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: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (792544)	6/29/2014 10:46:31 PM
From: joseffy	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571173

The EPA "has turned a regulatory fire hose on U.S. business."

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (792544)	6/29/2014 10:46:52 PM
From: joseffy	Respond to of 1571173

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce called the EPA's actions "a series of one-sided, politically charged regulations that are intended to take the place of legislation that cannot achieve a consensus in Congress."

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (792544)	6/29/2014 10:56:37 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1571173

Just insane.

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (792544)	6/30/2014 8:06:43 AM
From: FJB	2 Recommendations Recommended By i-node joseffy Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571173

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (792544)	6/30/2014 9:18:03 AM
From: Don Hurst	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571173

That's right, the?youth, Cruz and the rest of your anti-science teabagger crowd...oh yeah, teach creationism in our schools, the earth is 6000 years old...go after the EPA when now Henry Paulson joins George Schultz, the 4 Republican EPA Secretaries...to speak the truth and continue the warnings of 97% of climate science to the USA and the world... >>"The Coming Climate Crash Lessons for Climate Change in the 2008 Recession By HENRY M. PAULSON Jr.JUNE 21, 2014 THERE is a time for weighing evidence and a time for acting. And if there’s one thing I’ve learned throughout my work in finance, government and conservation, it is to act before problems become too big to manage. For too many years, we failed to rein in the excesses building up in the nation’s financial markets. When the credit bubble burst in 2008, the damage was devastating. Millions suffered. Many still do. We’re making the same mistake today with climate change. We’re staring down a climate bubble that poses enormous risks to both our environment and economy. The warning signs are clear and growing more urgent as the risks go unchecked. This is a crisis we can’t afford to ignore. I feel as if I’m watching as we fly in slow motion on a collision course toward a giant mountain. We can see the crash coming, and yet we’re sitting on our hands rather than altering course. We need to act now, even though there is much disagreement, including from members of my own Republican Party, on how to address this issue while remaining economically competitive. They’re right to consider the economic implications. But we must not lose sight of the profound economic risks of doing nothing. The solution can be a fundamentally conservative one that will empower the marketplace to find the most efficient response. We can do this by putting a price on emissions of carbon dioxide — a carbon tax. Few in the United States now pay to emit this potent greenhouse gas into the atmosphere we all share. Putting a price on emissions will create incentives to develop new, cleaner energy technologies.It’s true that the United States can’t solve this problem alone. But we’re not going to be able to persuade other big carbon polluters to take the urgent action that’s needed if we’re not doing everything we can do to slow our carbon emissions and mitigate our risks. I was secretary of the Treasury when the credit bubble burst, so I think it’s fair to say that I know a little bit about risk, assessing outcomes and problem-solving. Looking back at the dark days of the financial crisis in 2008, it is easy to see the similarities between the financial crisis and the climate challenge we now face. We are building up excesses (debt in 2008, greenhouse gas emissions that are trapping heat now). Our government policies are flawed (incentivizing us to borrow too much to finance homes then, and encouraging the overuse of carbon-based fuels now). Our experts (financial experts then, climate scientists now) try to understand what they see and to model possible futures. And the outsize risks have the potential to be tremendously damaging (to a globalized economy then, and the global climate now).Back then, we narrowly avoided an economic catastrophe at the last minute by rescuing a collapsing financial system through government action. But climate change is a more intractable problem. The carbon dioxide we’re sending into the atmosphere remains there for centuries, heating up the planet. That means the decisions we’re making today — to continue along a path that’s almost entirely carbon-dependent — are locking us in for long-term consequences that we will not be able to change but only adapt to, at enormous cost. To protect New York City from rising seas and storm surges is expected to cost at least $20 billion initially, and eventually far more. And that’s just one coastal city. New York can reasonably predict those obvious risks. When I worry about risks, I worry about the biggest ones, particularly those that are difficult to predict — the ones I call small but deep holes. While odds are you will avoid them, if you do fall in one, it’s a long way down and nearly impossible to claw your way out. Scientists have identified a number of these holes — potential thresholds that, once crossed, could cause sweeping, irreversible changes. They don’t know exactly when we would reach them. But they know we should do everything we can to avoid them. Already, observations are catching up with years of scientific models, and the trends are not in our favor.Fewer than 10 years ago, the best analysis projected that melting Arctic sea ice would mean nearly ice-free summers by the end of the 21st century. Now the ice is melting so rapidly that virtually ice-free Arctic summers could be here in the next decade or two. The lack of reflective ice will mean that more of the sun’s heat will be absorbed by the oceans, accelerating warming of both the oceans and the atmosphere, and ultimately raising sea levels. Even worse, in May, two separate studies discovered that one of the biggest thresholds has already been reached. The West Antarctic ice sheet has begun to melt, a process that scientists estimate may take centuries but that could eventually raise sea levels by as much as 14 feet. Now that this process has begun, there is nothing we can do to undo the underlying dynamics, which scientists say are “baked in.” And 10 years from now, will other thresholds be crossed that scientists are only now contemplating?"<< MORE nytimes.com[%22RI%3A6%22%2C%22RI%3A18%22]&_r=0

