The Biden Administration

125,912 Views | 2959 Replies | Last: 20 hrs ago by caryking
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?

SexualChocolate
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You may want to edit your derogatory term that you used on the first page.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SexualChocolate said:

You may want to edit your derogatory term that you used on the first page.


I'll just go with no.
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
cowboypack02 said:

statefan91 said:


lol.....Biden is calling for the release of the leader of the opposition party in Russia while the political party that he is now in charge of has been trying to put the leader of the opposition party in the US in prison for the last 4 years...

talk about irony....
The socialist party doesn't care. Must own the GOP and Conservatives at all costs. You know, defeat the Fascists and Bible thumping rubes. I for one would be ashamed if I called myself a liberal these days.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SexualChocolate
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That's your choice but you may need to educate yourself on acceptable terms. It is considered a derogatory term and can be offensive.

BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here is the hypocrisy of the left on full display. ZERO media questions about this. Had President Trump been found to have accepted this much "dark money" the House would have launched an investigation immediately.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-white-house-victory-fueled-by-record-shattering-145m-in-dark-money-report-says

And soon to follow.... the house bill on banning "dark money."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/politics-house-democrats-revive-for-the-people-act-which-mcconnell-once-called-democratic-politician-protection

Question to the lefties.... do any of you have ANY shame whatsoever or is it just common among you and your ilk to have no problem with hypocrisy, contradictory policies and overall smugness? Serious question. And please answer without mentioning anything to do with the GOP or President Trump. I'll sit back and wait.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SexualChocolate said:

That's your choice but you may need to educate yourself on acceptable terms. It is considered a derogatory term and can be offensive.




I'm not concerned about it. Victims will always find a way to be offended.
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SexualChocolate
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Not worth it...
waynecountywolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Judge just temporarily blocked Bidens deportation freeze of immigrants.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-biden-immigration-texas/u-s-judge-blocks-biden-deportation-freeze-nationwide-following-legal-challenge-by-texas-idUSKBN29V2CU?il=0

A federal judge in Texas on Tuesday temporarily blocked a move by new U.S. President Joe Biden to halt the deportation of many immigrants for a 100-day period, a swift legal setback for his ambitious immigration agenda.

U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton, an appointee of former President Donald Trump in the Southern District of Texas, issued a temporary restraining order that blocks the policy nationwide for 14 days following a legal challenge by Texas.

The Biden administration is expected to appeal the ruling, which halts the deportation freeze while both parties submit briefs on the matter.


cowboypack02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
waynecountywolf said:

Judge just temporarily blocked Bidens deportation freeze of immigrants.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-biden-immigration-texas/u-s-judge-blocks-biden-deportation-freeze-nationwide-following-legal-challenge-by-texas-idUSKBN29V2CU?il=0

A federal judge in Texas on Tuesday temporarily blocked a move by new U.S. President Joe Biden to halt the deportation of many immigrants for a 100-day period, a swift legal setback for his ambitious immigration agenda.

U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton, an appointee of former President Donald Trump in the Southern District of Texas, issued a temporary restraining order that blocks the policy nationwide for 14 days following a legal challenge by Texas.

The Biden administration is expected to appeal the ruling, which halts the deportation freeze while both parties submit briefs on the matter.



I still don't think that federal judges should be able to pass a nationwide injunction.....but my heart says that i'm ok with this because everything that Trump tried to do for the last few years got held up the same way
statefan91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
waynecountywolf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:


Tulsi would have been a better choice than KH.- no ridiculous laugh and way hotter, too
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:


Public Sector unions suck.

Teachers unions protect teachers and don't care about students. The overall reaction by teachers unions this year has been absurd. The Chicago union is currently defying orders to return to work.

I feel very similar about police unions.
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
You are talking apples to oranges. Police Unions serve a purpose. See what happens when your party tries to "defund" the police as opposed to cutting funding for teachers. One is good and one is bad. You figure out which one is which.

Police Unions have been made necessary to protect the police from socialist leaders like Dumb Deblasio and Fredo's Brother. Necessary.

Teacher's Unions serve one purpose and that is the teachers. Sure it's a tough job. Illinois and Michigan have teachers making close to 100k a year for working 9 months and they still strike on a regular basis. Unnecessary.


Police officers make a fraction of that.

In my opinion ALL Unions should be busted up. It should be all voluntary and not required. This isn't 1920 and there are labor laws in place that supersede anything that the Unions provide other than you got to have a Union card, pay your dues and hope to get a job crook show.

