On crashes, blame and ignoring problems......
People in their 20's who rushed out and bought a home, hearing if they didn't that they'd be priced out of the market forever, now that they're going to lose everything and go bankrupt, they'll hate you.
They'll hate that they got suckered (thank you George Bush and the "ownership society"). They'll hate the baby boomers who didn't save for retirement, yet managed to create the ultimate pump-and-dump, and then bankrupted the US, spending the nation's wealth and future earnings on stupid wars and out of control entitlements.
But alas, this is nothing compared to the hatred and disgust ALL future generations on earth for hundreds and hundreds of years will rightly have for essentially anyone born from 1900 to 2000, especially the incompetent and corrupt world leadership of today.
Why, you ask, will all future generations hate the people and leaders of earth today? Why will everyone in the future think the people of the twentieth century were self-obsessed, greedy, horrible and non-altruistic people?
Because of this.
January 31, 2007
Future generations will hate you
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
50 comments:
mmmmmmmmmmmm........no, I dont think so.
Geezus dude, make up your mind! You hate greed, you decry materialism, you act like a treehugger and then in the next post you rag on the Clintons, liberals and honest poor people seeking opportunity in America.
So are you a selfish, guilt-ridden republican or a progressive, egalitarian wannabe?
.
.
.
Another Zero comment blog topic. What a surprise. Should I yell "first" or something? Did the Nazis chase away your readership, or the republicans? But I repeat myself.
The report sounds devastating. While Bush has been denying the problem, reality has crept up.
What's the combined value of real estate in all major cities likely to be inundated in 50-100 years, give or take? And no, it doesn't take an 80 or even 20 foot rise. We're not planning for even a modest rise. Can historic tall buildings be relocated?
"So are you a selfish, guilt-ridden republican or a progressive, egalitarian wannabe?"
Answer: I'm a free thinker who isn't tied down to either political party or ideology (or TV network)
Now we just need leaders to emerge in that vein. Common sense is what this country needs right about now.
The Republicans had the roost to themselves back in the '20s and look how that wound up...
Now they've had the roost again and have succeeded in maxing out the credit. But not before ratcheting up the bankruptcy laws during the boom. Who says they didn't realize what they and their special interests were doing ... let out just enough slack for the public to hang themselves. Oh well. Here comes the plunge roller coasters are known for...
The Dems walked right through the open door the Republicans provided with their economic failure ('32). And since the masses had the vote and bore the brunt of the bust, the environment launched direct aid programs and high taxes on the rich (gotta pay for them). Wash, rinse, and repeat? Maybe if the Republicans would learn how to govern better...
Oops! Not roller coaster time yet = "Get the Secure Advantage from Quicken Loans. Select a low monthly payment option now and increase your cash flow by thousands!!!" 2005 continues to live...
Quicken Loans must still be able to unload their loan portfolio in the resale market. However, many sub-prime lenders are closing their doors (rather than honor buyback provisions.) The music will soon stop.
"Future generations will hate you"
If the heat gets bad enough the Republican party will just change it's name again.
Why is this in a housing blog?
I believe one of the lessons the 20 somethings will walk away with is: Do not listen to people who have a stake in what they try to sell..push..or whatever. Think for yourself and do the research! Or you will be made a fool...and ruin your life..
No problem, in 100 years, we can just relocate to Mars. Wait, what's that, Mars is suffering from global warming too? You mean it's warming up on its own, without the benefit of industrialization, SUVs or housing booms? But why, why could that be? Could it be that the sun is burning hotter as a result of magnetic activity on its surface, and thus warming the planets more than usual?
http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=174711
I'm not saying that we can go polluting as much as we want. That's not the point. We SHOULD make the efforts to make our planet sustainable. But the scientific community should accept that global warming has been caused by a confluence of factors, including increased solar irradiation, and we don't really have any way of knowing which factor is responsible for how much.
I'm sick of everyone talking about how the sky is falling with regard to climate change. Whether you're right or not, no one likes a nag. I wish that those responsible (the media, the scientific community) could just present the straight up facts and let people figure it out. But I'm betting that the straight up facts are still unknown, so we might as well scare the sheeple into a frenzy. It's irresponsible and it won't get us anywhere.
