philippines for an all-expense paid week to get a knee replaced, for less than a knee replacement costs in the USA.

So...talk to me about consumption, measured in US dollars, but not adjusted for local rates. And tell me again how I have to consult some expert to know these things.

#111 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-09-01 12:44 AM | Reply

Are you making an appeal to authority by bringing up your trustee status? I look forward to seeing a link to your peer reviewer counter study.

#112 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-09-01 12:07 PM | Reply

Reviewed

#113 | Posted by visitor_ at 2019-09-01 12:08 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort