Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: Ben on March 17, 2015, 11:12:40 AM
-
EPA studying potential regulation of outdoor grills, to include catalytic converters. That's gonna have to nearly double the price of a grill if it happens.
http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/03/17/lawmaker-calls-for-rebellion-against-epa-pollution-emissions-for-backyard/
-
Sounds like someone just invested in platinum.
-
They've been rattling on about this on and off for years, but it's looking more serious.
How in the hell would you ever get a cat converter up to operating temperature with a grill?
That's insane. But that's the EPA for you.
-
How's a catalytic converter supposed to work once it's covered in grease?
-
How's a catalytic converter supposed to work once it's covered in grease?
I'd assume that, if it were to get hot enough to actually work as a catalytic converter, it would simply burn off any accumulated grease into a carbon ash.
-
How's a catalytic converter supposed to work once it's covered in grease?
They'll end up being just like chain saws. If you want it to run properly, you remove the Cat before you even start the thing for the first time..
-
They'll end up being just like chain saws. If you want it to run properly, you remove the Cat before you even start the thing for the first time..
FELONY! YOU'RE COMMITTING A FELONY!
Not to mention you're a rapist of the good mother earth!
Our motto -- The most extreme inconvenience for no measurable gain is the least we can impose on you.
-
I guess I should buy a new grille as soon as Lowe's puts them on sale. I haven't had one for several years. Wasn't planning to buy one, but this could be an incentive.
I'll bet the grille manufacturers' association is behind this -- anything to generate panic buying must be good, right? (Hey, it worked for AR-15s and ammunition!)
-
I wonder if they're going to try and regulate fire pits.
Chris
-
Mike, I would have thought you'd be in favor of this. After all, based on these statistics I just made up, grilling an average steak is as bad for the environment as burning six floppy disks.
What is the wisdom on long-lasting grills? Is stainless all around still the gold standard, or is there something better these days?
-
I have visions of an expensive, finely made honeycomb platinum ceramic structure all plugged solid with hamburger fat.
Reading the article, it's even better. They plan to have the grill's exhaust force-fed through the converter. "[T]he emission removal system includes the use of a 'secondary air filtration system is composed of a single pipe duct system which contains a specialized metal filter, a metal fan blade, a drive shaft, and an accompanying power system with either a motorized or manual method'".
Yeah, no. I'll build my own grill out of a pile of bricks before I put up with that nonsense.
-
Mike, I would have thought you'd be in favor of this. After all, based on these statistics I just made up, grilling an average steak is as bad for the environment as burning six floppy disks.
What is the wisdom on long-lasting grills? Is stainless all around still the gold standard, or is there something better these days?
What do you think I fuel my grill with?
I have a Weber kettle that I don't use much these days. The biggest secret to a long lasting grill of any type is to clean out the ashes at the end of the season and give everything a good cleaning. Unfortunately, the spot welds on the legs are eventually going to give out no matter what you do. That's one of the biggest flaws of the Weber.
I tend to prefer cast iron cooking grates, myself. I'd put them in my kettle, but my god they are expensive!
"Yeah, no. I'll build my own grill out of a pile of bricks before I put up with that nonsense."
Before I read your post I was thinking that very thing myself.
It's not hard at all to cobble together a very workable grilling solution.
-
Does it even apply to actual grills, or just to those people who think they're "grilling" when they're only using a stripped down gas stove outside?
I mean really, if I want to cook over propane, I'll do it inside with air conditioning and a sink handy. Outside is for wood.
-
The day that I'm required to have a cat converter on my grill is the day I burn a tire in my fire pit as protest.
-
OH! This is only about propane (at this point).
Good lord.
-
Where there's smoke, there's EPA.
-
So, declare the smoke from my Weber gas grill to be hazardous waste, require this super filtration system, and also require that the grill be inspected annually by a certified grill inspector, who will charge me $75 for my annual license. Oh, and mandate that I wear a respirator while I cook on my grill. And, I'm sure charcoal would be quickly caught up in this nightmare scenario, or outright banned for reasons I'm too outraged to even think about...
