Philippians 2:10-11
To argue with a person who renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead. ~ Thomas Paine
“The greatest conspiracy theory is the notion that your government cares about you”- unknown.
Now the details of her plan are some GOP conspiracy???
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...w-deal-details
The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.
It's that simple.
The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.
It's that simple.
From a friend on the Green New DUD
I have been looking into and thinking about the New Green Deal some and playing with the number a bit. My sources of information are primarily from on-line, and I tried to use several sources in order to overcome political bias. I will start by saying there are some environmental parts of the Proposal (P) that make sense if they are not taken too far. These include re-forestation of certain mountain terrains or idling non productive lands etc. However, these are minor parts of the P and are probably intended to generate more broad scale support for the crap part of the P.
The purpose of the P is to combat the impacts of Climate Change (CC).
The main short term objective of the P is to eliminate fossil fuel use for producing electricity in the USA and replace it with renewable sources (RS). Other objectives include "Living Wage" jobs for everyone that wants one by increasing government control of labor and public services. Also included is a "Living Wage for all those who cannot and WILLNOT accept a government job.
There are a bunch of objective time lines being thrown around, but the first one I looked at is the reduction of Green House Gases (GHG) by 16% by year 2025. The long term is to reduce by 70% by 2050. Cost estimates seem iffy at best but, I read where bernie says the cost to convert to RS would cost $ 1.0 trillion per year. Where is this money going to come from. bernie want to tax Wall Street, tax wealthy folk, confiscate wealth, etc. I have another suggestion. So with the 2025 horizon in mine, I offer the following.
The USA produces 6,673 Million metric tons (mt) of C02e (equivalent) GHG annually. (e) is used to standardize various forms of GHG such as methane that has a much different negative impact on CC than CO2. This pans out to be about 20 mt per person in the US. Therefore, there is a function between the size of the population and GHG production. Now I know that all individuals do not have the same GHG footprint, but for the sake of argument lets assume the relationship is 1 person per 20 mt GHG.
There are different estimates about how many people are in the US illegally. I read from 12 million to 25 million. Most lower estimates are from liberal sources who are trying to diminish the concerns by citizens. I decided to go with 20 million to make calculations simple. 20 million people X 20 mt of GHG/person = 400 Million mt GHG. This suggests that illegals are responsible for producing 6% of GHG annually in the country.
Illegals account for 1.5 Million children born per year in the US. While these kids are considered citizens, they still would not be here if there parents had not entered illegally. So, between now and the end of 2025 (our short term target date), 10.5 Million additional children will have been added to our population due to illegals. 10.5 X 20 mt of GHG/person = 210 Million mt of additional GHG will be added to the atmosphere, or an additional 3%.
By 2025, illegals will be responsible for almost half of the equivalent GHG we are targeting for removal. If we removed all illegals from this country we would be able to achieve 50% of the GND goal without raising any taxes on anyone.
So, where do we get the other $500 Billion per year?
This is where the GND gets interesting. The GND proposal also strives to give every person in the USA a guaranteed living income whether they want to work or not. After looking at different estimates of what a "Living Income" is, I settled on $26,000 per year. I think this is lower than what the liberals would recommend. But here goes anyway. My bet is that if illegals were given the choice of picking beans for $5.00 per hour, or getting $26,000 for setting around camp, they would choose camp. So, current population of illegals (20 Million) X $26,000 = $520 Billion. Bingo!
Now the bonus. According to the U.S. Dept. of whoever keeps these stats., illegals cost American tax payers $116 Billion annually, and I bet that is lowballing big time.
Bottom line. If we deported all people residing in this country illegally, we could reach the 2025 goal of GHG reduction and have enough money left over to make DACA immigrants legal residents.
Now I know there are a lot of assumption surrounding my calculations. Still, even if I am off a ways, it is still clear that this whole GHG issue is amplified somewhat by having 20 Million additional folk producing GHGs and sucking resources that could be used to solve problems for citizens. It also shows how stupid and pathetic the left is by proposing ridiculous/costly solutions for a speculative problem, and at the same time demanding open borders. I wonder what the left would say to the idea that their open border option is also increasing the GHG emissions they are so intent on eliminating. I know how they would react. They don't give a shit because addressing Climate Change is not their intent. Their intent is to bring America down.
Forgive me for being so long.
Ok, I've got an El Camino full of rampage here, so what's the plan?If you can't win a gun fight against a lightly-trained individual during broad daylight with 88 rounds of 30-06, I'm not sure you'd be able to do it with... any other firearm.
-Fjallhrafn
The illegal calculation is just looking at direct effects, the real effect is the secondary effects. Cheap labor drives down housing costs per/sqft and reduces the cost of unskilled labor for things like gardeners and lansdscape jobs.
With out illegals lowering the wages of home buildings, the price per sq ft for new housing would go up. Smaller houses use less energy (electricity production), use less resources to be made (manufacturing CO2), increase urban density (and reduce transpo C02 emissions). Less landscaping means less thirsty plants. It costs CO2 to clean water, and water is scarce out west.
You have the initial direct effect, and then you have the knock on effect.
Stop CO2 at the border!!!
The Second Amendment ACKNOWLEDGES our right to own and bear arms that are in common use that can be used for lawful purposes. The arms can be restricted ONLY if subject to historical analogue from the founding era or is dangerous (unsafe) AND unusual.
It's that simple.
Ever since Al Gore stepped out with the whole Global warming thing, it's been a highly visible swindle perpetrated on the American Public.
When he decided he could sell offsets for your carbon emissions, I was immediately aware that we weren't facing a global crisis, we were facing one of the biggest flim flam jobs ever to be faced by Man.
That Scientist stood in line to eat this up with one hand, they were getting research grants with the other. Those grants came from .gov funds which in turn came from our pockets in the name of taxes.
In the meantime, the very folks pushing this agenda jet everywhere they go to tell us, not about Global Warming, because that scam played out quickly, now it's about climate change.
These folks are hucksters. It's about money and power.
Bookmarks