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: koan who wrote (1010007)	4/5/2017 8:18:27 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By one_less Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572437

>> I have never posted anything about eugenics. Ever. But you HAVE claimed that broad scientific support implies the creation of scientific fact. You HAVE done that. And the same was done as proof of scientific fact in regard to eugenics. So, how do you square these two views WITHOUT admitting your claims about global warming are wrong? I know, this isn't a court and you cannot be required to answer hard questions. But occasionally, you would be well served to admit the inconsistencies in your points. Just trying to help you realize some faults that the echo chamber may not point out for you.

To: koan who wrote (1010007)	4/6/2017 7:18:02 AM
From: Taro	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572437

Read Crichton's article first and then argue! The similarities between the development of "Eugenics" and the development of "AGW" with 90+ of the "Scientists" in support and the majority of the politicians from both sides following troop are described in crystal clear language by Crichton. This all happened before the Nazis grabbed it for their own purposes. Even in Sweden "Statens Institut för Rashygien" was founded in 1922 and fully supported by 95% of the politicians from left and right. Again, 90+ % of all scientists in the Western world supported the theories and next the established Science of Eugenics until and even through WW II. Nobody did - or had ever done -, however, when Nazi Germany's horror activities become public after the war. Read the article (if you dare) - and argue then, Koan!

To: koan who wrote (1010007)	4/6/2017 10:19:54 AM
From: puborectalis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572437

Doug Kass........ Remember when the big argument in favor of President Trump was that he was a dealmaker who knew how to get things done? That was when he was doing real estate deals. Now he has to deal with 535 other politically partisan legislators in Congress on their own real estate turf. * Does the administration have the depth of experience, understand the extent of the legwork and organization required for passing legislation or have a coherent idea or shared vision of what it wants to achieve and what problems it means to solve? * If President Trump can't easily put through a health-care package, what does that mean for more difficult regulatory reforms and his tax- and fiscal-policy agenda? * President Trump took credit for the stock market's advance since his election victory. Will he take responsibility for Tuesday's correction, and possibly a further correction? Is it a slippery slope for an administration to use the S&P 500 as a barometer of success? And is a pro-business and anti-domestic programs (in education, the arts, etc.) agenda going to benefit those in the lower and middle class (largely his base) who have suffered the most over the last decade? Bottom Line Instead of attacking the intelligence community, alienating and attacking President Obama, warring with the press, fighting with Republicans on the Hill who refuse to give the president everything he wants and condemning the Democratic opposition --generally staying at war with everyone -- it is time in line with his promises during his campaign for Mr. Trump to change things, shake things up and make lives better for Americans. Does anyone believe, given the above, that President Trump can get the Chinese to stop North Korea's military expansion? To me, the current tests in North Korea and around the globe will continue. It is hard for many to yet see clear domestic and foreign policies from the White House -- no overriding doctrine, strategy and framework are emerging to guide us forward. And, to many, daily White House photo ops don't pass the test. Governing is not as easy as we see on television. The president needs to develop the personal discipline and team to more appropriately understand the complexity and challenges of the issues our country faces. If not, the markets will grow impatient -- post-haste!