elkabong82 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 You all know twa is messing with you right? There's no way he believes some of this stuff. It's rude when you're trying to legitmately discuss something though. And it's dismaying (if that's a word) that he does it when I've seen he is fully capable of carrying a good discussion regardless of whether or not I agree or disagree with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 The problem with the wolf analogy is that the wolf is a noble animal that cares for and well sacrifice it for the pack. Enron was not a wolf. Wolves are socialist. Maybe Enron was a pack? (I think you are a little too deep with the noble animal bit,try meeting a hungry one) Elk excusing them would be saying they didn't deserve to pay for their actions...Which I have never done Understanding why events occur is not a endorsement. Depending on personal morality and self control is counter to our system of laws and regulations,and our prisons reinforce the error of that notion. ---------- Post added January-31st-2011 at 07:14 PM ---------- So, you're saying that the problem was not enough regulation?---------- Post added January-31st-2011 at 07:28 PM ---------- We're in a Sarah Palin thread and you're surprised that there's a Sarah defender in here whose technique consists of "Ignore the person's point, and spout slogans"? Ineffective regulation...quality over quantity I do love her technique of ignoring others points and making her own...don't be hating on slogans,if they weren't effective no one would use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Maybe Enron was a pack? (I think you are a little too deep with the noble animal bit,try meeting a hungry one)Elk excusing them would be saying they didn't deserve to pay for their actions...Which I have never done Understanding why events occur is not a endorsement. Depending on personal morality and self control is counter to our system of laws and regulations,and our prisons reinforce the error of that notion. Fair enough, I just happen to think that reffering to them as animals merely taking advantage of a situation that presented itself is incorrect because while the wolf has impulse to attack, a person has the ability to control that impulse. Wolves are acting on instinct, a person chooses to corrupt. I guess I'm just being too ideological, because I think that even if the opportunity was there people should be responsible enough to do the right thing and point out that it's there rather than take advantage of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I guess I'm just being too ideological, because I think that even if the opportunity was there people should be responsible enough to do the right thing and point out that it's there rather than take advantage of it. Expecting a Corp to be moral is a big mistake Sorry for some of my excesses,but I truly find it hard to be too serious in a thread such as this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Expecting a Corp to be moral is a big mistakeSorry for some of my excesses,but I truly find it hard to be too serious in a thread such as this I really do need to start avoiding threads like this. It's like passing a car wreck on the highway, somtimes my neck is already jerking back before I can even tell myself to ignore it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo-toni Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 After watching Jon Stewart last nite I realize I owe Palin an apology. I had always thought she was dumber than a bag of rocks. Now I discover she's been cleverly disguising her identity as a Russian spy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madison Redskin Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I do love her technique of ignoring others points and making her own...don't be hating on slogans,if they weren't effective no one would use them. She uses slogans because she recognizes they're effective, but also because that's the only tool in her shed. Do you believe she is capable of articulating intelligent, informed, and coherent arguments, without the assistance of her minions? I don't. She's a vacuous talking-point machine. All she needs to do is get on a stage and say, "Freedom ... America ... hardworking ... troops ... freedom ... tough ... betcha ... freedom," and her followers go bat ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I really do need to start avoiding threads like this. It's like passing a car wreck on the highway, somtimes my neck is already jerking back before I can even tell myself to ignore it. Embrace the madness....it's good for you at times “We see the Doctor behaving in a way which he believes to be normal but which is in fact bizarre. But we forgive him because he does it with such spirit and good grace. He’s not afraid to be himself – which is liberating and endearing. He’s never underhand – just a bit mad. I want to embrace the madness and push it further!” added Yes Madison,I actually do believe so...though likely not to some Ivy league standards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Sarah Palin What is the by product if Snooki and Glenn Beck were to have a child Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcsluggo Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 It is interesting that the people that actually know something about the cali energy market are choosing not to interject into this trainwrech sideshow...no? Anyway, going back to the original thread premise... Palin clearly knew what was meant by "Sputnik moment" in the way Obama was using it and was also clearly trying to make a point by purposely shifting the focus of that statement in another direction. She also did an incredibly miserable ham-fisted job of doing so.... in spite of the fact that she specifically steered the "conversation" exactly where she wanted to go... she seemed to have no depth of understanding of her OWN position, and got muddled and lost anyway. As a former prof that occasionally gave oral exams as make-ups to students that missed the in-class test, i have seen this situation often... when a student boldly strides into an area of thought with a simple initial point ... and then slowly starts to circle the drain as they try to fill in the gaps in an argument that they just simply haven't thought about very much, or just simply don't actually understand:: they parrot an intial point, but cannot add nuance because they really don't understand the intial point they parroted. btw... freely "offering" oral exams as a make-up to missed tests works as a WONDERFUL deterrent to missing tests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 btw... freely "offering" oral exams as a make-up to missed tests works as a WONDERFUL deterrent to missing tests. I imagine so,it likely can be entertaining as well. As to Cali energy I would welcome expert opinion.......on why they were in that position Simply poor unfortunates caught in the tide and cast upon the rocks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACW Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 After watching Jon Stewart last nite I realize I owe Palin an apology. I had always thought she was dumber than a bag of rocks. Now I discover she's been cleverly disguising her identity as a Russian spy. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-january-31-2011/from-russia-with-gov Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I imagine so,it likely can be entertaining as well.As to Cali energy I would welcome expert opinion.......on why they were in that position Simply poor unfortunates caught in the tide and cast upon the rocks? No, it was an object lesson in poorly planned deregulation. The Cali Legislature saw what happened when telephone service was deregulated - choices skyrocketed, prices plummetted, economic efficiencies took over, and everyone benefited. They decided that the same thing would happen if they deregulated electricity. Take energy generation away from the regulated utilities, and free up the generators to produce in the most efficient way possible and compete for the customers' business. It was a massive fiasco because 1) the demand for electricity is inelastic, 2) Electricity cannot be stored and we cannot do without it, 3) electricity needs to be generated relatively closely to where it is used and there are a limited number of connections in the electical grid through which it can be passed, 4) once deregulated, the energy providers were able to purchase all of the plants in a local area, creating a local "spot market" monopoly that they could exploit, 5) those providers took plants off line for "maintenance" during peak use periods, creating artificial shortages, and causing the wholesale price to spike up to 20 times the normal price, which explaines why there was 461% more "downtime" for electrical plants during the first year of deregulation than there was the year before, 6) the utilities had to pay the outrageous prices because if they didn't blackouts would occur, 7) the providers colluded with each other, overscheduling the main electrical pipelines so that it appeared that there were electricity shortages even when there weren't, 8) state control of energy generation is legally preempted by federal authority in many ways, and the newly elected Bush Administration refused to permit the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to intervene or even investigate the situation, etc. Ultimately, we learned that you cannot treat electricity like a commodity and trade it in a spot market manner. It is too easy to manipulate. If you want to deregulate it,you need to do it with long term contracts, like they do in Pennsylvania. Why was the California deregulated system so poorly designed, so subject to manipulation? Why, because it was designed by "experts" from Enron and Reliant, of course. Now is twa's chance to pipe in with a few myths about the situation, like California lacked adequate generating capacity to satisfy its growing population (not true) and that this happened (it didn't) because of excessive environmental regulation (also not true) and so forth. Don't be fooled or distracted by these posts. These posts are as inevitable as the sun rising in the east but they are total baloney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Why was the California deregulated system so poorly designed, so subject to manipulation? Why, because it was designed by "experts" from Enron and Reliant, of course. Interesting,they helped design ours as well ...Now who has oversight and approved this poorly designed and easily manipulated system? Back to Simply poor unfortunates caught in the tide and cast upon the rocks?....Making the right choices matter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matty dread Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Palin has trouble comprehending a lot of things, so I'm not really too surprised about her latest episode of stupidity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Electricity was also deregulated here in Maryland. It was expected that deregulating would create competition and drive prices down. I now pay 80% more for electricity than I did in 2006. But as I've been told ,, my need for electricity without proper means for generating it myself just means it's my fault when the wolf turns me upside down and shakes my pockets empty. Oh yeah, trust those energy companies. They'll do the right thing. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Perhaps you should look to your gamekeepers? I assume since ya pay them and all they are supposed to do something Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DRSmith Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 One can not ignore conmpanies Enron being the worst taking power generation off line for "maintence" more often than before and booking lines to cut down on the amount of energy that could be shipped into the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 She offered a counter to the analogy...a butchered one I agree Good thing we all agree she's a dumbass then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Bank robbery is not caused by bank robbers. It is caused by government, failing to prevent bank robberies. Any person would have to be an idiot to expect morality from bank robbers. Which is why the government should completely stop trying to stop bank robberies. Because government causes bank robberies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Good thing we all agree she's a dumbass then. Yes,and relatively speaking she has a lot of company Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bang Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Perhaps you should look to your gamekeepers?I assume since ya pay them and all they are supposed to do something I'm not sure I follow your term 'gamekeepers" I suspect it's still to do with the notion that businesses are wolves who are expected to prey upon you.. which would mean that the gamekeepers would be those who regulated them And we had that, up until 2007. Then the 'gamekeepers', were called off by the deregulation. And an 80% price hike later, here I am sitting in a cold house because I don't want to run my bill up too high. ~Bang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Larry if the security guard held the door open and opened the vault would you say he is complicit or simply incompetent? Ain't this fun? added Bang we deregulated and I don't recall a major hike(fifty different solicitations for service and crap,and it ain't went down though) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 Larry if the security guard held the door open and opened the vault would you say he is complicit or simply incompetent?Ain't this fun? I'd say lobbied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I'd say lobbied. Another tangent I like Are lobbyist immoral for advocating for their clients benefit? Being in business one of my early self conflicts was how much profit was morally acceptable to me and where does it change to being predatory. I would expect a Corp to be less concerned with such by it's structure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.