Accepting Change is a Happier Path!

My Recent Posts

Each day when we wake up, whether we realize it or not, things have changed.

Accepting changes as positive creations of the universe, allows us to learn and create a new story of how life is unfolding, based on the NOW. Bob Dylan said in 1964; "the times they are a changin", and he was right. 

 

Let’s look at one specific example, US Electricity power generation, and specifically the number of people employed in the various sectors. Coal is one which got a lot of coverage, and from the emotional reactions one would think that this industry employed a high percentage of the US workforce. If we “get the men back in the ground” we will be on our way to making “America Great Again”.  Well here are the stats from Forbes;

  1. Solar- 373,807 people employed
  2. Wind- 101,738
  3. Coal- 86,035
  4. Nuclear- 78,156
  5. Natural gas- 52,125
  6. Advanced gas- 36,157
  7. Oil and Petroleum- 12,840

 

We would all save ourselves a lot of anxiety, if we would more quickly accept change. The problem is that humans tend to cling to the behavioral patterns they have developed in the past. But the past is no longer where we live.  Add to that the pack dynamics, where the group or tribe one belongs to, is even more resistant to change than the individual. Our human tendency is towards living in the past and fearing the future. We are hard-wired that way from our evolutionary past, however it does not serve us well now.

The best path is to not resist. Rather than struggle, why not adapt to changes and develop resilience and make it fun to decide the best way forward, knowing that you can never go back. Or in other words, make way for the new normal! You will be happier, and live life with less stress. 

Comments

Autumn Cote Added Jul 28, 2018 - 7:23am
Please note, it’s against the rules to post articles here unless you comment on the work of others.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 28, 2018 - 8:01am
Something I do always, Autumn. :)
Dino Manalis Added Jul 28, 2018 - 8:17am
 Change must be positive and hopeful, not negative and depressing!
Jeff Jackson Added Jul 28, 2018 - 8:20am
Interesting facts, Stephen. Three Mile Island ruined Nuclear, along with the fact of radiation lasting hundreds of thousand of years with nowhere the toxic stuff. Did you know that the greater fuel efficiency and fewer people taking cars is actually threatening the highway system in the long run? Change sometimes comes real hard, but it comes nonetheless.
Leroy Added Jul 28, 2018 - 8:48am
Good point, Stephen.  We should all be willing to accept change.  I wish many of those here would get over the Clinton loss to Trump and accept that he is president rather than persistently claim that his presidency is illegitimate.  Whether you like him or not, he is the American president.  Get over it already.
 
You never seemed to make a point with electricity generation.  I am confused.  Are you suggesting that we accept solar and wind as the future because so many more are employed in this sector?  I'd wager that most of those engaged with wind and solar have temporary jobs.  Much of it is caused by government subsidies.  When the subsidies run dry, so will the jobs.  Very little of the electricity consumed comes from solar.  It's debatable that even with the subsidies that homeowners actually benefit over the long term from solar cell panel installations.  I think we will find out in ten to fifteen years.  I'm wagering that most homeowners will find that solar panels are a lot like swimming pools when they go to sell their houses.  They are a liability.  My neighbor had solar panels installed on his eleven to twelve-year-old roof.  The roof has twenty-five-year shingles, but they won't last that long.  The roofers took shortcuts.  He had leaks after the installation of the panels.  Some shingles have already been blown off during a storm.  He may get twenty years out of the shingles with some patching along the way.  About the time he reaches breakeven with subsidies, he will have to have the panels removed to install a new roof.  I imagine that it will cost as much or more than the original installation.  And, if he still wants solar panels, he will have to have them reinstalled, this time without subsidies.  Maybe it is good for employment.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 28, 2018 - 9:44am
So true Dino, and we have the power to frame how we accept change and make it a positive. 
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 28, 2018 - 9:45am
Great fact Jeff! 3-mile Island really 'woke' us to the fact that nuclear was not the long time energy answer we had hoped. 
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 28, 2018 - 9:51am
I agree Leroy, we do have to accept the present situation, stop the emotional outbursts, and focus energy on moving forward. If people have a problem with the current leader than focus on the next elections. 
I am not saying solar is the ultimate answer, and I am aware that a high% of electricity generated is done by fossil fuels. Just that these are the people employed now. And your point about upgrading solar installations, especially as new technology is introduced, is quite valid I think with keeping those people working. 
Jeff Michka Added Jul 28, 2018 - 12:56pm
It was fun having a sound company called "Three Mile Island Sound and Light."  When Ronnie Ray gun was trickling down and forgetting who he was, we haD a governor we calleded Dixie Lee Death Ray, that advocated a chicken in every pot and a nuclear power plant in their backyard.  WSPP (whoops) went the way of the dodo, bond holders holding the bag, screaming because the plants weren't built and they didn't make, but lost millions.  Awwwwwww.  "No risk" investments are real as fairy dust.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 28, 2018 - 1:01pm
Thanks for the comment Jeff. There is risk in everything, but it is all about reducing the risk with sound thought and non-emotional analysis of where things are at. 
opher goodwin Added Jul 28, 2018 - 4:07pm
Stephen - I think we are inherently conservative and become fixed in our own narrow confines. For most people this occurs in childhood and they rarely break out of the mold created by parents. 
Instead of learning from experience we merely choose the experiences and friends that reinforce our fixed ideas.
That is why religions work on the psychology of kids. Get 'em young and you've got them for life.
The ability to think and change is rare.
opher goodwin Added Jul 28, 2018 - 4:09pm
Stephen - huge strides are being made in non-polluting renewables. It does not take much to see they are the future.
Hopefully fusion energy will be cracked in the near future and a whole new world will open up - or else they'll be major advances in batteries and energy storage.
Those seem to be the holy grail to me.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Jul 28, 2018 - 4:39pm