Hey Keith...it's called the DIE OFF!!!
It is a biological term that ALL species adhere to on earth -
human's DIE OFF is only delayed because we found and use lots of CHEAP OIL.
Once the carrying capacity (another biological term) is exceeded - that is once the population of any species exceeds its capability to feed itself ...it DIES OFF.
When the oil becomes cost prohibitive...or unavailable...food production will grind to a halt.
There is no mystery here Keith, and in fact 9-11 was explicitly carried out to create martial law in advance of the die off...flight 93 never made it to the WH.
So Keith - once again 8 in 10 GOTZ TO GO...if not more.
Same thing with the youth of today paying a large portion into Social Security. The burden is already here.
There will be a larger divide when folks realize they will not have the standard of living of past generations...at least not as easy.
Dr. Housing Bubble
you should direct their annimosity towards the elite whites - not all whites and not all baby boomers. we baby boomers are a dumb easily manipulated group. the elite whites took advantage of your stupidity. based on what you are saying the elite whites will continue to have the next generation directing their efforts towards those who are not the reason for their difficulties at all. get the elite whites. i'm not talking upper middle class or even lower upper class - i'm talking the true elites - the super super super super rich. by definition they have to be evil beyond belief. that may be felt to be a biased statement - but show me a super super super rich person who is not a bad person and i will be delighted to take them off the list.
Some one took the Gov. Terror warning
system pics and wrote this parody.
It is really lol funny. have a look!
iw
http://tinyurl.com/25ehxa
Reports from the fascist, socialist UN are about as worth while as reports from the fascist, socialist US government. And...if there isn't enough water, then these future people who will hate us will never exist, so we don't have to worry about their opinions. The best way of insuring there will be enough fresh water is to get the government out of the business of managing and owning water. The best way of insuring that any resource will be "managed" well is to put it in private hands and out of the control of government. When the government owns anything, it is not owned by "all of us" -- it is owned by the people who purchase the government by making politicians and government managers and their families and friends rich.
Future generations will hate you?
Everyone hates us now! So Big deal!
Well, today's generation doesn't know much about what it was like to live around the first two world wars or even the gilded age (pre-1914), where a vast majority of urban Americans lived in <600 sq ft dwellings.
So I figured that future generations will adapt to this life of being a vagabond/drifter and simply blame *the world*, as if it were a sentient entity, for their ills w/o referencing other eras. Of course, anyone will money around them will be a target for theft or kidnapping.
Lost Cause,
It's the last day of the month. All the regulars here - uneducated, unemployed, Democrat renters are in line for the welfare checks.
Wait until mid-afternoon. After they've cashed the checks and purchased their alcohol for the month, they will once again start posting about how awful Republicans and Mexicans are.
Oh no!!! Global Warming!!! AHHHHHH!!! Run for the hills folks!!! Oh no, the earth is 0.1 degrees warmer, we're all gonna die!!!
Keif - another lemming who will swallow every lie presented to him by the Democratz. Never mind that throughout history the earth has warmed and cooled and wamred and cooled. Yet because Al Gore needs a platform for 2008, all of a sudden Climate Change (wasn't it Global Warming, why the rebranding?) is back as a fashinable cause du celebre that has all of Hollywood buzzing.
What happened to banning guns? Ending poverty? Ending child hunger? Saving the whales? Can't you liberals pick a cause and see it through to the end?
At least when you wanted to end hunger it didn't cost me anything. Now you want to fix a non-existent problem by taxing me to death and taking away my car. You see Keefie, most lemmings like you who tell pollsters they are "concerned" about global warming are full of shit. When push comes to shove and they realize that "doing something" about global warming means ridinga bike and living in a 400 sq ft solar powered house, I have a feeling their concerns will go away pretty fast.
The best way of insuring there will be enough fresh water is to get the government out of the business of managing and owning water.
**********
Too late, Japan owns all of our spring water sources in the US of A, Japanese Private Corporations that is.
Long term the Rebulican party is doomed because they have left behind 90% of Americans. We may not see it now, but wait until your kids grow up and cant afford much of anything. The distant past doesn't matter, people expect to do better than the previous generation; this is what was promised by the technological society - otherwise what we are we adapting for?!?
