This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Fake News - Global Warming Consensus

Jump to new

I googled USA federal reserve and flat earth economics and went to a Russian site. I listened to the video, hopefully I don't have a Russian bug in my computer now! He was talking about the economy being flat and working with economics to address that situation. I am not going to link it here as it may not be a safe site to view. But he was not talking about flat earth economics.
 

It is called Felony Disenfranchisement and is not focused on any one demographic.

As of 2008 over 5.3 million people in the United States were denied the right to vote due to felony disenfranchisement.[10] In the national elections in 2012, the various state felony disenfranchisement laws together blocked an estimated 5.85 million felons from voting, up from 1.2 million in 1976. This comprised 2.5% of the potential voters in general. The state with the highest number of disenfranchised voters was Florida, with 1.5 million disenfranchised.[6]
 
Sorry,

for another thread, but the USA fed was taken over by, what I refer to as flat earth scientists. So too a number of senior central bankers. Ben Bernake was at best, a mid range economics professor with some very seriously stupid economic theories which had never worked. Same form Yellen and so too the whole Chicago economic theory group.

Drip down or trickle down economics has never worked. That being a regressive tax system where say my Gates pays 12% tax and his secretary pays 35%. Very simply put, Mr Gates spends under 10% of his income and lower wage earners 100% or close to it. Taking money from someone who spends it, is absurd. Doing it of course has seen the wealth in the USA flow from the middle class which had 25% of the wealth in 1980 .... a mid range number for the 60% in that section to a mere 11% officially.

Beyond supporting this, Fed members hand picked by the banks who own the USA fed, each from 1983 or so onward believed in NO or low intervention and rules, LOW LOW LOW interest rates and all believed bubbles in assets were impossible to see and stop.

Amazing but true ...

Worse, well, Bernanke and Yellen and the head of Goldman Sachs went to Harvard together ... well Yellen was not a student but a PA .... deputy Fisher ... was Yellens uni professor and so on and so forth. Yellens husband worked at a Goldman Sachs funded school at some Uni and when they all left ... off on speaking tour ... to investment banks at 150-200k a pop and as the door hit their behind ... they went to the favorite think tank for Goldman Sachs that produces some really nasty papers ... the Brookings Institute ... Both now reside there.

I call them flat earth .... Noam Chomsky ex MIT and now Northern, a legend ... called them a cult ... whoops so did I. We had a board for 10 years, all same economic theory, all with links to big brother, all same religion ... not that that's the issue ... but more importantly who believed in reducing laws and supervision of markets, did not believe in bubbles and fervently believed one could not stop a bubble even if one could see it.

basically if it were like the new EPA guy Trump has, a lobbyist for fossil fuels ... he is dismantling every rule and regulation and so too is Trump ... because he has a hunch, which is sadly relevant to the question of WHEN if ever any action will occur out of the USA.

In 2005 ... or so ... I wrote a paper that was not one that amused BUSH junior, the worst president to that date, ever ... about the worlds largest oil find of 180 billion or so barrels of oil ... the TAR SANDS of Canada. One can of course make petrol out of coal if one wants to, it will take about 40% of the energy contained ... tar sands ... are the second worst at 35% of the oil or energy recovered is spent. First they have to heat the tar to 80 degrees C then it becomes a sludge full of heavy metals and difficult to refine. Anyhow, I said then Kyoto was dead at that point.

Most amusing, 60 minutes did a piece on the Tar sands, NOT A WORD about the energy cost, or the gunk it produced .... the toxic crap.

Such is life.

Oh back to Yellen and Bernanke and Greenspan, every other central bank, or decent one KNOWS how to see a bubble .... stopping it they have a massive arsenal of tools on the fiscal side. We just used some of them here in Australia to slow things down in Sydney. Bluntest tool and biggest is interest rates, If any central bank raised rate by 5% I believe housing activity would cease !! Less blunt it lower rises and even if that's NOT possible a central bank SHOULD use say its requirements for reserves from banks to influence loans and raising the reserves required by 10% on any investment or NO DEPOSIT loan will stop any speculation pretty much dead without hurting other sectors.

USA fed, did not even see .... the GFC and price rises of 10-15% in 20 cities .... so when I call them flat earth or incompetent, that's being nice. Bernanke and some of his quotes are sad, Greenspan as he left ... went I don't understand how the GFC happened, Yellen, well she was too arrogant to admit anything, she had been pushing her rubbish for over 20 years. Sadly anything is for sale in the USA and in the case of climate change, well, major political donors well represented by Oil and Gas and Coal.

Not a theory, a sad reality of 2019.

have fun
 
"The study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, used data from Nasa’s gravity recovery and climate experiment (known as Grace) and GPS stations scattered across Greenland to analyze changes in ice mass.

