sell! sell! sell!

[eek.]

Ethnic cleaning has been going on in the UK for years, most people simply move to a different area a few miles away, as evidenced by the Brexit results, they don't usually leave the country
Eventually you get a Brexit type vote which puts the brakes on the process, although the EU with its democratic deficit system can mean a long time between decisions

The German elections are due in the next 12 months and there's going to be changes methinks

 

[tiznow]

Monopoly land! AT&T and Time Warner gonna merge

 

[tiznow]

12 point lead for queen Hillary... the rig (trump being a blatant sociopath and unelectable for potus) is nearly complete.. as expected once debates happened it was game over...

 

[tiznow]

volcker says we're doomed which is obvious to anybody paying attention.. and also explains why fed can't raise rates

----------

Ignoring the Debt Problem

By PAUL A. VOLCKER and PETER G. PETERSON


October 21, 2016


Op-Ed Contributors
Together, the two of us have 179 years of life experience and 13 grandchildren. We have served presidents of both parties. We have seen more campaign seasons than we care to count — but none as strange as this one.
Insults, invective and pandering have been poor substitutes for serious debate about the direction in which this country is going — or should be going. And a sound and sustainable fiscal structure is a key ingredient of any viable economic policy.
Yes, this country can handle the nearly $600 billion federal deficit estimated for 2016. But the deficit has grown sharply this year, and will keep the national debt at about 75 percent of the gross domestic product, a ratio not seen since 1950, after the budget ballooned during World War II.
Long-term, that continued growth, driven by our tax and spending policies, will create the most significant fiscal challenge facing our country. The widely respected Congressional Budget Office has estimated that by midcentury our debt will rise to 140 percent of G.D.P., far above that in any previous era, even in times of war.
Unfortunately, despite a brief discussion during the final presidential debate, neither candidate has put forward a convincing plan to restrain the growth of the national debt in the decades to come.
Throughout the campaign, Donald J. Trump has called for a combination of deep tax cuts that appear to far exceed proposed spending reductions, at the clear risk of substantially increasing the ratio of debt to G.D.P. Hillary Clinton has set out more balanced and detailed proposals, but they would still fail to stabilize and reduce our debt burden.
Whoever wins, the new president will eventually face fiscal realities that force him or her to develop strategies for decreasing the national debt as a share of the economy over the long term.
Our current debt may be manageable at a time of unprecedentedly low interest rates. But if we let our debt grow, and interest rates normalize, the interest burden alone would choke our budget and squeeze out other essential spending. There would be no room for the infrastructure programs and the defense rebuilding that today have wide support.
It’s not just federal spending that would be squeezed. The projected rise in federal deficits would compete for funds in our capital markets and far outrun the private sector’s capacity to save, to finance industry and home purchases, and to invest abroad.
Instead, we’d be dependent on foreign investors’ acquiring most of our debt — making the government dependent on the “kindness of strangers” who may not be so kind as the I.O.U.s mount up.
We can’t let that happen — not if we want an America that is able to provide growth and stability at home while maintaining global leadership. We would risk returning with a vengeance to stagflation — the ugly combination of inflation and economic stagnation that we tasted in the 1970s.
The solutions are clear enough. A realistic approach toward the major entitlement programs is required, given that they are projected to account for all of the growth of future noninterest spending.
We should make gradual adjustments to the Social Security system that still maintain present benefit levels for those at or near retirement, with particular attention to those most in need. Our health care systems can be made more efficient, with better approaches toward cost control. Since health care represents 70 percent of the growth of our major entitlement programs over the next 30 years, bending the cost curve is essential to the long-term well-being of our economy.
It’s no secret that our federal tax system is broken — unfair, inefficient and prone to political manipulation. It’s filled with exclusions, deductions, exemptions and preferential rates — so-called tax expenditures — that are ripe for reform. Those policies cost about $1.5 trillion each year and disproportionately benefit the well off. Tax reform could provide better incentives for economic growth, while raising more revenue, even as the code is simplified.
But we face an immutable fact. Fair and responsible reforms will take years to implement. And businesses and individuals will need time to adjust.
Delaying action now will make the needed changes only more painful and difficult later on, while also increasing the risk of financial crisis before the reforms are even made. That is why the real debate should begin immediately.
Yet at the final presidential debate, both candidates missed the opportunity to clearly lay out their visions for a fiscally responsible, long-term future for our country. There’s still time to solve this problem. But our next president needs to show leadership in the first months.
At our age, neither of us will personally suffer from a failure to act. It is those with long lives ahead — grandchildren and great-grandchildren — who deserve the benefit of prospering in a nation with sound finances.
Take some advice from two observers who have been around for a while: The long term gets here before you know it.

