60 mpg by 2025

[Ren]

Oil isn’t an issue. In fact, if we do run out of it, it will be at a time when it doesn’t matter. There will be no energy deficit. Hundreds of companies are pouring Billions of dollars into alternative energy and materials for everything from cars to home heating to tupperware. If you can build any substance molecule by molecule, power an engine with pure water, and store large amounts of sun/wind-produced electrical energy for years, where is the need for oil?

[Coronita]

[quote=equalizer]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx%5B/quote%5D

I don’t know how I got dragged into this one EQ. But, my take is that.

I do agree with you to a limited extent that

1)Democracy is not necessary the most efficient way to bring about change versus a totalitarian form of government

2)Totalitarian government is much more efficient in making changes….however the emphasis is FOR BETTER OR WORSE…

On one hand of the spectrum, China is much more efficient in advancement at the current stage only because the current government sees the value of capitalism and is cramming this down the rest of the country’s throat. However, one quickly forget that China also went through several years (decades) or being completely backassward. Look no further back than the cultural revolution, in which there was a government sanctioned agenda to cleanse the well educated. IF we have a dictator that is completely backassward, well the country is screwed…Look no further than North Korea.

Democracy on the other hand probably isn’t the most efficient form of getting things done, because ideally in incorporates everyone’s right, even folks who arguably are unfit/misinformed/un-knowledgeable (yes I know there’s no such word. I’m learn from palin :)) to be in a position to make a decision. Who is it that has a right to decide who is “fit or unfit”. It’s really would be a random decision..So the most appropriate option is to include everyone. So there’s plenty of disagreement on issues, and it generally would take longer to reach a consensus..However the advantages are really (ideally) decisions are a reflection of what a majority of people want I say ideally, because in practice, in recent times I’m not so sure this is the case in the U.S…More on that later)

So there’s a tradeoff here between democratic government versus such totalitarian/planned economies.

Now about the U.S…I’m not so sure really that our policies and votes are really counting that much anymore.. I mean, so often in CA is propositions pass with a majority only for them to be overturned by a judge due to a lawsuit filed by a special interest group… I think this really disenfranchise the majority who already decided based on the vote. It’s my be convenient for the minority of people who were against what the others want, but still I find it anti-democracy. For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.

Off subject. Regarding what I said about job growth. I think it was taken out of context. Certain areas, there will be no job growth. Not all, but specific areas. I don’t think we will have too many issues in technology. I think the bigger issue in technology will be finding people who would be able to do the work…..But we can agree to disagree on that point.
Green tech is a farce imho…The battle will be in personal communication and computing, where the two converge…It’s like what the Sanjay Motorola CEO has said…Like the how WWI started, the Duke has already been shot…Everyone else just hasn’t realized that it’s happened. There’s going to be an all out war in the personal communication and computing sector over the next decade….Consider this. The apple iPad last quarter just cannabalized laptop sales by 50%, according to sales number from Best Buy…Why do you think all these computer companies are scrambling to creating tablet devices now?

http://www.businessinsider.com/best-buy-ceo-ipad-is-cannibalizing-laptop-sales-2010-9

What I want to know is folks that are green, how much of this technology crap are you using, because a lot of this definitely is not green.

[Coronita]

[quote=equalizer]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx%5B/quote%5D

I don’t know how I got dragged into this one EQ. But, my take is that.

I do agree with you to a limited extent that

1)Democracy is not necessary the most efficient way to bring about change versus a totalitarian form of government

2)Totalitarian government is much more efficient in making changes….however the emphasis is FOR BETTER OR WORSE…

On one hand of the spectrum, China is much more efficient in advancement at the current stage only because the current government sees the value of capitalism and is cramming this down the rest of the country’s throat. However, one quickly forget that China also went through several years (decades) or being completely backassward. Look no further back than the cultural revolution, in which there was a government sanctioned agenda to cleanse the well educated. IF we have a dictator that is completely backassward, well the country is screwed…Look no further than North Korea.

