vxbush 7/14/2022 6:12:44 AM

1

vxbush 7/14/2022 6:12:56 AM

2

buzzsawmonkey 7/14/2022 6:56:18 AM

3

Actual scientists make actual sense about "anthropogenic climate change." 

Of course, it won't make the slightest difference to Congress, but it's nice to have it out there.

My own take, of course, is that it doesn't matter in the slightest whether "anthropogenic climate change" is real or not.  All the people who want to "regulate the planetary climate" and demand the power and unlimited resources to do so are people who have proven themselves incapable of competently managing and running recently-built, closed, man-made systems. They cannot competently run power grids, or municipal water systems or trash pickup; they cannot competently maintain, let alone repair, the "roads and bridges" they are always prating about; they cannot competently run or maintain the public housing they increasingly want people to live in, or the public transportation systems that they want people to rely on. The best we can hope for is that if any immediate genuine problem arises, the response won't be too incompetent.

Occasional Reader 7/14/2022 8:48:26 AM

4

Reply to buzzsawmonkey in 3:

Not to mention: 

"the SEC’s proposed rule change (taken without any Congressional authority) to make all publicly traded companies adopt climate change mitigation policies.

This is, quite frankly, fascistic. 

vxbush 7/14/2022 9:07:25 AM

5

In #3 buzzsawmonkey said: Of course, it won't make the slightest difference to Congress, but it's nice to have it out there.

It's also a good-level summary of a topic that includes the bigger issues of who should handle scientific issues, scientists or governments. I'm keeping it for that reason. 

JCM 7/14/2022 9:09:19 AM

6

Reply to Occasional Reader in 4:

Given West Virginia v EPA recently they should know better.

It should be a simple matter to bring a case based on that and slap SEC down...

Maybe go farther go after Wickard and get all these unconstitutional agency shut down.

Hey, I can dream can't I?

Occasional Reader 7/14/2022 9:15:04 AM

7

Reply to JCM in 6:

The word for the day is: Gleichschaltung

buzzsawmonkey 7/14/2022 9:16:05 AM

8

In #4 Occasional Reader said: This is, quite frankly, fascistic. 

Hell, everyone with any sense knew that fascistic control of business was coming down the pike when Biden started talking about using the War Procurement Act (or whatever it's called) to solve the Great Formula Shortage that Biden's own administration caused. 

They've held off going full-tilt into nationalization until after the midterms---which would be about when these SEC regs would appear.  Personally, much as I'd love to see the landslide everyone's talking about take place, I think that the Republicans are going to manage to blow it by a combination of their own fecklessness and unchecked vote fraud---after which the roller coaster will really get going.

JCM 7/14/2022 9:29:32 AM

9

Reply to buzzsawmonkey in 8:

They signaled that with Obama / Warren's "you didn't build that".

vxbush 7/14/2022 9:37:56 AM

10

In #8 buzzsawmonkey said: Personally, much as I'd love to see the landslide everyone's talking about take place, I think that the Republicans are going to manage to blow it by a combination of their own fecklessness and unchecked vote fraud---after which the roller coaster will really get going.

Yup. I'm expecting the blowout to be a simple puff of hot air. I would love to be wrong.

buzzsawmonkey 7/14/2022 9:48:22 AM

11

In #10 vxbush said:

I don't know whether the Palooka Party will take its usual dive or merely wimp out---or a combination of the two---but if they don't at least score a few major upsets the Left is going to run wild.

JCM 7/14/2022 11:34:59 AM

12

Reply to buzzsawmonkey in 11:

It should by all rights be a bigger turnover than 2010, but I don't expect as much as 1894.

The Palooka Party just doesn't have what it takes to capitalize on the current political party.

That will attenuate the turnover wave, add in the levels of fraud I suspect occur around the country combined with the feckless (R)s and hope for a mere majority.

Occasional Reader 7/14/2022 12:33:14 PM

13

In #12 JCM said: but I don't expect as much as 1894.

I wasn't around in 1894, so I don't recall how that went... : )

JCM 7/14/2022 1:32:02 PM

14

Reply to Occasional Reader in 13:

Large flip in history, 100 + seats in The House.

JCM 7/14/2022 3:09:41 PM

15

Put this in your watch list.

I'm seeing memes showing up, the theme of them is how repaying home mortgage loans is unfair and only makes the rich, richer.