Oh, and for you charcoal purists, I have two grills...a gas grill I use for fast cooks...burgers, hot dogs...simple and easy at the end of a work day. Weber Spirit, 3 burner. And, I have my father's Weber kettle that I bought him for father's day in 1989. Old Smokey gets fired up for anything that is a low and slow cook. Yeah, the wood handles have rotted away, and the vent covers in the bottom have rusted through, but the history, and the way it cooks...
They can have my grills when they pry them from my cold, greasy fingers...
-
I actually am surprised that they're focusing on gas grills at this time. The normal modus operandi would be to restrict or require permits for wood and charcoal, moving people to gas grills as "greener" alternatives, then ban charcoal, then start doing what they're studying now, and go after gas grills.
The way they're doing it now (and I recognize it's just a study at this time) would result in people saying "Screw paying $3000 for a Rube Goldberg gas grill - I'll buy a bag of charcoal and a steel fire pit from Costco."
-
Just when you think gov't can;t get more stupid and overbearing, something like this pops up.
Given:
1. Bricks, pavers, or concrete blocks.
2. A grill lattice.
3. A replacement burner element.
4. Metal garbage can lid.
5. Propane tank/bottle & hose to fit burner element.
6. 15 minutes of time and a few beers.
I could put together a nice propane grill. No mortar needed.
-
Just when you think gov't can;t get more stupid and overbearing, something like this pops up.
Given:
1. Bricks, pavers, or concrete blocks.
2. A grill lattice.
3. A replacement burner element.
4. Metal garbage can lid.
5. Propane tank/bottle & hose to fit burner element.
6. 15 minutes of time and a few beers.
I could put together a nice propane grill. No mortar needed.
Well, you'll get away with it until the new 18 bajillion dollar EPA enforcement satellite picks up the heat signature, identifies the gases, then sends an alert to the local EPA black ops team to come to your house and stomp your kitten's head.
=D
-
Well, you'll get away with it until the new 18 bajillion dollar EPA enforcement satellite picks up the heat signature, identifies the gases, then sends an alert to the local EPA black ops team to come to your house and stomp your kitten's head.
=D
Nah. Predator with onboard sensors plus Hellfire. Done.
-
If this were to happen, you would see a lot of fire pits show up in back yards and maybe more yard and house fires resulting.
-
Isn't most of the smoke emission from the burning grease and oil from the food, not the actual fire?
-
Nah. Predator with onboard sensors plus Hellfire. Done.
Sorry folks, just another tragic accidental NG explosion, nothing to see here, move along. [tinfoil]
-
Backwoods charcoal producers will become the new moonshiners.
-
If this were to happen, you would see a lot of fire pits show up in back yards and maybe more yard and house fires resulting.
So are you saying that apartment dwellers are going to have to go without?
We had an apartment building locally burned to about medium-well when the grease buildup on the underside of the balcony above reached critical temperature. Quite the weekend show.
stay safe.
-
When you think about it, how can they ban those little charcoal grill burners that you can buy for $20? They can try, but it is too easy to just make a substitute.
We have a mini-propane grill and a case of the little bottles as part of our hurricane preparedness kit at the plant I work at. They are screwing around with a wide range of products.
-
When you think about it, how can they ban those little charcoal grill burners that you can buy for $20? They can try, but it is too easy to just make a substitute.
Simple. You ban the fuel.
-
Hard to ban the fuel. LP is used for a lot more than grills. Paving company I once worked for used a ton of the grill sized tanks for torches, paver heaters, etc. Not to mention all the folks who heat their homes on the big LP tanks. Charcoal, well industrial charcoal uses aside, anyone can make charcoal with some wood and an air tight container.
-
I was referencing specifically MechAg's comment regarding charcoal grills.
And yes, it's possible to make charcoal with a little labor.
But why do that when it's far simpler to burn wood?
-
Not to mention you're a rapist of the good mother earth!
I like to think that I'm keeping power tools out of landfills by not letting them melt down after three days of running too lean. ;)
-
BBQ grills are just the beginning.