No matter how many times, Fox NEWS talks about middle class Americans at Walmart buying big screen TVs, what matters most is: housing, healthcare, education, retirement, and most of all - the ability of our society to support healthy happy functional stable family creation. If you expect to buy off people's most basic instincts with another Xbox or breakfast cereal, you are dreaming.
Too bad for the younger generations..I got mine and living the good life in Phoenix with a lot of others like myself.
Yeah..comfortable early retirement in Arizona while watching the white trash struggle and compete for crumbs.
Is this a great country or what?
The only solution is for the masses is to live in a virtual reality world and not try to achieve anything in the real world other than put in their time at the office or facility for an oligarch.
That's the "Lawnmower Man" vis-a-vis "Blade Runner" amalgam of a future and it's the only course. People cannot be made happy because not everyone can have a beautiful wife, a great house, and an executive position at a tech firm. The average person will have to work for scraps of food, a unit to live in, and a port into a VR world where they can live out their fantasies.
I'm not saying that we can go polluting as much as we want. That's not the point. We SHOULD make the efforts to make our planet sustainable. But the scientific community should accept that global warming has been caused by a confluence of factors, including increased solar irradiation, and we don't really have any way of knowing which factor is responsible for how much.
This is a lie.
The scientific community, now and today, certainly DOES have a clue, because of the tremendous, and very serious work done over the last thirty to forty years. It is not just theory but a result from mountains of physical evidence.
This is what science does, it figures and disentangles physical causation and finds the numbers.
That quoted statement was the state of the science sometime in 1965 or 1970 or so, when we didn't know enough to be sure to quantify the relative magnitudes and directions of all the potential influences. (and the supposed 'hype' over global cooling was only media hype not scientific)
Now, those other effects have been analyzed, measured and quantified and they do NOT explain the current observations, whereas including the human influence from emitted fossil fuels does.
In fact, it is literally physically impossible for the atmospheric changes from humans---which is now an incontrovertible physical fact measured directly in the atmosphere over decades---to NOT change the climate.
The rest is the specific quantification and we now know the answer pretty well. The continued observations over last 15 years have substantively validated the standard theory---and most surprises have been towards the even more pessimistic side of things.
Yes, I am a professional physicist and I can understand the primary literature.
If you want to understand the scientific position as it is actually (and not as the propagandists think it is), I strongly recommend
www.realclimate.org
- DOW at record today
- DHI (DR HORTON) up $1.30 to $29
Yeah the end of the world is coming.
"I got mine and living the good life in Phoenix with a lot of others like myself."
LOFL!
"- DOW at record today
- DHI (DR HORTON) up $1.30 to $29
Yeah the end of the world is coming."
Sorry, that's just the Wall Street elite celebrating Bernanke's surrender to inflation. Plenty more gigantic liquidity injections going right into Goldman Sachs' and Morgan Stanley's accounts at the Fed. You're not invited.
Renter 9:13:32 PM,
Just because YOU have no stake in the economy, just because YOU have no investments, just because YOU only make $8 an hour serving me my morning latte and couldn't care less what DHI or the DOW do, don't assume everyone else is in your situation.
You go on renting your 1 bed 1 / 1 bath ghetto apartment and let me worry about things like interest rates.
The average person will have to work for scraps of food, a unit to live in, and a port into a VR world where they can live out their fantasies.
What you meant to say was "The average HP reader renting a 1 bed/1bath ghetto apartment will have to work for scraps of food, a unit to live in, and a port into a VR world where they can live out their fantasies.
Keif,
you amaze me..
you are right-on in regards the the RE bubble,
but, man you got it all wrong everywhere else.
shut up and sing..
BUY GOLD AND SILVER
"BUY GOLD AND SILVER"
Bwaaaahahaahaha... I just sold a shitload of gold and silver and made some OK profit but I would run not walk from it at this point.
Too many special interests involved, which are helping to destroy not only the US but the entire planet. For instance, I suggest that all of you read one of the best selling books of 2006, Omnivore's Dilemma. It will change the way you see food and our economy. The data presented is mind boggling. Just check the reviews at amazon.com to get a glimpse to what the book is about.
