Our world is far better off than we think

49 Comments on "Our world is far better off than we think"

Midnight Oil on Tue, 24th Jan 2017 8:21 pm 



To be honest…for myself…everything is awesome…and that is all that really matters…Trump, I’m sure, will fix that

kenxxx3000 on Tue, 24th Jan 2017 9:00 pm 



I hope so

dave thompson on Tue, 24th Jan 2017 10:15 pm 



Happy days are here and all is just great if you happen to be a sheikh in the gulf?

Sissyfuss on Tue, 24th Jan 2017 10:37 pm 



These fellows statistics are as phony as an unemployment rate of 5% with 94 million sitting on their derrieres.

Outcast_Searcher on Tue, 24th Jan 2017 11:21 pm 



siss, with “analysis” like that, you’d never be happy with ANY data which didn’t fit your preconceived notions.

Since when should unemployment include young kids, retirees, etc?

GregT on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 12:04 am 



“The national unemployment rate remained at 4.9 percent in August, the Labor Department reported Friday. But relying on that one headline number as an indicator of the economy’s direction leaves out a lot of important information.”

“Most economists look past the official unemployment rate — that 4.9 percent figure, also know as the “U-3″ number — to other metrics that provide their own views of the state of jobs.”

“One of those figures is something called the U-6 rate, which has a broader definition of what unemployment means. That figure remained unchanged in August, at 9.7 percent.”

“The official unemployment rate is defined as “total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force,” but doesn’t include a number of employment situations in which workers may find themselves. The U-6 rate is defined as all unemployed, plus “persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the labor force.”

“In other words: the unemployed, the underemployed and the discouraged.”

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/09/02/jobs-number-whats-the-real-unemployment-rate.html

Sissyfuss on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 1:28 am 



You’re right, OS. The 94 mil I’v seen in various articles does include individuals you mentioned but Shadowstats using the numbers once used by the government before they massaged them to keep the sheeple placid notes the number today should be at 22.7%. The truth is out there.

Cloggie on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 2:57 am 



Over the same period, ever fewer people go through life illiterate; infant mortality is dropping across all social classes; life expectancy is on the rise; and, despite current conflicts like the one in Syria, historically compared, the number of people dying by violence is dropping.

Ouch, you are not supposed to say these kinda things on a notorious doomer forum, where death is a way of… em… life. And for some a business model.

These fellows statistics are as phony as an unemployment rate of 5% with 94 million sitting on their derrieres.

It is very important for comrade Siss that everybody is involved in productive work, makes money and spends it on stuff. If necessary in a central planned program.

So the entire planet is “moving forward” and is happy. Oh wait, not everybody. The white folks in the North, who made this change for the better possible in the first place, with technological progress and trillions of development aid and giant industrial productivity and infinite quantities of goodwill towards the third world (unless you have oil under your Allerwertesten), are now facing the distinct possibility of becoming overrun and eventually extinct by the very same people they helped advancing. And don’t expect any gratitude from these billions who multiply at breakneck speed. And the state of despair of whitey is worst in the US, because there the demographic balance is most threatening and now they are beginning to revolt and so do their cousins in Europe.

#BuildThatWall

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/24/politics/donald-trump-immigration-refugees/

Finally a president who does what he promised. Go Donald and make it easier for us to do the same in Europe!

peakyeast on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 4:29 am 



I cant say that I find the wall idea counterproductive. What would be productive is to collect the people crossing the border and use the raw materials they so generously offer (i.e. themselves) for spare parts for sick Americans. If this is announced widely and publicly along the border and in Mexican television then it is a fully voluntary offer the migrants come with. 😉

pointer on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 6:29 am 



Virtually all the pessimists have a place to live, water to drink (and waste), food to eat (and waste), entertainment to distract them (including petroleum-fueled vehicles — driving is a form of entertainment say the commercials), but the pessimists don’t appreciate these things. Add to that the fear and envy of others who the pessimists believe to be better off than they are. Such is the fiction of small minds.