Hell, Sleepy Joe already cost 12k Union jobs in his first three days. Isn't the "Union workers" POTUS?

Elect a clown get a circus.
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-keystone-xl-gina-mccarthy-jobs-sacrifice

Such a fine outstanding President putting all these evil environmental destroyers out of work.......I guess telling a lifelong welder to "build solar panels isn't insulting at all. At least the lefties are consistent with their smug condemnation of blue collar workers. 2022 can't get here fast enough.

BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
According to Sleepy Joe today is "abortion" day. He intends on signing more EOs that will fund abortions around the world with U.S. taxpayer dollars. Way to go Sleepy. If he hasn't already sunk the Senate and the House in 2022 yet he most certainly will after today.

At least we have a Press Secretary that is transparent with the Clown Show and is open, honest and always tells the truth....

packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
statefan91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Caveat - I know ZERO about drilling / fracking / etc. I'm sure that Biden's shifting focus to renewables will cost jobs in regions dependent upon fossils. Hopefully there are social programs to support those people, as well as support to help them reskill as needed.

Reading that article made it seem like much of this has been a trend going on for multiple years:

Quote:

Today, a lone semi is gassing up. The cafe is deserted. A frozen sign in the snow advertises a move-in special at the vacant motel. Even before the pandemic, there was a glut in natural gas on the market so companies were scaling back.

Quote:

But some here will tell you Wyoming has had years to prepare for the eventuality of fossil fuels going away and little has been done. Linda Baker is a teacher and longtime environmental activist in Pinedale, a town of 2,000 once infamous for its brown cloud from drilling obscuring the Wind River mountains. Baker says blame towards the feds is misguided, it's the companies, she says, that overproduced.

"It's uneconomical to drill right now," Baker says. "Oil and gas will cry bloody murder but right now they're not drilling, because they can't afford to."

Conservationists are also quick to point out that most of the Jonah Field is already leased anyway. Some companies in western states are also holding on to existing leases and not even developing them. There were 21 drilling rigs statewide in Wyoming a year ago, now there's only six.
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
statefan91 said:

Caveat - I know ZERO about drilling / fracking / etc. I'm sure that Biden's shifting focus to renewables will cost jobs in regions dependent upon fossils. Hopefully there are social programs to support those people, as well as support to help them reskill as needed.

Reading that article made it seem like much of this has been a trend going on for multiple years:

Quote:

Today, a lone semi is gassing up. The cafe is deserted. A frozen sign in the snow advertises a move-in special at the vacant motel. Even before the pandemic, there was a glut in natural gas on the market so companies were scaling back.

Quote:

But some here will tell you Wyoming has had years to prepare for the eventuality of fossil fuels going away and little has been done. Linda Baker is a teacher and longtime environmental activist in Pinedale, a town of 2,000 once infamous for its brown cloud from drilling obscuring the Wind River mountains. Baker says blame towards the feds is misguided, it's the companies, she says, that overproduced.

"It's uneconomical to drill right now," Baker says. "Oil and gas will cry bloody murder but right now they're not drilling, because they can't afford to."

Conservationists are also quick to point out that most of the Jonah Field is already leased anyway. Some companies in western states are also holding on to existing leases and not even developing them. There were 21 drilling rigs statewide in Wyoming a year ago, now there's only six.

That is mighty kind of you to "hope" these out of work people can pay their bills, feed their families and keep their homes. Don't hurt your shoulder patting yourself on the back.

"Hopefully there are social programs to support those people, as well as support to help them reskill as needed."

Instead of catering to the far left why didn't Sleepy Joe make sure these people had jobs to transition into when he signed the Executive Order? You had Ketchup Boy Kerry telling people to learn to build solar panels that lost their jobs.

Where are the solar panels built now? CHINA.

In order for them to be built here there would have to be infrastructure, factories, rail lines etc..... Be the socialist party can't do that with signing a blank piece of paper in a fancy leather binder can they?

The socialists only care about power and sticking it to Conservatives. Again, never underestimate the lefties' ability to **** things up. With all three branches of government all they are going to accomplish is to further divide this country.

Great job socialists. Great job.
packofwolves
How long do you want to ignore this user?
packgrad said:




Mentioned on news this morning, current salaries in green energy (e.g. solar) don't compare to oil/gas. Many may end up with salary cuts, possibly significant.

Amazing to me how many defend this policy decision. It is not even a transition approach, like ramp up green energy and associated jobs then look to phase out oil/gas over time.
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
That is exactly what SHOULD have happened. You can't fully own the Conservatives like that. Plus you have to keep the Bartender and the Flunky Bunch happy or they will make life miserable for Sleepy Joe and Horizontal Harris.

