Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds up, leaving litt...

Full story: Newsday

When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore.
Comments
35,181 - 35,200 of 46,210 Comments Last updated Yesterday

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37468
Jul 27, 2013
 

Judged:

3

2

2

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
I watched the Men Who Built America on the History Channel.......... The 2008 bailouts happened because we were told not bailing out failure would pretty much be the end of the world. You notice a central theme throughout global warming that by not doing anything, we are dooming ourselves and our children to their demise.......
If you want to know what life would be like without bailouts take a look at Egypt right now. They are out on the streets risking their lives not just because of religious differences. It's because they have NOTHING to lose, NO future, No money and a growing population into poverty.
That is what too big to fail looks like! So wake up & learn from history instead of trying to re-live it.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37469
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Fair Game wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
LOL.
So your response to my pointing out that the report referred to ENSO-adjusted temperatures is to simply leave out the bit about ENSO-adjusted temperatures and try again.
You really are a clown.
Well since according to NOAA this method of ENSO-adjusted temps started in 2009, then there are not too many of these to find. How about you provide the information.
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37470
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
You have all the hallmarks of a fully fledged "tea bagger" this blind belief in a system that is broken yet keep recalling history as tho it's the past everyone should aspire to. The past is gone, there is no going back. Capitalism is a well oiled machine it's not going to stop for you. Did you see what happened when Lehman bros was allowed to fail. It was the start of the contagion that spread around the world at lightspeed. Canada a good example and many others. If the Banking system had been allowed to fail in the US, your house would be worth NOTHING! your kids future would be worth nothing! Yet as much as it sticks in everyone's throat good tax payers money being used to prop up greed it was a gun to the head type choice.
Yet the tea party wisdom, says no to bailouts, no to taxes and no to everything else including climate change. I was one who personally lost $200K off my retirement savings in 2008 through no fault of mine as that money was supposed to be in AAA products a supposed fail safe investment and clearly it wasn't. That was Wall St fraud, not bad investments.
So yeah, i have a barrow to push on this as well. Yet I believe that we should do something about protecting our environment even if it costs me dearly.
Where in my post did I say we should aspire to anything? All I was referring to was a documentary about men of industry and one of the tactics they would use to acquire more money and power. In fact watching that show is why I started reading about the Federal Reserve because it seems over and over these same men acquired most of the economy and they would always find a way to get rid of the competition and increase profits. Some of these same men with the inclusion of the Rothchilds and our government developed the Federal Reserve. Banks were failing at the time and the Federal Reserve would be here to protect us from future panics and to keep interest rates low. But look what that union of banks has actually done. It has created a banking environment where there is no fear of risky investments and they have spread the risk across all banks so that there is no incentive for the banks who were careful in regards to their reserve ratios to be so anymore. They have made themselves too big to fail on purpose.

It doesn’t matter how many laws congress passes. The Federal Reserve has their own books. We have no idea who they lend to or who pays back. The Federal Reserve does not have to answer to congress or to us. Even if you got every law you wanted passed on the banks, it still wouldn’t matter. The Federal Reserve can do what it wants when it wants. You lost 200,000 while Goldman Sachs received a bailout and special treatment and recouped all of its losses from its investments in AIG and banks overseas were funneled money through Goldman Sachs from the bailout. These bailouts have been happening for over 80 years. At some point you have to ask yourself that if protecting taxpayers was one of their goals (congress, Federal Reserve, Treasury) they would have made the banks take concessions, but in no uncertain terms, everyone is focused on making the banks whole again and in the case of the 2008 bailout, to the tune of 7 trillion dollars.

http://theweek.com/article/index/221883/the-f...

The taxpayers are not even thought of or cared about. They are simply a pawn in the game. And it has been like this since the creation of the Federal Reserve.