Davy on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 7:13 am 



More techno optimism patting itself on the back wanting so hard to believe everything is fine. This is because the central narrative of modern man is continuous healthy progress. For every one of those optimistic points in the above article there are two equal and opposite failures that drowns the entire story in despair. This is the central insanity of modern man. He can play a song of plenty as he dances near the abyss. You can have some positive results as you destroy your underlying support system. This is craziness because these optimistic stories abound in modern life. Trump is a shining example of this same theme. Trump is even craftier because he is admitting the problems have become so bad they have to be fixed. The status quo just preaches everything is fine. That was Obama’s tune. During his very last days he was crowing how great his legacy was. I don’t even want to talk about Europe or China because they are in la la land. Russia is the only real shining beacon of reality. Putin is a great leader in this respect.

Cloggie on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 8:30 am 



More good news, this time Germany, where a fundamental pv solar breakthrough has been achieved, opening up the specter of much cheaper solar cells.

Where would we be without the people of Peenemuende, I am asking you. Oh wait, it is Goettingen:

https://cleantechnica.com/2017/01/25/holy-hot-polarons-batman-new-perovskite-solar-cell-shows-promise/

Davy on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 8:42 am 



Clog, I was curious at your interesting use of words, how does “shows promise” go to the next level of “breakthrough”. You are being lighthearted and funny right?

Article: “Holy Hot Polarons, Batman! New Perovskite Solar Cell Shows Promise”

Comment: “More good news, this time Germany, where a fundamental pv solar breakthrough has been achieved, opening up the specter of much cheaper solar cells.”

GregT on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 9:52 am 



“Our world is far better off than we think”

The title of the article says it all. An egocentric view of the world.

Firstly, it isn’t “our world”. It doesn’t belong to us. It was here for billions of years before we arrived on the scene, and it will be here for billions of years after we are gone.

Secondly, it doesn’t matter what we think, if we can’t learn to take care of “the world” which has given us all life, our ability to think will cease to exist, as will we.

Understanding Egocentric thinking

Egocentric thinking emerges from our innate human tendency to see the world from a narrow self-serving perspective. We naturally think of the world in terms of how it can serve us.
Our instinct is to continually operate within the world, to manipulate situations and people, in accordance with our selfish interests.

At the same time, we naturally assume that our thinking is rational. No matter how irrational or destructive our thinking is, when we are operating from an egocentric perspective, we see our thinking as reasonable. Our thinking seems to us to be right, true, good, and justifiable. Our egocentric nature, therefore, creates perhaps the most formidable barrier to critical thinking.

Dr. Linda Elder
Dr. Richard Paul

Foundation for Critical Thinking.

http://www.criticalthinking.org//

Jef on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 9:58 am 



This post is a sad desperate attempt to feel good in a time when the trend for everything important is very bad and getting worse all the time.

“80 percent of U.S. adults face near-poverty, unemployment, survey finds”

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/80-percent-of-us-adults-face-near-poverty-unemployment-survey-finds/

Cloggie on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 10:03 am 



Clog, I was curious at your interesting use of words, how does “shows promise” go to the next level of “breakthrough”. You are being lighthearted and funny right?

It is a breakthrough on a very fundamental level, namely a radical new physical principle to generate solar electricity, meaning we have a new track of development.

Cloggie on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 10:08 am 



Jef, your “80% link” says:

Four out of 5 U.S. adults struggle with joblessness, near-poverty or reliance on welfare for at least parts of their lives, a sign of deteriorating economic security and an elusive American dream.

That is a very loose description of “near poverty”. Most normal people face a crisis at some point in their lives or periods of unemployment.

So I only need the be unemployed for 6 months and I already belong to the “80%”.

The US is still #13 on the GDP per capita picking order:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

Let’s not exaggerate.

GregT on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 10:23 am 



GDP

History:

“GDP first came into use in 1937 in a report to the US Congress in response to the Great Depression after Russian economist Simon Kuznets conceived the system of measurement.”

“Beginning in the 1950s, however, some began to question the faith of economists and policy makers in GDP internationally as a gauge of progress. Some observed, for example, a tendency to accept GDP as an absolute indicator of a nation’s failure or success, despite GDP’s failure to account for health, happiness, and other constituent factors of general welfare. In other words, these critics drew attention to a distinction between economic progress and social progress.”

