Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (336404)	5/4/2007 8:06:21 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574465

re: An easier question would be what's right about them... Whoa. I'll back out of this conversation as I just read one note, not the whole string. And frankly don't have the time or patience for you your nuance. All I know is that if you pay people more, they perform better. Studies have shown it. They have more self respect, they take their job more seriously, they worry more about losing their job. I really didn't need a study as it works for the folks that work for me. I just saw your 'objection' to maximum salaries and wondered why you were such an asshole.

To: TimF who wrote (336404)	5/5/2007 7:42:33 AM
From: Road Walker	Respond to of 1574465

The Warming Challenge Yesterday’s report on global warming from the world’s most authoritative voice on climate change asserts that significant progress toward stabilizing and reducing global warming emissions can be achieved at a relatively low cost using known technologies. This is a hugely important message to policy makers everywhere, not least those in the United States Congress. Many of them have been paralyzed by fears — assiduously cultivated by the Bush administration — that a full-scale attack on climate change could cripple the economy. The report was the third this year from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The first report, in February, blamed humans for rising atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. A second report last month warned of famine, floods and other ecological disasters unless emissions were brought under control. The new report deals with remedies. It warns that over the course of this century, major investments in new and essentially carbon-free energy sources will be required. But it stresses that we can and must begin to address the problem now, using off-the-shelf technologies to make our cars, buildings and appliances far more efficient, while investing in alternative fuels, like cellulosic ethanol, that show near-term promise. The report also made clear the risks of delay, noting that emissions of greenhouse gases have risen 70 percent since 1970 and could nearly double from current levels by 2030 if nothing is done. For that reason, it said, it is vital for policy makers to discourage older technologies — coal-fired power plants with no capacity to store carbon emissions, for instance — so as not to lock in further increases in emissions, which would make the task much harder and more expensive down the road. From a political and legislative perspective, the report could not have been more timely. A run of fortuitous events — including the panel’s first two reports, increased agitation at the state and local level, and the recent Supreme Court decision authorizing the government regulation of carbon dioxide — has elevated the warming issue in the public consciousness and on Congress’s list of priorities. Moreover, many of the report’s proposals have already found a home in pending legislation. Bills to increase fuel efficiency in cars and trucks have been introduced in both houses; Jeff Bingaman, the Democrats’ Senate spokesman on energy matters, is drafting a measure that would require utilities to generate 15 percent of their electricity from wind and other renewable sources; Barbara Boxer, head of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has offered an ambitious bill to greatly increase investments in alternative fuels. None of these bills are surefire winners. But by showing that the costs of acting now will be trivial compared with the price to be paid if we do nothing, the report can only improve their chances. Copyright 2007 The New York Times Company