The scientific community, now and today, certainly DOES have a clue, because of the tremendous, and very serious work done over the last thirty to forty years. It is not just theory but a result from mountains of physical evidence.
This is what science does, it figures and disentangles physical causation and finds the numbers.
That quoted statement was the state of the science sometime in 1965 or 1970 or so, when we didn't know enough to be sure to quantify the relative magnitudes and directions of all the potential influences. (and the supposed 'hype' over global cooling was only media hype not scientific)
Now, those other effects have been analyzed, measured and quantified and they do NOT explain the current observations, whereas including the human influence from emitted fossil fuels does.
In fact, it is literally physically impossible for the atmospheric changes from humans---which is now an incontrovertible physical fact measured directly in the atmosphere over decades---to NOT change the climate.
The rest is the specific quantification and we now know the answer pretty well. The continued observations over last 15 years have substantively validated the standard theory---and most surprises have been towards the even more pessimistic side of things.
Yes, I am a professional physicist and I can understand the primary literature.
If you want to understand the scientific position as it is actually (and not as the propagandists think it is), I strongly recommend
www.realclimate.org
And scientists are always right, huh? Because scientists didn't start by believing that the earth was flat and that the sun orbited it like a moon, or that lead could be transformed into gold? Pardon me if I don't really accept the "I'm right because I'm a scientist and I say so" argument. If man-made climate change is an irrefutable fact, why are people having trouble expressing in layman's terms what the problem is, what caused it, and how to solve it?
I think you missed the point of my previous post, but upon rereading it myself, I didn't make myself all that clear. So I'll expand.
Pollution is a problem. I am all for any measure that we as people, our government or industry can do to stop pollution or reduce it greatly. What we can irrefutably state is that pollution contaminates the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the food we eat. This is a proven fact.
Climate change, should you believe that it exists, is also caused by pollution. However, climate change is also expressed as a chain reaction that is very difficult to stop once it gets out of control. So regardless of the positives that take place today in terms of fighting climate change, we won't see any improvements tomorrow. In the medical community, the best doctors address the source of the problem, not a difficult to pin down symptom. The environmental community is doing the opposite, trying to change the climate, when the more realistic solution is curb pollution and hope to God that things work out.
It's like telling a smoker with a five-pack a day habit to cut down to three packs a day so they won't get cancer. We can't say with any certainty that the semi-reformed smoker won't get cancer anyway.
That's why I find the "fight against climate change" to be absurd propaganda. The "fight against pollution" is a far more measurable goal, and would produce much of the same positive environmental results.
I had followed the theory of increased solar radiation hitting earth with some interest, as it seemed to be at least an equally plausible explanation to climate change. However, what sealed it for me was the fact that Mars is also experiencing similar climate change, and to my knowledge, we're not polluting Mars at the same rate. That gave the solar irradiation theory a lot more credibility in my eyes. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what happens. I will laugh my arse off if that theory proves to be true and governments try to take credit for saving the environment.
I personally find the dichotomy of this thread hilarious. To wit:
Here we are, a group of people (trolls aside) who come together on this site in the common belief that we are being deceived by the people in power and the mainstream media, and are trying to do everything in our power to share our little secret with the world.
Yet on climate change, there are more than a few people here who take the same mainstream media articles as fact. I would have figured you people to be a bit more consistent.
Jeez. Who gives a rat's ass about future generations?
Oh wait, here's a quarter. Go call someone who cares.
". If man-made climate change is an irrefutable fact, why are people having trouble expressing in layman's terms what the problem is, what caused it, and how to solve it?"
It is very simple to explain, and lay artilces are very easy to locate. Something else is behind your question. Would you like us to recommend reliable sources for the general reader?
Consider: the post-industrial level of CO2 is currently twice what it was during all naturally-ocurring peaks of the past 650,000 years. Solar variability, if confirmed, does not account for the levels of greenhouse gases, and the predictions are made assuming constant insolation. Hence, increased solar radiation can be ignored.
I worked at the High Altitude Observatory in Boulder Colorado and was there at the time one solar variability experiment was shut down with a negative result. This does not preclude changes from happening now, but would mean during at least part of our Industrial Age, the sun's output was effectively constant.