Solar- 373,807 people employed

That means it is LESS efficient. So to pay for the solar power, one has to include the payroll of 373,807 people!  Solar power is expensive, and requires MORE manpower. Labor is expensive. Oil is the least expensive!
 
So with regular tornadoes in the Midwest---how many Solar Farms will be taken out by tornadoes? Let's see, restringing power lines and power poles, or buying new solar panels on new platforms? What is easier and faster?   NOT Solar panels!
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 28, 2018 - 4:43pm
Thanks so much for the great comments Opher. 
I wonder though what % of children choose not to follow the mold their parents cast them in? My guess is 30% will explore the outside world IF they move away from home. And will the internet affect the numbers who explore outside their county, within this decade? 
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 28, 2018 - 4:45pm
I agree Opher, just a matter of time before renewables become the dominant energy source. Fossil fuel is pulling out every dirty trick in the book to keep their marketshare for as long as possible, but it is just a matter of time.
Dr. Rupert Green Added Jul 28, 2018 - 4:57pm
@Hunter. 
"Each day when we wake up, whether we realize it or not, things have changed.
Accepting changes as positive creations of the universe, allows us to learn and create a new story of how life is unfolding, based on the NOW. "
 
Quite true, but a hallmark of our democracy has been the reflection and the stability accorded by resistance to change. A student of gov. 101 will learn of the foot-dragging by the bureaucrats can thwart the arbitrary and capricious  (impulsive and reckless) action of uninformed or misguided leaders. Thus, President Trump's call for a wall can remain in the pipeline for 5 years if the bureaucrats feel it is unsound. Given your argument, President Trump's call for a wall is constructed in one year. A year later, it was found to be a major source of flooding and erosion of farmland.  Was the quick acceptance of change wise? I am sure you can find major projects or buildings that were demolished or scaled down because of flaws brought on by rush. In Jamaica, a thing called new math was implemented and it so upset the people, it had to be abandoned. I believe the same happened here why we are one of the industrialized countries that have not adopted the metric system.
 
Indeed, for good reasons, no professionals fear change such as educators.  I will argue that resistance will avoid groupthink that causes lemmings to all jump to their death over the cliff.
Ryan Messano Added Jul 28, 2018 - 5:34pm
Per Ardua, Ad Aspera
 
