The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
Comments
-
We NEED to do SOMETHING!
-
Buying a company's stock from the company raises capital. Obviously.greenblood said:
So a company isn’t allowed to sell additional shares after an IPO? I’d like to see the law that says that. Please triple down on stupid.2001400ex said:
Um buying stock, unless involved in an IPO or pre IPO, gives nothing to a company. That's the dumbest thing I've ever read in here.greenblood said:
Last time I checked, buying stock in a company provides that company capital to make investments leading to employment.2001400ex said:
Investing in the stock market is different than a business making an investment leading to employment. You seriously are a dullard. And I chuckle at the others jumping on your fucktarded bandwagon.RaceBannon said:
I heard that the rich didn't spend or invest their tax cuts2001400ex said:
Have you heard of investing and capital gains? Do you think his money just sits in a bank account?Bendintheriver said:
AG is worth 300MM. He sold his failing network for (his take) 100MM. At last check Al Jazeera is in a lawsuit with AG over the remaining balance owed of 64MM. That means he made exactly 36MM off of Current TV. Again, a just about bankrupt "network".
Gore was given (how does one of the dumbest occupants ever of the WH get 74MM in free stock handed to him?) free stock and recently sold half of it. That total was 37MM for his shares.
If he is worth 300MM and he received 110MM from the ventures you say is where he made all his money, where do you think the other 190MM came from?
Dance you chicken, dance.
So were you lying then or are you lying now?
Buying a company's stock on the market from other investors provides demand for the company's stock, helping to support the stock price. This is important for several reasons, not the least of which is that it establishes the stock's value on the market so that when the company needs to raise capital, the public equity markets are an attractive option.
Yes, a company is obviously allowed to issue and sell stock after the IPO. It's called a secondary offering. I've worked on more of those than IPOs. -
I knew we were more honeys than just joob brothers.creepycoug said:
Buying a company's stock from the company raises capital. Obviously.greenblood said:
So a company isn’t allowed to sell additional shares after an IPO? I’d like to see the law that says that. Please triple down on stupid.2001400ex said:
Um buying stock, unless involved in an IPO or pre IPO, gives nothing to a company. That's the dumbest thing I've ever read in here.greenblood said:
Last time I checked, buying stock in a company provides that company capital to make investments leading to employment.2001400ex said:
Investing in the stock market is different than a business making an investment leading to employment. You seriously are a dullard. And I chuckle at the others jumping on your fucktarded bandwagon.RaceBannon said:
I heard that the rich didn't spend or invest their tax cuts2001400ex said:
Have you heard of investing and capital gains? Do you think his money just sits in a bank account?Bendintheriver said:
AG is worth 300MM. He sold his failing network for (his take) 100MM. At last check Al Jazeera is in a lawsuit with AG over the remaining balance owed of 64MM. That means he made exactly 36MM off of Current TV. Again, a just about bankrupt "network".
Gore was given (how does one of the dumbest occupants ever of the WH get 74MM in free stock handed to him?) free stock and recently sold half of it. That total was 37MM for his shares.
If he is worth 300MM and he received 110MM from the ventures you say is where he made all his money, where do you think the other 190MM came from?
Dance you chicken, dance.
So were you lying then or are you lying now?
Buying a company's stock on the market from other investors provides demand for the company's stock, helping to support the stock price. This is important for several reasons, not the least of which is that it establishes the stock's value on the market so that when the company needs to raise capital, the public equity markets are an attractive option.
Yes, a company is obviously allowed to issue and sell stock after the IPO. It's called a secondary offering. I've worked on more of those than IPOs.
Reg A me, bitch.
Don’t touch my reverse merger share exchange ratios though. -
So do we have 11 years or are we still endangering our grandchildren?
Can you guys make up your fucking minds?
We have science on our side - APAG -
So was this a troll job or a trigger job snowflake?Gwad said:https://skepticalscience.com/consensus-boston-u.html
When do 97% of people agree on anything, even ice cream? In scientific circles, consensus is a rare trophy, held to famously exacting standards. When a scientific consensus is finally reached — e.g., the Earth orbits the sun; water freezes at 32°F, 0°C; blood is red — a new fact joins the foundations of human discovery.