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/gdp.asp

GDP is a modern ideology, coined from the modern school of economics. The modern school of economics itself, is a failed ideology, born from an ever expanding source of energy, derived from fossil fuels. Econo-speak. More appropriately, the act of turning our once biodiverse planet, into a toxic waste dump. The end of the world as we knew it.

More egocentrism.

penury on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 11:24 am 



Everything is better? try telling that to the people of Greece, Syria, Afganistan,Venezula,Brazil,etc,etc. Try telling that to the millions of U.S. citizens who are on EBT cards, living in tent cities, dependent upon their parents for housing because of debt. Talk to the people who are no longer counted in the U.S. They have been out of work so long they are no longer counted, because they are no longer on benefits and have not looked for a job lately, mainly because after five years or more unemployment they are aware that there are no jobs. Health care around the world is collapsing, education (at least in the U.S.) is a joke. And not a funny one. Open your eyes and look at what is happening, do not believe MSM they are only allowed to report government facts and figures. but would your government lie to you?

Jerry McManus on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 12:06 pm 



C’mon folks, can’t you see you’re fighting a straw man?

Of course this is as good as it gets! The peak always comes just before the fall, does it not?

So, stop wasting your time trying to prove the author is wrong. They’re not wrong, things have never been better per capita.

That’s what you get when you burn billions of tons of carbon in millions and millions of heat engines. Isn’t it? You get billions of invisible “energy slaves” doing all the hard work of lifting billions of people out of poverty.

What they’re NOT saying is the terrible price that we have paid for all of that relatively luxurious standard of living.

I’m talking of course about the cost to the biosphere of our planet and the cost to countless future generations who will inherit a wrecked planet wracked by war, hunger, disease and death.

That’s what you get when all those heat engines stop running and those billions of “energy slaves” leave town. Isn’t it?

penury on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 2:16 pm 



All I say is” where did the article originate?” The article mentions the war in Syria and apparently considers the other eight not worth mentioning. And Jerry, you are correct this is the vest it will ever be again, but the greatest period for the humans of the world appeared to be between 1950 and 2000, But of course that figure probably only included developed countries.

GregT on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 2:20 pm 



” a radical new physical principle to generate solar electricity”

1800s
1839 – Alexandre Edmond Becquerel observes the photovoltaic effect via an electrode in a conductive solution exposed to light.
1873 – Willoughby Smith finds that selenium shows photoconductivity.
1877 – W.G. Adams and R.E. Day observed the photovoltaic effect in solidified selenium, and published a paper on the selenium cell. ‘The action of light on selenium,’ in “Proceedings of the Royal Society, A25, 113.
1878 – Augustin Mouchot displays a solar power generator at the Universal Exhibition in Paris.
1883 – Charles Fritts develops a solar cell using selenium on a thin layer of gold to form a device giving less than 1% efficiency.
1887 – Heinrich Hertz investigates ultraviolet light photoconductivity and discovers the photoelectric effect
1887 – James Moser reports dye sensitised photoelectrochemical cell.
1888 – Edward Weston receives patent US389124, “Solar cell,” and US389125, “Solar cell.”
1888-91 – Aleksandr Stoletov creates the first solar cell based on the outer photoelectric effect
1894 – Melvin Severy receives patent US527377, “Solar cell,” and US527379, “Solar cell.”
1897 – Harry Reagan receives patent US588177, “Solar cell.”

1900–1929
1901 – Philipp von Lenard observes the variation in electron, energy with light frequency.
1904 – Wilhelm Hallwachs makes a semiconductor-junction solar cell (copper and copper oxide).
1905 – Albert Einstein publishes a paper explaining the photoelectric effect on a quantum basis.
1913 – William Coblentz receives US1077219, “Solar cell.”
1914 – Sven Ason Berglund patents “methods of increasing the capacity of photosensitive cells.”
1916 – Robert Millikan conducts experiments and proves the photoelectric effect.
1918 – Jan Czochralski produces a method to grow single crystals of metal. Decades later, the method is adapted to produce single-crystal silicon.
1920s – Solar water-heating systems, utilizing “flat collectors” (or “flat-plate collectors”), relied upon in homes and apartment buildings in Florida and southern California.

