Green New Deal

[sealybobo]

The main thing is, it should be mandated by law.

Not mandated by law but government should lead the charge.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Yea like 4 day school weeks. Think about all the buses that wouldn't be sucking down gas on Friday's if we did that.

They can give kids homework to do on Fridays.

And the post office could be closed on Tuesdays or whatever day they think is best.

It would kind of force industry to comply because parents need to be home for their children when they are not in school on Friday or Monday. Government offices and courts would be closed as well.

How about free school is delivered online? Why are we spending so much for such a shitty product? So outdated.

I’d love to see what public teachers who complain when they only work 8 months a year, would do if we did away with free public schools. Like newspapers no one buys anymore kids can log in and one teacher can teach hundreds of students by using technology.

Public schools are like prisons. So many who can afford to send their kids to private schools. I don’t even know any kids who go to public schools.

Anyways, we taxpayers could save a fortune if parents paid for their kids education.

Then if a ghetto mom can’t afford to educate her kids, that’s on her for having them.

We don’t need to encourage more people to have more kids. Mother Nature says enough is enough

Home schooling seems to have a lot of success. Unfortunately, many families are not in the position to have a single-earner income and still be able to support the family.

I believe the average educational cost is 12K per year per student. So why don't we pay home school parents money instead of giving it to the schools? If a mother wants to educate her own children, why not three or four other kids from the neighborhood? We will pay them 9K per student, and that would at least save taxpayers 3K a year per student, and eventually close the schools down.

It would not only help home school families, but perhaps open up opportunities for others who wish to work at home. If you can't afford to quit your job to teach your children, you might be able to do that by teaching other kids as well. It could also help people with physical disabilities who cannot work at a job.

I had a great idea once where we should get some women who are on welfare certified as daycare people and have them get off welfare

We have a lot of parents who need daycare. And we have a lot of single moms at home on welfare.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Not mandated by law but government should lead the charge.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

Yea like 4 day school weeks. Think about all the buses that wouldn't be sucking down gas on Friday's if we did that.

They can give kids homework to do on Fridays.

And the post office could be closed on Tuesdays or whatever day they think is best.

It would kind of force industry to comply because parents need to be home for their children when they are not in school on Friday or Monday. Government offices and courts would be closed as well.

How about free school is delivered online? Why are we spending so much for such a shitty product? So outdated.

I’d love to see what public teachers who complain when they only work 8 months a year, would do if we did away with free public schools. Like newspapers no one buys anymore kids can log in and one teacher can teach hundreds of students by using technology.

Public schools are like prisons. So many who can afford to send their kids to private schools. I don’t even know any kids who go to public schools.

Anyways, we taxpayers could save a fortune if parents paid for their kids education.

Then if a ghetto mom can’t afford to educate her kids, that’s on her for having them.

We don’t need to encourage more people to have more kids. Mother Nature says enough is enough

Home schooling seems to have a lot of success. Unfortunately, many families are not in the position to have a single-earner income and still be able to support the family.

I believe the average educational cost is 12K per year per student. So why don't we pay home school parents money instead of giving it to the schools? If a mother wants to educate her own children, why not three or four other kids from the neighborhood? We will pay them 9K per student, and that would at least save taxpayers 3K a year per student, and eventually close the schools down.

It would not only help home school families, but perhaps open up opportunities for others who wish to work at home. If you can't afford to quit your job to teach your children, you might be able to do that by teaching other kids as well. It could also help people with physical disabilities who cannot work at a job.

I had a great idea once where we should get some women who are on welfare certified as daycare people and have them get off welfare

We have a lot of parents who need daycare. And we have a lot of single moms at home on welfare.

You would have to use caution with that. Some of these welfare people I wouldn’t let take care of my dog.

It’s like when some people say only non-working people should serve on juries because they have the time. Good idea on paper because not many working people can afford to take off of work. On the other hand, if you or somebody you loved was on trial, would you want the Obama Phone lady on that jury?

Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[Taz]

Is the Green New Deal about legalizing weed?

 

[Redfish]

They are still heating their homes and they still get out. They may be going to different places (traffic happens when masses of people go to the same place at the same time)

A four day week is basically a wash as far as energy goes. If that appeals to you, go for it.

There are many businesses that do that (primarily in the summer...ya know when it's nicer to get out and drive)

In your defense I looked it up and Saturday is the busiest day on the roads.

I’m going to do more research. I still think we drive more miles on weekdays.

I used to drive 2 hours a day Monday through Friday. If I took fridays off that would be huge savings but now I’m 7 minutes from work so now when I’m off I drive MORE

The idea of a four-day workweek is not new.