Couple that with sending U.S. taxpayer dollars all over the world to fund abortion the next two years will be the last that the socialist see control over all three branches of government for a very long time.
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
statefan91 said:

Caveat - I know ZERO about drilling / fracking / etc. I'm sure that Biden's shifting focus to renewables will cost jobs in regions dependent upon fossils. Hopefully there are social programs to support those people, as well as support to help them reskill as needed.

Reading that article made it seem like much of this has been a trend going on for multiple years:

Quote:

Today, a lone semi is gassing up. The cafe is deserted. A frozen sign in the snow advertises a move-in special at the vacant motel. Even before the pandemic, there was a glut in natural gas on the market so companies were scaling back.

Quote:

But some here will tell you Wyoming has had years to prepare for the eventuality of fossil fuels going away and little has been done. Linda Baker is a teacher and longtime environmental activist in Pinedale, a town of 2,000 once infamous for its brown cloud from drilling obscuring the Wind River mountains. Baker says blame towards the feds is misguided, it's the companies, she says, that overproduced.

"It's uneconomical to drill right now," Baker says. "Oil and gas will cry bloody murder but right now they're not drilling, because they can't afford to."

Conservationists are also quick to point out that most of the Jonah Field is already leased anyway. Some companies in western states are also holding on to existing leases and not even developing them. There were 21 drilling rigs statewide in Wyoming a year ago, now there's only six.

The best plan would be to impose something like a carbon tax and trade scheme. The goal is to set a rate that properly captures the environmental externalities of burning fossil fuels. Agreeing on this rate is the hardest part. If it's too high it's just another tax with significant deadweight loss. If it's too low, there isn't enough incentive for the carbon trading market to take off.

But the upshot is a market based transition to renewables. As they become cheaper and technology advances, the market will naturally shift over time with less of an immediate shock.
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fact is this wasn't thought through. It was a "reaction" once again by the left. Hundreds of thousands of jobs are going to be lost because of the policies being signed by EOs. Good thing the lefties taught Trump about "judge shopping." See how many cry about the judges ruling against EOs from Sleepy Joe. Hypocrisy at its finest.
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

statefan91 said:

Caveat - I know ZERO about drilling / fracking / etc. I'm sure that Biden's shifting focus to renewables will cost jobs in regions dependent upon fossils. Hopefully there are social programs to support those people, as well as support to help them reskill as needed.

Reading that article made it seem like much of this has been a trend going on for multiple years:

Quote:

Today, a lone semi is gassing up. The cafe is deserted. A frozen sign in the snow advertises a move-in special at the vacant motel. Even before the pandemic, there was a glut in natural gas on the market so companies were scaling back.

Quote:

But some here will tell you Wyoming has had years to prepare for the eventuality of fossil fuels going away and little has been done. Linda Baker is a teacher and longtime environmental activist in Pinedale, a town of 2,000 once infamous for its brown cloud from drilling obscuring the Wind River mountains. Baker says blame towards the feds is misguided, it's the companies, she says, that overproduced.

"It's uneconomical to drill right now," Baker says. "Oil and gas will cry bloody murder but right now they're not drilling, because they can't afford to."

Conservationists are also quick to point out that most of the Jonah Field is already leased anyway. Some companies in western states are also holding on to existing leases and not even developing them. There were 21 drilling rigs statewide in Wyoming a year ago, now there's only six.

The best plan would be to impose something like a carbon tax and trade scheme. The goal is to set a rate that properly captures the environmental externalities of burning fossil fuels. Agreeing on this rate is the hardest part. If it's too high it's just another tax with significant deadweight loss. If it's too low, there isn't enough incentive for the carbon trading market to take off.

But the upshot is a market based transition to renewables. As they become cheaper and technology advances, the market will naturally shift over time with less of an immediate shock.
Statefan, NC State has some of the best Intellectual property (I can't remember which department) out there regarding clean fracking. The professors and students, I hear, are doing a bang up job on this.

As I understand it, the (clean) fracking process is more expensive; so, it is more cost effective for the industry to buy than to drill when prices get too low.

Isle, I am never a fan of Government introducing schemes like offsets to induce behavior. In a free-market economy (which we don't have anymore), people will drive change faster than anyone. In summary, a market based transition is "NOT" when the Government induces behavior. I think that is what you are saying, if not, please correct me.