Now the EPA wants to monitor shower use: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/03/17/epa-wants-to-monitor-how-long-hotel-guests-spend-in-shower/?intcmp=latestnews
-
And woodstoves
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
The more government rubs up against people the less people like it. This is a major imposition that will cut across all parties and ideologies.
-
Does it even apply to actual grills, or just to those people who think they're "grilling" when they're only using a stripped down gas stove outside?
I mean really, if I want to cook over propane, I'll do it inside with air conditioning and a sink handy. Outside is for wood.
That's what my wife said when we were shopping for a new grill after buying the house. I saw her point, and am much happier with the big Weber kettle than I would have been with a gas grill.
-
Wood stoves have been in EPA's sights for literally decades. It really ramped up in the 1970s with the huge increase in the number of people heating with wood due to the Arab Oil Embargos, lean economic times, and spiking prices all around.
But shower use? :facepalm:
That sounds to me as if it should be a state concern.
-
That's what my wife said when we were shopping for a new grill after buying the house. I saw her point, and am much happier with the big Weber kettle than I would have been with a gas grill.
Yep. I had a gas grill for awhile, one that the neighbors gave me.
In reality it was no faster than charcoal -- the time it takes a propane grill to heat up to a good cooking temperature is about the same time it takes a load of charcoal to get rolling -- and it had none of the flavor profile of a charcoal grill.
I used it for maybe two years, and when the burners rotted out I didn't bother replacing them.
-
In reality it was no faster than charcoal -- the time it takes a propane grill to heat up to a good cooking temperature is about the same time it takes a load of charcoal to get rolling -- and it had none of the flavor profile of a charcoal grill.
I usually delay myself a bit more by working mostly from wood, but when I'm done cooking I throw a few more mesquite splits on, let them get started, then close the dampers so I'll have some charred for faster startup next time. It's worth it for the hardcore mesquite flavor on cheaper meats, and charring up enough to not cook over fresh wood is worth the extra effort when I'm cooking up some really good meat.
-
If I have time or am cooking a lot of food on the grill, I go with charcoal and maybe even add some nicely seasoned wood. However, if I just want to cook a few burgers or hot dogs, then I use these (http://www.amazon.com/BIC-Charcoal-Alternative-FlameDisk-1-Pack/dp/B0062QJLSI). They do a pretty good job.
Chris
-
However, if I just want to cook a few burgers or hot dogs, then I use these (http://www.amazon.com/BIC-Charcoal-Alternative-FlameDisk-1-Pack/dp/B0062QJLSI). They do a pretty good job.
Chris
Oops, it's a clickable link.
Never mind.
And holy crap, nearly $10 for a single grilling session, compared to maybe $1 of charcoal?
Looks to me like a very expensive solution for people who might want to consider grilling over burning money instead.
-
Some of those little charcoal burners are also very very cheap.
-
Some of those little charcoal burners are also very very cheap.
I've seen single use picnic trays (basically charcoal in a heavy aluminum pan with some kind of pressed aluminum "grate" for about $5.
-
Oops, it's a clickable link.
Never mind.
And holy crap, nearly $10 for a single grilling session, compared to maybe $1 of charcoal?
Looks to me like a very expensive solution for people who might want to consider grilling over burning money instead.
They're $4/each as a 10 pack. You're paying for convenience.
Chris
-
They're $4/each as a 10 pack. You're paying for convenience.
Chris
Yeah, I understand convenience.
The way that Amazon page reads, though, it sure makes it seem as if you are paying almost $10 for a SINGLE flame disk. I didn't see the option to knock that price down.
-
A 1 pack is $10, but right next to it is a 10-pack for $40.
Chris
-
A 1 pack is $10, but right next to it is a 10-pack for $40.
Chris
Huh. Lookie there.
-
Next time you're over, I'll either use one to cook or I'll give you one to try for yourself.
Chris
-
Would you guys knock it off. We need to get back to the FEMA shelter (40 to a box) so we can huddle around the single candle and eat our .gov approved and issued bowl of gruel.
-
Would you guys knock it off. We need to get back to the FEMA shelter (40 to a box) so we can huddle around the single candle and eat our .gov approved and issued bowl of gruel.