Democracy on the other hand probably isn’t the most efficient form of getting things done, because ideally in incorporates everyone’s right, even folks who arguably are unfit/misinformed/un-knowledgeable (yes I know there’s no such word. I’m learn from palin :)) to be in a position to make a decision. Who is it that has a right to decide who is “fit or unfit”. It’s really would be a random decision..So the most appropriate option is to include everyone. So there’s plenty of disagreement on issues, and it generally would take longer to reach a consensus..However the advantages are really (ideally) decisions are a reflection of what a majority of people want I say ideally, because in practice, in recent times I’m not so sure this is the case in the U.S…More on that later)

So there’s a tradeoff here between democratic government versus such totalitarian/planned economies.

Now about the U.S…I’m not so sure really that our policies and votes are really counting that much anymore.. I mean, so often in CA is propositions pass with a majority only for them to be overturned by a judge due to a lawsuit filed by a special interest group… I think this really disenfranchise the majority who already decided based on the vote. It’s my be convenient for the minority of people who were against what the others want, but still I find it anti-democracy. For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.

Off subject. Regarding what I said about job growth. I think it was taken out of context. Certain areas, there will be no job growth. Not all, but specific areas. I don’t think we will have too many issues in technology. I think the bigger issue in technology will be finding people who would be able to do the work…..But we can agree to disagree on that point.
Green tech is a farce imho…The battle will be in personal communication and computing, where the two converge…It’s like what the Sanjay Motorola CEO has said…Like the how WWI started, the Duke has already been shot…Everyone else just hasn’t realized that it’s happened. There’s going to be an all out war in the personal communication and computing sector over the next decade….Consider this. The apple iPad last quarter just cannabalized laptop sales by 50%, according to sales number from Best Buy…Why do you think all these computer companies are scrambling to creating tablet devices now?

http://www.businessinsider.com/best-buy-ceo-ipad-is-cannibalizing-laptop-sales-2010-9

What I want to know is folks that are green, how much of this technology crap are you using, because a lot of this definitely is not green.

[Coronita]

[quote=equalizer]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx%5B/quote%5D

I don’t know how I got dragged into this one EQ. But, my take is that.

I do agree with you to a limited extent that

1)Democracy is not necessary the most efficient way to bring about change versus a totalitarian form of government

2)Totalitarian government is much more efficient in making changes….however the emphasis is FOR BETTER OR WORSE…

On one hand of the spectrum, China is much more efficient in advancement at the current stage only because the current government sees the value of capitalism and is cramming this down the rest of the country’s throat. However, one quickly forget that China also went through several years (decades) or being completely backassward. Look no further back than the cultural revolution, in which there was a government sanctioned agenda to cleanse the well educated. IF we have a dictator that is completely backassward, well the country is screwed…Look no further than North Korea.

Democracy on the other hand probably isn’t the most efficient form of getting things done, because ideally in incorporates everyone’s right, even folks who arguably are unfit/misinformed/un-knowledgeable (yes I know there’s no such word. I’m learn from palin :)) to be in a position to make a decision. Who is it that has a right to decide who is “fit or unfit”. It’s really would be a random decision..So the most appropriate option is to include everyone. So there’s plenty of disagreement on issues, and it generally would take longer to reach a consensus..However the advantages are really (ideally) decisions are a reflection of what a majority of people want I say ideally, because in practice, in recent times I’m not so sure this is the case in the U.S…More on that later)

So there’s a tradeoff here between democratic government versus such totalitarian/planned economies.

Now about the U.S…I’m not so sure really that our policies and votes are really counting that much anymore.. I mean, so often in CA is propositions pass with a majority only for them to be overturned by a judge due to a lawsuit filed by a special interest group… I think this really disenfranchise the majority who already decided based on the vote. It’s my be convenient for the minority of people who were against what the others want, but still I find it anti-democracy. For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.