1930–1959
1932 – Audobert and Stora discover the photovoltaic effect in Cadmium selenide (CdSe), a photovoltaic material still used today.
1935 – Anthony H. Lamb receives patent US2000642, “Photoelectric device.”[1]
1941 – Russell Ohl files patent US2402662, “Light sensitive device.”
1948 – Gordon Teal and John Little adapt the Czochralski method of crystal growth to produce single-crystalline germanium and, later, silicon.[2]
1950s – Bell Labs produce solar cells for space activities.
1953 – Gerald Pearson begins research into lithium-silicon photovoltaic cells.
1954 – On April 25, 1954, Bell Labs announces the invention of the first practical silicon solar cell.[3][4] Shortly afterwards, they are shown at the National Academy of Science Meeting. These cells have about 6% efficiency. The New York Times forecasts that solar cells will eventually lead to a source of “limitless energy of the sun.”
1955 – Western Electric licences commercial solar cell technologies. Hoffman Electronics-Semiconductor Division creates a 2% efficient commercial solar cell for $25/cell or $1,785/watt.
1957 – AT&T assignors (Gerald L. Pearson, Daryl M. Chapin, and Calvin S. Fuller) receive patent US2780765, “Solar Energy Converting Apparatus.” They refer to it as the “solar battery.” Hoffman Electronics creates an 8% efficient solar cell.
1958 – T. Mandelkorn, U.S. Signal Corps Laboratories, creates n-on-p silicon solar cells, which are more resistant to radiation damage and are better suited for space. Hoffman Electronics creates 9% efficient solar cells. Vanguard I, the first solar powered satellite, was launched with a 0.1W, 100 cm² solar panel.
1959 – Hoffman Electronics creates a 10% efficient commercial solar cell, and introduces the use of a grid contact, reducing the cell’s resistance.

1960–1978
1960 – Hoffman Electronics creates a 14% efficient solar cell.
1961 – “Solar Energy in the Developing World” conference is held by the United Nations.
1962 – The Telstar communications satellite is powered by solar cells.
1963 – Sharp Corporation produces a viable photovoltaic module of silicon solar cells.
1964 – Farrington Daniels’ landmark book, Direct Use of the Sun’s Energy, published by Yale University Press.
1967 – Soyuz 1 is the first manned spacecraft to be powered by solar cells
1967 – Akira Fujishima discovers the Honda-Fujishima effect which is used for hydrolysis in the photoelectrochemical cell.
1968 – Roger Riehl introduces the first solar powered wristwatch.[5]
1970 – First highly effective GaAs heterostructure solar cells are created by Zhores Alferov and his team in the USSR.[6][7][8]
1971 – Salyut 1 is powered by solar cells.
1973 – Skylab is powered by solar cells.
1974 – Florida Solar Energy Center begins.[9]
1974 – J. Baldwin, at Integrated Living Systems, co-develops the world’s first building (in New Mexico) heated and otherwise powered by solar and wind power exclusively.
1976 – David Carlson and Christopher Wronski of RCA Laboratories create first amorphous silicon PV cells, which have an efficiency of 1.1%.
1977 – The Solar Energy Research Institute is established at Golden, Colorado.
1977 – The world production of photovoltaic cells exceeded 500 kW
1978 – First solar-powered calculators.[10]
1979 – President Jimmy Carter Installs 1st White House Solar Panels.
Late 1970s: the “Energy Crisis”; groundswell of public interest in solar energy use: photovoltaic and active and passive solar, including in architecture and off-grid buildings and home sites.

Cloggie on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 4:04 pm 



http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aenm.201602174/full

What is new here is that researchers found a way to reduce the recombination of exited electrons in a lattice and thus increase the efficiency of a solar cell by application of Perovskite material. So, once an electron has been separated from the “mother atom” by a photon, it doesn’t fall back easily to a vacant place in another atom, leading to useless heat.

