Jump to content

nkreed

Community Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    833

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by nkreed

    Global warming err Climate change HOAX

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    1 hour ago, /dev/null said:

    https://science.slashdot.org/story/18/10/04/1918200/wide-scale-us-wind-power-could-cause-significant-warming-study-says

     

     

    Wow. Talk about using the smallest thing to point to large scale disaster.  The "significant warming" that is pointed out in the article is one that is on a small scale with 100% wind energy production (we know this to be improbable). Even then the affect is significantly smaller than our current waste heat production of fossil fuels.

     

     

    President Donald J. Trump's Supreme Court Associate Justice Kavanaugh

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    6 hours ago, Alaska Darin said:

    Please, tell me where I stand on health care.  I can’t wait to find out what I think.

     

    You don’t get to pretend that the “Affordable Care Act” wasn’t sold as being a cheaper solution to what was in place...it’s literally in the name.  Welcome to consequences.

     

     

    Alaska Darin, well played. It was out of line to presume something.  I never let you know my feelings at to the abomination of a law Obamacare in it's finality.  The Who said it best, "meet the new boss. Same as the old boss."  Nothing changed, the insurance companies just made more money.

     

     

    4 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

    The problem with declarations that start with "This is the reason that...." is that where human beings are concerned, there are an infinite number of reasons and rationales to explain why people choose to handle things a certain way.  You're oversimplifying an incredibly complex issue to the extent that you're arguing against using logic and reason to analyze the veracity of one individuals claims v another.  To suggest that your commentary has nothing to do with these hearings, while on a message board specifically discussing this hearing seems a bit shallow.  Here's the reason my thoughts on Ford's allegations are not "the problem" ..my thoughts on Ford v Kavanaugh have nothing to do with my thoughts on any other case involving allegations of sexual assault. 

     

    I do maintain that people unwilling to consider the totality of the information available at the click of a button and defer to "everyone should be believed every time" are a much bigger problem than what I post on a message board. 

     

    The good news is you are consistent. There are many, many powerful people in government and beyond that are hoping that a large number of people think that health insurance can be boiled down to "we are all one pool of healthy and sick" which then obviously and definitively means lower cost. 

     

    Seriously, read a book or two about actuarial science, risk management and human behavior. 

    You're right, I do oversimplify. How else am I to communicate with those that are too dumb otherwise? /s 

     

    I have not argued for a lack of reasoning. In fact I will always argue FOR reasoning. Just because I left a comment stating that women have been repressed does not assume that I am without reason.

     

    What is the old addage? Oh yes, "the bigger the lie, the more it will be believed." And what has this administration been saying since day one about those that made accusations? These are people looking to make money. So surprise that same line of thinking comes out with this accusation.

     

    I'm not going to say that this may not be the reason. Heck, even Hitler knew that in a "big lie there is always credibility; because the broad masses of a Nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than conciously or voluntarily" (Mein Kampf).  So that lends me to ask, which side is making the broad lie that reached down to the emotional nature? It could be partisan in nature, or it could be the administrations lie told over and over too.  Interesting thoughts no doubt.

     

    Healthcare- how has capitalism helped with the insurance industry?  Where are the checks and balances of a neutral capitalistic society? Oh yes demand is so high that it commands a higher cost?  How about limiting the supply by having a form of medice that treats the human, not the symptoms?  We have moved too far away from treating the entire body as a whole toward a system that treats each symptom with a pill, that may cause a side effect for which another pill exists. I really do feel that we can simplify it down that far.

     

    4 hours ago, LABillzFan said:

     

    There is an entire thread dedicated to the health care discussion here, so I'm sure we should keep that discussion isolated, but I can't let this go: one of THE primary selling points of Obamacare was that it was going to reduce annual health insurance costs, on average, $2500 per year. The promise was never to get it to $20K a year for everyone since we were well on our way to that number already.

     

    THAT is revisionist history. It's like arguing that yes, Obama said if you like your doctor, you could keep your doctor, but if you lost  your doctor, that must mean you didn't like your doctor.

    I will go to the healthcare thread to post more if need be. Yup, it was a sorry attempt to stifle the rising costs.  The original bill, as proposed would have worked, however the final outcome was terrible but exactly what the insurance companies wanted. I will not lie and say that Obamacare worked, cause I don't believe that's what I said. I just wanted to make it clear that the insurance issue has not changed with the exception that the insurance carriers are making more money.

     

     

    And how much time do you all have to make these posts? Jeeze these forums move fast!

    President Donald J. Trump's Supreme Court Associate Justice Kavanaugh

    in Politics, Polls, and Pundits

    Posted

    3 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

    I don't resent anyone, I simply pointed out the facts as I see them. But I'm not a dimwit, either, and I will tell you that I don't wrap myself in a cloak of emotions when considering the difference between "actual survivors of sexual assault" and a political operative/pawn who resets the narrative du juor. 

     

    I'd also argue that it's perfectly reasonable to call bull sh6t on a bull sh6t story....and if somehow you or anyone else sees that as a reflection on personsally held beliefs on actual victims of sexual assault, that's really your issue, not mine. 

     

    Btw, news has leaked that the FBI found no corroboration of the esteemed dr's story, not surprising anyone as there were several versions.  Shocking. 

     

    This is why there is significant amount of under reporting of sexual assaults. Call bull on what is "presumed bull" is how we got here. Women have generally been thought of as less of a person since forever.  (I'll conceed some religions and cultures actually point to women as the sacred line).  However in European thought and the Western world born from European expansion, the woman has been treated as inferior.  So if a woman makes a statement of sexual assault, it has historically been presumed bull if the male is of any importance to society.  