The main thing is, it should be mandated by law.

Not mandated by law but government should lead the charge.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

If anything is to be accomplish government must be the driving force because it involves the entire world. Regardless of where greenhouse gases originate, the result is the same. Climate does not respect national boundaries.

which world government would do that? just asking. Is there some world governing body that has control of China, India, South America, north America, and Europe?

I think we could get a world consensus on reducing pollution, you don't need the unproven pollution/climate link to fight pollution. Why does the left insist on that? We all know the answer, don't we? Its because the left wants to control the lives of every human on earth.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Yea like 4 day school weeks. Think about all the buses that wouldn't be sucking down gas on Friday's if we did that.

They can give kids homework to do on Fridays.

And the post office could be closed on Tuesdays or whatever day they think is best.

It would kind of force industry to comply because parents need to be home for their children when they are not in school on Friday or Monday. Government offices and courts would be closed as well.

How about free school is delivered online? Why are we spending so much for such a shitty product? So outdated.

I’d love to see what public teachers who complain when they only work 8 months a year, would do if we did away with free public schools. Like newspapers no one buys anymore kids can log in and one teacher can teach hundreds of students by using technology.

Public schools are like prisons. So many who can afford to send their kids to private schools. I don’t even know any kids who go to public schools.

Anyways, we taxpayers could save a fortune if parents paid for their kids education.

Then if a ghetto mom can’t afford to educate her kids, that’s on her for having them.

We don’t need to encourage more people to have more kids. Mother Nature says enough is enough

Home schooling seems to have a lot of success. Unfortunately, many families are not in the position to have a single-earner income and still be able to support the family.

I believe the average educational cost is 12K per year per student. So why don't we pay home school parents money instead of giving it to the schools? If a mother wants to educate her own children, why not three or four other kids from the neighborhood? We will pay them 9K per student, and that would at least save taxpayers 3K a year per student, and eventually close the schools down.

It would not only help home school families, but perhaps open up opportunities for others who wish to work at home. If you can't afford to quit your job to teach your children, you might be able to do that by teaching other kids as well. It could also help people with physical disabilities who cannot work at a job.

I had a great idea once where we should get some women who are on welfare certified as daycare people and have them get off welfare

We have a lot of parents who need daycare. And we have a lot of single moms at home on welfare.

You would have to use caution with that. Some of these welfare people I wouldn’t let take care of my dog.

It’s like when some people say only non-working people should serve on juries because they have the time. Good idea on paper because not many working people can afford to take off of work. On the other hand, if you or somebody you loved was on trial, would you want the Obama Phone lady on that jury?

Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

It's supposed to be a "jury of your peers". Not sure there's any sense in which I can consider that "my peers".

 

[sealybobo]

It would kind of force industry to comply because parents need to be home for their children when they are not in school on Friday or Monday. Government offices and courts would be closed as well.

How about free school is delivered online? Why are we spending so much for such a shitty product? So outdated.

I’d love to see what public teachers who complain when they only work 8 months a year, would do if we did away with free public schools. Like newspapers no one buys anymore kids can log in and one teacher can teach hundreds of students by using technology.

Public schools are like prisons. So many who can afford to send their kids to private schools. I don’t even know any kids who go to public schools.

Anyways, we taxpayers could save a fortune if parents paid for their kids education.

Then if a ghetto mom can’t afford to educate her kids, that’s on her for having them.

We don’t need to encourage more people to have more kids. Mother Nature says enough is enough

Home schooling seems to have a lot of success. Unfortunately, many families are not in the position to have a single-earner income and still be able to support the family.

I believe the average educational cost is 12K per year per student. So why don't we pay home school parents money instead of giving it to the schools? If a mother wants to educate her own children, why not three or four other kids from the neighborhood? We will pay them 9K per student, and that would at least save taxpayers 3K a year per student, and eventually close the schools down.

It would not only help home school families, but perhaps open up opportunities for others who wish to work at home. If you can't afford to quit your job to teach your children, you might be able to do that by teaching other kids as well. It could also help people with physical disabilities who cannot work at a job.

I had a great idea once where we should get some women who are on welfare certified as daycare people and have them get off welfare

We have a lot of parents who need daycare. And we have a lot of single moms at home on welfare.

You would have to use caution with that. Some of these welfare people I wouldn’t let take care of my dog.

It’s like when some people say only non-working people should serve on juries because they have the time. Good idea on paper because not many working people can afford to take off of work. On the other hand, if you or somebody you loved was on trial, would you want the Obama Phone lady on that jury?

Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

It's supposed to be a "jury of your peers". Not sure there's any sense in which I can consider that "my peers".

And pro life people want these women having babies and not aborting them?

 

[Taz]

It would kind of force industry to comply because parents need to be home for their children when they are not in school on Friday or Monday. Government offices and courts would be closed as well.

How about free school is delivered online? Why are we spending so much for such a shitty product? So outdated.

I’d love to see what public teachers who complain when they only work 8 months a year, would do if we did away with free public schools. Like newspapers no one buys anymore kids can log in and one teacher can teach hundreds of students by using technology.

Public schools are like prisons. So many who can afford to send their kids to private schools. I don’t even know any kids who go to public schools.

Anyways, we taxpayers could save a fortune if parents paid for their kids education.

Then if a ghetto mom can’t afford to educate her kids, that’s on her for having them.

We don’t need to encourage more people to have more kids. Mother Nature says enough is enough

Home schooling seems to have a lot of success. Unfortunately, many families are not in the position to have a single-earner income and still be able to support the family.

I believe the average educational cost is 12K per year per student. So why don't we pay home school parents money instead of giving it to the schools? If a mother wants to educate her own children, why not three or four other kids from the neighborhood? We will pay them 9K per student, and that would at least save taxpayers 3K a year per student, and eventually close the schools down.

It would not only help home school families, but perhaps open up opportunities for others who wish to work at home. If you can't afford to quit your job to teach your children, you might be able to do that by teaching other kids as well. It could also help people with physical disabilities who cannot work at a job.

I had a great idea once where we should get some women who are on welfare certified as daycare people and have them get off welfare

We have a lot of parents who need daycare. And we have a lot of single moms at home on welfare.

You would have to use caution with that. Some of these welfare people I wouldn’t let take care of my dog.

It’s like when some people say only non-working people should serve on juries because they have the time. Good idea on paper because not many working people can afford to take off of work. On the other hand, if you or somebody you loved was on trial, would you want the Obama Phone lady on that jury?

Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

It's supposed to be a "jury of your peers". Not sure there's any sense in which I can consider that "my peers".

I'm sure they could find some mentally retarded people to judge you.

 

[easyt65]

WOW....231 'pages' later, and we are still amazingly talking about...

...A plan to attempt to achieve the un-achievable based on the use of NON-existent technology that would admittedly cost more money than we could ever afford to pay even if the government robbed 'the wealthy' of every dime they owned and took every resource from every successful business sin the United States.

The ATTEMPT to achieve this alone would reduce the United States to modern-day Venezuela.

 

[jc456]

The idea of a four-day workweek is not new.

The main thing is, it should be mandated by law.

Not mandated by law but government should lead the charge.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

If anything is to be accomplish government must be the driving force because it involves the entire world. Regardless of where greenhouse gases originate, the result is the same. Climate does not respect national boundaries.

why do some countries get colder than others if the same amount of CO2 is above them?

There are many reasons why some countries are very cold and other are very hot. Probably the most significant is the fact that the earth is round and not flat, the Sun's rays don't fall evenly on the land and oceans. The sun shines more directly near the equator bringing these areas more warmth. In addition, there are winds, storms, and of course greenhouse gases which all effect the climate.

Greenhouse gases often get a bum rap because of climate change. However, greenhouse gases are extremely important to our survival. Although they are only a tiny part of our atmosphere, without them there would be no weather because the lower and upper atmospheric temperatures would be nearly the same. For any point on earth there would little of no variation in temperature. There would essentially no rainfall resulting in mass extinctions of plant and animal life.

Greenhouse gases not only make possible weather but they act as a thermostat to regulate it. The intricate relationship between greenhouse gases and climate is a marvel of creation and one that man should not fuck around with.

So the heater function of CO2 can’t warm cold countries? Only warm warm ones? Hmmm I think you don’t know

 

[sealybobo]

The main thing is, it should be mandated by law.

Not mandated by law but government should lead the charge.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

If anything is to be accomplish government must be the driving force because it involves the entire world. Regardless of where greenhouse gases originate, the result is the same. Climate does not respect national boundaries.

why do some countries get colder than others if the same amount of CO2 is above them?

There are many reasons why some countries are very cold and other are very hot. Probably the most significant is the fact that the earth is round and not flat, the Sun's rays don't fall evenly on the land and oceans. The sun shines more directly near the equator bringing these areas more warmth. In addition, there are winds, storms, and of course greenhouse gases which all effect the climate.