I would stop focusing your anger on the “tea baggers.” The anger should be directed to everyone in our government for allowing the outright theft by the banks of the citizens
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37471
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want to know what life would be like without bailouts take a look at Egypt right now. They are out on the streets risking their lives not just because of religious differences. It's because they have NOTHING to lose, NO future, No money and a growing population into poverty.
That is what too big to fail looks like! So wake up & learn from history instead of trying to re-live it.
Are you kidding me? No bailouts? The aid we send every year to Egypt pays for 80% of their military and a portion of the aid pays for education and welfare services. If the Egyptian government only has to pay for 20% of the military and also gets welfare aid from us, what exactly are they doing with their money? Is there a pattern here....corrupt governments receive aid and bailout money and then don't use it to help their people and then can't pay it back and so on and so on....Maybe this is what life is like with bailouts.

Egypt has already received USD 3 billion from the United Arab Emirates, USD 2 billion of which was a cash deposit and USD 1 billion an outright grant along with another 6 billion of aid coming in from other countries.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07/23/31523...
kristy

Oviedo, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37472
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Spain Privatizes the Sun.

An article has been translated in English and states this:

The Secretary of State for Energy, Alberto Nadal, signed a draft royal decree in which consumption taxes are levied on those who want to start solar power systems on their rooftops. The tax, labeled a "backup toll" is high enough to ensure that it will be cheaper to keep buying energy from current providers. If you get caught collecting photons of sunlight for your own use, you can be fined as much as 30 million euros. If you were thinking the best energy option was to buy some solar panels that were down 80% in price, you can forget about it. "Of all the possible scenarios, this is the worst,” said José Donoso, president of the Spanish Photovoltaic Union (UNEF), which represents 85% of the sector’s activity. Before the decree it took 12 years to recover the investment in a residential installation of 2.4 kilowatts of power. Following the decree, it will take an additional 23 years according to estimates by UNEF.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/20...

Is this really true? If so, it is just another example of how governments work with industry and banks to shut out competition/free market and reap bigger profits while fleecing the people.

Since: Mar 09

Penrose, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37473
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
Where in my post did I say we should aspire to anything? All I was referring to was a documentary about men of industry and one of the tactics they would use to acquire more money and power. In fact watching that show is why I started reading about the Federal Reserve because it seems over and over these same men acquired most of the economy and they would always find a way to get rid of the competition and increase profits. Some of these same men with the inclusion of the Rothchilds and our government developed the Federal Reserve. Banks were failing at the time and the Federal Reserve would be here to protect us from future panics and to keep interest rates low. But look what that union of banks has actually done. It has created a banking environment where there is no fear of risky investments and they have spread the risk across all banks so that there is no incentive for the banks who were careful in regards to their reserve ratios to be so anymore. They have made themselves too big to fail on purpose.
It doesn’t matter how many laws congress passes. The Federal Reserve has their own books. We have no idea who they lend to or who pays back. The Federal Reserve does not have to answer to congress or to us. Even if you got every law you wanted passed on the banks, it still wouldn’t matter. The Federal Reserve can do what it wants when it wants. You lost 200,000 while Goldman Sachs received a bailout and special treatment and recouped all of its losses from its investments in AIG and banks overseas were funneled money through Goldman Sachs from the bailout. These bailouts have been happening for over 80 years. At some point you have to ask yourself that if protecting taxpayers was one of their goals (congress, Federal Reserve, Treasury) they would have made the banks take concessions, but in no uncertain terms, everyone is focused on making the banks whole again and in the case of the 2008 bailout, to the tune of 7 trillion dollars.
http://theweek.com/article/index/221883/the-f...
The taxpayers are not even thought of or cared about. They are simply a pawn in the game. And it has been like this since the creation of the Federal Reserve.
I would stop focusing your anger on the “tea baggers.” The anger should be directed to everyone in our government for allowing the outright theft by the banks of the citizens
Remember it was the conservative attitude of freeing capitalism by relaxing banking regulations and influence of the mighty corporations that allowed them to go wild. The teabaggers seem to hate government yet support the very things that brought us to the brink.

It is more than the lynch pins of the Tea Party posting the Ten Commandments, praying in school, and Anti-abortion and gay marriage that we need to focus upon. As voters, we need to quit listening to the hot buttons of hatred and prejudices and focus on making America the country of the many. What caused the illegals in the country? We cannot blame the impoverished folks from Mexico. They just want to provide for themselves. The problem has been those who knowingly hire them because they can exploit them for profit. Otherwise we could have brought them across in a legal manner.