Fire is the test of gold, Adversity of a strong man.
Seneca
opher goodwin Added Jul 28, 2018 - 5:55pm
Stephen - I don't know. It seems that most Americans don't even own a passport and have a very rudimentary idea of the rest of the world. It's a very insular society. It is what creates these strange attitudes. I've noticed this whole frontiers attitude too. It's as if the very idea of civilisation is an anathema yet they want to rule the world and be better than everyone else.
I guess it's the confusion of being such a nascent nation.
opher goodwin Added Jul 28, 2018 - 5:56pm
Stephen - in the meantime the planet suffers and we'll all pay the price.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 28, 2018 - 6:11pm
Dr Green, a great counterpoint you make, and a very valid one. 
Following like lemmings is not something we want to do. Be careful not to follow someone who whips people up and relies on emotion, is a valid point. Free individualistic thought will reduce that risk.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 28, 2018 - 6:14pm
Not sure I would say most Americans Opher, would need to study some stats on that. It is just that this segment of America have a giant megaphone right now. 
Jeff Michka Added Jul 28, 2018 - 8:33pm
I didn't realize ol Lindsey is one of the Koch Bros, but I guess that explains the beard ("They won't recognize me.")
TexasLynn Added Jul 28, 2018 - 11:00pm
I appreciate Leroy bringing a lot of this into perspective. 
 
The post implies that the number of employed should be a deciding factor in future energy generation.  It shouldn't.  The post intentionally neglects to look at the efficiency of the energy generated per employee (or better yet per dollar) nor does it even consider the percentage of overall energy generated per source.  It neglects to look at how many of these jobs are created by government largess.  It fails to on so many levels.
 
Bull all arguments on both sides can be settled with one stroke of the legal/legislative pen.  No subsidies.  No tax breaks.  No nothing.  Let each and every means of generating power stand on its own two feet. 
 
It is my suspicion that on their own, solar and wind can't cut it.  I don't know for sure because the propaganda is hard to wade through.  I personally know of wind farm projects cancelled when the government subsidies ran out.  It’s my nature to ask, “Why is that, if wind and solar are such good and efficient means of generating power and fossil fuel generation is a thing of the past?”
 
BUT, as stated above, there is an easy way to find out. 
 
We likely won't find out, because those pushing the green agenda KNOW those methods aren't viable in the free market.  You guys (on the left) suspect as much also... but have never had a problem with government forcing your agenda on all us ignorant deplorables.
Ken Added Jul 29, 2018 - 2:52am
Interesting facts, Stephen. Three Mile Island ruined Nuclear, along with the fact of radiation lasting hundreds of thousand of years with nowhere the toxic stuff.
 
Lol!  how many died from 3 mile island...can you get the number above 0?   Nope, you can't.  hundreds of thousands of years? Lol  Nagasaki and Hiroshima have been active ever since the bombings.  It didn't even take 100 years, let alone hundreds of thousands of years.  fear mongering is wonderful for the left to push their agenda...
 
 
opher goodwin Added Jul 29, 2018 - 7:28am
Ken - me thinks you hide behind a charade. Of course people died as a result of Three Mile Island. They also died from Chernobyl and Windscale.
The background radiation was raised and it induced cancers. It is just impossible to determined which were caused by background radiation and which were a direct result of the radiation released. That's where the squirming comes in.
We do know the ones directly killed at Chernobyl - 47. But the real numbers are in thousands.
Michael B. Added Jul 29, 2018 - 8:31am
Hmmm...this post seems to be atypical from you Stephen. You almost sound like an HR manager who is about to tell someone that they are being let go, or in general telling someone that they are about to be force-fed a giant shit sandwich, lol.
 