Greenhouse gases often get a bum rap because of climate change. However, greenhouse gases are extremely important to our survival. Although they are only a tiny part of our atmosphere, without them there would be no weather because the lower and upper atmospheric temperatures would be nearly the same. For any point on earth there would little of no variation in temperature. There would essentially no rainfall resulting in mass extinctions of plant and animal life.

Greenhouse gases not only make possible weather but they act as a thermostat to regulate it. The intricate relationship between greenhouse gases and climate is a marvel of creation and one that man should not fuck around with.

So the heater function of CO2 can’t warm cold countries? Only warm warm ones? Hmmm I think you don’t know

Your question is probably a stupid one

Why Is the Cold Weather So Extreme if the Earth Is Warming?

But I'm not a scientist.

You should ask the experts except you don't believe them.

 

[Cecilie1200]

How about free school is delivered online? Why are we spending so much for such a shitty product? So outdated.

I’d love to see what public teachers who complain when they only work 8 months a year, would do if we did away with free public schools. Like newspapers no one buys anymore kids can log in and one teacher can teach hundreds of students by using technology.

Public schools are like prisons. So many who can afford to send their kids to private schools. I don’t even know any kids who go to public schools.

Anyways, we taxpayers could save a fortune if parents paid for their kids education.

Then if a ghetto mom can’t afford to educate her kids, that’s on her for having them.

We don’t need to encourage more people to have more kids. Mother Nature says enough is enough

Home schooling seems to have a lot of success. Unfortunately, many families are not in the position to have a single-earner income and still be able to support the family.

I believe the average educational cost is 12K per year per student. So why don't we pay home school parents money instead of giving it to the schools? If a mother wants to educate her own children, why not three or four other kids from the neighborhood? We will pay them 9K per student, and that would at least save taxpayers 3K a year per student, and eventually close the schools down.

It would not only help home school families, but perhaps open up opportunities for others who wish to work at home. If you can't afford to quit your job to teach your children, you might be able to do that by teaching other kids as well. It could also help people with physical disabilities who cannot work at a job.

I had a great idea once where we should get some women who are on welfare certified as daycare people and have them get off welfare

We have a lot of parents who need daycare. And we have a lot of single moms at home on welfare.

You would have to use caution with that. Some of these welfare people I wouldn’t let take care of my dog.

It’s like when some people say only non-working people should serve on juries because they have the time. Good idea on paper because not many working people can afford to take off of work. On the other hand, if you or somebody you loved was on trial, would you want the Obama Phone lady on that jury?

Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

It's supposed to be a "jury of your peers". Not sure there's any sense in which I can consider that "my peers".

I'm sure they could find some mentally retarded people to judge you.

I said MY peers, not yours.

 

[Taz]

Home schooling seems to have a lot of success. Unfortunately, many families are not in the position to have a single-earner income and still be able to support the family.

I believe the average educational cost is 12K per year per student. So why don't we pay home school parents money instead of giving it to the schools? If a mother wants to educate her own children, why not three or four other kids from the neighborhood? We will pay them 9K per student, and that would at least save taxpayers 3K a year per student, and eventually close the schools down.

It would not only help home school families, but perhaps open up opportunities for others who wish to work at home. If you can't afford to quit your job to teach your children, you might be able to do that by teaching other kids as well. It could also help people with physical disabilities who cannot work at a job.

I had a great idea once where we should get some women who are on welfare certified as daycare people and have them get off welfare

We have a lot of parents who need daycare. And we have a lot of single moms at home on welfare.

You would have to use caution with that. Some of these welfare people I wouldn’t let take care of my dog.

It’s like when some people say only non-working people should serve on juries because they have the time. Good idea on paper because not many working people can afford to take off of work. On the other hand, if you or somebody you loved was on trial, would you want the Obama Phone lady on that jury?

Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

It's supposed to be a "jury of your peers". Not sure there's any sense in which I can consider that "my peers".

I'm sure they could find some mentally retarded people to judge you.

I said MY peers, not yours.

So retards with a really hairy bush. Got it.

 

[jc456]

AOC made history...

The quickest, greatest, most embarrassing flop by a newly elected politician...

As well as eliminated 25000 jobs with one comment.

 

[Flopper]

The main thing is, it should be mandated by law.

Not mandated by law but government should lead the charge.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

If anything is to be accomplish government must be the driving force because it involves the entire world. Regardless of where greenhouse gases originate, the result is the same. Climate does not respect national boundaries.

why do some countries get colder than others if the same amount of CO2 is above them?