Getting back to the political influence of the conservatives, we see a definite rejection by them of the scientific findings of global warming and even pollution of the environment by industries. The ultra conservatives are playing fiddle to the industro-financial machine that is plaguing the USA.
Coal is King

Kuttawa, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37474
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

kristy wrote:
Spain Privatizes the Sun.
An article has been translated in English and states this:
The Secretary of State for Energy, Alberto Nadal, signed a draft royal decree in which consumption taxes are levied on those who want to start solar power systems on their rooftops. The tax, labeled a "backup toll" is high enough to ensure that it will be cheaper to keep buying energy from current providers. If you get caught collecting photons of sunlight for your own use, you can be fined as much as 30 million euros. If you were thinking the best energy option was to buy some solar panels that were down 80% in price, you can forget about it. "Of all the possible scenarios, this is the worst,” said José Donoso, president of the Spanish Photovoltaic Union (UNEF), which represents 85% of the sector’s activity. Before the decree it took 12 years to recover the investment in a residential installation of 2.4 kilowatts of power. Following the decree, it will take an additional 23 years according to estimates by UNEF.
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/20...
Is this really true? If so, it is just another example of how governments work with industry and banks to shut out competition/free market and reap bigger profits while fleecing the people.
Just another illustration of the growing mountain of evidence that solar power does not work.

Spain is not alone. Arizona Power is asking the public service commission for permission to charge people who install solar panels on their roofs a fee of $100 per month to cover the cost that this burdensome and expensive nuisance imposes upon the electric power distribution system.

I would personally prefer that power companies be allowed to ban solar outright, but as long as they must humor the tree huggers then make the tree huggers pay for it. Don't socialize the cost by spreading it among sensible power customers who don't install the ugly junk.

Since: Mar 09

Penrose, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37475
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
Just another illustration of the growing mountain of evidence that solar power does not work.
Spain is not alone. Arizona Power is asking the public service commission for permission to charge people who install solar panels on their roofs a fee of $100 per month to cover the cost that this burdensome and expensive nuisance imposes upon the electric power distribution system.
I would personally prefer that power companies be allowed to ban solar outright, but as long as they must humor the tree huggers then make the tree huggers pay for it. Don't socialize the cost by spreading it among sensible power customers who don't install the ugly junk.
The prime minister told Parliament yesterday he’d impose a levy to spread the expense of closing a gap between costs and revenue in the country’s electricity business, which has racked up debts of 25 billion euros ($31 billion). Details may be announced as early as tomorrow after the weekly Cabinet meeting.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-11/spai...

So, it seems that Spain is simply looking for revenue, unlike the carbon tax proposals, that does nothing positive except raise reve3nues for Spain.

One answer: APS is facing its own mortality. If rooftop solar is adopted widely enough, it means a death spiral for the electric utilities. The price per kilowatt-hour for solar is plummeting. The utilities all know it, and they’re fighting back by making net-metering more expensive.
Another answer: The Arizona Corporation Commission (the state’s name for its Public Utilities Commission) is closely allied with the American Legislative Exchange Council, a group generally pushing model right wing laws within states.
“There’s no reason other than ideology,” Nancy LaPlaca, an Arizona energy consultant, tells TakePart.“They just don’t like solar.” Four of the commission members are associated with ALEC. One of them is a former Chevron consultant.
http://www.takepart.com/article/2013/07/19/so...
It looks like the utilities in Arizona are running scared and want to impose a tax on solar to protect their investments. Is this an example of a "free market" approach?
Coal is King

Kuttawa, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37476
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
If rooftop solar is adopted widely enough, it means a death spiral for the electric utilities.
If the electric utilities are destroyed and it all becomes solar, what are you going to do after dark and on cloudy days?

Oh! I know. Freeze in the dark.

