Democrats versus Republicans

[sck5]

He may not be getting it because even though you can find scientists who dont believe in the greenhouse effect, most of them do. For them it isnt a political issue and they would be amused that it is discussed in a thread named "dems and repubs"

[sck5]

my statement that most scientists believe it is true? Here is an article from US News (no left wing rag) supporting that statement. You can find plenty of others but this was the first that popped up

Survey Tracks Scientists' Growing Climate Concern - US News and World Report

[PBzeer]

A survey of 489 scientists is proof?

[PBzeer]

Some common sense in the pages of Newsweek?
RealClearPolitics - Our Sinking Welfare State

[ssneade]

and i'm also sure if it were studied, fine chemicals like chlorodine and paraquat aren't as bad as first thought.

maybe mr. massive should check out the environmental impact of hybrid battery production for his ass end billboard mobile.

danged liberal bed wetter.

[jackdale]

Back to the subject at hand:

Democrats and Republicans

[US27inKS]

[jackdale]

US27inKS

Saw the earlier posting. Guess you were wondering around too much to see it.

[US27inKS]

Originally Posted by jackdale

US27inKS

Saw the earlier posting. Guess you were wondering around too much to see it.

Someone emailed that to me. I actually haven't been reading every post here, been sailing instead. Hell, for all I know, I might have already posted it. I can't help it, no will of my own.

[ssneade]

here's some facts those union loving democrats would rather you didn't know:

* Studies typically find that unionized companies earn profits between 10 percent and 15 percent lower than those of comparable non-union firms.

* Some unions win higher wages for their members, though many do not. But with these higher wages, unions bring less investment, fewer jobs, higher prices, and smaller 401(k) plans for everyone else.

* Final union contracts typically give workers group identities instead of treating them as individuals. Unions do not have the resources to monitor each worker's performance and tailor the contract accordingly. Even if they could, they would not want to do so. Unions want employees to view the union--not their individual achievements--as the source of their economic gains.

* Consequently, union contracts compress wages: They suppress the wages of more productive workers and raise the wages of the less competent. Unions redistribute wealth between workers.

* A better summary of the economic research is that unions do not increase workers' wages by nearly as much as they claim and that, at a number of companies, they do not raise wages at all.

* In essence, unions "tax" investments that corporations make, redistributing part of the return from these investments to their members. This makes undertaking a new investment less worthwhile. Companies respond to the union tax in the same way they respond to government taxes on investment--by investing less.

* Research shows that unions directly cause firms to reduce their investments. In fact, investment drops sharply after unions organize a company. One study found that unionizing reduces capital investment by 30 percent--the same effect as a 33 percentage point increase in the corporate tax rate

* The balance of economic research shows that unions do not just happen to organize firms with more layoffs and less job growth: They cause job losses. Most studies find that jobs drop at newly organized companies, with employment falling between 5 percent and 10 percent.