Off subject. Regarding what I said about job growth. I think it was taken out of context. Certain areas, there will be no job growth. Not all, but specific areas. I don’t think we will have too many issues in technology. I think the bigger issue in technology will be finding people who would be able to do the work…..But we can agree to disagree on that point.
Green tech is a farce imho…The battle will be in personal communication and computing, where the two converge…It’s like what the Sanjay Motorola CEO has said…Like the how WWI started, the Duke has already been shot…Everyone else just hasn’t realized that it’s happened. There’s going to be an all out war in the personal communication and computing sector over the next decade….Consider this. The apple iPad last quarter just cannabalized laptop sales by 50%, according to sales number from Best Buy…Why do you think all these computer companies are scrambling to creating tablet devices now?

http://www.businessinsider.com/best-buy-ceo-ipad-is-cannibalizing-laptop-sales-2010-9

What I want to know is folks that are green, how much of this technology crap are you using, because a lot of this definitely is not green.

[Coronita]

[quote=equalizer]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx%5B/quote%5D

I don’t know how I got dragged into this one EQ. But, my take is that.

I do agree with you to a limited extent that

1)Democracy is not necessary the most efficient way to bring about change versus a totalitarian form of government

2)Totalitarian government is much more efficient in making changes….however the emphasis is FOR BETTER OR WORSE…

On one hand of the spectrum, China is much more efficient in advancement at the current stage only because the current government sees the value of capitalism and is cramming this down the rest of the country’s throat. However, one quickly forget that China also went through several years (decades) or being completely backassward. Look no further back than the cultural revolution, in which there was a government sanctioned agenda to cleanse the well educated. IF we have a dictator that is completely backassward, well the country is screwed…Look no further than North Korea.

Democracy on the other hand probably isn’t the most efficient form of getting things done, because ideally in incorporates everyone’s right, even folks who arguably are unfit/misinformed/un-knowledgeable (yes I know there’s no such word. I’m learn from palin :)) to be in a position to make a decision. Who is it that has a right to decide who is “fit or unfit”. It’s really would be a random decision..So the most appropriate option is to include everyone. So there’s plenty of disagreement on issues, and it generally would take longer to reach a consensus..However the advantages are really (ideally) decisions are a reflection of what a majority of people want I say ideally, because in practice, in recent times I’m not so sure this is the case in the U.S…More on that later)

So there’s a tradeoff here between democratic government versus such totalitarian/planned economies.

Now about the U.S…I’m not so sure really that our policies and votes are really counting that much anymore.. I mean, so often in CA is propositions pass with a majority only for them to be overturned by a judge due to a lawsuit filed by a special interest group… I think this really disenfranchise the majority who already decided based on the vote. It’s my be convenient for the minority of people who were against what the others want, but still I find it anti-democracy. For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.

Off subject. Regarding what I said about job growth. I think it was taken out of context. Certain areas, there will be no job growth. Not all, but specific areas. I don’t think we will have too many issues in technology. I think the bigger issue in technology will be finding people who would be able to do the work…..But we can agree to disagree on that point.
Green tech is a farce imho…The battle will be in personal communication and computing, where the two converge…It’s like what the Sanjay Motorola CEO has said…Like the how WWI started, the Duke has already been shot…Everyone else just hasn’t realized that it’s happened. There’s going to be an all out war in the personal communication and computing sector over the next decade….Consider this. The apple iPad last quarter just cannabalized laptop sales by 50%, according to sales number from Best Buy…Why do you think all these computer companies are scrambling to creating tablet devices now?

http://www.businessinsider.com/best-buy-ceo-ipad-is-cannibalizing-laptop-sales-2010-9

What I want to know is folks that are green, how much of this technology crap are you using, because a lot of this definitely is not green.

[Coronita]

[quote=equalizer]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx%5B/quote%5D

I don’t know how I got dragged into this one EQ. But, my take is that.

I do agree with you to a limited extent that

1)Democracy is not necessary the most efficient way to bring about change versus a totalitarian form of government

2)Totalitarian government is much more efficient in making changes….however the emphasis is FOR BETTER OR WORSE…

On one hand of the spectrum, China is much more efficient in advancement at the current stage only because the current government sees the value of capitalism and is cramming this down the rest of the country’s throat. However, one quickly forget that China also went through several years (decades) or being completely backassward. Look no further back than the cultural revolution, in which there was a government sanctioned agenda to cleanse the well educated. IF we have a dictator that is completely backassward, well the country is screwed…Look no further than North Korea.