“Once a bachelor, always a bachelor”.

GregT on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 6:00 pm 



4 Summary and Conclusion

“Consequently, such strongly absorbing hot polarons with long lifetimes may represent an ideal light absorber for harvesting photons in the IR and visible part of the solar spectrum. These results may offer new perspectives for design of nanoscale oxides for hot polaron photovoltaics or photocatalysis.”

Sounds like that ~200 year old science still has a ways to go. The really big discovery will be when they finally figure out a way to grow PV panels naturally, using only photosynthesis. Only then will we finally have found a truly renewable apparatus to gather solar energy and to convert it into electricity. There would still be the small problems of transmitting that electricity, storing that electricity, and transforming it into the voltages normally used in the non-renewable gadgets that we use that same said electricity for.

Maybe it would just be easier to keep burning fossil fuels for all of that stuff.

makati1 on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 6:24 pm 



Jerry, I wouldn’t worry too much about “future generations”. You are living the last habitable years on planet Earth. Anyone born now will not live to a normal old age. Maybe not even to adulthood.

shortonoil on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 7:48 pm 



“I cant say that I find the wall idea counterproductive.”

The Wall doesn’t have to be very long. Southern Cal to the BadLands. If they make it across the BadLands let them in! It is still displaying bones put there in the 1880’s

Midnight Oil on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 9:00 pm 



Wall? That’s why they make tunnels….

makati1 on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 9:13 pm 



I’ll believe the wall when it is totally in place and operational/effective. Odds of that happening: 3 in 10.

GregT on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 10:25 pm 



It’s only 1500 miles mak. Think of all the jobs. A few million unemployed could have it completed in a couple of months. Just add shovels, concrete, gravel, water, and solar powered cement mixers.

makati1 on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 11:11 pm 



lol … GregT, it IS possible, but not likely. How many non-Mexicans have the physical ability to do a real days physical labor for months, or even a day? Few, if any. And even fewer if they are on welfare, unemployment or “disability”.

Then there is the mental decision to do so. Again, not evident in the masses. There is no desire to “earn” a living in America. Can they do it in front of a computer with A/C, a soft chair and frequent breaks? lol

GregT on Wed, 25th Jan 2017 11:27 pm 



Why not get the illegal immigrants themselves to build it? I hear there’s as many as 20 million of them, and they aren’t afraid of hard physical labour. Offer them amnesty, and even pay them 15 bucks an hour. And when they’re done in the south, put them to work up north. It’s only a matter of time before the mass migrations begin. Gotta keep those tax slaves from leaving the farm.

makati1 on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 12:37 am 



Lol. an idea that would not go over with the American unemployed, even if they would not want to do the work themselves. Can you imagine if Trump actually did that? lol

I agree that immigration from the south is just beginning, but they will pass thru the new 3rd world America for the cooler Canadian country. Nowhere else to go.

GregT on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 1:40 am 



“Can you imagine if Trump actually did that?”

Honestly mak? I’m not sure that I have a wild enough imagination, to even begin taking a wild stab in the dark as to what Trump might do next. He makes about as much sense to me as Kevin does.

Davy on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 3:45 am 



Well, if people that are in shock and awe would look back to the election then they would not need wild imagination to figure Trump out. Trump told people what he was going to do and now he is doing it like he said he would. I am trying to figure out what imagination is needed other than to scratch ones head at how someone that got elected would actually do what he said he would do. I guess many of you thought with a conspiracy mind and anti-American contempt that he was just a puppet. How about that he isn’t and many of you are gut shot.

Cloggie on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 3:56 am 



Trump has indeed shown in his first week in office that he is not a puppet.

makati1 on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 3:59 am 



Davy, having experienced one president disposed of because he bucked the system, (I was 19) I have little hope this one will make it thru four years unless he bends his knee to the real powers in the FSA. OR, he has the military behind him to have a coup and become dictator. We live in most interesting, dangerous and precarious times.

