NASA scuttling more space missions so it can spend more on global warming

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 08:01:40 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Now that you are paying attention I'll post this again:

French government expenditures by %GDP are more in line with Cuba's, ie very high.

France certainly needs some capitalism in order not to be a third world country.

I saw it the first time. I didn't respond because it's a non sequitur.
You clearly have no idea what socialism is. It has nothing to do with
how a society chooses to invest its resources.

France is as capitalistic as the U.S., if not more. Free enterprise is
thriving there.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 12:37:22 -0400, AM wrote:

Socialism is largely non-existent in the developed western world.



You have got to be kidding me !

Not at all. Where do you see socialism?

On Monday, March 17, 2014 1:12:40 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 12:37:22 -0400, AM wrote:

Socialism is largely non-existent in the developed western world.

You have got to be kidding me !

Not at all. Where do you see socialism?

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...04260912499092

It is amazing to see St Patrick's day become a Northern hemisphere Spring festival with green being the appropriate color as life returns to the fields and forests in that tone and as life wakes up in tandem with the great cycles of our planet in terms of migrations,the hibernation cycle and something as simple as the birds singing in the morning. This is what makes astronomy such a joy as orchestrating the events are the great motions which should be close to the hearts and minds of those who engage themselves with creation.

So this year readers should appreciate the dual rotations which make the seasons possible as one polar coordinate turns into darkness while the other emerges into the Sun's appearance and polar day. Of course these locations represent all locations on the planet as they turn once to the Sun aside from and in addition to daily rotation.

So this is a St Patrick's day gift that is here to stay for all those who are spirited along with the festival that is closest to the Northern Equinox and signals the end of meteorological winter. Great technological achievements are meaningless without heart and that is why contemporary tools are here to help people appreciate discoveries rather than as factual tyrannies. Like all things,only confident people and those comfortable with themselves will know what I mean.

On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 12:09:13 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Not at all. Where do you see socialism?

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...04260912499092

Nope. Having some companies backed by the state doesn't make a country
socialist. Having all or most companies controlled by the state does.
But we don't see that, do we?

On Monday, March 17, 2014 1:29:09 PM UTC-7, oriel36 wrote:

It is amazing to see St Patrick's day become a Northern hemisphere Spring festival with green being the appropriate color...

Just FYI...

http://www.ibtimes.co.in/articles/54...p-10-facts.htm

"Several artwork of the saint shows him dressed in blue, leading the color to be associated with St Patrick's Day. But later on, green began to be associated with the day after Ireland adopted green as its national color. Also, popular Irish legend has it that fairies wore green. This is one of the reasons why adults eat, wear and drink green on St Patrick's Day."

So this year readers should appreciate the dual rotations which make the seasons possible...

Of course, that should read as "about 366.25 sidereal rotations (or about 365.25 solar rotations) and one "apparent rotation"...

On Monday, March 17, 2014 4:37:42 PM UTC-4, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Mon, 17 Mar 2014 12:09:13 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

Not at all. Where do you see socialism?

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/...04260912499092

Nope. Having some companies backed by the state doesn't make a country
socialist. Having all or most companies controlled by the state does.

You are making a logical error once again. While a government that owned/controlled all companies would be called socialist, it would NOT have to own/control even "most companies" to be called socialist.

French governments have long promoted socialist policies and still do:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/1...t-farrage.html

Those with money to invest or wishing for a more competitive environment seem to be looking elsewhere.

France's high government expenditures relative to GDP should be another clue.

On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 02:52:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

You are making a logical error once again. While a government that owned/controlled all companies would be called socialist, it would NOT have to own/control even "most companies" to be called socialist.

Fine. If you want to define individual policies as socialist, every
country on Earth has some. That doesn't make them socialist nations,
however.

France's high government expenditures relative to GDP should be another clue.

There is no connection between government expenditures and choice of
economy.

On 3/13/2014 3:56 AM, wrote:
On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 9:58:31 PM UTC-4, RichA wrote:
On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 12:53:25 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:

On Sunday, March 9, 2014 8:43:34 PM UTC-7, RichA wrote:

The Eurotrash socialists are busy bankrupting their countries by squandering money on solar and wind power. Spain was a good example of this. I hardly think they'll pony up any more money for a space mission.

And conventional nuclear energy that's going to cost future generations those extra billion per year (and that's only if nothing bad ever happens) is not a bankrupting consideration?

A billion per year is chump change compared to the cost of overall much more expensive energy.

Agreed. An extra $1000 per year on utilities will result in $200 billion lost by US consumers alone. And that's a VERY conservative estimate. The resultant drag on the economy and incomes will make the situation even worse.

Obviously you don't even care about those extra billions or even the
$5+T that is still missing in action.

How many hundred million humans do you plan on culling this coming year?

On Tuesday, March 18, 2014 3:32:30 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:
On 3/13/2014 3:56 AM, wsnell01 wrote:

On Wednesday, March 12, 2014 9:58:31 PM UTC-4, RichA wrote:

A billion per year is chump change compared to the cost of overall much more expensive energy.

Agreed. An extra $1000 per year on utilities will result in $200 billion lost by US consumers alone. And that's a VERY conservative estimate. The resultant drag on the economy and incomes will make the situation even worse.

Obviously you don't even care about those extra billions

What makes you say that?

or even the $5+T that is still missing in action.

Show proof of a "missing" $5,000,000,000,000.

How many hundred million humans do you plan on culling this coming year?

Zero.