Opporturnity

[Lost User]

Ka?l wrote:

And to compensate this we have to create 'real' value massively

'real value' = meaningless liberalist day dreaming verbage. where did you pick this up from karl.

Ka?l wrote:

green economy

how is this fundamentally different tothe current economy in view of the current crisis?

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[Lost User]

5 People like Karl have thier heads in the clouds and dont understand the simple reality of the current crisis.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[KaRl]

No one is deafer than he who doesn’t want to listen. Just two examples: - The car industry is falling. Let help them to build cars based on new technologies - by imposing some conditions when giving subsisdies, by helping R&D. - The house industry is falling. Let help them by subsidizing the renovation of houses so they become more energy-efficient.

When they kick at your front door How you gonna come? With your hands on your head Or on the trigger of your gun?

Fold with us! ¤ flickr

[Rob Graham]

wolfbinary wrote:

Take electric cars for example. When they first got started they couldn't make it very far. As the technology and money has been made available to further it, it has progressed considerably. While there are still problems to solve, its not as though they're insurmountable. We'll get there.

A commonly held misconception. Electric cars actually cause more pollution[^] and environmental damage than those they replace. It is less efficient to burn coal (or natural gas) to make electricity, transmit it with 50% line loss to change a battery (with additional losses in the charging process) in order to run the car than it would to power the car directly with gasoline. It astounds me that people actually think electric cars solve ANY problems. Hastily dumping a bunch of money into technologies whose impact is not well understood because of some emotional bias that leads us to beleive it is "better" than what we are replacing will have huge unintended consequences that we will only regret. We have already driven up the price of corn by subsidizing ethanol production to be "green", a foolish move that is almost impossible to undo because of the farming lobby.

[KaRl]

It's so good to see someone so superior that he is able to understand the simple reality of the current crisis? May I wash you feet?

How do you own disorder? Fold with us! ¤ flickr

[KaRl]

fat_boy wrote:

'real value' = meaningless liberalist day dreaming verbage. where did you pick this up from karl.

When you build something and sell it, you create value. When you make money with speculation, you don't.

fat_boy wrote:

how is this fundamentally different tothe current economy in view of the current crisis?

The way to go out this crisis will be by injecting enormous quantities of taxpayers money. Instead of giving this money without any control, let use it with thinking a step ahead.

Change of fashion is the tax levied by the industry of the poor on the vanity of the rich Fold with us! ¤ flickr

[Lost User]

Karl, the current crisis has nothing to do with CO2 or 'green' living. Basing an ecobnomy on environmental reasons wont have any effct on it. Like I wrote, but without response from you, if the banks dont start lending again there isnt going to be an economy at all, let alone one that could be considered green.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[KaRl]

Rob Graham wrote:

Electric cars actually cause more pollution[^]

The Prius is not an electric car but an hybrid. Anyway, This study has been completely contradicted by studies from MIT, Argonne National Labs and Carnegie Mellon’s Lifecycle Assessment Group. The reality is hybrids can significantly cut global warming pollution, reduce energy use, and save drivers thousands at the pump[^]

Patriotism is when love of your own people comes first; nationalism, when hate for people other than your own comes first Fold with us! ¤ flickr

[Lost User]

Ka?l wrote:

When you build something and sell it, you create value. When you make money with speculation, you don't.

Ha ha! I dont believe you can be that naieve Karl. Without lending for gain we wouldnt have an economy Karl beyond that of the early middle ages.

Ka?l wrote:

The way to go out this crisis will be by injecting enormous quantities of taxpayers money. Instead of giving this money without any control, let use it with thinking a step ahead.

I dont have a problem with investing in valid areas, but the principle problem is getting bad debt out of the banking system and permitting a house price drop in the US and UK of at least 30% without bringing the entire country to its knees.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[Oakman]

Ka?l wrote:

The car industry is falling. Let help them to build cars based on new technologies

OK. Do we give as much money to Honda who has been building new technology cars as well highly fuel-efficient gas powered ones as we do to GM which kept building gigantic SUVs and got the US Congress to declare them to be taxable as cars, not trucks?

Ka?l wrote:

The house industry is falling. Let help them by subsidizing the renovation of houses so they become more energy-efficient.

Are we talking about the one-year inventory of empty houses that are for sale at firesale prices (if you can qualify for an old-fashioned 20% down mortgage), or the thousands of homes that are in foreclosure but not yet bank-owned, or paid-for houses like mine? Speak up. I'm a little deaf when someone says, "Let's you and me spend your money." Edit/ I guess these questions were just too hard to answer :( /Edit

Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface

modified on Thursday, January 22, 2009 12:47 PM

[Mike Gaskey]

Ka?l wrote:

The car industry is falling

because people are out of work and can't afford the fucking things, which have been made more expensive through government intervention.

Ka?l wrote:

The house industry is falling

because banks loaned, gave mortgages to people that really weren't qualified, under pressure from the government. those mortgages are now toxic loans and the homes bought using these faulty mortgages are being repossessed at an alarming rate and being dumped on the market at low, low prices. So ... we have government intervention that totally fucked up or contributed mightily to fucking up two industries and our cure is more government intervention??? Yep, makes sense to me.