Under normal circumstances, a 97% consensus of the world’s leading scientists on anything would establish it as fact and compel action if needed. But our circumstances are not normal. Only 12% of Americans realize that that the scientific consensus on climate change is greater than 90%. Even among people who are Alarmed or Concerned about climate change, the consensus is somewhat unknown. Of the Alarmed, 84% understand the scientific consensus on climate change (16% do not); and 73% of the Concerned (27%).
Pussy -
I don’t give a fuck if climate change is real, not real, man caused or not man caused. What I do know is government will only fuck things up more if they are involved. Higher taxes and artificially raising energy costs (which hursts the poor) will save us! Fuck off.
And if you’re a big green new deal person and don’t think nuclear is a major component of getting off carbon, then you need to kill yourself because you’re a hypocrite and not serious about getting off carbon. So double fuck off. -
The fact that Bernie didn't include nuclear in his plan is disappointing to say the leastMikeDamone said:I don’t give a fuck if climate change is real, not real, man caused or not man caused. What I do know is government will only fuck things up more if they are involved. Higher taxes and artificially raising energy costs (which hursts the poor) will save us! Fuck off.
And if you’re a big green new deal person and don’t think nuclear is a major component of getting off carbon, then you need to kill yourself because you’re a hypocrite and not serious about getting off carbon. So double fuck off.
Coming from a staunch supporter -
Bernie is a bumbling old commie who thinks China has it right when “helping their poor”.bigcc said:
The fact that Bernie didn't include nuclear in his plan is disappointing to say the leastMikeDamone said:I don’t give a fuck if climate change is real, not real, man caused or not man caused. What I do know is government will only fuck things up more if they are involved. Higher taxes and artificially raising energy costs (which hursts the poor) will save us! Fuck off.
And if you’re a big green new deal person and don’t think nuclear is a major component of getting off carbon, then you need to kill yourself because you’re a hypocrite and not serious about getting off carbon. So double fuck off.
Coming from a staunch supporter
He’s a clown. It’s not surprising he thinks nuclear isn’t an option. He loses his ability to control people if energy is cheap and abundant -
A link for "helping their poor".......to die.MikeDamone said:
Bernie is a bumbling old commie who thinks China has it right when “helping their poor”.bigcc said:
The fact that Bernie didn't include nuclear in his plan is disappointing to say the leastMikeDamone said:I don’t give a fuck if climate change is real, not real, man caused or not man caused. What I do know is government will only fuck things up more if they are involved. Higher taxes and artificially raising energy costs (which hursts the poor) will save us! Fuck off.
And if you’re a big green new deal person and don’t think nuclear is a major component of getting off carbon, then you need to kill yourself because you’re a hypocrite and not serious about getting off carbon. So double fuck off.
Coming from a staunch supporter
He’s a clown. It’s not surprising he thinks nuclear isn’t an option. He loses his ability to control people if energy is cheap and abundant
https://www.dailywire.com/news/51135/sanders-praises-communist-china-ted-cruz-crushes-hank-berrien?utm_source=cnemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=082919-news&utm_campaign=position1 -
Sanders told Hill.TV’s Krystal Ball, "China is a country that is moving unfortunately in a more authoritarian way in a number of directions. But what we have to say about China in fairness to China and its leadership is if I’m not mistaken they have made more progress in addressing extreme poverty than any country in the history of civilization, so they’ve done a lot of things for their people."Sledog said:
A link for "helping their poor".......to die.MikeDamone said:
Bernie is a bumbling old commie who thinks China has it right when “helping their poor”.bigcc said:
The fact that Bernie didn't include nuclear in his plan is disappointing to say the leastMikeDamone said:I don’t give a fuck if climate change is real, not real, man caused or not man caused. What I do know is government will only fuck things up more if they are involved. Higher taxes and artificially raising energy costs (which hursts the poor) will save us! Fuck off.
And if you’re a big green new deal person and don’t think nuclear is a major component of getting off carbon, then you need to kill yourself because you’re a hypocrite and not serious about getting off carbon. So double fuck off.