Gruel: Soon to be re-named "Fairness Food." Hell, nutty libertarians want us to all eat beans, so it is hard not to believe the left wants us to eat gruel.
-
Gruel: Soon to be re-named "Fairness Food." Hell, nutty libertarians want us to all eat beans, so it is hard not to believe the left wants us to eat gruel.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.meme.am%2Finstances%2F500x%2F60367833.jpg&hash=31bee32badd2b4264c9e650f74463dac4e4779ae)
-
Gruel: Soon to be re-named "Fairness Food." Hell, nutty libertarians want us to all eat beans, so it is hard not to believe the left wants us to eat gruel.
Hmm?
-
Next time you're over, I'll either use one to cook or I'll give you one to try for yourself.
Chris
You used one last year, I think. I recall whatever it was that we ate tasting like a Pu Pu Platter...
-
I didn't have them last year. I've only used two and you weren't there for either one.
Chris
-
Someone used one where I was in attendance.
That's right, I eat other people's burgers, too!
-
Hmm?
Tyler Cowen, economist at George Mason University.
http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303342104579097482945031804?cb=logged0.5428346160333604
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/10/tyler-cowen-90-of-americans-will-and.html
To sum up, Mr. Cowen believes that America is dividing itself in two. At the top will be 10% to 15% of high achievers, the “Tiger Mother” kids if you like, whose self-motivation and mastery of technology will allow them to roar away into the future. Then there will be everyone else, slouching into an underfunded future of lower economic expectations, shantytowns and an endless diet of beans. I’m not kidding about the beans.
Poor Americans, writes Mr. Cowen, will have to “reshape their tastes” and live more like Mexicans. “Don’t scoff at the beans,” he says. “With an income above the national average, I receive more pleasure from the beans, which I cook with freshly ground cumin and rehydrated, pureed chilies. Good tacos and quesadillas and tamales are cheap too, and that is one reason why they are eaten so frequently in low-income countries.”
So what am I to do to save my sons from this bean-filled future?
I realize I'm a wacko extremist, unlike all the mainstream intellectuals such as Tyler, but maybe instead of 85 or 90% of Americans living more like Mexicans, the government should try to, you know, restrict immigration?
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101137659
...In his final chapter, "A New Social Contract?," Mr. Cowen cruelly lays it all out. "We will move from a society based on the pretense that everyone is given an okay standard of living to a society in which people are expected to fend for themselves much more than they do now." The top 10% will have it better than ever. The majority will suffer stagnant or falling wages but have more opportunities for cheap education and cheap fun. The rest will fall by the wayside, with government less and less able to take care of them. It will be dazzling at the top, and "meh" to miserable for the rest.
http://www.armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?action=printpage;topic=41784.0
-
Did you really get from that summary that Cowen or other nutty libertarians want everyone to eat beans? I suppose Malthus wanted to see overpopulation drive famine as well?
-
"...In his final chapter, "A New Social Contract?," Mr. Cowen cruelly lays it all out. "We will move from a society based on the pretense that everyone is given an okay standard of living to a society in which people are expected to fend for themselves much more than they do now." The top 10% will have it better than ever. The majority will suffer stagnant or falling wages but have more opportunities for cheap education and cheap fun. The rest will fall by the wayside, with government less and less able to take care of them. It will be dazzling at the top, and "meh" to miserable for the rest."
Wow. You mean, like, how the founders and framers expected things to work?
Inconceivable.
-
Did you really get from that summary that Cowen or other nutty libertarians want everyone to eat beans? I suppose Malthus wanted to see overpopulation drive famine as well?
Yes. His colleague at Mason has written and said as much. He explicitly stated that we need to have open borders and even out the wages between the USA and the third world. That it is racist and jingoist and nationalist not to.
To quote Dave Barry, "I am not making this up." Take a gander:
http://intelligencesquaredus.org/debates/past-debates/item/909-let-anyone-take-a-job-anywhere
Nutty libertarians be nutty. Nobody forces them to make nutty statements.
