Global warming LOL

Discussion in 'Politics' started by John_Wensink, Aug 13, 2013.

  1. jem

    jem

    your marxist arguments have no real world support so you rely on these b.s. kind of grab ass arguments.


    Lets see where we are in a few years... when these tax increases have had an impact.




     
    #131     Aug 27, 2013
  2. Ricter

    Ricter

    If you're going to try and use the "there's a delay" argument, I can do the same and be vague about its length. Very convenient.
     
    #132     Aug 27, 2013

  3. Gee, you are doing a bunch of insulting but still missing the point that Spencer's chart is simply fraudulent. You may be fine with that because it supports your psychotic position, but to those of us with intellectual integrity and sanity, it is not.


    Let me try again. He used a very particular subset of the world's temperatures that do not represent the world temps as a whole. It's simple as that. He did it to deceive, not to be accurate. That you defend him just means you are also comfortable with lying and deceit. Which is no surprise. Deceit should be your middle name.

    The IPCC models are proving correct. If anything they have underestimated the effects of man caused global warming.

    Virtually all the world's science is in agreement that almost all the warming over the last fifty years is due to man's release of CO2.
     
    #133     Aug 27, 2013
  4. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    YOU LIE!
     
    #134     Aug 27, 2013
  5. jem

    jem

    ok troll liar tell us how you can be the one of the few agw assholes left on the earth lying about the temperature record.

    Produce links to the data you fricken lying ass troll.

    Then explain why the former agw nutter scientist I quote next is also wrong.

    If you can't produce proof of warming in the air temps the last 16 years Spencer was telling the truth and you have been lying.






     
    #135     Aug 27, 2013
  6. jem

    jem

     
    #136     Aug 27, 2013
  7. jem

    jem

    This has to be some of your most ilogical bullshit ever. The tax year is not even over... How could you be making any argument at all.

    and

    Of course results from tax changes can take time to digest.
    Right now we see businesses droping full time employees to part time. That will take a while to take effect and show up in tax receipts.

    We will need a full year of obamas tax increases and gdp destruction before we know its effect on tax revenues.






     
    #137     Aug 27, 2013
  8. Ricter

    Ricter

    The tax increase of January was to payroll taxes, which have an immediate bearing on consumer spending, which is 70% of GDP. The drag on the economy due to the increase has been calculated and reported.

    There are other variables at work, variables which also upset your simplistic "tax cuts raise revenue".
     
    #138     Aug 27, 2013
  9. Ricter

    Ricter

    futurecurrents, the temperature anomaly chart indicates high temp anomalies are outpacing low temp anomalies. But how, by count, or by degree (no pun)?
     
    #139     Aug 27, 2013
  10. jem

    jem

    a. interesting but other than the correlation argument I cited today, I always wrote that the last 4 major tax cuts were followed by an increase in revenue.

    b. you can't make use of that argument in reverse because that Romer and Romer study I just cited shows tax increases hurt gdp.

    c. The tax increases as to payroll tax will definitely increase revenues in the short run. But as they destroy buying power the negative effects will take a while to filter through to a lower gdp and therefore lower tax revenue.

    Additionally the tax effects of rest of obamas tax increases will not be felt for a few years.

    So you argument is just more grab ass Krugman like crap.

     
    #140     Aug 27, 2013