Ahhh yes, what to do about power? I read somewhere that around 80% of France's electricity is nuclear. They build a more-or-less standard design, whereas in the U.S. they are all unique, and no two plants are the same. Another factor which I think will come more and more into play will be water desalinization and purification. Both are intensely energy-intensive, and we have yet to find the technology to make relatively cheap fresh water in sufficient volumes. In addition to being powerless, many will be very thirsty, too...enough to to go war over. NASA and the JPL are currently working on a satellite called SWOT, Surface Water and Ocean Topography, which is going to map all of the water of the Earth.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 29, 2018 - 8:51am
Lindsay, in the long run though, don't you think it is better to employ people, as opposed to the environmental cost incurred with fossil fuels? I would rather breathe the sweat of human beings, than noxious fumes from petro-chemicals. 
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 29, 2018 - 9:00am
Texas, you make good points however you assume that we have no problems with raping the planet(our home) of resources and worrying about what this home is going to be like for our future generations to live in. We have opposing perspectives on how things are. I believe the number employed should be part of the long term solution to many things. And number 2 you think anything to do with GREEN, is a leftist plot hatched by a syndicate of leftist thinkers whose only goal is to piss people off with all this nonsense. You cannot understand my perspective and I certainly cannot understand yours. But that is the reason for this forum, imo. :)
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 29, 2018 - 9:07am
Ken, I am not pushing any agenda for left, right or center, my agenda is for the cosmic universe to be in greater harmony, if you really want to know. 
(and check out how that Russian nuclear facility accident is working out for the people that live around the area- YIKES!)
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 29, 2018 - 9:13am
Michael, an interesting observation! I can tell you that I recently retired from the Corporate world(after 37.5 years of continual employment), so perhaps this event has influenced my tone? hmmm
And thanks for the comments! I agree that we have more problems to solve than just energy. Water is HUGE, probably more so than energy.  However I am optimistic that with greater harmony humankind will solve these problems. 
Michael B. Added Jul 29, 2018 - 10:03am
They seem to be making progress. For example, there are now solar-powered water purification units about the size of a suitcase, but I think the volumes produced barely meet one person's daily needs for hydrating themselves alone, but as technology improves, so will everything else. I think that's the way to go in the developing world, which are in areas where the Sun is out much, much more, and people will have greater control. Of course, all is well until some warlord or corrupt officials confiscates and/or steals them outright. Nobody is harsher on people than their own brethren, it seems.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 29, 2018 - 10:17am
You got that right Michael, the specter of human greed lies waiting in the psyche of all. It is the enemy of progress.  
Leroy Added Jul 29, 2018 - 10:59am
"Nagasaki and Hiroshima have been active ever since the bombings.  It didn't even take 100 years, let alone hundreds of thousands of years."
 
It's not a fair comparison, Ken.  The bombs were exploded above ground.  Most of the radiation was dispersed by the wind.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 29, 2018 - 1:22pm
Great point Leroy! 
Neil Lock Added Jul 29, 2018 - 2:40pm
Stephen: Do you have a link to the Forbes article you took the numbers from?
 
To accept a change, or not, should be a rational decision for each of us. And you should ask, is this change for the better? (for you and for others). And if the answer is "no" or even "maybe," why should you expect others to agree with your proposal for change? And where do you get the "authority" to impose it on them against their wills?
 
Further, wouldn't a general principle of "accept change" leave people open to accepting atrocities, like Hitler forbidding Jews to marry? Just because it's a new "law?"
 
Personally Stephen, I desperately do want change. I want to get rid of politics. All politics. I want change for the better - for every peaceful, honest, productive individual in the world.
John Minehan Added Jul 29, 2018 - 3:53pm
As Kerr said, "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose."  (No, I don't speak French but it still sounds better.)
TexasLynn Added Jul 29, 2018 - 4:35pm
Stephen >> You make good points
 
Logical equal good... yes.  In this case, on Leroy's coattails.
 
Stephen >> however you assume that we have no problems with raping the planet(our home) of resources and worrying about what this home is going to be like for our future generations to live in.
 
But... that wasn't a part of the argument in this post was it?  So please don't play a shell game with me...
 
I don't assume we have NO problem... just not one of a catastrophic scale you guys on the left present.  And not to the point that we should dramatically increase the cost of power for the common man just because 1) it's green or 2) it employs more people
 
My concern is to do things in the most efficient manner possible and not screw the people paying for power for agenda driven reasons.  You and Opher and others have zero problem with that.
 
Stephen >> We have opposing perspectives on how things are.
 
That would be an understatement. :)
 
Stephen >> I believe the number employed should be part of the long term solution to many things.
 
OK... but should that trump the cost per unit of energy.  If it takes 100 green energy employees to create 1 unit of energy vs 10 fossil fuel energy employees to create 1 unit of energy.  Do the ten times the jobs justify ten times the price? 
 
Based on your post and general ideology... I'd guess yes, you're OK with that.  That's because your concern is more centered on "progress" and the planet.
 
I would say no, because my concern is more centered on the standard of living of the people who will pay that cost.
 
Stephen >> And number 2 you think anything to do with GREEN, is a leftist plot hatched by a syndicate of leftist thinkers whose only goal is to piss people off with all this nonsense.
 
Completely wrong on multiple levels.
1) Not all of you guys belong to a syndicate... for many of you, it's evolved into something like a pagan religion.
2) Not "anything" but a lot of this bullshit (like the premise of this post). 
3) Your goal is not to just piss people off, but to control them for the common good (as is the goal with all leftist and socialist endeavors).
 
Stephen >> You cannot understand my perspective and I certainly cannot understand yours.
 