"...In his final chapter, "A New Social Contract?," Mr. Cowen cruelly lays it all out. "We will move from a society based on the pretense that everyone is given an okay standard of living to a society in which people are expected to fend for themselves much more than they do now." The top 10% will have it better than ever. The majority will suffer stagnant or falling wages but have more opportunities for cheap education and cheap fun. The rest will fall by the wayside, with government less and less able to take care of them. It will be dazzling at the top, and "meh" to miserable for the rest."
Wow. You mean, like, how the founders and framers expected things to work?
Inconceivable.
Ayn Rand was not contemporaneous with the Founding.
At the founding we had a rather large and educated supermajority middle class with very small upper and lower classes. The founders and their documents give no evidence that they thought to change that. On the contrary, there is evidence that they sought to sustain such a societal composition. The writings of Ben Franklin allude to this.
And there is the wee concept of "Jeffersonian Democracy" which thought the middle class exemplified what was best in America and that gov't policy ought to be for its benefit. Now just who might this "Jefferson" fellow be?
As was noted in the other thread I linked, Cowen is incorrect in that the top 10% is not likely to be the most intelligent and productive, but that the 10% will be the best connected.
His premise is wrong from the start.
It won't be techno-nerds and high achievers who are the top 10-15%, it will be the QE thieves/bankers and leaders of the 'party' who will be on top, with everyone else on the bottom. Its happening already, and we are well on our way.
...We may reach a 90%/10% situation, but it won't be because of technological progress or genetic trends. It will be because of political machinations and manipulations, just like it has been for the history of the world.
Six of the top ten counties with the highest median household income surround Washington, DC, and are due to fed.gov bureaucrats, policritters, and hangers-on. Another one, Los Alamos, NM, is also due to fed.gov largesse taken from taxpayers at the point of a gun. A last two are bedroom communities for Wall Street financial folk, who are wealthy nowadays due to the multitudinous bailouts of their corporations with taxpayer dollars(1).
Only one of the top ten counties has a median income that can not be linked to fed.gov machinations.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/tomvanriper/2013/04/25/americas-richest-counties/
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/eddf45kjmh/where-they-make-the-most/
The top 10% won't be the smartest, but relatively smart folk who are connected to fed.gov. Note that notoriously productive places like Silicon Valley are not in the top ten. Petroleum boom locations are not, either. The top 10% will not be folk who provide/produce useful goods or services, but the agents of the state and their coteries. Even really smart IT folk in Arizona will be eating beans with the rest of us.
(1) The recent sub-prime mortgage bailout is just the latest in a series of bailouts. A chronic underestimation of risk with the foreknowledge that fed.gov will bail them out when their bets go tits up. (AKA "moral hazard") Off the top of my head: Mexican economic collapse, Russian economic collapse, Eastern Europe collapse, Asian currency & market collapse. There are more.
(2) Here are a few listed in wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_American_debt_crisis#Effects_of_Latin_American_Debt_Crisis_and_the_IMF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1997_Asian_financial_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_Russian_financial_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subprime_mortgage_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_economic_crisis_in_Mexico#Financial_assistance_package
-
I really need to get appointed to the federal bench... =D
-
Yes. His colleague at Mason has written and said as much. He explicitly stated that we need to have open borders and even out the wages between the USA and the third world. That it is racist and jingoist and nationalist not to.
Wait, are we talking about Cowen or his colleague now?
-
Wait, are we talking about Cowen or his colleague now?
Yes.
Only question, "Which one is nuttier?"
Cowen: "Let them eat beans" author.
Caplan: Wants to bring in enough third worlders such that American and third world wages intersect. Says it out loud. And we (Americans) are Very Bad People if we don't let them. So extreme in his views he even lost an audience of affluent lefties during the debate on immigration in the UK.
-
I'm still not catching on to to what Cowen said that was so shocking, but okay.
Just out of curiosity, is the next step that by extension all Libertarians are nutty?
-
Gruel: Soon to be re-named "Fairness Food." Hell, nutty libertarians want us to all eat beans, so it is hard not to believe the left wants us to eat gruel.