Since: Mar 09

Penrose, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37477
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
If the electric utilities are destroyed and it all becomes solar, what are you going to do after dark and on cloudy days?
Oh! I know. Freeze in the dark.
If there is a need there will be an electric grid. The grid can be used to transport solar and wind as well as nuclear and fossil fueled plants to supplement consumer based collectors. If the corporations cannot support the grid, the government will. Whatever is necessary.
Coal is King

Kuttawa, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37478
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
If there is a need there will be an electric grid. The grid can be used to transport solar and wind as well as nuclear and fossil fueled plants to supplement consumer based collectors. If the corporations cannot support the grid, the government will. Whatever is necessary.
Ah! Now, at last, we are getting to the bottom of the great CO2 Man Made Global Warming Hoax: it is just a way to advance the socialist goal of nationalizing private industry.

“Let's X Change!!”

Since: Feb 09

B4 HOPE Is Gone...

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37479
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember it was the conservative attitude of freeing capitalism by relaxing banking regulations and influence of the mighty corporations that allowed them to go wild. The teabaggers seem to hate government yet support the very things that brought us to the brink.
Wasn't it Bill Clinton who supported the repeal of Glass-Steagall.....and the sitting POTUS who signed its demise? Of course it was! Learn the facts, Bozo.

It's bad enough that you people are always promoting bad ideas, but when things go wrong.....you blame others for your decisions.

Since: Mar 09

Penrose, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37480
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

ritedownthemiddle wrote:
<quoted text>Wasn't it Bill Clinton who supported the repeal of Glass-Steagall.....and the sitting POTUS who signed its demise? Of course it was! Learn the facts, Bozo.
It's bad enough that you people are always promoting bad ideas, but when things go wrong.....you blame others for your decisions.
The Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act was passed by a partisan vote.The bill then moved to a joint conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. Democrats agreed to support the bill after Republicans agreed to strengthen provisions of the anti-redlining Community Reinvestment Act and address certain privacy concerns; the conference committee then finished its work by the beginning of November. On November 4, the final bill resolving the differences was passed by the Senate 90-8, and by the House 362-57. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Blil...

As you see, the bill was veto proof. This was after the conservative mantra reenforced by the right wing media that if the market was turned loose, everything would be utopian.

Since: Mar 09

Penrose, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37481
Jul 28, 2013
 
Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
Ah! Now, at last, we are getting to the bottom of the great CO2 Man Made Global Warming Hoax: it is just a way to advance the socialist goal of nationalizing private industry.
If you believe that government programs for the common good are socialism, you have been victimized by the RW fanatics and their biased media. No one wishes to nationalize any industry if it is doing the job that is necessary to maintain a society. It is only when they are not willing because of low profits, do not have a quick enough return for large investments, or monopolize a necessary product that the government must step in. That is why we need government.

An possible example where government must step in is in vaccinations of infectious diseases for the masses to prevent an epidemic that would disrupt the social order. The vaccine must be cheap enough so it can readily be distributed to everyone. Pharmaceuticals do not wish to invest in the development and manufacture because the profits are low. This is a case where government subsidies will encourage the production and distribution of the vaccine. Government is not all bad. Private industry is not all encompassing. That is why the partnership of both is desirable. It is what made the USA great.
Coal is King

Kuttawa, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37482
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Patriot AKA Bozo wrote:
<quoted text>
If you believe that government programs for the common good are socialism, you have been victimized by the RW fanatics and their biased media. No one wishes to nationalize any industry if it is doing the job that is necessary to maintain a society. It is only when they are not willing because of low profits, do not have a quick enough return for large investments, or monopolize a necessary product that the government must step in. That is why we need government.
An possible example where government must step in is in vaccinations of infectious diseases for the masses to prevent an epidemic that would disrupt the social order. The vaccine must be cheap enough so it can readily be distributed to everyone. Pharmaceuticals do not wish to invest in the development and manufacture because the profits are low. This is a case where government subsidies will encourage the production and distribution of the vaccine. Government is not all bad. Private industry is not all encompassing. That is why the partnership of both is desirable. It is what made the USA great.
You need to learn some real history, not the "social studies" that they teach in today's socialist-minded public schools.