I would furhter add that the researchers I knew were dedicated to finding the truth. Scientists are not generally too a-political if anything. They patiently and humbly present information falling over themselves not to make sweeping claims, only to be ignored by policy makers. Do you have any idea how difficult radiative transfer is? It is true, appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. But appeal to humble brilliance armed with supercomputers, planes, and the good old dry erase board (not to mentione peer-review) - I'll take that over something I read on a blog any day.
If you really don't understand, I'll be happy to break it down for you. But I think it's clear who has the axe to grind.
It's just more ecofascist propaganda designed to destroy industrial civilization.
They'll find out in 20 years, that most of the warming is due to natural cycles. Either cycles that the sun goes through or natural cycles in the Earth's climate.
Even if we had working fusion reactors, the environmentalists would find some reason that we should not use it. Like, deuterium depletion would hurt the plants or the fish or whatever.
Fusion reactors produce neutrons which renders parts of the fusion reactor radioactive.
No peasant in China or India gives a flea's ass about global warming and never will. What happens in 50 years or 100 years is not something that they care about. That's for bored rich people to worry about who need to give their life a purpose since their basic needs are taken care of by a trust fund or their rich friends who give them juicy book or movie deals.
The peasant is hungry now and will not tolerate some pampered foreigner telling him that he can't burn coal or own a car or cook his meals with natural gas. Kyoto is DOA.
I wish that we did not have to use oil and send all our money to Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, or Russia or some other terrorist sh*thole. But that's just a fact of life for the next 20 or so years. Get over it.
The rich white elites will hire their own security people to take out the anonymous trash who try to kidnap them.
"Climate change, should you believe that it exists, is also caused by pollution. However, climate change is also expressed as a chain reaction that is very difficult to stop once it gets out of control."
There is so much wrong with this and the following statements in your feverish post, I'm not sure it is possible to address it all here.
You are talking about the "runaway greenhouse effect", which is likely underway, but only very recent. Global warming can happen, and be disastrous, without turning into a feedback system.
A feedback system is slightly different than a chain reaction, although both are irreversible processes.
Multiple fallacies here. First, false dichotemy - attacking global warming and pollution are the same thing. Unless you mean the "blue sky" ideas in ciculation that involve literally cooling the planet by reducing insolation via mega engineering effort. We need to brainstorm, but a mega engineering solution is highly unlikely, and that they are even on the table demonstrates our level of desperation.
If you read actual quotes from climate researchers, they frequently describe the resistance to sharp curbs on greenhouse gases as an "uncontrolled experiment". That is, we can't tell you with 100% certainty (even the new report claims 99% certaintly) what will happen. But weigh that against the possibility of human-induced mass extinction.
I should have mentioned - I am not the professional Physicist who posted above. You are stuck with two scientifically literate people!
The free market can solve global warming like deregulation worked for the energy industry. That said, converting the world to clean, renewable energy is the biggest growth industry of the next century.
Oh, and what rock have people claiming the fact of global warming is "liberal" been under? Trolls-b-gone.
YoungExecnever2B said...
Here we are, a group of people (trolls aside) who come together on this site in the common belief that we are being deceived by the people in power and the mainstream media, and are trying to do everything in our power to share our little secret with the world.
Yet on climate change, there are more than a few people here who take the same mainstream media articles as fact. I would have figured you people to be a bit more consistent.
--------------------------------
just cause it feels good dosnt make it true.
Gee, Mommy n Daddy pay for everything, they've got their, ipods, cell-phones, some Damn nice cars, no responsibilities, minimal education or indoctrination, school starts at 9am, out by 1:30p (what's that all about?)their arrogant, cocky, rude, self-centered, narcisistic lil ghetto wanna-be's......and they'll hate me, Well Big F'n surprise!
Renter 9:13:32 PM,
Just because YOU have no stake in the economy, just because YOU have no investments, just because YOU only make $8 an hour serving me my morning latte and couldn't care less what DHI or the DOW do, don't assume everyone else is in your situation.
You go on renting your 1 bed 1 / 1 bath ghetto apartment and let me worry about things like interest rates.
