OT: Carbon credits

[krw]

They're no state secret.

Try Google. $30K/yr in electricity AND another $30K/yr in natural gas is accounts for a tad more CO2 than I use.

[Larry Jaques]

On Sat, 9 Jan 2010 12:23:08 -0500, the infamous "J. Clarke" scrawled the following:

At the cost of how many lives? The "right thing" directly translates into murder, just as the ban on DDT did, and just as methanol is starting to do right now.

Yeah, "the right thing"...

--============================================-- Growing old is mandatory; growing up is optional. ---

ToolyRoo(tm) and Possum(tm) Handy Pouches NOW AVAILABLE!

[Lee Michaels]

Obviously a troll.

Did you see his e-mail addy?

[Mark & Juanita]

So, in your opinion, the complete dismantling of civilization in the industrialized world and impoverishing its citizens all for the purpose of averting a hypothetical disaster bolstered by shoddy science with questionable assumptions and promoted by people in an establishment dependent upon grants for which the results are expected to support the hypothetical disaster (or no future grants will occur) is OK with you?

Heaven help us all

[Mark & Juanita]

... and right there you show an ignorance of how the world really works and the balancing effects of market forces. When one points to problems that have occurred throughout recent history, you can pretty much always find a statist intervention that has served as the causitive agent for the disaster that then is blamed on a market run amok (cf Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the CRA -- mandating loans to people with no chance of paying them back).

Even in non-capitalist societies, market forces (that people will almost always act in their own best interest) still always work, but to the detriment of the people in those societies. In those societies, the forces are at their root, survival in that society. So, in a society where the oddball sticks out and is likely to get hammered down hard, those who would be innovators keep their ideas to themselves to avoid that fate. Where everyone gets paid the same, someone who would be motivated to succeed and excel will throttle back their effort to the group average since there is no value to attempting to excel.

Adam Smith did not invent the capitalist society or free market, he merely observed the benefits of such a society because it is fundamentally tied to the human spirit and basic human motivations.

Government should exist to make sure the playing field is not corrupted and to curb dishonest people, not to attempt to guarantee outcomes.

There are lots of societies across the world that practice the kind of control you appear to adore -- I suggest you look at joining one of them

[Revivul]

One day, perhaps you'll do me the honor of explaining just what "kind of control" it is that I adore.

More straw men. Lovely.

[Revivul]

YOU weren't even capable of understanding WHY I posted that.

Wow!!

[Revivul]

You might also judge me a troll if you heard how silly my middle name is.

Sometimes, it's better to address the arguments that somebody makes (as distinct from the arguments that you wish he HAD made -- the obvious practice of some/many on this ng).

Unless you can't.

[Revivul]

Ouch.

You're point is irrelevant. You attack others, but don't understand the argument they're making, so ... you make up a position and ascribe it to them.

But you're wrong.

After three times around, I can only assume it's intentional.

But ... while plonking is a coward's way out ... posting to let others know that you chose to do it ... more so :-)

[HeyBub]

Well, you did say: "Reduce our dependence on fossil fuel ... dramatically," and the presumption is that you want that eventuality enforced or encouraged by the government.

To me, there seems three ways to accomplish that which you adore:

• A cheaper alternative to fossile fules is found,

• Government imposes rationing or subsidies of some kind,

• Government imposes a return to living off gathered nuts and berries.

I'd rather prefer the first.

[HeyBub]

How? By mandating reduced usage? By putting down a bet on sunbeams? Virtually ALL of the imported oil goes to the transportation sector. The ONLY way to reduce that importation is to grossly limit movement of people, goods, and supplies.

No, it's not finite in the sense we're running out. Every year the known reserves of petroleum increase.

Of the top 15 countries exporting oil to the U.S. (Canada, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Venezuela, Iraq, Angola, Algeria, etc.), only one (Venezuela) can be said to be controlled by an unstable regime.

Um, respiratory issues true, but pollution today is lower than it ever has been; certainly lower than in 1975, even lower than it was in 1850 London. An argument can be made that advances in technology (powered by energy) now allow those with respiratory problems, such as asthma, to lead lives of chronic, but manageable, difficulty, but live nevertheless, rather than dying off pretty quickly with an acute problem.

In addition, you're not going to produce much steel with a water-wheel or donkeys trudging in a circle.

Huh? Are you saying that war is a BAD thing? That's just plain nuts. War, in general, is a Good Thing (tm) - at least wars pursued by us.

Well, let's have some of these valid reasons, then.

[Revivul]

Why, how, by whom, with what capital??

The thousands upon thousands upon thousand of pages Tax Code is chock full of social engineering elements.

