Unemployment rate climbed to 11.5 percent in Calif.

[Marty]

We are hurting in California and it is hard to think about fishing when there are lots of anglers without a job. The funny thing is it does not matter what party or Ideological you are unemployment can hit anyone of us. Just a year ago the unemployment rate was 6.8 percent but the cause of the problem was years in the making and the solution is also years away.

What should be done and how would or what suggestion would you offer to those in Sacramento? You know what I think = http://www.westernbass.com/forum/viewto ... =50240&f=8

What would you do or suggest?

[Bobby Burgess]

I'm unemployed and have been for several weeks now. I don't know what I am going to do? If something doesn't happen soon I may have to move out of the state. I've been looking online for jobs in Texas and they seem to have a lot of openings. Oregon, Az, and Al as well all have plentiful jobs. This state just seems to get rid of jobs instead of keeping them. In fact the past six companies that I have worked for either closed up shop or moved manufacturing to Singapore or some other Asian country.

[Marty]

I really sorry to hear that Bobby and I hope you find something soon. If you do move to find a job you will find the cost of living will be a lot less then here in California. I have friends that have moved to Texas, Arizona, and Alabama for work and all say that it is so much better there. I don’t know any one going to Oregon maybe it is just too much like California.

There are only two reasons that I stay in California and that is my job and the fishing in the Delta. But if the job goes I will be moving to Colorado, in fact I’m the only one left here and the rest of my family has already gone.

I really do believe it is only going to get worst here in California.

[2ndsuks]

This state just seems to get rid of jobs instead of keeping them. In fact the past six companies that I have worked for either closed up shop or moved manufacturing to Singapore or some other Asian country.

California, the shinning light on the hill for great progressive thinkers.
We are and have been the most liberal state in the union and look where those politics have brought us.

[Greg_Cornish]

Buy my house, I'll be gone in a NY minute.

[Marty]

"Little by little jobs are leaving California. In the past year or so, the drip, drip drip, has become a flood. As AB 32 gets traction, this flood will become a tsunami."

"Two months ago, more than 300 people were employed at the site making engine parts for trucks and heavy machinery for Gregg Industries, which is owned by Neenah Enterprises Inc. in Wisconsin."

"But a settlement with the South Coast Air Quality Management District required Gregg to spend $5 million on factory improvements, so the company decided instead to leave the state. Company spokesman Adan Ortega Jr. said Gregg didn't want to make the payment in the difficult economic climate."

"Did you know that Hershey (the candy maker) had a wherehouse in Redlands (San Bernardino County)? It, too, left the State. We all know of productive people and middle sized businesses that have left for less regulation, fewer unions and lower taxes."

"In part, the problem is because of an uncertain future. We know the "rules" today, but what will they be tomorrow? This uncertainly forces companies to leave State, before they are forced to pay a tax if they want to leave (a couple of years ago Democrats in Sacramento made such a stupid proposal)"

"Want to kill jobs? Sacramento is an expert at this."

[Marty]

"Al Gore is laughing all the way to the bank. His Halloween Every Day tactics have forced businesses to spend billions renting already existing trees--to offset real work. Big businesses pay others for "offsets"--meaning greenhouse gases , globally, stay the same, but some get rich at the expense of others--with nothing changing in the climate."

"The measure, which might be considered by the House this week, would force businesses to meet steadily tightening limits on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions blamed for global warming. To meet the new caps, companies could cut their emissions or buy allowances from the federal government or other businesses to spew more of the pollutants."

"Lets define "cutting emissions"--that means either spending non productive dollars to meet junk science standards. Or it means cutting jobs. In California, our version of the proposed Federal law, AB 32, has caused massive job losses, businesses leaving the State and higher consumer prices. Nothing good happens, except for Al Gore, he gets richer and a great big belly laugh on all of us."

[Jeff C.]

"Lets define "cutting emissions"--that means either spending non productive dollars to meet junk science standards.

Marty, since when are you qualified to say something is "Junk Science"? You (and your fellow conservatives) have shown time and time again that you aren't qualified to evaluate the validity of scientific theory.

Thank goodness our fine president is not a member of the "flat Earthers" like so many Republicans. I know you believe that Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage are the foremost experts on climate science, but I'm glad that our great president chose instead to consult the leading Ph.D.s in climatology and atmospheric science on this particular topic.

[Marty]

"Lets define "cutting emissions"--that means either spending non productive dollars to meet junk science standards.

Marty, since when are you qualified to say something is "Junk Science"? You (and your fellow conservatives) have shown time and time again that you aren't qualified to evaluate the validity of scientific theory.

Thank goodness our fine president is not a member of the "flat Earthers" like so many Republicans. I know you believe that Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage are the foremost experts on climate science, but I'm glad that our great president chose instead to consult the leading Ph.D.s in climatology and atmospheric science on this particular topic.