Davy on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 4:23 am 



It is yet to be seen if the establishment allow Trump to do what he wants to do. In a week he has upturned many sacred cows and muzzled the neoliberals. The election and its aftermath already had the neocons muzzled. Impeachment and in some circles and removal by other means is I imagine being plotted. He has not done anything wrong or illegal I can see at this point. The establishment better pull itself together from a full route and establish defensive positions. I don’t see the reserves anywhere. This was a crushing blow and all I see is the full retreat in whining and anger. Whining solves little and only serves to fracture the opposition more. The whining I am hearing is not coherent and focused. It is all over the place. It is global. If Trump can stay alive this is all playing into Trumps strength. Divide and fracture the establishment. That is how you drain an undrainable swamp by turning it into a moat. Let it surround you and protect the castle.

I want change and I want the establishment disrupted. I want this because a crisis is the only way we can change behavior for a coming civilization decline. These are scary times and I have no illusions that this is a dangerous gamble. Yet, an entrenched status quo was likewise dangerous and worse a dead end. Change was never going to come easy with the problems we have today.

We need an opposition but one that is not just the establishment retaking its former corrupt positions. We need a real opposition to step up that has learned from its mistakes and comes back stronger and with wisdom. The debacle of Hillary that was Obama’s legacy is that chance to rebuild from ruin. The problem is it will take time to reform from ruin and trump is moving quickly. Trump needs an opposition or he will become nothing but an extremist and tear the country apart. Trump needs opposition for himself. He needs the challenge and discipline of a fight and he needs the boundaries of a deal.

Cloggie on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 4:30 am 



Good to see that “redneck Davy” and “American traitor makati” can have an exchange without insults. In reality they have quite a lot in common regarding world view.

Davy on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 4:36 am 



The Mexican didn’t take this election serious and continued to disregard the border with drugs and people. The “maniana” mentality and the surety Hillary would win blindsided them. The liberals had ulterior motives for immigration that were idealistic and practical. Practically the immigrants were a good vote source. This was all OK if they stayed out of the rich enclaves. Not in my backyard is a rich liberal immigration hypocrisy. For many businesses both liberal and conservative immigrants were good for business.

Whine all you want how Mexico has a right to allow its people to travel north but reality is saying Trump is drawing a line in the desert sand. The economic benefits going to Mexico and the benefits of people coming north has gotten out of hand. The Trumps wall will likely not happen how we think. It will take more than his two terms to get a 1000 miles of concrete off the ground. Think of building a highway that long. Some actual concrete will happen in appropriate locations for sure. The real wall will likely not be physical. If Mexico was smart it would take steps to secure its borders. The reason they don’t is because it is lucrative for drugs and money. Immigrants send back reparations and drugs return profits.

Mexico and the US can solve this issue together not alone. It is by Trump saying we are building a wall that maybe the issue will actually be put on the table with real solutions that work. There are ways Trump can make Mexico pay for this. Reparations and migrants can be taxed as one example. I am horrified at the environmental damage of a wall. Think of the disruption to a vast beautiful ecosystem of the desert southwest. I spent some time there back in the 90’s when I had a Mexican girlfriend. Yet, I want a restriction on people heading north. This country is already overpopulated by at a minimum of 100MIL if some kind of collapse occurs. These are the kind of behavior changes that have to start. This kind of change is going to be messy let’s hope some kind of realistic option surfaces because a great Trump wall is not one.

Cloggie on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 4:47 am 



It will take more than his two terms to get a 1000 miles of concrete off the ground.

Why would that be? The dirt poor Hungarians erected an effective fence within an matter of weeks in places where it mattered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_border_barrier

The border between Hungary and Serbia is 175 kilometres (109 mi) long. In June 2015 the Hungarian cabinet approved construction of a 4 metres (13 ft) high barrier. Construction of the barrier began in early July… The barrier was completed in September

Hungarian GDP: $0.26T
Population: 10 million

US GDP $17T
Population: 330 million

Should be a piece of cake for the US and will not take 2 terms, not in a long shot.

But a fence is not enough, you need a motivated border patrol as well, that resolutely pushes anybody back who dares to cross. The Hungarians do that.

