Dear America: You should be mad as hell about this!

[ginwilly]

North Carolina is absolutely the ass, and Fayetteville is the anus.

The conclusion that talk of cities makes no sense, is the conclusion I was trying to lead Ginwilly to. The mixing of names, neocon, colonialist and dickhead, is my colorful way of describing a certain ignorant mindset that people who oppose progress share. Maybe New York is the brain, maybe DC is.

Maybe logic consists more in rhapsody than rhetoric, the abstract concepts better conveyed in non conventional terms. If you don't want to understand it you won't.

Things are so much more complicated than central planners grasp. It's either that or the ego is so immense they feel they really do know what's best. There is a reason some people (who are able) choose to live in a high rise penthouse with millions of neighbors while others choose to live more reclusive and sprawling. It would be unfair of either to make decisions and policies for how the other should live. What works in San Fran may not work in Charlotte. Hell what works in Charlotte may not work in Durham.

What's best for the individual is what's best for the whole, not the other way around.

 

[abandonconflict]

I'm OK with amendments too. There was no amendment to expand the commerce clause, it was simply legislated by the Supreme Court. Thanks for the drug war, FDR.

Alright I'll read about the Commerce Clause.

 

[ginwilly]

I'm OK with amendments too. There was no amendment to expand the commerce clause, it was simply legislated by the Supreme Court. Thanks for the drug war, FDR.

I don't think people realize what Wikard v Filburn has done to our country. Today's SCOTUS is looking at that decision while weighing the health care bill. To think it was 9-0 in favor of telling a man he could only grow so much on his own property, lovely. FDR, now there's a man who knew how to fundamentally change America.

 

[abandonconflict]

OK, I think I know why you are drawing a connection between FDR and the drug war. Good one, blame the libruls...wait no they are all in it together. The Commerce Clause is the legal precedent for the federal government to regulate (pretty much anything), the supreme court shot down so many of his New Deal acts, but suddenly started accepting some, odd.

 

[ginwilly]

I linked the wiki in my last post abandon if you aren't familiar with the case. It would probably be 5-4 the other way today and we would have a completely different America today. Not saying better or worse, just different. That decision shaped a lot of future federal cases.

 

[abandonconflict]

 

[Padawanbater2]

Exactly ^^^

That spells it out pretty clear...

That's simply not right.

 

[canndo]

i never met a farmer who planned his planting based on anything other than the price he could get for the crop from actual buyers. If somebody offers me a contract to buy cow turds at $5 a bushel ill grab a shovel and start flippin. until somebody signs the contract though, cow turds are still only worth $20 - $50 a ton as fertilizer depending on location. thats real economics. theres lotsa doctors and dentists who sit on their humps because the people around aint sick. supply doesnt mean shit if nobody is buying.

I once had a company that sold b/100 (biodiesel, pure). I was eventually forced out for reasons I won't go into now, however, I got to know some of the history of some of the feedstock for my business. It could be argued (although rather poorly) that in this case, supply created demand.

Big Ag had been looking for ways to keep the land it controled in rotation and found that the nitrogen fixing properties of soy fit the bill nicely, after a time, it had surpluses of soy. At the time there was no demand for soy unless they were willing to ship it overseas as this country didn't use it except rarely as oil. Of course soy could always be used as feed for livestock but this brought low returns. What large corporations tend to do is create "filler" products that it can slip into our foodstream in order to boost the price of their crops. And so we saw soy filler placed in our pre-prepared foods. After a while we saw soy nuts, soy "milk", increases in tofu production, soy plastics and the like - finally, about 7 years ago they managed to get the government to offer them a one dollar per gallon "rebate" on bio. We have seen the same thing occuring with corn and corn products - until the public finally took issue. (we who used secondary feedstock only got 50 cents - quite the opposite of what would make good economic sense). Now one could say that this abundance of seemingly useless "created" demand - except of course there really is no "demand" for soy milk or soy filler, there is only a demand for cow's milk and cheap meat.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

If we things aren't working right, government will fix it. Sure prohibition, the war on drugs and the housing market didn't work out, but those weren't really government's fault anyway. Next time government will give me a mansion, a 2012 Porsche 911, and whatever else I want. Fuck Allah, government will give me 73 virgins!