Democracy on the other hand probably isn’t the most efficient form of getting things done, because ideally in incorporates everyone’s right, even folks who arguably are unfit/misinformed/un-knowledgeable (yes I know there’s no such word. I’m learn from palin :)) to be in a position to make a decision. Who is it that has a right to decide who is “fit or unfit”. It’s really would be a random decision..So the most appropriate option is to include everyone. So there’s plenty of disagreement on issues, and it generally would take longer to reach a consensus..However the advantages are really (ideally) decisions are a reflection of what a majority of people want I say ideally, because in practice, in recent times I’m not so sure this is the case in the U.S…More on that later)

So there’s a tradeoff here between democratic government versus such totalitarian/planned economies.

Now about the U.S…I’m not so sure really that our policies and votes are really counting that much anymore.. I mean, so often in CA is propositions pass with a majority only for them to be overturned by a judge due to a lawsuit filed by a special interest group… I think this really disenfranchise the majority who already decided based on the vote. It’s my be convenient for the minority of people who were against what the others want, but still I find it anti-democracy. For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.

Off subject. Regarding what I said about job growth. I think it was taken out of context. Certain areas, there will be no job growth. Not all, but specific areas. I don’t think we will have too many issues in technology. I think the bigger issue in technology will be finding people who would be able to do the work…..But we can agree to disagree on that point.
Green tech is a farce imho…The battle will be in personal communication and computing, where the two converge…It’s like what the Sanjay Motorola CEO has said…Like the how WWI started, the Duke has already been shot…Everyone else just hasn’t realized that it’s happened. There’s going to be an all out war in the personal communication and computing sector over the next decade….Consider this. The apple iPad last quarter just cannabalized laptop sales by 50%, according to sales number from Best Buy…Why do you think all these computer companies are scrambling to creating tablet devices now?

http://www.businessinsider.com/best-buy-ceo-ipad-is-cannibalizing-laptop-sales-2010-9

What I want to know is folks that are green, how much of this technology crap are you using, because a lot of this definitely is not green.

[afx114]

[quote=flu]For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.[/quote]

I agree with the gist of your argument, but not necessarily with your specific examples. It’s not so cut and dry as “overturning the will of the people” when it comes to civil rights. I would argue, and I’m guessing the judges you mention would argue as well, that civil rights are not subject to popular vote or legislation. At one time the majority of the people wanted interracial marriage banned, but the will of the majority was overturned for the rights of the minority. In many ways, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work and exactly why the balance of power was designed the way it was.

[afx114]

[quote=flu]For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.[/quote]

I agree with the gist of your argument, but not necessarily with your specific examples. It’s not so cut and dry as “overturning the will of the people” when it comes to civil rights. I would argue, and I’m guessing the judges you mention would argue as well, that civil rights are not subject to popular vote or legislation. At one time the majority of the people wanted interracial marriage banned, but the will of the majority was overturned for the rights of the minority. In many ways, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work and exactly why the balance of power was designed the way it was.

[afx114]

[quote=flu]For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.[/quote]

I agree with the gist of your argument, but not necessarily with your specific examples. It’s not so cut and dry as “overturning the will of the people” when it comes to civil rights. I would argue, and I’m guessing the judges you mention would argue as well, that civil rights are not subject to popular vote or legislation. At one time the majority of the people wanted interracial marriage banned, but the will of the majority was overturned for the rights of the minority. In many ways, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work and exactly why the balance of power was designed the way it was.

[afx114]

[quote=flu]For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.[/quote]

I agree with the gist of your argument, but not necessarily with your specific examples. It’s not so cut and dry as “overturning the will of the people” when it comes to civil rights. I would argue, and I’m guessing the judges you mention would argue as well, that civil rights are not subject to popular vote or legislation. At one time the majority of the people wanted interracial marriage banned, but the will of the majority was overturned for the rights of the minority. In many ways, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work and exactly why the balance of power was designed the way it was.