Coming from a staunch supporter
He’s a clown. It’s not surprising he thinks nuclear isn’t an option. He loses his ability to control people if energy is cheap and abundant
https://www.dailywire.com/news/51135/sanders-praises-communist-china-ted-cruz-crushes-hank-berrien?utm_source=cnemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=082919-news&utm_campaign=position1 -
It was rhetoricalcreepycoug said:
Buying a company's stock from the company raises capital. Obviously.greenblood said:
So a company isn’t allowed to sell additional shares after an IPO? I’d like to see the law that says that. Please triple down on stupid.2001400ex said:
Um buying stock, unless involved in an IPO or pre IPO, gives nothing to a company. That's the dumbest thing I've ever read in here.greenblood said:
Last time I checked, buying stock in a company provides that company capital to make investments leading to employment.2001400ex said:
Investing in the stock market is different than a business making an investment leading to employment. You seriously are a dullard. And I chuckle at the others jumping on your fucktarded bandwagon.RaceBannon said:
I heard that the rich didn't spend or invest their tax cuts2001400ex said:
Have you heard of investing and capital gains? Do you think his money just sits in a bank account?Bendintheriver said:
AG is worth 300MM. He sold his failing network for (his take) 100MM. At last check Al Jazeera is in a lawsuit with AG over the remaining balance owed of 64MM. That means he made exactly 36MM off of Current TV. Again, a just about bankrupt "network".
Gore was given (how does one of the dumbest occupants ever of the WH get 74MM in free stock handed to him?) free stock and recently sold half of it. That total was 37MM for his shares.
If he is worth 300MM and he received 110MM from the ventures you say is where he made all his money, where do you think the other 190MM came from?
Dance you chicken, dance.
So were you lying then or are you lying now?
Buying a company's stock on the market from other investors provides demand for the company's stock, helping to support the stock price. This is important for several reasons, not the least of which is that it establishes the stock's value on the market so that when the company needs to raise capital, the public equity markets are an attractive option.
Yes, a company is obviously allowed to issue and sell stock after the IPO. It's called a secondary offering. I've worked on more of those than IPOs. -
Hundreds of millions of chicoms are still living in extreme poverty. A very small amount of Americans are living in poverty largely as a result of addiction and mental illness. Keep rooting for the away team and communism.
-
Again you are lost in facts. China is awful. But they've done a ton to reduce poverty.WestlinnDuck said:Hundreds of millions of chicoms are still living in extreme poverty. A very small amount of Americans are living in poverty largely as a result of addiction and mental illness. Keep rooting for the away team and communism.
In China today, poverty refers mainly to the rural poor, as decades of economic growth have largely eradicated urban poverty.[1][2][3] The dramatic progress in reducing poverty over the past three decades in China is well known. According to the World Bank, more than 850 million people have lifted themselves out of extreme poverty as China's poverty rate fell from 88 percent in 1981 to 0.7 percent in 2015, as measured by the percentage of people living on the equivalent of US$1.90 or less per day in 2011 purchasing price parity terms.[4][5] -
So, because most Chinese now make more than $700.00 a year they’re system is enviable?2001400ex said:
Again you are lost in facts. China is awful. But they've done a ton to reduce poverty.WestlinnDuck said:Hundreds of millions of chicoms are still living in extreme poverty. A very small amount of Americans are living in poverty largely as a result of addiction and mental illness. Keep rooting for the away team and communism.
In China today, poverty refers mainly to the rural poor, as decades of economic growth have largely eradicated urban poverty.[1][2][3] The dramatic progress in reducing poverty over the past three decades in China is well known. According to the World Bank, more than 850 million people have lifted themselves out of extreme poverty as China's poverty rate fell from 88 percent in 1981 to 0.7 percent in 2015, as measured by the percentage of people living on the equivalent of US$1.90 or less per day in 2011 purchasing price parity terms.[4][5]
-
Same measurement in the US.USMChawk said:
So, because most Chinese now make more than $700.00 a year they’re system is enviable?2001400ex said:
Again you are lost in facts. China is awful. But they've done a ton to reduce poverty.WestlinnDuck said:Hundreds of millions of chicoms are still living in extreme poverty. A very small amount of Americans are living in poverty largely as a result of addiction and mental illness. Keep rooting for the away team and communism.