SOYLENT GREEN
I've heard more than one liberal/environut assert that MEAT should be outlawed, as we can grow more food per acre if what we grew was destined directly for people rather than food animals. (Besides which, flatulent livestock emit global warming gasses. No joke in their minds. :facepalm: )
-
I'm still not catching on to to what Cowen said that was so shocking, but okay.
Stock up on beans, then, and start learning to love the crony corporatist state. Because I doubt you have the connections necessary to be one of the chosen few(1).
Just out of curiosity, is the next step that by extension all Libertarians are nutty?
What do you think? The idea of America with third-world class demographics and 90% of your countrymen so poor they can not afford meat doesn't bother you, a body's gotta wonder. I hope that Cowen and Caplan are SPECIAL and not representative, but your reaction is not a good sign.
(1)The thing about all these utopian creeds is that the adherents all assume they will be the ones on top and not dead in the ditch or eating the beans.
-
Stock up on beans, then, and start learning to love the crony corporatist state. Because I doubt you have the connections necessary to be one of the chosen few(1).
Oh, now I get it. Somehow you came up with the idea that Cowen was advocating declining living standards due to increased automation as some sort of Libertarian ideal. No wonder you have been making no sense.
What do you think? The idea of America with third-world class demographics and 90% of your countrymen so poor they can not afford meat doesn't bother you, a body's gotta wonder. I hope that Cowen and Caplan are SPECIAL and not representative, but your reaction is not a good sign.
So I have the advantage of having actually listened to an interview with Cowen a while back as opposed to just misreading a book review and letting my biases run free. I don't think I agree with most of his conclusions, but it is my understanding that his predictions are not made from the standpoint of "this is the way I want it to be because of my philosophy" so much as "this is the direction we are inevitably heading due to the development of technological solutions that replace human labor and the globalization of marketplaces." As far as him being the shining beacon of Libertarianism, well, based on what I know he is pro-Iraq war, pro-big government, pro-bailouts ... Not exactly some Utopian Libertarian. Comes down more in the Republican camp really.
I heard an interview with Caplan years ago and did not find it compelling.
-
Oh, now I get it. Somehow you came up with the idea that Cowen was advocating declining living standards due to increased automation as some sort of Libertarian ideal. No wonder you have been making no sense.
So I have the advantage of having actually listened to an interview with Cowen a while back as opposed to just misreading a book review and letting my biases run free. I don't think I agree with most of his conclusions, but it is my understanding that his predictions are not made from the standpoint of "this is the way I want it to be because of my philosophy" so much as "this is the direction we are inevitably heading due to the development of technological solutions that replace human labor and the globalization of marketplaces." As far as him being the shining beacon of Libertarianism, well, based on what I know he is pro-Iraq war, pro-big government, pro-bailouts ... Not exactly some Utopian Libertarian. Comes down more in the Republican camp really.
I heard an interview with Caplan years ago and did not find it compelling.
You have no advantage. I saw several of his talks & interviews when the book came out.
I've also presented enough data on Cowen's and Caplan's views to choke a horse as well as criticism where I think they get it wrong. And I have read them both to see how Caplan is bombastic in his insistence on on open borders to dilute the earning power of Americans and how Cowen is giddy at the thought of 90% sucking hind teat, in part due to the open borders fanatics. Maybe he was just animated in pushing his thesis (and his book), but both his tone and actual content sure make him come across as an advocate. And it is odd how an economist would miss how reducing the influx of foreign labor would reduce his projected inequality, unless he was hunky-dory with that influx or that influx was necessary for his thesis to have any validity. Is a supply and demand curve too much for him to comprehend? Maybe so, since his thesis and income from his book depend on him not understanding the relationship.
-
You have no advantage. I saw several of his talks & interviews when the book came out.
I've also presented enough data on Cowen's and Caplan's views to choke a horse as well as criticism where I think they get it wrong. And I have read them both to see how Caplan is bombastic in his insistence on on open borders to dilute the earning power of Americans and how Cowen is giddy at the thought of 90% sucking hind teat, in part due to the open borders fanatics. Maybe he was just animated in pushing his thesis (and his book), but both his tone and actual content sure make him come across as an advocate. And it is odd how an economist would miss how reducing the influx of foreign labor would reduce his projected inequality, unless he was hunky-dory with that influx or that influx was necessary for his thesis to have any validity. Is a supply and demand curve too much for him to comprehend? Maybe so, since his thesis and income from his book depend on him not understanding the relationship.