This showed that Greenland lost about 280bn tons of ice per year between 2002 and 2016, enough to raise the worldwide sea level by 0.03 inches annually."
Greenland's ice melting faster than scientists previously thought – study

The pace of ice loss has increased four-fold since 2003 as enormous glaciers are depositing ever larger chunks of ice into the Atlantic ocean, where it melts, causing sea levels to rise

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...sts-previously-thought-study?CMP=share_btn_tw
 
Meanwhile the rate of change for Antarctica is five-fold over a similar period, with actual annual losses now slightly below Greenland's but set to surpass it in the next decade.
 
Hi,

whilst an issue ... not far. Arctic ice I suspect is gone, its the ice down South, the stuff on the mainland that is the issue and if it all melted it would raise sea levels about 70 meters. This however is unlikely pre 2100 in any massive way. Next 30 years, I suspect Artic goes ice free during summer and possibly even winter about 2075.

Have fun
Cheers
 
Bas
Hard to see an Arctic completely ice free in summer within 30 years, but I doubt there will be much there to worry shipping. Here's a good article on the prediction of when. Arctic winters are unlikely to be ice free in the foreseeable future as ocean heat uptake is slow - a lot will depend on how the global warming rates change over the next hundred years.
The Antarctic has many thousands of years of ice mass even on a worst case scenario. Hard to chew through 3000 metres in a hurry.
 
The problem in Antarctica now is that the ice is now melting under the ice shelf and that the 3000 metre blocks are starting to move and will just slide off as happened in Greenland.
 
rederob said:
The Antarctic has many thousands of years of ice mass even on a worst case scenario. Hard to chew through 3000 metres in a hurry.
Click to expand...

It won't be the last 2950 metres of Antarctic ice melting that stuffs us.

I opened the question about what the next 30 years could hold if the ice melt around the world continued to accelerate because, IMV, the most serious damage to our world will occur with only a couple of metres of sea level rise. And if we don't take urgent steps to reduce GG emissions and whatever is necessary to control global warming we could be facing quite catastrophic economic consequences of sea level rise in the near future.

Consider. Every coastal city is vulnerable to rising sea levels. Some of course are in more immediate danger than others. Miami in Florida is probably a particularly good example of a city that is already awash.

At what stage will banks and insurance companies start drawing red lines around areas they will no longer insure or give mortgages? What will be the consequence for these areas as well as banks and owners who hold loans/equity in these properties?

If the pace of sea level rise starts to quicken how quickly will banks start to look at their property portfolios? How widespread will this be given that there are scores of vulnerable cities ? What will be the effect on coastal cities as significant areas and infrastructure become redlined ? What will happen as people realise this will not stop and that in 10-20-30 years the adjoining suburbs will be redlined ?
 
Howdy,
well its my understanding that unless the Antarctic melts we will be maybe 50cm rise by 2100. They say 30 cm ... I say 50 ... but even then, land is NOT a constant thing, it is rising or falling most of the time. So where will be hit is difficult to predict unless one knows if the land itself is rising or falling.

Either way, post 2050. For me, well, its not an issue in my lifetime.

Cheers
 
A lot of the USA coast beach houses can not be insured against hurricane anymore, nothing new for them.
In Australia my bet is it will take the form of a mandatory insurance available to everyone paid by a tax or fee on every insurance etc a medicare for house insurance. normal consequence of a system where we blame ugly capitalism and remove individual responsability.wait and see
 
I doubt it.
Councils have responsibility for these property matters and they will take the same actions as they do wrt to buildings/property in flood prone areas.
 
It pays a lot more if you are a believer !

This got a mention because it was the other way, imagine if they tried to list all the money flowing to the pro lobby, the names would come in faster than they could list them all
 
macca said:
It pays a lot more if you are a believer !

This got a mention because it was the other way, imagine if they tried to list all the money flowing to the pro lobby, the names would come in faster than they could list them all
Click to expand...
I am working on this now. It is wrapped up in a large number of 'green' tax free charities, I would suggest trillions of dollars available funding would just be just the tip of the iceberg.

Talking about icebergs.....
Antarctic Sea Ice Reaches New Maximum Extent

Two weeks after a new record was set in the Arctic Ocean for the least amount of sea ice coverage in the satellite record, the ice surrounding Antarctica reached its annual winter maximum—and set a record for a new high. Sea ice extended over 19.44 million square kilometers (7.51 million square miles) in 2012, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC). The previous record of 19.39 million kilometers (7.49 million square miles) was set in 2006.


 
macca said:
It pays a lot more if you are a believer !

This got a mention because it was the other way, imagine if they tried to list all the money flowing to the pro lobby, the names would come in faster than they could list them all
Click to expand...
Any evidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?
220 221 222
Replies
4K
Views
304K
basilio
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...