You certainly not understanding mine... granted.  My understanding yours... I think I've had it figured out for some time.  Leroy and a few others are consistent on nailing your perspective as well.
 
Stephen >> But that is the reason for this forum, imo. :)
 
Absolutely :)
Leroy Added Jul 29, 2018 - 6:57pm
In the US, at least where I live and have traveled, the environment is cleaner than it was 30 years ago.  And, with many more people than in the past, the environment is cleaner than it was 200 years ago.  Many of the rivers of Europe were horribly polluted back then.  With people burning coal in their houses in the big cities, the air was horrible to breathe.  It seems that as we progress towards cheaper energy, we improve the quality of life.
 
I am not worried about CO2.  Carbon is not a toxin, despite what O said.  It is debatable whether or not it has contributed to any warming, much less catastrophic warming.  If you want to talk about the associated pollution, then we have something to talk about.  I've lived in a place where I couldn't see the apartment building next to ours on some days due to pollution.  Let's focus on pollution.  Reducing it improves the quality of life.
 
Alternative energies are raising the cost of energy.  The aim is to increase the price of energy so that we use less.  That is a wrongheaded approach.  Let's go with what has helped: cheap energy.  Just imagine what we could do if energy were so cheap that it was effectively free.  We could solve so many problems such as clean drinking water across the globe.  Cheap energy is the last thing the progressives want.  That means that more people can share the earth.  More people in Africa can thrive and live decently.  If we can drive the cost of energy towards zero, just imagine how much better our lives would be.  Let's work on cheap energy, not expensive energy.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 29, 2018 - 8:08pm
Neil it was from a link on FB, I am sure that you can find it there. 
I am certainly with you on  I want change for the better - for every peaceful, honest, productive individual in the world.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 29, 2018 - 8:10pm
Leroy I want the world to have free energy as well. And I think that can happen, but not with fossil fuels.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 29, 2018 - 8:12pm
Texas, a pagan religion, seriously? 
And you and Leroy have me figured out? All I can say is wow. I do not have myself figured out and when I do get close, I change. :)
TexasLynn Added Jul 29, 2018 - 8:49pm
Stephen >> Texas, a pagan religion, seriously?
 
Oh yeah... definitely and seriously a pagan religion. I took a stab at it... but Neil Lock nailed it. Here you go, the Green religion explained (as documented by Neil)
 
The Green Religion

1) God: Gaia
  a) Her representatives on Earth: green activists 
  b) Her son: the United Nations
  c) Her cardinals: green politicians
  d) Her bishops: “scientists” that support the green agenda
  e) Her apostles: the mainstream media
  f) Her dogma: do as I say, not as I do
  g) Her faithful: collectivists, those that profit from the religion, the idiot believers
 
2) The devil: Enlightenment (a.k.a. “Lucifer”)
  a) His representatives on Earth: Every human being who doesn’t buy the green agenda without objective proof. Including individualists, libertarians, real scientists, many conservatives, and objective thinkers of all political stripes
  b) His three sons: Truth, Ethics and Justice
  c) His cardinals, bishops and priests: He has no permanent positions available
  d) His dogma: You have your religion, and I’ll have mine
  e) His apostles: All of us “heretics” who dispute the conventional wisdom when we think it’s wrong
  f) His faithful: Every human being worth the name
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
The left whores out science as it serves their purposes pimping her out to their various causes with climate change being their best John.
 
As a man of faith, I'm OK with your religion, as long as you don't make me pay for it, which is what is currently happening and what this post advocates for.
TexasLynn Added Jul 29, 2018 - 8:53pm
Stephen >> And you and Leroy have me figured out?
 
Nope... just your "perspective" and world view.
 
Stephen >> All I can say is wow.
 
Don't be too impressed... leftism isn't that complicated or varied. :)
Jeff Michka Added Jul 29, 2018 - 9:27pm
Neither is hypocritical rightism, TraitorLynn.  Yeah, "we" all want to subjugate people like you, press their families into slavery and take all your money for the collective pot to hand to the armies of brown people "invading" "good white people space."  You folks really need to go back to coal as the fuel and energy source of the future.  When you die, it won't matter what shape the world is in, right?  Plus, if you go back to coal, all the coal miners will go back to work.  Now since about 20% of them are junkies since they were last underground, might take a while for them to deliver coal.    Miner overheard: "Coal for Texas?  After I get my afternoon fix."
TexasLynn Added Jul 29, 2018 - 11:02pm
Stephen, when all is said and done, I ask for only one thing. 
 