 

[Dr Kynes]

I once had a company that sold b/100 (biodiesel, pure). I was eventually forced out for reasons I won't go into now, however, I got to know some of the history of some of the feedstock for my business. It could be argued (although rather poorly) that in this case, supply created demand.

Big Ag had been looking for ways to keep the land it controled in rotation and found that the nitrogen fixing properties of soy fit the bill nicely, after a time, it had surpluses of soy. At the time there was no demand for soy unless they were willing to ship it overseas as this country didn't use it except rarely as oil. Of course soy could always be used as feed for livestock but this brought low returns. What large corporations tend to do is create "filler" products that it can slip into our foodstream in order to boost the price of their crops. And so we saw soy filler placed in our pre-prepared foods. After a while we saw soy nuts, soy "milk", increases in tofu production, soy plastics and the like - finally, about 7 years ago they managed to get the government to offer them a one dollar per gallon "rebate" on bio. We have seen the same thing occuring with corn and corn products - until the public finally took issue. (we who used secondary feedstock only got 50 cents - quite the opposite of what would make good economic sense). Now one could say that this abundance of seemingly useless "created" demand - except of course there really is no "demand" for soy milk or soy filler, there is only a demand for cow's milk and cheap meat.

soy has been an export crop for decades, while it may be "new" to the american diet, its never been a fallow crop, or a green manure crop. soy has always been tilled as a cash crop.
nitrogen fixing for fallow feilds is the province of clover, and alfalfa. if anyone wished to grow a cash crop that fixes nitrogen between their main seasons, while still bringing in more cash than livestock feed, the choice was beans. white, pinto, lima, etc etc etc... they all fix nitrogen as readily and soya, have easily accessible markets in the US canada and mexico, grow without the need for expensive defoliants or pesticides and can be stored for long periods when markets are flat. soya was never a major crop in the US untill the 70's and early 80's when the "soy is healthy" craze began and congress decided to ay on riddonkulous subsidies for their new fad crop. giant agribusinesses started tilling thousands, and eventually millions of acres just fr the subsidies, and wound up dumping millions of tons of cheap soya on the market. searching for a sucker to buy your unsaleable crop is not supply creating demand, it's MARKETING creating a market for junk

 

[canndo]

If we things aren't working right, government will fix it. Sure prohibition, the war on drugs and the housing market didn't work out, but those weren't really government's fault anyway. Next time government will give me a mansion, a 2012 Porsche 911, and whatever else I want. Fuck Allah, government will give me 73 virgins!

Government does "fix" it, not always well, but much better than if you had noone looking out for you at all.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Government does "fix" it, not always well, but much better than if you had noone looking out for you at all.

I know I wouldn't sleep well knowing government wasn't there looking out for me. I'd have to resort to something drastic, like smoke weed. I'm glad government doesn't allow me to for my own good. I don't even need to. Government cured my bipolar. Imagine what my life would be like without all those government luxuries.

 

[canndo]

I know I wouldn't sleep well knowing government wasn't there looking out for me. I'd have to resort to something drastic, like smoke weed. I'm glad government doesn't allow me to for my own good. I don't even need to. Government cured my bipolar. Imagine what my life would be like without all those government luxuries.

You pick out a few things that you are discontent with but you seem to ignore all of the safeguards afforded you, your water is likely safe, your food is on the whole safe, the drugs you need are probably safe. The simple fact that you can be assured that the food you eat has a label describing all of the contents and that the label is likely accurate, is a function of government. The fact that you can fly safely is a function of government as well.