Dude, listen to what you are saying – you sound like you just got laid! He’s just a dude like anyone else! He put his pants on just like you one leg at a time. I see you are nothing but a follower with no direction of your own. Stand up and be a Man and not a drone.

[Jeff C.]

I see you are nothing but a follower with no direction of your own. Stand up and be a Man and not a drone.

Hah, once again your own words betray you. What legitimate scientific sources did you consult in reaching your conclusion that anthropogenic global warming is "junk science"? What? You heard it from Fox and Friends? Way to think for yourself, Marty!

Uh..um.. I'm sorry. After eight years of having a near-moron as president it's nice to finally have a president who actually consults scientists when shaping political policy. Unlike the near-moron who tried to use his political policy to shape science.

[Ringer]

Uhh, Jeff-Might start actually reading the news. Hundreds of climate scientists have now switched sides on the global warming issue and more every week. Guess they are seeing the new data and don't want to be listed as morons who cried wolf. No doubt we impact the climate to a minimal extent but if you don't think the Gore hysteria was a for profit plot you are naive. Yes bush was not too bright but at least he had character. "I will close GITMO within 6 months/I will have open and transparent government/I will balance the budget in the first term/ I will get rid of don't ask don't tell/ Americans who earn less than $250000 per year will not see one extra dollar in taxes/ I will get us out of Iraq within 16 months/ I will have healthcare for all Americans/ I will get rid of lobbyists in Washington/ I will always be an ally of Israel etc, etc. I am wondering if liberals who voted for the guy are embarrassed by the sucker punches they are taking.

[Jeff C.]

LOL Ringer, Where did you hear about all these "scientists" who dispute global warming? Did you see this list from a reputable scientific organization like the American Meteorological Society, World Metorological Society, or National Academy of Sciences?

No, you likely saw it on a Conservative blog! Hah! To give you a sense of what the world's leading scientists are actually saying about global warming here is a link to a press release by the most prestigious science academies in the world. If nothing else, you should note the signature of the head of the National Academy of Sciences, which is the most prestigious and rigorous scientific organization in the U.S.:

http://www.nationalacademies.org/includ ... mate09.pdf

On the other hand, if you truly believe that global climate change is an undecided issue among the scientific community, then you should put your money where your mouth is.

$100 says I can find at least 5 times as many legitimate scientific peer reviewed journal articles published in the last year supporting the fact that anthropogenic global climate change is a realty than you can to the contrary.

Here's a link of a scientific database that indexes most of the peer reviewed scientific journal articles. To pull up scientific journal articles you just put in a phrase such as "global warming" in the search box.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/

How about it? Easy money right? The Conservative blogs can't be wrong, can they?

[Ringer]

Here is a report from the Senate committee on climate change that should be somewhat unbiased:

UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

Study: Half of warming due to Sun! –Sea Levels Fail to Rise? - Warming Fears in 'Dustbin of History'

'No evidence for accelerated sea-level rise'



Update: March 16, 2009: Prominent Scientsits Continue to Join Report:

Now More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

Link to Intro and full updated report:

Link to Full Printable 255-Page PDF Report

POZNAN, Poland - The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. Set for release this week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report features the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists, many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN. The report has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke out in 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

The U.S. Senate report is the latest evidence of the growing groundswell of scientific opposition rising to challenge the UN and Gore. Scientific meetings are now being dominated by a growing number of skeptical scientists. The prestigious International Geological Congress, dubbed the geologists' equivalent of the Olympic Games, was held in Norway in August 2008 and prominently featured the voices and views of scientists skeptical of man-made global warming fears. [See Full report Here: & See: Skeptical scientists overwhelm conference: '2/3 of presenters and question-askers were hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC' ]
Now, I am sure you will deny the fact that global climate scientists who previously supported the scam have reversed their positions but I tend to believe that America has no impact at all on this issue anyway. China builds a new coal powered plant every day. I tend to read both sides and come to a conclusion but if you want to drive all of your businesses and actual working people out of your state to make Al Gore rich then have at it.

[Greg_Cornish]

Whew! Heat index is 115 in some places in MN last few days. Never got that hot when I was a kid and we farmed with horses. Its playing out exactly as Gore said it would. Scary.

[Ringer]

Coolest june in history here in AZ so according to my science we are in a global cooling period. Instead of cap and trade why not allow the building of new nuclear plants and eliminate the need for coal entirely? You can store the waste right here in AZ for a fee. We need the money.

[Greg_Cornish]

Coolest june in history here in AZ .

Yeh, all global warming scientist agree there will be drastic weather changes. It was one of the coldest springs on record in Minnesota too. ....Until this hot spell. I don't have any kids though so I don't need to be concerned like most of you.

[Marty]

Ok Jeff with your superior education maybe you can answer a few questions that I have.

1. Why did your elite NCBI scientists change “Global Warmingâ€

[Jeff C.]

Here is a report from the Senate committee on climate change that should be somewhat unbiased:

UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims ...