No subsidies.  A level playing field.
 
If the "change" you put your faith in and proselytize to us is truly the future, then it will win on its own merit.  If not, it will go the way of every other snake oil industry.
 
If you truly believed, I think you would agree… but you don’t.  Not really.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 30, 2018 - 7:10am
Texas, thanks for that outline of how leftist thinking is akin to a cult religion. But these points do not resonate with me, or at least I don't think so. 
I am very spiritual, and my core beliefs are probably a lot closer to yours, then you can imagine. 
I do not believe the creator is gender specific. 
I am very adamant about "do unto others as you would have others do unto you". 
And I do not know very much about the United Nations. 
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 30, 2018 - 7:14am
Texas, what if your neighbor declared, I am going to make my own power because it is cheaper. But he or she built an incinerator which spewed fumes into your yard. Would you put up with the toxic fumes because it is cheaper- even if he or she said, I will give you a deal on your power too? 
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 30, 2018 - 7:35am
Jeff, I am perplexed at how many on the right do feel that there is a sinister leftist force at work behind the scenes. 
Doug Plumb Added Jul 30, 2018 - 7:37am
re "Or in other words, make way for the new normal! You will be happier, and live life with less stress. "
 
  I think most of the Bolsheviks in Russia would have agreed to that back before the big change.
  Since you are a believer, you must think the Germans went along with the holocaust.
  Stephen, there are many highly accomplished people trying to tell you the truth. You will not listen because the Jewish media will not tell you about them, or the truth about the Bolsheviks.
 
Try listening to a professor of medicine explain what is actually going on.
 
"Don't worry be happy" is a good philosophy for nine year olds, not adults.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 30, 2018 - 7:41am
Or if you don't like doctors, try a professor of English Lit. Other kinds of Professors E. Michael Jones, Michael Hoffman
 
Those are just three that I can think of off the top of my head. In a day, I can come up with 300 full PhD's all saying the same thing. You will not find their work on Amazon or on TV.
Stephen Hunter Added Jul 30, 2018 - 7:43am
Doug, I would rather live my life in peace, and we can learn a lot from the carefree attitude of a 9 year old. We were not put on this earth to struggle eternally. Yes there are challenges we all go through but living in a constant state of fear is not the normal I choose anyway.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 30, 2018 - 9:48am
Living in fear is only rational when there is something to fear. Adults face these fears. Hiding from rational fear rather than dealing with it is not rational. Irrationalism is dangerous.
If every single astronomy book published on Amazon said the moon was made of cheese, and if anyone that pointed out that cows cannot fly was censored and labeled as a delusional conspiracy theorist, people would assume that there is ample evidence that the moon was made of cheese, and therefore cows must be able to fly.
All these people that get censored and labeled as delusional are saying the same thing.
Doug Plumb Added Jul 30, 2018 - 9:53am
Its not exclusively Jewish, and many great people have been trying to stop this conspiracy (Luciferianism / "Free" Masonary). Henry Makow writes about a Jewish investigator into illuminati sex slavery, torture etc. A great many, maybe most of these great people have been Jewish.
TexasLynn Added Jul 30, 2018 - 1:33pm
Stephen >> Texas, what if your neighbor declared, I am going to make my own power because it is cheaper. But he or she built an incinerator which spewed fumes into your yard.
 
You keep moving the shell around and getting me to pick the argument I must now defend.  First it was number of employees, then saving the planet, now pollution.  I don't think your game is ever designed for me to find the ball under the shell.
 
As for this latest straw-man... my neighbor can do anything he wants on his land as long as he follows existing law.  I suspect in your example... he isn't.
 
As for as his "deal"; I guess that depends on exactly how bad the fumes are and if he is following the law.  It gets back to cost/benefit analysis which the left NEVER does in this regard.  You will always side with your god (the earth) at the expense of people.
 
There are laws concerning pollution.  I'm in favor of having them (within common sense reason, of course). 
 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
 
I will throw the question back at you one more time... would you, personally, accept "no subsides" for any source of energy and let the market/people decide?
 