Mike - typical white guy. The USA does have universal healthcare, but you have to pay for it. D'oh. Thomas Mann - "Tolerance becomes a crime when applied to evil." The NYT - my leftist brochure. Calling an illegal alien an “undocumented immigrant” is like calling a drug dealer an “unlicensed pharmacist”. God doesn't believe in atheists, therefore they don't exist.

[KaRl]

fat_boy wrote:

the current crisis has nothing to do with CO2 or 'green' living.

No kidding.

fat_boy wrote:

if the banks dont start lending again there isnt going to be an economy at all

When the banks will start lending again, the crisis will still be there - unless you consider building another bubble based on credit as the solution? If so, I have to say to you that your solution will only lead to a massive deflation.

I prefer the company of peasants because they have not been educated sufficiently to reason incorrectly. Fold with us! ¤ flickr

[Lost User]

Ka?l wrote:

No kidding.

Thats a facetious response Karl.

Ka?l wrote:

the crisis will still be there

But it cant be fixed by moving to a green economy Karl! Which was your very siggestion. It can only be fixed by scrapping the financial instruments that are behind this or improving the regulation that allowed such bad practices to go unchecked.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[Lost User]

Mike Gaskey wrote:

repossessed at an alarming rate and being dumped on the market at low, low prices

This will happen in the UK by mid year. I can easially predict a house price collapse on 50% based on this because without mortgages, people arent even going to able to buy them cheap except those with cash, and they are going to driver a hard bargain.

Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription

[KaRl]

fat_boy wrote:

Thats a facetious response Karl.

Not even. You're the only one who mention environemental questions as a root for the current crisis.

fat_boy wrote:

But it cant be fixed by moving to a green economy Karl! Which was your very siggestion.

No. My suggestion is that this crisis can be an opportunity. My point is: Massive amounts of public money will be injected, let use it in a greener direction, it would be wiser.

fat_boy wrote:

It can only be fixed by scrapping the financial instruments that are behind this or improving the regulation that allowed such bad practices to go unchecked.

Scrapping financial instruments won't give a job to the millions who lost theirs worldwide.

How do you own disorder? Fold with us! ¤ flickr

[KaRl]

Mike Gaskey wrote:

because people are out of work and can't afford the f***ing things, which have been made more expensive through government intervention.

Rather because car makers make products which are not like the ones consumers want. That's why Toyota is now in front of GM.

Mike Gaskey wrote:

because banks loaned, gave mortgages to people that really weren't qualified, under pressure from the government.

At the gun point.... yeah right. Why do housing collapse in Europe too then? Just because there was a huge speculative bubble, as in the US.

Mike Gaskey wrote:

those mortgages are now toxic loans

Those toxic loans have been multiplied many times thanks to the financial practice of securitization.

Mike Gaskey wrote:

we have government intervention that totally f***ed

Dream on. Even Greenspan recognizes that the Free Market ideology is flawed.

The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread Fold with us! ¤ flickr

[phannon86]

While I'm not taken in by the whole global warming/climate change personally, I see the benefits of switching to a fuel type, why waste a finite resource that so many countries squabble over? And I'm with you on electric cars Rob, too many people are just blind to where the electricity comes from. It goes unnoticed simply if the emissions of the car itself while running are zero. Hydrogen fuelled cars seem much more viable (Honda FCX Clarity), if you're going to power a car, why not use the most common element in the universe?

He who makes a beast out of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man

[R Giskard Reventlov]

You said: "to suggest that the former head of it is "entrenched in world banking" is a serious misunderstanding" And he is an economist and an ex-advisor to the UK govt on financial matters. Besides, everyone gets advice about banking from people who know nothing about banking: they're called bankers.

me, me, me

[Rob Graham]

Nice quote out of context there Karl. You should apply for a job with MSNBC. What the article you linked to (which did not cite any of those studies) actually said was: "David Friedman, research director of the Clean Vehicles Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, thinks that CNW’s results and apparent methodology bring red flags. “This study has been completely contradicted by studies from MIT, Argonne National Labs and Carnegie Mellon’s Lifecycle Assessment Group. The reality is hybrids can significantly cut global warming pollution, reduce energy use, and save drivers thousands at the pump,” commented Friedman." So what we actually have is an assertion that makes claims about studies it does not cite or identify made by a third party with a clearly biased interest. I would still like to see proof that generating electricty in a power plant with fossil fuel (80% of the US supply), transmitting it over a lossy grid to charge batteries, then running a vehicle with an electric motor from those batteries is more efficient than using the fossile fuel to directy generate power at the point of use.

[Rob Graham]

the problem with hydrogen is where to get it. On earth most of it is bound up in water molecules, and you need to generate electricity to separate it out. You end up with the same problem: you don't really fix the problem, you just relocate it with increasing inefficiency. There may be other ways to separate hydrogen from oxygen than electrolysis, but they will all require energy input of some sort to break the molecular bonds. The physical process will also have some losses, so there will be a net loss of efficiency. Then there's the problem that water vapor produced by recombining it in a fuel cell is an even more potent green house gas than CO2. What happens when we start producing that on a scale 10x -100x greater than present? TANSTAFL.