[afx114]

[quote=flu]For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.[/quote]

I agree with the gist of your argument, but not necessarily with your specific examples. It’s not so cut and dry as “overturning the will of the people” when it comes to civil rights. I would argue, and I’m guessing the judges you mention would argue as well, that civil rights are not subject to popular vote or legislation. At one time the majority of the people wanted interracial marriage banned, but the will of the majority was overturned for the rights of the minority. In many ways, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work and exactly why the balance of power was designed the way it was.

[Coronita]

[quote=afx114][quote=flu]For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.[/quote]

I agree with the gist of your argument, but not necessarily with your specific examples. It’s not so cut and dry as “overturning the will of the people” when it comes to civil rights. I would argue, and I’m guessing the judges you mention would argue as well, that civil rights are not subject to popular vote or legislation. At one time the majority of the people wanted interracial marriage banned, but the will of the majority was overturned for the rights of the minority. In many ways, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work and exactly why the balance of power was designed the way it was.[/quote]

Fine. I don’t want to argue over these two hot topics in this thread. There’s another thread about that.
I think you get my point…What I meant to say is that democracy isn’t necessarily the most efficient form of bring change, but I wouldn’t want to live in a planned/totalitarian government either.

[Coronita]

[quote=afx114][quote=flu]For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.[/quote]

I agree with the gist of your argument, but not necessarily with your specific examples. It’s not so cut and dry as “overturning the will of the people” when it comes to civil rights. I would argue, and I’m guessing the judges you mention would argue as well, that civil rights are not subject to popular vote or legislation. At one time the majority of the people wanted interracial marriage banned, but the will of the majority was overturned for the rights of the minority. In many ways, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work and exactly why the balance of power was designed the way it was.[/quote]

Fine. I don’t want to argue over these two hot topics in this thread. There’s another thread about that.
I think you get my point…What I meant to say is that democracy isn’t necessarily the most efficient form of bring change, but I wouldn’t want to live in a planned/totalitarian government either.

[Coronita]

[quote=afx114][quote=flu]For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.[/quote]

I agree with the gist of your argument, but not necessarily with your specific examples. It’s not so cut and dry as “overturning the will of the people” when it comes to civil rights. I would argue, and I’m guessing the judges you mention would argue as well, that civil rights are not subject to popular vote or legislation. At one time the majority of the people wanted interracial marriage banned, but the will of the majority was overturned for the rights of the minority. In many ways, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work and exactly why the balance of power was designed the way it was.[/quote]

Fine. I don’t want to argue over these two hot topics in this thread. There’s another thread about that.
I think you get my point…What I meant to say is that democracy isn’t necessarily the most efficient form of bring change, but I wouldn’t want to live in a planned/totalitarian government either.

[Coronita]

[quote=afx114][quote=flu]For example, the gay-marriage ban in CA. Personally, I had no issues with gay-marriage, but the voters did speak that they wanted the ban. Why should a judge be allowed to overturn what the people wanted? Same thing could be said about the immigration bill in Arizona. And this is also why CA will never do anything to take care of immigration issues/etc.[/quote]

I agree with the gist of your argument, but not necessarily with your specific examples. It’s not so cut and dry as “overturning the will of the people” when it comes to civil rights. I would argue, and I’m guessing the judges you mention would argue as well, that civil rights are not subject to popular vote or legislation. At one time the majority of the people wanted interracial marriage banned, but the will of the majority was overturned for the rights of the minority. In many ways, this is exactly how the system is supposed to work and exactly why the balance of power was designed the way it was.[/quote]

Fine. I don’t want to argue over these two hot topics in this thread. There’s another thread about that.
I think you get my point…What I meant to say is that democracy isn’t necessarily the most efficient form of bring change, but I wouldn’t want to live in a planned/totalitarian government either.

[Author]

Posts