 

[tiznow]

Monopoly land! AT&T and Time Warner gonna merge

Looks like we may also be reaching peak M&A pseudo monopoly creation for this boom cycle before the bust.. lot of lawmakers talking out against it especially with elections coming up..

 

[eek.]

just one big shitshow to get Hillary elected and hand liberals control of the Supreme Court..

I think that's why so many righties and non-liberals will vote for Trump, to stop the supreme court getting too Liberal.
Trump is a 4 year problem, the supreme court is 1 to 2 decades of fundamental home based legislation

The evangelicals for example are backing Trump bigtime

 

[tiznow]

The scary part for me is dems might now snatch control of congress due to trump making a mockery of the GOP... polls are saying it's now a toss up for control of congress...

 

[tiznow]

[h=1]Climate change is making western wildfires much worse[/h][h=2]New study finds higher temperatures and dryer land has allowed fires to spread across 16,000 more acres.[/h]Oct 11

A firefighter covers his face while battling a wildfire near Morgan Hill, CA. CREDIT: AP/Noah BergerHuman-caused climate change is driving wildfires to be far more destructive, new research found — nearly doubling the forest fire area in the western United States over the past three decades.
Since 1984, aridity stemming from higher temperatures has allowed wildfires to spread across 16,000 square miles more than they otherwise would have, according to the study, published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. That’s equivalent to an area larger than Massachusetts and Connecticut combined.
“No matter how hard we try, the fires are going to keep getting bigger, and the reason is really clear,” Park Williams, coauthor and bioclimatologist at Columbia University’s Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, said in a statement. “Climate is really running the show in terms of what burns. We should be getting ready for bigger fire years than those familiar to previous generations.”
According to the study, temperatures in forested parts of the west increased about 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit since 1970, and are expected to keep rising. More heat dries out land as warmer air sucks up moisture that vegetation and soil would otherwise get. That drying effect is a major factor behind the rise in wildfires.
In the study, the west includes California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Montana, Colorado, and Wyoming.
Researchers noted that firefighting suppression techniques are also playing a role in facilitating more destructive fires. By constantly putting out fires, authorities have allowed areas saved to build up dry fuel that later ignites. “We’re seeing the consequence of very successful fire suppression, except now it’s not that successful anymore,” lead author John Abatzoglou, a geography professor at the University of Idaho, said in a statement.
To reach their conclusions, researchers examined eight systems that rate forest aridity and compared them with actual fires, as well as climate models that estimate human-caused warming. The data showed that 55 percent of the increase in fuel aridity could be attributed to climate change. Researchers also concluded that global warming’s role in increasing aridity has grown since 2000, and will continue to do so.
The study comes less than a month after the Soberanes Fire near Big Sur, California became the most expensivewildfire in U.S. history. The blaze, which is 99 percent contained some two months after it started, has cost $236 million, the San Jose Mercury News reported. At its height, some 5,000 firefighters battled the fire that destroyed 57 homes and killed a bulldozer operator.
While the study is touted to be one of the first to quantify how much global warming is expanding wildfires in the west, for the past few years researchers have been warning that higher temperatures will almost certainly cause more wildfires worldwide.
Just last year, U.S Forest Service researchers and others published a studythat found wildfire season has gotten longer and far more expensive, and the global area affected by wildfire has doubled in the last 35 years.
And earlier this year, a study from the National Center for Atmospheric Research found an 80 percent probability that any summer between 2061 and 2080 will be warmer than the hottest on record across the world’s land areas unless greenhouse gas emissions are sharply curbed.