C'mon... :P ... If enough people decided that curtailing global warming is worth 2x 5x or 10x the price for energy, problem solved.  If the technology catches up (like you think it will) problem solved.
TexasLynn Added Jul 30, 2018 - 1:55pm
Stephen >> But these points do not resonate with me, or at least I don't think so.
 
Most on the left would take offense to the depiction because of their pride in their secular humanism.  They will always deny the religion religious elements of their ideology.
 
I'm not saying this applies to all leftist; just to enough of them to be evident.
 
Stephen >> I am very spiritual
 
Good for you.  Good luck on that path.
 
I’ve never found complete agreement on spiritual matters a condition for understanding or common ground.
 
Stephen >> ...and my core beliefs are probably a lot closer to yours, than you can imagine.
 
I mean no disrespect, but I doubt it.
 
I'm a Christian, and not in the generic sense of a general belief in a "creator"; but in the sense that Jesus Christ was literally God, who walked the Earth so that we might be reconciled with Him.
 
Acceptance or rejection of THAT fact would be the measure I would use to judge closeness to me or the world.
 
Living by the command to "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" is admirable; but it does not even begin to encompass the gospel (good news) I believe and by which I live (through Him).
Doug Plumb Added Jul 30, 2018 - 2:40pm
Left wing environmental policies, from purely both an economic viewpoint and a "save the earth" viewpoint are just plain stupid. Not enough of the general public has the technical sense to see this. The media is not going to inform people about the whole truth of Green evironmentalism.
 
re "Living by the command to "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" is admirable; but it does not even begin to encompass the gospel (good news) I believe and by which I live (through Him)."


 
No, I agree, but its a basis from which to write laws.


 
TexasLynn Added Jul 30, 2018 - 2:59pm
Doug >> No, I agree, but its a basis from which to write laws.
 
I can see that... as long as you apply a healthy dose of common sense and skepticism towards said laws. I believe that many socialist have the best of "intentions". One could even say that they believe they would want to live under such laws.
 
The problem arises that theory and practice of such laws are two entirely different things.
Neil Lock Added Jul 30, 2018 - 3:59pm
Stephen: We would all save ourselves a lot of anxiety, if we would more quickly accept change.
 
Indeed so, as long as the change is for the better. So why don't you simply accept "climate change?" Whether or not it's caused by human beings?
 
It seems to me that your argument in this article is self-contradictory.
 
TexasLynn Added Jul 30, 2018 - 4:53pm
Neil Lock >> Indeed so, as long as the change is for the better.  So why don't you simply accept "climate change?"
 
Now that's just crazy talk.  Accepting change is what WE do, not our betters.
 
But I see your error.  You were looking for consistency in logic and application.  Nope; doesn't apply here.
 
The next time you're confused just think of Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio, and every other Hollywood hypocrite pushing this stuff as they jet-set around the world.  When they say "we" need to reduce our "carbon footprint", understand, they just mean "you".
Doug Plumb Added Jul 30, 2018 - 8:22pm
re "I can see that... as long as you apply a healthy dose of common sense and skepticism towards said laws. I believe that many socialist have the best of "intentions". One could even say that they believe they would want to live under such laws.
 
The problem arises that theory and practice of such laws are two entirely different things.
"
You should read a good book on law. I would recommend Savigny on History of the Roman law. This is a really good book on Jurisprudence. Any book published on Jurisprudence will be good. Many are free, get an old one.
  Pufendorf is good because he constantly references the NT - and OT I think. I read him years ago. Bentham, the second book is also very good in that it explains Bentham's real views on Utilitarianism, very different than from the Satanist, Mills.
  The problems you describe are characteristic to any law system, but the Romans were very smart and worked on this for a long time.
The Mogget Added Jul 31, 2018 - 1:29pm
Here is another set of numbers that may interest you. Dirty power is very dangerous compared to clean power. Coal mining is a dangerous job. Who in their right mind would try to protect coal miner jobs? Lets outsource that crap.
 
Mortality Rate (deaths/trillionkWhr)
Coal – global average            100,000 
Coal – China                           170,000 
Coal – U.S.                              10,000
Oil                                           36,000
Natural Gas                            4,000
Biofuel/Biomass                     24,000
Solar (rooftop)                       440
Wind                                      150
Hydro – global average         1,400 
Hydro – U.S.                           5 

Nuclear – global average      90w/ Chern&Fukush)
Nuclear – U.S.                        0.1 

Recent Articles by Writers Stephen Hunter follows.