So ... OUR government -- in that regard -- practices the "kind of control" that 'Mark & Juanita' overtly decried.

I'll presume he/she/they actually DID know that. How could anybody NOT? I presume he/she/they will now seek to relocate (to ... ???).

Wars predicated on other causes, but ... suspiciously centered in oil-rich nations ... are de facto oil subsidies, no?

What's wrong with subsidies to switch us OFF OF fossil fuels ... asap ... instead/in addition??

I'm genuinely interested in an other-than-ideological argument.

As a former VP of a couple of NYSE-traded companies ... smart CEOs and execs get AHEAD of things like this. The more consolidated the control of finite oil resources IS, the more victimized by other-than-market-based pricing we will be.

Anybody that's watched Big Oil in recent decades ... knows that's already starting.

So ... why not??

No troll. Sorry. Just the anomalous poster, here, that doesn't think ... the way so many of you do ... and ... comes to his positions through listening to LOTS of valid argument ... not just the ones that appeal most to my closely-held positions ;-)

[Revivul]

Says you.

Alternative fuel sources -- hydrogen highway, to cite but one possibility.

Until when? Are we making more?

No. So ... it's finite. Why must we run a nation in 365 day cycles. Why not get ahead of a problem ... even once ... without throwing blood and treasure at it?

Nice re-phrase/twist/manipulation.

I always wonder if the people who engage in this sort of tactic, online, would do so at the corner coffee shop, face to face. I tend to doubt it. It's cheap, and I'd surely call you on it.

And am.

Who sits on the largest % of the known oil reserves in the world?

Would it or would it not be reduced further with clean, renewable energy sources, rather than huge reliance on fossil fuels??

'Nother manipulation/dodge on your part.

Hm. I'm skeptical that fossil fuels and wter wheels/donkeys are the only two options. Nice black/white argument.

Sigh. You'll never see what you look away from.

Confirmation bias. It's rife on this ng.

[Swingman]

Note the NAME of the forum you have taken upon yourself in which to post your ideology, then try posting some actual "woodworking" content and you may well be surprised ...

[Dave Balderstone]

So, what have you made from wood lately?

The last thing I did was a bowl from a piece of box elder burl as a Christmas gift for the family of a good friend of my 14 year old son.

My next project may be a large bookcase for my daughter's room.

[Lew Hodgett]

----------------------------------------------- When you have facts, use them.

When you don't, throw crap on the wall and hope it sticks.

A classic case of crap on the wall.

Lew

[Dave Balderstone]

We've seen them come and go, here on the wreck. Remember "The Man in the Doorway" a few years back?

I don't recall who summed that one up, but the line was classic:

"There's someone filling a much needed gap."

[Revivul]

'bout six hours, today, marking and mortising the legs for my night stand.

Sadly, the upper, front through mortise was slightly tight -- just tight enough to split the 3/8" of wood remaining above it when I tapped the through-tenon into place to dry fit it all.

Probably beyond repair. May be a do-over.

Whaddyagonnado??

Sounds like fun!

[Revivul]

I'm stuck.

It *seems* that what *you're* saying is that woodworkers (of which I am one) are illogical, irrational, intellectually dishonest, and both narrow- and closed- minded.

But that shouldn't be right.

If I've mis-interpreted, please elaborate.

SURELY you don't ALL think that Freud dado sets are incredible and wonderful, but the only an absolute *idiot* would *ever* consider using a Forrest Dado King.

Surely, there are those who like the PM66 and those who like the Unisaw.

Surely, there are those who like power tools, and the occasional neanderthal who prefers old-world hand tools.

Surely this is NOT the monolithic group that you convey. In my time as a woodworker, it's abundantly clear to me that this is a pursuit that requires *great* mental agility, clear-thinking, and a logical approach.

Right?

Confirmation bias* is an inherently evil and destructive thing.

So are the other dodges, argumentative tricks and manipulations, and logical fallacies that are bandied about on this ng when ANY OT thread comes up -- particularly in response to information or positions that don't jibe with the popular ones, here.

Why?

Why not have a discussion directly and honestly ... about ... whatever the topic is, provided you'd care to engage?

My take? Fear and insecurity.

People tend to be wildly uncomfortable with not knowing. THINKING that they know, then, provides great comfort.

Whereas admitting credible information, and then considering it, is just too unsettling for many people.

And that's a damned shame.

I *thrive* on valid and intelligent challenges to *my* beliefs.

WTF is the point of listening to a bunch of people who think as I already do? I'm plenty intellectually secure. I don't need that reinforcement.

[Swingman]

Rachel, Rachel? Is that you, Rachel Maddow? We didn't know YOU were a woodworker!!