     

    I'm not typing this to make any statement about the proceedings.  I wanted to point out the presumed bull part of the statement and to try to explain the "other sides" thinking.

     

     

    2 hours ago, Alaska Darin said:

    If you start listening to the fans, you’re going to become one.  Principles are one of the most important parts of real leadership.  This is plainly an attempt at mob rule, much like Obamacare was.  You sell two or three easy to understand points by hammering them incessantly, while ignoring anything even remotely reasonable.  That’s why the dummies are able to talk about “preexisting conditions” this election cycle while ignoring that everyone is paying an average of about $20k a year for health care.

     

    Liberal partisans are literally the dumbest people on the planet.

    Health insurance.....yikes here we go.  We are paying 20k a year. First, we were well on our way to that number without Obamacare.  Using this as an argument that it's Obamacares fault is revisionist history.  Second, who can afford that? 20k on healthcare is absolutely ridiculous and where do these profits go? Pharma, medical tech and insurance (liability insurance that is). If these numbers don't tell you that our healthcare system is absolutely out of control I don't know what will. Again, blaming it on Obamacare is ludicrous.  Our healthcare industry was headed this way well before the law.

     

    I think I know where you will fall in this argument, but I would rather have an entire nation paying for health insurance through a single means than only those who can afford it through a private industry.  The cost would be reduced because we are all one pool of healthy and sick, and the ability to control cost would be significant.

     

    I'm also confident a second additional insurance market will exist as well, leaving people who can afford the payments to have additional items not covered under the single system.  BTW, nice assertion at the end.?

    • Like (+1) 2

    NanoCrystal Electricity/ Tesla

    in Off the Wall Archives

    Posted

    59 minutes ago, ExiledInIllinois said:

    Yep!

     

    Got in a heated debate w/the BossWoman & Her Assistant (My Daughter) standing in line @ Meijer and then driving home. LoL...

     

    They took the Augie argument.  I was in no good mood seeing the Bills getting rubbed out by the Packers via my phone.

     

    It revolutionized nothing. All I had was a TV in my pocket, according to My argument... They saw differently.  On top of it, I was balancing the bank book while texting the local Bears fan chump @ work who was chirping about the Bears running roughshod over putrid Tampa D!

     

    My argument... Nothing has changed... Except that I was out and about multi-tasking... I would have still been prickly & cross! LoL...

     

    I Thanked technology for enjoying a Big Indian Brunch Buffet and shopping w/My two favorite Ladies while the game was on.

     

    I had radio, TV, etc... All as one one in My pocket.  That's it.

     

    Nikola Tesla predicted all this stuff in the 1920s.  The concept was there.

    So is there anything that is invented that is brand new? Unless we have scientifically discovered anti matter or have created a Quantum Leap accelerator there will never be a new invention.

     

    And to Figster's point, if we can use the nanocrystal electricity and electromagnetic propulsion together well enough maybe we can get higher and faster roller coasters!

    • Haha (+1) 1

    NanoCrystal Electricity/ Tesla

    in Off the Wall Archives

    Posted

    On 9/29/2018 at 11:32 PM, ExiledInIllinois said:

    No.  Not really.  Electricity, radio, TV, how we travel, microwave, dishwasher... Stuff like that.

     

    Maybe I am over simplifying it.

     

    I can see robotics being revolutionizing.

     

    This is an interesting topic, but what do all inventions really have in common?  They make our lives easier in some way.

     

    I would consider in a few years self driving cars as a revolutionary item you speak of.  This fully fits with your TV, radio examples, because those both just changed how we listen to others, while a self driving car changes how we drive.

     

    Others I can think of that fit in this discussion: Bluetooth, cordless power tools, Roomba (that's robotics), 3g then 4g and soon 5g, cellular phones. I'm sure there's a lot more it just has to be thought on a little longer.

    • Like (+1) 1

    The Bills Worked Out Eight Players Yesterday

    in The Stadium Wall Archives

    Posted

    8 hours ago, The Wiz said:

    I can't tell if you are agreeing with me or trying to tell me I forgot about the snow game.

     

    I was including the snow game if the latter.  That's why I said 3 and not 2 starts.

    Both actually. I should have worded it better, obviously.  I was under the impression the initial post was about a future start. 

     

    In my conversations with many a Bills fan, not on TBD, they seem to forget he started the snow game. So in this respect we agree, he started 3 games he couldn't finish.

     

    With that said, please accept this...?

    Pegulas get NLL expansion team in Rochester

    in Off the Wall Archives

    Posted · Edited by nkreed
    Opening my mouth before thinking.

    57 minutes ago, apuszczalowski said:

    Another franchise to run into the ground?

    The real question is can he own the team, since he owns the Sabres and Bills?   And what about the Bandits which he owned through the Sabres I thought.

     

    Edit- I read the article and found out that indeed he will own to teams in the same league..... Seems like a conflict of interest.

    (meta): "thumbs-up" vs. "thanks"

    in Off the Wall Archives

    Posted · Edited by nkreed

    32 minutes ago, /dev/null said:

    that's what we have DC Tom for

    Don't you mean his bot?

     

    Also, on a side note about the buttons.  Every confused decreases the +rating listed next to the username by one. I'm not saying it matters, but I thought I'd throw that out there for those that track it.

    • Sad 1
×
×
  • Create New...