How exactly is that libertarian? ???
-
Open borders is a core plank
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
-
Open borders is a core plank
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
For any that do believe in "open borders", it's contingent on other things first. And "open borders" isn't the only thing he is talking about.
-
Would you guys knock it off. We need to get back to the FEMA shelter (40 to a box) so we can huddle around the single candle and eat our .gov approved and issued bowl of gruel.
Where the hell are you getting GRUEL from, prole?!? Who told you you could have something like THAT? :police:
Remember, that candle has to last you 3 more months - you won't get another just because you burned it up early. And don't forget to pay your carbon tax on that!
-
Open borders is a core plank
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
After (and ONLY after) demolishing the Welfare State, sure.
-
You have no advantage. I saw several of his talks & interviews when the book came out.
So you know better, but maintain your glaring misinterpretation out of dishonesty rather than ignorance? Here I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt like a sucker.
I've also presented enough data on Cowen's and Caplan's views to choke a horse as well as criticism where I think they get it wrong.
As I said, I'm not invested in either man's theories, but I have yet to see where you've done anything but attack straw men in a weak attempt to smear an opposing ideology. On reflection, perhaps that much straw could choke a horse. Perhaps if you made your sparring partners from hay or oats?
Again, Cowen's book is making predictions (right or wrong, for better or worse), not suggestions, and he is politically closer to Republicans than Libertarians anyway. You keep trying to conflate Cowen and Caplan's views despite the fact that they bear little resemblance to each other. But then, you are so familiar with them that I'm sure you already knew that.
In conclusion, I wouldn't have Cowen or Caplan over for a cookout, with or without a catalytic converter.
-
"Ayn Rand was not contemporaneous with the Founding."
Uhm... really?
You mean Ayn Rand came up with that concept, and those Founders/Framers were just a bunch of drunk prats?
It doesn't much matter what the Founders/Framers thought of the structure of society.
What matters is what they expected people to do inside of those structures, and the big one was be productive and fend for yourself.
-
Open borders is a core plank
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Our current Govt leadership is also pushing for effective "open borders". That doesn't make them libertarians.
That said, I think there are kooks in all of the parties that have strange ideas.
-
http://www.ibtimes.com/scientists-breed-heat-tolerant-beans-endure-global-warming-1858310
Just in time for global warming and the division of society into haves and have-nots, science has come up with bean crops that will thrive as the climate changes.
-
So you know better, but maintain your glaring misinterpretation out of dishonesty rather than ignorance? Here I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt like a sucker.
As I said, I'm not invested in either man's theories, but I have yet to see where you've done anything but attack straw men in a weak attempt to smear an opposing ideology. On reflection, perhaps that much straw could choke a horse. Perhaps if you made your sparring partners from hay or oats?
Again, Cowen's book is making predictions (right or wrong, for better or worse), not suggestions, and he is politically closer to Republicans than Libertarians anyway. You keep trying to conflate Cowen and Caplan's views despite the fact that they bear little resemblance to each other. But then, you are so familiar with them that I'm sure you already knew that.
In conclusion, I wouldn't have Cowen or Caplan over for a cookout, with or without a catalytic converter.
For your ideological butthurt:
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fstatic.caloriecount.about.com%2Fimages%2Fmedium%2Ffamily-corn-starch-percent-75196.jpg&hash=6810d3f9b36267a83de40841097c6600f1840b2a)
I have my religion mocked regularly; toughen up and get used to yours being slapped around for its silly faith-based bits. You'll be a better man for it.
Yes, Cowen does not fit into the "privatize the sidewalks" "no true scotsman libertarian" Randian wing of the libertarian movement. The thing about libertarians is that there is always some fevered soul more libertarian then thou and denouncing the rest as not true libertarians. Cowen does, however, assume all Caplan's policy prescriptions as given and has expressed support for them. Let me repeat: Cowen advocates for the policies that will result in what he described (10% on top, 90% sucking legumes) in Let Them Eat Beans The End of Average.