LMAO Ringer. Are you so naive that you don't recognize the fact that you pulled that garbage post off of a Republican Blog site? Thanks for supporting my point that most conservatives are so gullible that they can't separate fact from fiction.

But what about my challenge? Here's your chance to prove once and for all that there is no consensus among qualified scientists on man made global warming. If you're right, you should have no problem finding peer reviewed scientific articles published in the last year supporting your view. And remember, I don't win unless I find at least 5 times as many articles as you supporting the existence of man made climate change.

Easy money, right? Think of how many crank baits you can buy with my money.

[Jeff C.]

[quote="Marty"]Ok Jeff with your superior education maybe you can answer a few questions that I have.

1. Why did your elite NCBI scientists change “Global Warmingâ€

[Ringer]

Jeff-I pulled the info right off of the senate.gov website run by Barby Boxer. It is the minority page which usually contains the opposing opinions and any data the senators use to back up their position. Do you work in the green energy field? Why so paranoid and sensitive about the possibility of global warming being a global scam? If you really cared about the environment you would advocate the building of many more nuclear plants in the US but that would do nothing but produce 100% of our energy needs, eliminate coal fired plants totally and have zero atmospheric emissions. No way is that good since it would put coal companies and all the solar/wind scammers out of biz.

[2ndsuks]

Whew! Heat index is 115 in some places in MN last few days. Never got that hot when I was a kid and we farmed with horses. Its playing out exactly as Gore said it would. Scary.

NOAA: 2008 Temperature for U.S. Near Average, was Coldest Since 1997; Below Average for December

U.S. Temperature Highlights – December 2008

The average December 2008 temperature of 32.5 degrees F was 0.9 degree below the 20th Century average.
December temperatures were much below average across the Upper Midwest and cooler than average across much of the West, Northwest and Midwest. Warmer-than- average temperatures were experienced in the Southeast and Mid-Atlantic States.
The East North Central region (Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin) had its 10th coolest December on record. Respectively, Minnesota and North Dakota had their seventh and eighth coolest December.

LOL ya very alarming! LOL

[Ringer]

You all better write to the democrats and threaten to throw them out if they vote for Waxman's cap and trade bill. It creates a new tax of a minimum of $1500 per year average for every household in America. You need to throw that bum out.

[Jeff C.]

You all better write to the democrats and threaten to throw them out if they vote for Waxman's cap and trade bill. It creates a new tax of a minimum of $1500 per year average for every household in America. You need to throw that bum out.

As usual, you're arriving late to the party. We already had an election where we threw the bums out.

[Ringer]

Well Jeff, I just read a good article on cap and trade and the original researcher said the cost for an average household would only be $800 a year. Now Waxman is saying $1500 which means people with larger homes will see a lot more than that. Most universities are saying the average is over $300 per month. It will cost jobs but I know California has a surplus of those. Are you willing to pay $300 per month in extra taxes to fund $300 billion a year in new revenue for the government to spend? If so can you just pay $600 so I don't have to pay? You voted for the great liar. No new taxes, not one nickel if you make less than $250000 per year. OOPS!

[Jeff C.]

Well Jeff, I just read a good article on cap and trade and the original researcher said the cost for an average household would only be $800 a year. Now Waxman is saying $1500 which means people with larger homes will see a lot more than that. Most universities are saying the average is over $300 per month. It will cost jobs but I know California has a surplus of those. Are you willing to pay $300 per month in extra taxes to fund $300 billion a year in new revenue for the government to spend? If so can you just pay $600 so I don't have to pay? You voted for the great liar. No new taxes, not one nickel if you make less than $250000 per year. OOPS!

You conservatives love to throw around the scary rhetoric. Let's see, aren't you the one who said that Obama was gonna take my guns away? How'd that one work out for you?

[Ringer]

Ignore any factual data on cap and trade and pay the price. Fine with me but I don't think you should force me to follow you. I watched your favorite senator named Feinstein on television. When told that the number of Americans supprting 2nd amendment rights as 52% and the highest since polling began she said: "now is not the time to push for gun control but that time is coming and we will get it passed". Obama is afraid of the alarm raised by gun owners and he will do nothing until his second term. My money is on a one term president.

[2ndsuks]

You conservatives love to throw around the scary rhetoric. Let's see, aren't you the one who said that Obama was gonna take my guns away? How'd that one work out for you?

"But he's only been in office for six months" "Geeze, give him a chance!"


LOL LOL LOL

[2ndsuks]

You all better write to the democrats and threaten to throw them out if they vote for Waxman's cap and trade bill. It creates a new tax of a minimum of $1500 per year average for every household in America. You need to throw that bum out.

As usual, you're arriving late to the party. We already had an election where we threw the bums out.

We have a U.S. Senate, they have not voted!

[Vince E]

You all better write to the democrats and threaten to throw them out if they vote for Waxman's cap and trade bill. It creates a new tax of a minimum of $1500 per year average for every household in America.

Wait a minute, that's only going to apply to households making better than 250K,....... right?