Personally, I'd have no problem moving to alternative sources of energy; however, the most economical source is Nuclear (thats according to a relative of mine that was Town Manager of Louisburg. Louisburg is a co-op electrical suppler and he worked deals with providers all the time).

The dissenting opinion has been unleashed!!!!!
IseWolf22
How long do you want to ignore this user?
pineknollshoresking said:

IseWolf22 said:

statefan91 said:

Caveat - I know ZERO about drilling / fracking / etc. I'm sure that Biden's shifting focus to renewables will cost jobs in regions dependent upon fossils. Hopefully there are social programs to support those people, as well as support to help them reskill as needed.

Reading that article made it seem like much of this has been a trend going on for multiple years:

Quote:

Today, a lone semi is gassing up. The cafe is deserted. A frozen sign in the snow advertises a move-in special at the vacant motel. Even before the pandemic, there was a glut in natural gas on the market so companies were scaling back.

Quote:

But some here will tell you Wyoming has had years to prepare for the eventuality of fossil fuels going away and little has been done. Linda Baker is a teacher and longtime environmental activist in Pinedale, a town of 2,000 once infamous for its brown cloud from drilling obscuring the Wind River mountains. Baker says blame towards the feds is misguided, it's the companies, she says, that overproduced.

"It's uneconomical to drill right now," Baker says. "Oil and gas will cry bloody murder but right now they're not drilling, because they can't afford to."

Conservationists are also quick to point out that most of the Jonah Field is already leased anyway. Some companies in western states are also holding on to existing leases and not even developing them. There were 21 drilling rigs statewide in Wyoming a year ago, now there's only six.

The best plan would be to impose something like a carbon tax and trade scheme. The goal is to set a rate that properly captures the environmental externalities of burning fossil fuels. Agreeing on this rate is the hardest part. If it's too high it's just another tax with significant deadweight loss. If it's too low, there isn't enough incentive for the carbon trading market to take off.

But the upshot is a market based transition to renewables. As they become cheaper and technology advances, the market will naturally shift over time with less of an immediate shock.
Statefan, NC State has some of the best Intellectual property (I can't remember which department) out there regarding clean fracking. The professors and students, I hear, are doing a bang up job on this.

As I understand it, the (clean) fracking process is more expensive; so, it is more cost effective for the industry to buy than to drill when prices get too low.

Isle, I am never a fan of Government introducing schemes like offsets to induce behavior. In a free-market economy (which we don't have anymore), people will drive change faster than anyone. In summary, a market based transition is "NOT" when the Government induces behavior. I think that is what you are saying, if not, please correct me.

Personally, I'd have no problem moving to alternative sources of energy; however, the most economical source is Nuclear (thats according to a relative of mine that was Town Manager of Louisburg. Louisburg is a co-op electrical suppler and he worked deals with providers all the time).


First off, nuclear is absolutely the most economical and something we should be pursuing heavily. The biggest problem with Nuclear is NIMBYism. I'm also relatively OK with US fracking. The goal now should be to completely phase out only the dirtiest coal sources. Moving to renewable is a goal but a sustainable path is going to have a considerable bridge with relatively clean non-renewables.

I'm a fan of the market. Usually the market does best with no interference. However sometimes externalities are not captured by the price we all pay. Pollution and Carbon output are things not accurately captured by market costs. Instead we usually deal with them through regulation, which is usually one size fits all and increases both costs and complexity of running a business. Also regulations always entrench big, existing players and box out competitors.

I am starting from the premise, "Yes, climate change is a concern and we it would be a good idea to reduce carbon output as a society." You may not start from the premise, but I am, (let's separate out the economic question from the environmental). Now with that premise, a market solution is a preferable way of enacting change than a regulation. Carbon trading encourages the businesses most capable of reducing output, to do so quickly and therefore be able to sell their allocations who need to have a higher output. It incentives companies to self sort their carbon reduction bases on real cost, and which is more efficient than one size fits all rules.

TLDNR - Market solutions are better than regulations if you believe there is an underlying problem
packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Biden press secretary a white supremacist?

Pacfanweb
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well, being a redhead, she does lack skin pigment, as well as a soul, so.........
caryking
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IseWolf22 said:

pineknollshoresking said:

IseWolf22 said:

statefan91 said:

Caveat - I know ZERO about drilling / fracking / etc. I'm sure that Biden's shifting focus to renewables will cost jobs in regions dependent upon fossils. Hopefully there are social programs to support those people, as well as support to help them reskill as needed.