A Strategy for Rich Countries: Absorb More Immigrants
Unfortunately, regions with rapidly growing populations, like Africa and South Asia, often have lower living standards. In our likely global future, these regions will have more people than they can comfortably support, while many countries in the West and in East Asia will have too few young people for prosperous economies.
As an economist, I see an obvious solution: Relatively underpopulated and highly developed countries could profitably take in young Africans and South Asians — and both sides would gain. Yet it’s far from clear that all nations that could benefit from this policy would entertain it, partly because of persistent racial and cultural bias.
Screw Cowen where he breathes for smearing others who want to keep America American and prioritize their neighbors over aliens from thousands of miles away.
Wait, there's more:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/business/economy/31view.html (more American worker displacing nonsense)
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2013/03/cowen_on_immigr.html (unpatriotic / anti-nationalist)
So why report cost-benefit results only for United States citizens or residents, as is sometimes done in analyses of both international trade and migration? The nation-state is a good practical institution, but it does not provide the final moral delineation of which people count and which do not. So commentators on trade and immigration should stress the cosmopolitan perspective...
Economist Tyler Cowen never discusses in his article in today's New York Times promoting still more immigration to the West, the effects, of mass immigration from outside the EU on the societies, the well-being, the cohesion, of the countries of Western Europe, where those effects are now too obvious to be denied. He never discusses the non-economic effects of immigration, when that immigration is no longer from countries and peoples that share the same general beliefs and cultural norms, and levels of civilization. He never discusses, not a peep, about the special case of Islam, and of Muslim immigrants. He's a promoter of population growth primarily through immigration. Toward the end of his article he does mention signs of such growth through natural means, he doesn't tell us, doesnt disaggregate the figures, to explain if such growth in, for example, France, comes from the French or from the non-integrable Muslim population.
Cordex, your wallowing in ignorance while accusing others of dishonesty is not pretty. I have the data and argue it. All you are doing is hurling accusations because you are irritated someone pointed out how many libertarians are unpatriotic and care not a whit for their fellow Americans.
-
All you are doing is hurling accusations because you are irritated someone pointed out how many libertarians are unpatriotic and care not a whit for their fellow Americans.
(https://armedpolitesociety.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi0.kym-cdn.com%2Fphotos%2Fimages%2Fnewsfeed%2F000%2F131%2F399%2Ffry.PNG%3F1307468855&hash=191db331239011c883bf9620d00326930c37c09a)
-
For your ideological butthurt:
:laugh:
I have my religion mocked regularly; toughen up and get used to yours being slapped around for its silly faith-based bits. You'll be a better man for it.
Are you suggesting faith is inherently silly? Or just faith you don't share? I'm quite used to my ideology coming under fire - both from people with entirely valid concerns as well as folks who squawk senselessly without a rational leg to stand on. Then again, my ideology isn't really the subject here any more than a critique of John McCain would be an attack on your ideology. Or do you in fact stand behind everything said by anyone who claims to be a conservative or runs with the "conservative" party? After all, if you don't you're obviously applying the No true Scotsman fallacy ...
Cordex, your wallowing in ignorance while accusing others of dishonesty is not pretty. I have the data and argue it. All you are doing is hurling accusations because you are irritated someone pointed out how many libertarians are unpatriotic and care not a whit for their fellow Americans.
I've never been accused of being pretty and I do like a good wallow. However, to be fair I assumed you were not being dishonest until you crowed about how you did in fact know better.
As far as libertarians hating babies and apple pie, I would wager you would fail Caplan's Ideological Turing Test. That is to say, I don't believe you have much understanding of the positions you oppose.
-
Wow. You mean, like, how the founders and framers expected things to work?
Yeah, pretty much any society will stratify, but without government interference, (i.e. a government that only enforces contracts rather than dictating what they must say) it will stratify based on fair lines; the people who work neither smart nor hard will be hungry, those who work either smart or hard will be comfortable, and those who work both smart and hard will be rich.