 

[eek.]

We can't stop the world warming up Tiz, we're not significant
If we stopped using every CO2 emitter on the planet tomorrow the planet would still keep getting hotter

It might take a bit longer with less CO2 emissions, but it's gonna happen either way and there ain't nuffink we can do.

 

[tiznow]

As always it's not about the temperature itself but rather the rate of change.. nature cannot adapt quickly enough to the rate of change created by man... The unprecedented increase the rate of change has coincided with beginning of industrial revolution.. maybe just random chance?

not believing mankind is having an impact on earths warming trend (regardless of how much we to blame) is like believing in Santa Claus at this point.. evidence is overwhelming..

the human that set and left the campire fire which caused forest to burn 3 months is one tiny part of humans impact...

 

[tiznow]

Obamacare premiums going up 22% next year with options dwindling as anybody with a brain knew would happen..

until a leader with balls stands up and tells america we are a antion of obese slobs and as a nation we need to start taking responsibility for our own personal health .. healthcare costs in this country will continue to soar ... regardless of what system we come up with ..as the medical industry continues to find ways to keep us fat unhealthy slobs alive longer...

 

[eek.]

As always it's not about the temperature itself but rather the rate of change.. nature cannot adapt quickly enough to the rate of change created by man...

Ah. That will be what's left of nature that hasn't been annihilated yet then.
We've wrecked the oceans and are happily deforesting the planet, neonicotinoids are destroying the bee populations as well as all the other insects
There's not going to be a nature to save, we're going to toast the planet all on our own long before global warming gets any of us

 

[eek.]

until a leader with balls stands up and tells america we are a antion of obese slobs and as a nation we need to start taking responsibility for our own personal health .. healthcare costs in this country will continue to soar ... regardless of what system we come up with ..as the medical industry continues to find ways to keep us fat unhealthy slobs alive longer...

What came to mind for me was a strong whacky leader with a whacky hairdo, maybe they do have their uses after all... google strength through joy

 

[eek.]

Personally speaking I think that public entrances to non domestic buildings should all be narrowed to a maximum of 24 inches

The only exceptions to this rule being health food shops and gyms

 

[eek.]

They built a place called Prora to help reduce fatties and slobs in their new world order, it was a huge complex

 

[tiznow]

Not saying be a fascist and force people..

most people are lemmings.. America in need of a strong leader that is willing to tell us the hard cold facts of where we suck badly.. I know it won't happen but..

we will continue to go down the gutter with a majority of Americans being lazy fat dumb programmed debt slaving slobs that have been conditioned to suck off the government tit... Obamacare premiums up 22% no worries says government what you poor people actually pay won't go up much government will just debt more and pay the bulk of the increase.. debt don't matter till it does..

 

[tiznow]

Just boggles my mind when any politician talks about health care the issue of runaway obesity is never ever brought up.. it's always about how system should work left/right one party system bullshit..

the number 1 way to decrease health care costs is decrease obesity as obesity leads to all sorts of health problems..

this isn't rocket science..

 

[eek.]

Obesity was almost non-existent when we all had proper jobs to go to,(1950 to 1980) but the Government outsourced proper jobs overseas
Hardly anyone was on welfare either because you got a proper job easy peasy and it paid loads more money

If you want to fix things, get people proper jobs and all the rest falls into place on its own

The robots are coming now... so even less jobs... so it's only going to get worse

Globalisation and technology have turned the human race into human blobbys within a couple of generations

 

[eek.]