Our country was at its greatest in 1900. American industry was the mightiest in the world. American railroads had more miles of track and more rolling stock than all the rest of the world combined. American industry produced more goods than all of Europe combined. We mined half of all the coal mined in the world. The majority of the oil used in the world came from American wells. The U.S.A. was the world's greatest oil exporting nation.

Government did not subsidize any of that. None. Zero. Government didn't start subsidizing things that it deemed to be "in the public good" until the 1930s. Most of the things that it deemed "in the public good" were things that would not pay a profit and never did pay a profit.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37483
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

kristy wrote:
<quoted text>
..........
I would stop focusing your anger on the “tea baggers.” The anger should be directed to everyone in our government for allowing the outright theft by the banks of the citizens
You can say that laws don't make any difference when it was proven beyond doubt they do. For instance Canada & Australia as well as quite a few Scandinavian countries had laws limiting what Banks could risk their money in, the same laws also demand a certain percentage of their liquidity to be on hand. In the US, some banks over extended themselves by as much as 150%, now clearly any drop in market would render them insolvent. Yet this was Reagan "cutting the red tape" on business by allowing self regulation. Clinton also helped as well. If you have concrete laws in place, like limiting how big any Bank, Media organisation can get that is also a protection from too big to fail. But that has been ignored also.
All the countries that did not have those laws took a huge hit, and by the way the financial markets are connected today there are no borders. So countries doing the right thing take a hit as well.
That is what you ELECT a government for, to look after the interest of the majority & the country as a whole, not just the Goldman Sachs' of this world. But as soon as someone mentions any form of government control, out come the words "socialist" , "commies" from to right trying to protect the status quo. They don't want any Sheriff in town. Global Warming is no different, it's big business calling the shots until someone has the ball$ to say enough is enough!

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37484
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to learn some real history, not the "social studies" that they teach in today's socialist-minded public schools.
Our country was at its greatest in 1900. American industry was the mightiest in the world. American railroads had more miles of track and more rolling stock than all the rest of the world combined. American industry produced more goods than all of Europe combined. We mined half of all the coal mined in the world. The majority of the oil used in the world came from American wells. The U.S.A. was the world's greatest oil exporting nation.
Government did not subsidize any of that. None. Zero. Government didn't start subsidizing things that it deemed to be "in the public good" until the 1930s. Most of the things that it deemed "in the public good" were things that would not pay a profit and never did pay a profit.
You just made my point as to where real hard line conservatives want to be, "living in the past". Well the past has long gone, and you know as well as anyone, everything America once did can now be done off shore. In most cases at half the cost, so any business worth it's salt goes where the money is, not where you want it to be. So the smart thing would be, to create new industries that can't so easily be exported off shore. Clean Energy being one of them, yet this business has to compete against subsidised non clean producers. The model that you are promoting that built America does not apply in the 21st century I'm sorry but that is fact. It has to be refined to address a whole different set of circumstances and the wild west days are gone. There are 300 million extra citizens to look after and dwindling renewable resources.
LessHypeMoreFact

Toronto, Canada

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37485
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to learn some real history, not the "social studies" that they teach in today's socialist-minded public schools.
Actually, schools are not socialist at all. The term means 'fiat decisions' as opposed to private elite decisions. As long as those decisions are in the 'public good', all government is 'socialism' as it creates fiat laws and penalties to prevent abuses. That includes both individual socialism (i.e social insurance) but also farm bills, defense contracts and all other corporate welfare such as subsidies.

