Act now while supplies last!

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/04/13/3426117/climate-panel-avoiding-catastrophe-cheap/

Obvious stuff apparently every major government knows -

Now you might think it would be a no-brainer that humanity would be willing to pay a very high cost to avoid such catastrophes and achieve the low emission “2°C” (3.6°F) pathway in the left figure above (RCP2.6 — which is a total greenhouse gas level in 2100 equivalent to roughly 450 parts per million of CO2). But the third report finds that the “cost” of doing so is to reduce the median annual growth of consumption over this century by a mere 0.06%.

You read that right, the annual growth loss to preserve a livable climate is 0.06% — and that’s “relative to annualized consumption growth in the baseline that is between 1.6% and 3% per year.” So we’re talking annual growth of, say 2.24% rather than 2.30% to save billions and billions of people from needless suffering for decades if not centuries. As always, every word of the report was signed off on by every major government in the world.

Why are we so wasteful?

In 1970, cumulative CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, cement production and flaring since 1750 were 420±35 Gt [billion metric tons] CO2; in 2010, that cumulative total had tripled to 1300 ±110 Gt CO2.

I like her even more now.

And I liked her already.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/179239/presidential-prospect-or-not-elizabeth-warren-has-lesson-democrats

Those pesky software bugs ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbleed_Bug

Next time some idiot in your company seriously questions the need for testing, send them here.

I don't think it's a small coincidence ...

... that the last American President elected as a Republican which I actually respected, was perhaps the last American President legitimately elected.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/22980-thom-hartmann-there-has-not-been-a-legitimately-elected-republican

Gee, finally someone in the 'left-wing' gets it.

http://www.thenation.com/article/179147/why-do-so-many-leftists-want-sex-work-be-new-normal

It’s one thing to say sex workers shouldn’t be stigmatized, let alone put in jail. But when feminists argue that sex work should be normalized, they accept male privilege they would attack in any other area. They accept that sex is something women have and men get (do I hear “rape culture,” anyone?), that men are entitled to sex without attracting a partner, even to the limited extent of a pickup in a bar, much less pleasing or satisfying her. As Grant says, they are buying a fantasy—the fantasy of the woman who wants whatever they want (how johns persuade themselves of this is beyond me). But maybe men would be better partners, in bed and out of it, if they couldn’t purchase that fantasy, if sex for them, as for women, meant finding someone who likes them enough to exchange pleasure for pleasure, intimacy for intimacy. The current way of seeing sex work is all about liberty—but what about equality?

I thought the left was about that, too.

Heck, what about pleasure? When one take's one pleasure and places a price on it, there is no equality - not unless that truly works both ways.

I'm rooting for you Carey ... all the way to a Cup victory!

... your team as well.


http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/carey-price-looks-to-take-next-step-1.2596857

Hey there - corporations have more rights than you!

Didn't you know? We've lived in a plutocracy for some time now. This just makes it official.

http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/mccutcheon-decision-campaign-finance-040214

The remarkable story of how we have come to privatize political corruption in this country reached another milestone today as the Supreme Court, John Roberts presiding, handed down its decision in McCutcheon v. FEC, effectively demolishing the aggregate, two-year limit on contributions by individuals, and taking a big chunk out of Buckley v. Valeo, the misbegotten 1976 decision that got the ball rolling in the first place. It was a 5-4 vote, with the court split exactly as it had in the Citizens United case. In writing the opinion for the court, Roberts further emphasized the equation of money with speech, and also seemed to agree with Anthony Kennedy's famous assertion in Citizens United that the ability of megadonors to shovel gobs of money into the election process,"We now conclude that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption."

Sad to me, how I find the opposite to be true.