There are many reasons why some countries are very cold and other are very hot. Probably the most significant is the fact that the earth is round and not flat, the Sun's rays don't fall evenly on the land and oceans. The sun shines more directly near the equator bringing these areas more warmth. In addition, there are winds, storms, and of course greenhouse gases which all effect the climate.

Greenhouse gases often get a bum rap because of climate change. However, greenhouse gases are extremely important to our survival. Although they are only a tiny part of our atmosphere, without them there would be no weather because the lower and upper atmospheric temperatures would be nearly the same. For any point on earth there would little of no variation in temperature. There would essentially no rainfall resulting in mass extinctions of plant and animal life.

Greenhouse gases not only make possible weather but they act as a thermostat to regulate it. The intricate relationship between greenhouse gases and climate is a marvel of creation and one that man should not fuck around with.

So the heater function of CO2 can’t warm cold countries? Only warm warm ones? Hmmm I think you don’t know

Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere reflect radiated heat back to earth regardless of whether a country is in the arctic or the tropics.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I had a great idea once where we should get some women who are on welfare certified as daycare people and have them get off welfare

We have a lot of parents who need daycare. And we have a lot of single moms at home on welfare.

You would have to use caution with that. Some of these welfare people I wouldn’t let take care of my dog.

It’s like when some people say only non-working people should serve on juries because they have the time. Good idea on paper because not many working people can afford to take off of work. On the other hand, if you or somebody you loved was on trial, would you want the Obama Phone lady on that jury?

Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

It's supposed to be a "jury of your peers". Not sure there's any sense in which I can consider that "my peers".

I'm sure they could find some mentally retarded people to judge you.

I said MY peers, not yours.

So retards with a really hairy bush. Got it.

Please confine your sexual obsession with me to your personal fap sessions. Thanks.

 

[Flopper]

Something I have always wondered about is the dispersal of greenhouse gases and their effect on local weather. Greenhouses gas levels are a lot higher in say, Beijing than they are in Samoa due to local use of fossil fuels and other human activity.

 

[easyt65]

Something I have always wondered about is the dispersal of greenhouse gases and their effect on local weather. Greenhouses gas levels are a lot higher in say, Beijing than they are in Samoa due to local use of fossil fuels and other human activity.

No worries - AOC and Cory Booker have a plan for saying the earth from COW FARTS!

 

[jc456]

Not mandated by law but government should lead the charge.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

If anything is to be accomplish government must be the driving force because it involves the entire world. Regardless of where greenhouse gases originate, the result is the same. Climate does not respect national boundaries.

why do some countries get colder than others if the same amount of CO2 is above them?

There are many reasons why some countries are very cold and other are very hot. Probably the most significant is the fact that the earth is round and not flat, the Sun's rays don't fall evenly on the land and oceans. The sun shines more directly near the equator bringing these areas more warmth. In addition, there are winds, storms, and of course greenhouse gases which all effect the climate.

Greenhouse gases often get a bum rap because of climate change. However, greenhouse gases are extremely important to our survival. Although they are only a tiny part of our atmosphere, without them there would be no weather because the lower and upper atmospheric temperatures would be nearly the same. For any point on earth there would little of no variation in temperature. There would essentially no rainfall resulting in mass extinctions of plant and animal life.

Greenhouse gases not only make possible weather but they act as a thermostat to regulate it. The intricate relationship between greenhouse gases and climate is a marvel of creation and one that man should not fuck around with.

So the heater function of CO2 can’t warm cold countries? Only warm warm ones? Hmmm I think you don’t know

Greenhouse gases in the atmosphere reflect radiated heat back to earth regardless of whether a country is in the arctic or the tropics.

how do greenhouse gases reflect? are you saying they are glass? LOL

 

[jc456]

Something I have always wondered about is the dispersal of greenhouse gases and their effect on local weather. Greenhouses gas levels are a lot higher in say, Beijing than they are in Samoa due to local use of fossil fuels and other human activity.

boi, you swallowed the hook. too fking funny. perhaps one day you can tell me how warm CO2 is at different levels of ppm. hint, no one knows. but don't let that stop you from looking.

 

[sealybobo]

Something I have always wondered about is the dispersal of greenhouse gases and their effect on local weather. Greenhouses gas levels are a lot higher in say, Beijing than they are in Samoa due to local use of fossil fuels and other human activity.

I saw a show about the planet and they showed how the trees in the Amazon keep everyting from leaving the Amazon.

And they explained why Hawaii can experience all 4 seasons every day of the year. They are in the perfect spot. And how the desert storms travel the globe. Everything can be explained scientifically.