The right wing has TRIED to redefine socialism as 'welfare for the poor' so as to make it an insult but it doesn't really work if you know what the term means.
Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
Our country was at its greatest in 1900. American industry was the mightiest in the world. American railroads had more miles of track and more rolling stock than all the rest of the world combined. American industry produced more goods than all of Europe combined. We mined half of all the coal mined in the world. The majority of the oil used in the world came from American wells. The U.S.A. was the world's greatest oil exporting nation.
Ah, yes the 'good old days' of pollution, rich resources being wasted at a prodigious rate to fuel quick profits (capitalism) and slave labor. But the problem with profligate and intense industrialization is that you end up running OUT of those rich resources fast. By 1930's in fact. Then you have to try to take them from OTHER countries (globalization) that then decide they need them for themselves. Like having a party on your credit card and then getting the bills coming due.. Works for the stupid and the ignorant like 'Coal is King'. They never see the consequences, only the party.
Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
Government did not subsidize any of that. None. Zero. Government didn't start subsidizing things that it deemed to be "in the public good" until the 1930s. Most of the things that it deemed "in the public good" were things that would not pay a profit and never did pay a profit.
The problem was that the resources were getting lower grade and industrialization was starting to see labor as the 'enemy'. This meant that instead of the gold watch and pension, people were kicked out of work with nothing. The result was that the government had to take over the job of seeing to the health and welfare of those that were 'discarded' temporarily in order that they be available to the company when it regained it's senses or needed to expand again. With the move to automation, this has gotten even worse, and to some degree the 'working poor' have become entrenched as a subclass, due to the support system allowing business to pay even LESS attention to 'human assets'.
Coal is King

Kuttawa, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37486
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OzRitz wrote:
<quoted text>
You just made my point as to where real hard line conservatives want to be, "living in the past". Well the past has long gone, and you know as well as anyone, everything America once did can now be done off shore. In most cases at half the cost, so any business worth it's salt goes where the money is, not where you want it to be. So the smart thing would be, to create new industries that can't so easily be exported off shore. Clean Energy being one of them, yet this business has to compete against subsidised non clean producers. The model that you are promoting that built America does not apply in the 21st century I'm sorry but that is fact. It has to be refined to address a whole different set of circumstances and the wild west days are gone. There are 300 million extra citizens to look after and dwindling renewable resources.
Yes. The minimalist government, low taxes, low spending, free market model that I advocate BUILT America. We had great industries, working people worked, and there were jobs for them to do. The socialist welfare-nanny state, nationalize, regulate, subsidize every hare brained scheme that some quack dreams up that you advocate has been DESTROYING it since 1932.

Since: Mar 09

Penrose, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#37487
Jul 28, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Coal is King wrote:
<quoted text>
You need to learn some real history, not the "social studies" that they teach in today's socialist-minded public schools.
Our country was at its greatest in 1900. American industry was the mightiest in the world. American railroads had more miles of track and more rolling stock than all the rest of the world combined. American industry produced more goods than all of Europe combined. We mined half of all the coal mined in the world. The majority of the oil used in the world came from American wells. The U.S.A. was the world's greatest oil exporting nation.
Government did not subsidize any of that. None. Zero. Government didn't start subsidizing things that it deemed to be "in the public good" until the 1930s. Most of the things that it deemed "in the public good" were things that would not pay a profit and never did pay a profit.
It has been decades since I have been in school so what history I learned hasn't been from that!:)

You need to go back to school and learn how the government subsidized the railroads.

Most of the capital investment needed to build the railroad were got from selling government guaranteed bonds (granted per mile of completed track) to interested investors. The financial incentives and bonds would hopefully cover most of the initial capital investment needed to build the railroad. The bonds would be paid back by the sale of government granted land and prospective passenger and freight income. In addition to the railroad land grants which the railroads sold at low cost to pay back their government backed bonds (all were repaid) the 37th United States Congress passed the Homestead Acts which were several United States federal laws that sold an applicant 160 acres (65 ha) of unclaimed government owned land, typically called a "homestead", at low cost when the applicant did some prescribed work on it. There was now a strong and relatively low cost incentive for the settlement of the west which many thousands took advantage of. The railroads started new population growth and potential population growth induced many other railroads to be built and connected to the transcontinental railroad to serve communities and states off the original main track. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Transconti...

I know, the awful government made the coal barons quit using child labor to sort coal and made the owners improve their mine safety.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

76 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 8 min Grey Ghost 1,095,218
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 16 min RACE 97,745
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 44 min Jacques from Ottawa 176,672
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 1 hr Ace 49,241
IL Who do you support for Governor in Illinois in ... (Oct '10) 1 hr Cold hard facts 3,898
Animal Rescue Group: Man Charged with Arizona M... (Oct '12) 1 hr Punish him good 3
Amy 8-19 1 hr Pippa 12
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••