Cloggie on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 5:10 am 



Ron Paul on the financial correction (collapse?) Trump is likely facing during his presidency and no doubt is going to be blamed of rather than the true culprits like the Federal Reserve and its boundless Keynesian spending policies:

http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-thinks-trump-is-trying-to-stop-global-collapse-from-happening/

Davy on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 5:32 am 



Clog, sure we can throw a wall up then what? Are you going to do it right or just do it. A 100mi in the Balkans is not the desert southwest. The first thing that is going to happen is those industrious hard working Mexicans will build tunnels. They already have them. A wall that works for almost 2000 miles is not going up quick. Consider all the localities this will cross and all the permitting. Trump is talking about half that with a physical wall and the rest through use of natural barriers. This is still an enormous undertaking and one that is likely just a crazy ploy he will bargain with. The physical and political logistics considering all the other things he wants to do will bog him down. If he does not watch it this wall will bring him down. I think you are a little too techno optimist with this idea a wall can be slapped up quickly.

Davy on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 5:48 am 



“Pena Nieto Tells Trump Mexico “Will Not Pay For Any Wall”, Demands Respect”
http://tinyurl.com/jy8lojr

“While the costs of “building the wall” are largely unknown, estimates have been made by both political parties… https://www.statista.com/chart/7751/the-economics-of-trumps-mexico-wall/ “

“In a Monday speech, Peña Nieto said his government is prepared to negotiate with the US if Mexico’s national sovereignty is respected. He laid out economic integration and respect for the rights of migrants and the money they send home as his nation’s key negotiating points. Trump has suggested some of the $25 billion in annual remittances that migrants return home would be retained to pay for the border wall.”

Cloggie on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 6:28 am 



It is unrealistic to expect Mexico to pay for the wall. The wall is not in the interest of Mexico but in the interest of European-America, who are threatened to lose their entire country + identity to Mexico and the rest of Latin America (not to mention Asia, Africa and Islam); essentially conquest via the womb + still accepting the rule of the globalists in Washington, NYC and Hollywood (hi Meryl!), who couldn’t care less about American identity. The Mexican womb already conquered the SW.

If the badly motivated VoPo’s of the GDR could keep the Berlin Wall hermetically sealed, than the Americans and their superior technology can be expected to detect most tunnels.

makati1 on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 6:51 am 



Perhaps, being a construction project, which ALWAYS cost more and takes longer than planned, the $25B cost will end up being $100B and never get finished. Obviously, most here have not been involved with large construction projects. I have. I still say, it will never happen. Time will tell.

Cloggie on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 7:05 am 



America has 20 freaking aircraft carriers, that look rather finished to me, but which are pure attack weapons and largely obsolete in the 21st century of hyper-sonic missiles, not to mention submarines.

And China and Russia have embarked on an over-land “New Silk Road” counter strategy anyway, making these carriers even more obsolete.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_carriers_by_country

How about dumping two of those. Price tag $13B each.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-us-navys-new-13-billion-aircraft-carrier-will-dominate-the-seas-2016-03-09

Russia and China have both only one.

A wall, that’s real homeland defense.

Aircraft-carriers are NWO weapons, designed for raping far away countries like Iraq in order to add them to the Soros empire.

Cloggie on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 7:08 am 



Mistake, US has 10 carriers in service. 20 is the total number world-wide.

Davy on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 7:21 am 



“which are pure attack weapons and largely obsolete in the 21st century of hyper-sonic missiles, not to mention submarines. And China and Russia have embarked on an over-land “New Silk Road” counter strategy anyway, making these carriers even more obsolete.”

Which brings me to the question of why both China and Russia are turning to them.lol.

You guys have not learned from military history and force projection. Missiles will be met with missiles in a MAD ending. In the meantime force projection continues and aircraft carriers are effective. The US has years of experience and has created effective platforms and the competent use of them. It is likely 10 are too many on the other hand due to the cost and the reduced need for force projection in a new emerging multipolar world.

Cloggie on Thu, 26th Jan 2017 7:50 am 



Which brings me to the question of why both China and Russia are turning to them

Mostly talk. China could use them to reconquer Taiwan, patrol the South-China Sea or occupy the Philippines.