 

[canndo]

soy has been an export crop for decades, while it may be "new" to the american diet, its never been a fallow crop, or a green manure crop. soy has always been tilled as a cash crop.
nitrogen fixing for fallow feilds is the province of clover, and alfalfa. if anyone wished to grow a cash crop that fixes nitrogen between their main seasons, while still bringing in more cash than livestock feed, the choice was beans. white, pinto, lima, etc etc etc... they all fix nitrogen as readily and soya, have easily accessible markets in the US canada and mexico, grow without the need for expensive defoliants or pesticides and can be stored for long periods when markets are flat. soya was never a major crop in the US untill the 70's and early 80's when the "soy is healthy" craze began and congress decided to ay on riddonkulous subsidies for their new fad crop. giant agribusinesses started tilling thousands, and eventually millions of acres just fr the subsidies, and wound up dumping millions of tons of cheap soya on the market. searching for a sucker to buy your unsaleable crop is not supply creating demand, it's MARKETING creating a market for junk

I'm curious as to how I was fed such a story, you seem to know what you are talking about - point is the same though, demand isn't created by supply.

 

[NoDrama]

You pick out a few things that you are discontent with but you seem to ignore all of the safeguards afforded you, your water is likely safe, your food is on the whole safe, the drugs you need are probably safe. The simple fact that you can be assured that the food you eat has a label describing all of the contents and that the label is likely accurate, is a function of government. The fact that you can fly safely is a function of government as well.

I would take a couple issues with what you siad.
Prior to 1950, what was the most people affected by salmonella poisoning from a single source?
Do more people die from illicit or prescription drugs per year in USA?
There are plenty of those things on the labels that I would not consume. Potassium Bisulfate? Yummy!
How many terrorists has the TSA caught so far?

 

[canndo]

I would take a couple issues with what you siad.
Prior to 1950, what was the most people affected by salmonella poisoning from a single source?
Do more people die from illicit or prescription drugs per year in USA?
There are plenty of those things on the labels that I would not consume. Potassium Bisulfate? Yummy!
How many terrorists has the TSA caught so far?

I don't know about prior to 1950, I do know that in prior periods salmonella was not as prevelent and sources of food were far more local, thus, outbreaks far more contained. More people die from licit drugs, by far, but this is not comparable because illicit drugs are not used at the same rate. The fact that you wouldn't eat what is labeled on food makes my point - the government insists that the manufacturer makes you aware that they are in that food. I don't know how many terrorists have been caught, nor do we know how many have been prevented from trying - either way, you can as did the previous poster continue to find flaws and shortcomings but they do not disprove the fact that we are safer in this country because of government regulations on companies.

 

[Dr Kynes]

I'm curious as to how I was fed such a story, you seem to know what you are talking about - point is the same though, demand isn't created by supply.

the stories the populace at large are fed, especially about subjects as complicated as agricultural markets, or oil imports are usually faulty, fundamentally flawed by editing or outright lies.

we dont import oil for gasoline, gasoline is a by-product of oil's fractioning at the refinery to get the parts of the oil they really want. it's garbage thats put to use as a motor fuel.

Automobiles use gasoline as a fuel source because at the turn or the 20th century, gasoline was an abundant waste product oil refineries had to dispose of, they burned it in open pits to eliminate this waste material, while the earliest automobiles ran on methane via natural gas, coal gas or propane (its all methane at the heart of the fuel regardless of source) or methyl alcohol (wood alcohol, as opposed to ethyl which is whiskey, vodka and other grain spirits, or in short, food). gasoline has proven it's adequacy as a fuel for motor vehicles, but in the quest for renewable fuel sources, Archer Daniels Midland Con Agra and others have pressed for regulation and legislation to prevent the use of methyl alcohol (made from sawdust, hay, grass clippings and old paper) claiming its Explosive (lies) dangerously toxic (while gasoline is a health tonic) creates dangerous levels of emissions (more lies) and damages the environment (damned lies) Methyl alcohol breaks down into co2 and water in minutes in the environment (some gasoline components remain active and deadly for years) burns at a lower temp, and expands more than gasoline (more energy in an engine with less heat) and can be made from stuff that is readily available in any back yard. you can make the shit in your garage, and as long as you dont drink it, its safe as any other alcohol, and before it was declared poisonous by the brilliant scientific minds in congress, it was the first choice as a medical disinfectant for nearly a century and a half. Methyl is now only available as a fuel for chafing dishes (sterno) because ethyl alcohol is made from the products ADM and Con Agra want to sell. Ethyl alcohol doesnt have the methane-like energy rich component of methyl alcohol, so it delivers much less energy per gallon. thats why E85 sucks, while the pure methyl alcohol used by Nascar, and every other racing organization except Nitro dragsters and formula one is superior.