Global warming is the least of natures problems

The last report, published in 2014, estimated that the world's wildlife populations had halved over the last 40 years.
This assessment suggests that the trend has continued: since 1970, populations have declined by an average of 58%.

Dr Barrett said some groups of animals had fared worse than others.
"We do see particularly strong declines in the freshwater environment - for freshwater species alone, the decline stands at 81% since 1970. This is related to the way water is used and taken out of fresh water systems, and also the fragmentation of freshwater systems through dam building, for example."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-37775622

 

[tiznow]

Your Dog Probably Has Better Healthcare Than You DoTyler Durden's pictureby Tyler DurdenOct 26, 2016 7:45 PMSubmitted by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,Below is a short email that my friend Sam posted this morning to his Facebook page about his surprisingly positive experience with the US healthcare system.I thought it a fantastic read, and I wanted to pass it along to you:I had to run to the emergency room today for what may be a neurological issue. Dizziness, staggering, loss of balance, that kind of thing. I’m in San Diego, one of the most expensive cities in the world, and I have no insurance. I figured I was screwed. But instead, the experience was unreal. I got seen immediately. I didn’t even have time to sit down, they just whisked me into an examination room. The doctor and nurse were ON IT, and they took their time with the exam and consultation. The visit ultimately involved staying the whole day for observation, all kinds of tests, sedation and reversal, blood pressure check, a full blood panel work up (results tomorrow, yes TOMORROW keep your fingers crossed) and having both ears cleaned and flushed. The bill was a mere $374.63. Do I have some insane insurance plan? Nope. Am I being super-subsidized by the rest of America? Nope. Am I a privileged politician with a special “bosses only” healthcare plan? Don’t make me laugh. It turns out that the care was for my dog, not for me. And we didn’t go to a ‘people’ hospital– I obviously took my dog to an animal hospital. She and I are both biological machines, mammals made mostly of water (though she sheds more than I do). The only other real difference is that the government is regulating the hell out of healthcare for people, while (relatively speaking), leaving healthcare for animals alone. And that, my friends, is the reason Obamacare has flopped, and why your healthcare costs will keep going up. It’s not greed. It’s not the drug companies. It’s not anything other than the application of government intervention in what should be a free market.Simon again.It’s not exactly controversial these days to suggest that the US healthcare system is in bad shape.According to data collected by numerous independent agencies like the Institute of Medicine, Commonwealth Fund, and Kaiser Family Foundation, the US still ranks dead last among advanced economies in overall quality of its healthcare system.In fact, the US healthcare system has the worst record in the number of deaths caused by mistakes or inefficient care.And wait times in the US for urgent care and primary care visits rank lower than every other developed nation.Americans pay at least 50% more for healthcare in terms of annual spending than people in other advanced nations, yet they receive less care as measured by the number of doctor visits.Sure, it’s great that there are fewer uninsured people than ever before in the US, but this is a measure of QUANTITY, not a measure of QUALITY.Undoubtedly the US is home to some of the finest medical professionals in the world.But they’ve been buried under an expensive, over-regulated bureaucracy that continues to erode overall quality in the system.A 2015 report from the National Academy of Sciences summed it up by stating, “For Americans, health care costs and expenditures are the highest in the world, yet health outcomes and care quality are below average by many measures.”But instead of trying to understand WHY the system is so slow, bureaucratic, and expensive to begin with, politicians try to ‘fix’ it by creating more regulations.It’s as if they believe they can legislate their way to a quality, efficient medical care system, just as they believe they can legislate their way to a better education system or economic prosperity.This almost never works.After all, the people who come up with these rules are notoriously unqualified and have rarely ever held a job outside of their giant government bureaucracy.So despite what may be some very good intentions to fix the system, they invariably make things worse.The end result is that your pet probably has access to more efficient healthcare than you do.Do you have a Plan B?