In China today, poverty refers mainly to the rural poor, as decades of economic growth have largely eradicated urban poverty.[1][2][3] The dramatic progress in reducing poverty over the past three decades in China is well known. According to the World Bank, more than 850 million people have lifted themselves out of extreme poverty as China's poverty rate fell from 88 percent in 1981 to 0.7 percent in 2015, as measured by the percentage of people living on the equivalent of US$1.90 or less per day in 2011 purchasing price parity terms.[4][5]
As of 2009, the number of people who were in poverty was approaching 1960s levels that led to the national War on Poverty.[7] In 2011 extreme poverty in the United States, meaning households living on less than $2 per day before government benefits, was double 1996 levels at 1.5 million households, including 2.8 million children.[8] In 2012, the percentage of seniors living in poverty was 14% while 18% of children were.[9] The addition of Social Security benefits contributed more to reduce poverty than any other factor.[10] -
yeah -that 60's approach to poverty worked awesomely....50 years later, same shit. Affordable government housing, more benefits and welfare....free needles, blah blah blah.2001400ex said:
Same measurement in the US.USMChawk said:
So, because most Chinese now make more than $700.00 a year they’re system is enviable?2001400ex said:
Again you are lost in facts. China is awful. But they've done a ton to reduce poverty.WestlinnDuck said:Hundreds of millions of chicoms are still living in extreme poverty. A very small amount of Americans are living in poverty largely as a result of addiction and mental illness. Keep rooting for the away team and communism.
In China today, poverty refers mainly to the rural poor, as decades of economic growth have largely eradicated urban poverty.[1][2][3] The dramatic progress in reducing poverty over the past three decades in China is well known. According to the World Bank, more than 850 million people have lifted themselves out of extreme poverty as China's poverty rate fell from 88 percent in 1981 to 0.7 percent in 2015, as measured by the percentage of people living on the equivalent of US$1.90 or less per day in 2011 purchasing price parity terms.[4][5]
As of 2009, the number of people who were in poverty was approaching 1960s levels that led to the national War on Poverty.[7] In 2011 extreme poverty in the United States, meaning households living on less than $2 per day before government benefits, was double 1996 levels at 1.5 million households, including 2.8 million children.[8] In 2012, the percentage of seniors living in poverty was 14% while 18% of children were.[9] The addition of Social Security benefits contributed more to reduce poverty than any other factor.[10]
#cabrinigreen
Maybe try something different? Like train people up and put them in rehab to get off the drugs.....christ, go back to the 30's model and send them to government work camps. There's some sweet state and national parks out there because of those Depression era projects.
-
How much in chicom benefits does a poor rice farmer in China get? The US extreme poverty guy/gal has a flat screen TV, a smartphone, AC and indoor plumbing. You suck at this. No one in the US is illegally immigrating to China. We have thousands and thousands of poor illegals from China. Hondo, you suck at this.
-
You painted Biden comment as fucktarded. 850 million people have been pulled out if extreme poverty in China. Biden was right. Sorry if that makes your snatch sore.WestlinnDuck said:How much in chicom benefits does a poor rice farmer in China get? The US extreme poverty guy/gal has a flat screen TV, a smartphone, AC and indoor plumbing. You suck at this. No one in the US is illegally immigrating to China. We have thousands and thousands of poor illegals from China. Hondo, you suck at this.
-
Keep rooting for the away team. So, the US should openly engage in unfair trade and intellectual property theft for the benefit of poor Americans. Got it. Clearly the better economic program.
-
Fixed that for you.2001400ex said:
Sanders told Hill.TV’s Krystal Ball, "China is a country that is moving unfortunately in a more authoritarian way in a number of directions.Sledog said:
A link for "helping their poor".......to die.MikeDamone said:
Bernie is a bumbling old commie who thinks China has it right when “helping their poor”.bigcc said:
The fact that Bernie didn't include nuclear in his plan is disappointing to say the leastMikeDamone said:I don’t give a fuck if climate change is real, not real, man caused or not man caused. What I do know is government will only fuck things up more if they are involved. Higher taxes and artificially raising energy costs (which hursts the poor) will save us! Fuck off.
And if you’re a big green new deal person and don’t think nuclear is a major component of getting off carbon, then you need to kill yourself because you’re a hypocrite and not serious about getting off carbon. So double fuck off.
Coming from a staunch supporter
He’s a clown. It’s not surprising he thinks nuclear isn’t an option. He loses his ability to control people if energy is cheap and abundant
https://www.dailywire.com/news/51135/sanders-praises-communist-china-ted-cruz-crushes-hank-berrien?utm_source=cnemail&utm_medium=email&utm_content=082919-news&utm_campaign=position1But what we have to say about China in fairness to China and its leadership is if I’m not mistaken they have made more progress in addressing extreme poverty than any country in the history of civilization, so they’ve done a lot of things for their people." Murdered millions and starved 50 million to death so we can feed some of them and use them as slave labor. Before we shoot them!