And I'm sure you're just the investment genius who has SOOO much going on. That's why you're on here, posting on HP 25x a day, every day, right? LOL.
The topic overview said:
"People in their 20's who rushed out and bought a home, hearing if they didn't that they'd be priced out of the market forever, now that they're going to lose everything and go bankrupt, they'll hate you."
The previous topic was about a "short sale."
I have a question. Suppose there is a major correction to housing prices. And what if you owe significantly more to the bank than your house is worth. Can you just go to the bank and give them back the keys? Do you still owe the bank the difference? The "short sale" article suggests that you would not owe the bank the differrence but that it would be forgiven and, on top of that, that the this forgiveness of debt would be counted as income by the IRS.
So does the bank really forgive the difference? Do you have to file for bankruptcy in order for this to happen, or can you really just walk away? A coworker and I were trying to figure this out today. I really do not know the answer to this question.
Trying to argue with someone about global warming is like trying to argue that 9-11 was an inside job.
Like the housing bust...if you would have told people two years ago the bottom would fall out...they would think you a conspiracy nut...well well...
Call me alpha, omega, or the color purple...the housing bust is just that...9-11 was an inside job...and global warming is accelerated by human cause (primarily the burning of fossil fuels, but the occassional cig that starts a massive forest fire also is our bad).
My point...to those who have seen the truth....keep fighting the good fight...for all others...well...not much left on your life support system...so you won't be around for very much longer.
Cheers
I should have mentioned - I am not the professional Physicist who posted above. You are stuck with two scientifically literate people!
Look at me. I'm trembling. In all seriousness, I'm not disagreeing with your science, and I'm happy that you're taking the time to try to explain things a little more clearly. Certainly we can agree that trying to understand the full nature of a phenomenon will lead to greater knowledge than vehemently defending one small corner of the playing field without regard or tolerance for what else is going on around it.
I checked out www.realclimate.org, and after getting past all of the spelling and grammar mistakes, scientific double-talk and poor attempts at humour, I did find some interesting facts and theories. Actually, once I got used to the weird language you science-folk use, it was a pretty good read. But you need an editor or something.
A couple of interesting points stood out: that the solar irradiation theory, at least in the articles I read, was not debunked. There seems to be a growing consensus that both increases in solar irradiation and human-generated greenhouse gases are both to blame for changes in the climate, but no two articles I read could agree on what percentage of global warming was caused by which factor. The majority do state that whatever the percentages are, human-made greenhouse gases are causing the majority of change. There is also mention in a few articles of global warming as a result of volcanic activity, a phenomenon that is hardly man-made.
As far as slowing down, stopping, or reversing climate change, I think that even the scientists have to agree that it's ludicrous to expect to be able to regulate the Earth's climate like a thermostat by adding or removing certain gases from Earth's atmosphere. To believe that would be the pinnacle of human egotism.
Anyway, I'm still not convinced that "saving the environment" is something that we can accomplish as a species, nor would it be something that we should spend an inordinate amount of money on. A more sensible solution would be to promote responsible use of resources (which I'm sure all of us, me included, can work on) and to adapt to our changing environment instead of seeking to control it.
Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study
Ian Sample, science correspondent
Friday February 2, 2007
The Guardian
Scientists and economists have been offered $10,000 each by a lobby group funded by one of the world's largest oil companies to undermine a major climate change report due to be published today.
Letters sent by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), an ExxonMobil-funded thinktank with close links to the Bush administration, offered the payments for articles that emphasise the shortcomings of a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
PARIS - The world's leading climate scientists said global warming has begun, is "very likely" caused by man, and will be unstoppable for centuries, according to a report obtained Friday by The Associated Press.
The scientists — using their strongest language yet on the issue — said now that the world has begun to warm, hotter temperatures and rises in sea level "would continue for centuries," no matter how much humans control their pollution. The report also linked the warming to the recent increase in stronger hurricanes.
"The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone," said the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — a group of hundreds of scientists and representatives of 113 governments.
The phrase "very likely" translates to a more than 90 percent certainty that global warming is caused by man's burning of fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame.
What that means in simple language is "we have this nailed," said top U.S. climate scientist Jerry Mahlman, who originated the percentage system.
Post a Comment