when you get sold a story by somebody with a agenda its almost always bullshit.

 

[cannabineer]

the stories the populace at large are fed, especially about subjects as complicated as agricultural markets, or oil imports are usually faulty, fundamentally flawed by editing or outright lies.

we dont import oil for gasoline, gasoline is a by-product of oil's fractioning at the refinery to get the parts of the oil they really want. it's garbage thats put to use as a motor fuel.

Automobiles use gasoline as a fuel source because at the turn or the 20th century, gasoline was an abundant waste product oil refineries had to dispose of, they burned it in open pits to eliminate this waste material, while the earliest automobiles ran on methane via natural gas, coal gas or propane (its all methane at the heart of the fuel regardless of source) or methyl alcohol (wood alcohol, as opposed to ethyl which is whiskey, vodka and other grain spirits, or in short, food). gasoline has proven it's adequacy as a fuel for motor vehicles, but in the quest for renewable fuel sources, Archer Daniels Midland Con Agra and others have pressed for regulation and legislation to prevent the use of methyl alcohol (made from sawdust, hay, grass clippings and old paper) claiming its Explosive (lies) dangerously toxic (while gasoline is a health tonic) creates dangerous levels of emissions (more lies) and damages the environment (damned lies) Methyl alcohol breaks down into co2 and water in minutes in the environment (some gasoline components remain active and deadly for years) burns at a lower temp, and expands more than gasoline (more energy in an engine with less heat) and can be made from stuff that is readily available in any back yard. you can make the shit in your garage, and as long as you dont drink it, its safe as any other alcohol, and before it was declared poisonous by the brilliant scientific minds in congress, it was the first choice as a medical disinfectant for nearly a century and a half. Methyl is now only available as a fuel for chafing dishes (sterno) because ethyl alcohol is made from the products ADM and Con Agra want to sell. Ethyl alcohol doesnt have the methane-like energy rich component of methyl alcohol, so it delivers much less energy per gallon. thats why E85 sucks, while the pure methyl alcohol used by Nascar, and every other racing organization except Nitro dragsters and formula one is superior.

when you get sold a story by somebody with a agenda its almost always bullshit.

I will disagree with two technical points.
1) The octane numbers (which indicate suitability for piston engines) of methanol and ethanol are nearly identical.
2) Ethanol has a rather higher energy density than methanol. If you look at methylene (fuel minus water) component, it's 43.75% for methanol and 60.8% for ethanol. Satd. hydrocarbons are essentially 100% methylene and win the energy density sweepstakes. cn

 

[NoDrama]

More people die from licit drugs, by far, but this is not comparable because illicit drugs are not used at the same rate.

Are the legal licit drugs regulated?

I don't know how many terrorists have been caught, nor do we know how many have been prevented from trying - either way, you can as did the previous poster continue to find flaws and shortcomings but they do not disprove the fact that we are safer in this country because of government regulations on companies.

Over the last 11 years, ZERO terrorists have been caught by TSA, but some terrorists have been able to get past TSA. At a cost of 8% of the national Deficit we have gotten bupkis.

 

[Islam]

We needed a revolution for a long time.