Reading that article made it seem like much of this has been a trend going on for multiple years:

Quote:

Today, a lone semi is gassing up. The cafe is deserted. A frozen sign in the snow advertises a move-in special at the vacant motel. Even before the pandemic, there was a glut in natural gas on the market so companies were scaling back.

Quote:

But some here will tell you Wyoming has had years to prepare for the eventuality of fossil fuels going away and little has been done. Linda Baker is a teacher and longtime environmental activist in Pinedale, a town of 2,000 once infamous for its brown cloud from drilling obscuring the Wind River mountains. Baker says blame towards the feds is misguided, it's the companies, she says, that overproduced.

"It's uneconomical to drill right now," Baker says. "Oil and gas will cry bloody murder but right now they're not drilling, because they can't afford to."

Conservationists are also quick to point out that most of the Jonah Field is already leased anyway. Some companies in western states are also holding on to existing leases and not even developing them. There were 21 drilling rigs statewide in Wyoming a year ago, now there's only six.

The best plan would be to impose something like a carbon tax and trade scheme. The goal is to set a rate that properly captures the environmental externalities of burning fossil fuels. Agreeing on this rate is the hardest part. If it's too high it's just another tax with significant deadweight loss. If it's too low, there isn't enough incentive for the carbon trading market to take off.

But the upshot is a market based transition to renewables. As they become cheaper and technology advances, the market will naturally shift over time with less of an immediate shock.
Statefan, NC State has some of the best Intellectual property (I can't remember which department) out there regarding clean fracking. The professors and students, I hear, are doing a bang up job on this.

As I understand it, the (clean) fracking process is more expensive; so, it is more cost effective for the industry to buy than to drill when prices get too low.

Isle, I am never a fan of Government introducing schemes like offsets to induce behavior. In a free-market economy (which we don't have anymore), people will drive change faster than anyone. In summary, a market based transition is "NOT" when the Government induces behavior. I think that is what you are saying, if not, please correct me.

Personally, I'd have no problem moving to alternative sources of energy; however, the most economical source is Nuclear (thats according to a relative of mine that was Town Manager of Louisburg. Louisburg is a co-op electrical suppler and he worked deals with providers all the time).


First off, nuclear is absolutely the most economical and something we should be pursuing heavily. The biggest problem with Nuclear is NIMBYism. I'm also relatively OK with US fracking. The goal now should be to completely phase out only the dirtiest coal sources. Moving to renewable is a goal but a sustainable path is going to have a considerable bridge with relatively clean non-renewables.

I'm a fan of the market. Usually the market does best with no interference. However sometimes externalities are not captured by the price we all pay. Pollution and Carbon output are things not accurately captured by market costs. Instead we usually deal with them through regulation, which is usually one size fits all and increases both costs and complexity of running a business. Also regulations always entrench big, existing players and box out competitors.

I am starting from the premise, "Yes, climate change is a concern and we it would be a good idea to reduce carbon output as a society." You may not start from the premise, but I am, (let's separate out the economic question from the environmental). Now with that premise, a market solution is a preferable way of enacting change than a regulation. Carbon trading encourages the businesses most capable of reducing output, to do so quickly and therefore be able to sell their allocations who need to have a higher output. It incentives companies to self sort their carbon reduction bases on real cost, and which is more efficient than one size fits all rules.

TLDNR - Market solutions are better than regulations if you believe there is an underlying problem
Isle, in general we agree; however, we do start from a different premise.

I always start from a premise of: Government (really people) can't help themselves and the corruption that exist in it is horrible for people. The collusion between government and big business (tech, financial sector, etc) completely works against the people. I still consider myself the people.

I think the biggest issue we have with inducing schemes is that you can't please everyone. The coal industry doesn't want to lose its footing. I can't blame them at all as they are people too... they may completely disagree with you.

To prove my point, just watch the actions of the SEC and other agencies based on the GameSpot deal... Wall Streeters will be taken care of and the so-called nerds will be attacked, I believe..
The dissenting opinion has been unleashed!!!!!
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Close your eyes for a moment. Pretend this is Kayleigh McEnamy talking about President Trump's Treasury Secretary. Now tell me how blind the media is and how embedded they are with the socialist party.

BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Here's Sleepy Joe...the "blue collar" POTUS....BULL*****.... This clown is doing nothing but what the far left socialists want him to do.

packgrad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BBW12OG
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Curious to see if anyone from the MSM will ask Circle Back Queen about Sleepy Joe's thoughts on this little gem. I'm pretty damn sure this qualifies as SOCIALISM.

 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.