To: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (792544)	6/30/2014 9:21:36 AM
From: FJB	1 Recommendation Recommended By joseffy Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1571173

Ending the federal worker gravy train By Betsy McCaughey U.S. Army retired Col. Herb Rosenbleeth (C) listens to opening remarks by members of Congress during a meeting of the Senate-House Veterans Affairs Conference Committee June 24, 2014 at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC. Photo: Getty Images This month’s congressional hearing on outlandish bonuses at the Veterans Administration is the latest proof that the nation needs to overhaul how federal workers in every department are paid and promoted. They’re on the gravy train, and taxpayers are being taken for a ride. Back in 1883, Congress passed the Pendleton Act to replace patronage with a federal civil service in which workers would be hired and paid based on merit. There is no MERIT anymore. Scramble the letters. What you have now is a TIMER system. Workers put in time and get hefty salaries and bonuses, regardless of work quality, with virtually no risk of being fired. Gina Farrissee, assistant secretary for human resources at the VA, told Congress that executive bonuses “are awarded only after a rigorous and diligent review.” Nonsense. The regional director overseeing the Pittsburgh VA collected a $63,000 award in 2012 shortly after six vets treated there died needlessly from legionella, an infection traced directly to poor maintenance of the facility. The General Accountability Office investigated VAs nationwide and reported in July 2013 that doctors get bonuses regardless of work quality. A radiologist cited for mistakes reading mammograms got a $8,216 bonus, even though a professional-standards board deemed him unqualified to continue his current duties. A surgeon suspended for 14 days for abandoning a patient on the operating table and leaving the medical center, with only unsupervised residents to complete the procedure, still got an $11,189 annual bonus. But it’s not just the VA. Every federal department has this putrid culture. The Internal Revenue Service doles out bonuses to employees guilty of illegal drug use, unemployment-benefits fraud, even tax evasion. A Treasury inspector general’s report released April 22 states that, “with few exceptions, the IRS does not consider tax compliance or other misconduct when issuing performance awards or most other types of awards.” Yet IRS Commissioner John Koskinen told Congress this month that a special independent prosecutor to investigate IRS targeting of conservative groups “would be a monumental waste of taxpayer funds.” That’s a novel concern at the IRS or any federal agency. The Pendleton Act stipulated that federal employees would be hired and promoted based on merit. But merit no longer matters. Take the Environmental Protection Agency worker making $125,000 a year who spent hours a day watching porn, including four hours on a website called “Sadism is Beautiful.” Yet he received performance awards. “How much pornography would it take for an EPA employee to lose their job?” asked Congressman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) during an Oversight Committee hearing in May. The answer is that firing a federal worker is almost impossible, and making it stick, even less likely. Data from the Office of Personnel Management indicate that it is five times as hard to get fired from a federal job as from a private-sector one. Incredibly, most federal departments have even laxer standards than the VA. Jeff Neely, the General Services Administration employee pictured in a hot tub sipping wine on taxpayer money, retired with benefits after the lavish 2010 Las Vegas boondoggle he attended was uncovered in the media. Two co-workers were fired but reinstated with back pay after appealing to the “merit” system’s protection board, which protects everything but merit. It’s been claimed that federal workers settle for lower pay in exchange for job security. Don’t believe it. A worker with a high-school education earns 21 percent more working for the federal government than for a private employer, and gets 72 percent more in benefits. A worker with a bachelor’s degree also makes out better with Uncle Sam, getting about the same wages as in the private sector but 46 percent more in benefits. Only professionals such as lawyers, medical doctors and Ph.Ds get paid less in federal jobs than private sector ones, according to the Congressional Budget Office. In addition, the federal workplace offers 10 paid holidays, plus 13 to 26 days annual vacation (depending on longevity) and up to 13 paid sick days a year. All in all, up to 49 paid days off. That’s easy street. Meanwhile, taxpayers are on the Road to Serfdom, working longer and paying more to support a government that does not serve them.