The solution for anything that is a bridge to far is compromise. Classic labor negotiations always begin with the two sides shooting for the moon and conceding nothing. In a different lifetime our parties would have worked towards a bearable middle.

So you believe that climate change is 1. Man made 2. Is absolutely going to cause a disaster and 3. The green new deal and central planning will solve it. Of course you also bought into Russian collusion, so maybe you’re just easily fooled.

Dang, thus should have been a series - the Paine/Husky graphic is awesome

How in the world did they just recently come to the conclusion that 'labour takes longer than we previously thought'? How are these NEW guidelines? It's not like this is a new occurrence. Labour has been an event going back more than a few years. It speaks volumes to the current system we have today, where every procedure needs to be resolved in 10 minutes. (Pardon the hyperbole) and you trust these people to give an honest assessment of vaccines? Further, they'd butcher you for a minor surgery and leave you literally scarred for life with their non-cosmetic approach to medicine, what's a little autism to them?

Juan,

Let's start with collusion. "Russia, if your listening, send us Hillary's emails." I could pretty well rest my case there and that was before Meuller started sending Trump's cronies to jail. We will see how quick Trump is to force Javanka to release their private emails on foreign policy.

As for Global warming it's simple. For 500 million years vegetation absorbed photons and made starchy energy rich carbon compounds out of them. Over those 500 million years erosion, sedimentation plate techniques and other geological forces buried a fabulous motherload of coal based methane, coal, oil and natural gas in the ground thereby removing a heat trapping gas from the atmosphere. Something dug up a shitload of that energy, starting with the industrial revolution, and freed the carbon to refill the atmosphere and the oceans. It wasn't chimpanzees that did all that!

It’s almost as if people who don’t believe they have a promising future ahead of them get addicted. Is that a function of being poor, or being convinced you’re a victim who can’t make a difference? If only we could give these people more money and move them to the city? No. Poor city folk have their own problems, as does anyone, rich or poor who hasn’t found a meaningful purpose in life. Maybe Peter can write an article defending the overprescribing of opiates, and every other contributor here can blame Trump for the nihilism and lack of values and purpose which is true cause of all this pain and suffering.

If Member Lofald had a medical crisis in her family, she could tap the resources of a medical plan earned from a lifetime of teaching. I doubt she would be "looking at refinancing."

"Russia, if your listening, send us Hillary's emails." Apparently you have no sense of humor. Everyone else watching that saw it as the joke that it was. At least we can all take comfort in the fact that Hillary will never be president. As for explaining where some of the C02 came from, nicely done. It also comes from volcanoes, huge wild fires, breathing, and many other sources. But what about the other 2 questions? Green new deal? Disaster? Where's the proof.

Juan,

Sometimes central planning works. We won WW2 with it. Sometimes it's a nightmare as it was in every Soviet state. The national healthcare in western Europe is both more comprehensive and less expensive than we offer in the US with our decentralization.

Green New Deal - Haven't paid attention to it yet. When I do I expect to find pros and cons. I find the Trumpian hysteria about AOC...well hysterical.

As for natural carbon emissions...there is a long history of them in ice cores and a longer one in sedimentary rock. Volcanic eruptions are episodic compared to human economic activity which has experienced a long annual climb of emissions. And none of the volcanos have spewed out plastic bags yet.

Central planning for a war should be short term, and one would expect that money to be paid back. The central planning the USA has done since FDR has left us 20 Trillion in debt with no way to pay it back. I acknowledge that your generation doesn't give a shit about leaving your children and grand children an impossible debt load and no way to pay it back (as long as you got yours!)

The boomers have been making terrible decisions since they crawled out. But then your generation has always had a terrible nihilist streak, maybe it's been your intention to destroy the USA the entire time. As for the rest of us, we can't afford more short sighted, feel good decisions that will leave us saddled with even more debt and have no guaranteed benefit. Let me ask you this. Why in God's name should we listen to you?

Maybe we'll find a technological solution to capture carbon that doesn't involve the creation of more waste in the form if lithium batteries and whatever other high tech waste the "green" new deal spews out. Is it better to replace baggies with toxic waste?

As I said before, the green new deal has never been about controlling carbon, it's always been about command and control of the economy. Maybe it's time to step aside, and take Nancy and Chuck with you. Haven't the boomers caused enough damage already?

Thank you Juan,

That's the most honest thing you have ever written. And I agree with you to a shocking degree.

But, being me, I have some quibbles. Baby Boomers own the Republican party and haven't been shy about boosting those trillions in deficit spending.

As for command and control of a centralized economy. That's a big consideration. I got a shock years ago in an economy class when Stalin's command economy was shown to have been vastly more productive than capitalist demand economies. Oh, it had its shortcomings. No consumer goods for one thing and terrible central planning fiascos plus production under the threat of a gun. Look at China today with a massive central command beating the pants off of everybody else.

I recently read that a successful hedge fund manager said that what the world has is a pyramid scheme economy. That perfectly summarizes what I've thought for years. We can continue paving over the Earth until there is nothing left to pave over. Humanity needs to prepare for a world where it no longer depends on always getting bigger and bigger until collapse is inevitable. Juan, I have two grandsons who will never know a world like the one I knew existed when I was little.

Your bubble of cynicism may inspire you to lump me with the worst of the Chicken Little greenies but they are not wrong to fret about our future and, based on what you just wrote to me, you evidently agree.

20 years ago I became a part of the anti deficit spending crusade that ironically only democrats acted to bring about. Look at Trump for God's sake. He only cares about the economy burning bright until he is reelected. That will keep him out of court for another 4 years untill his colestrol finally catches up with him and his kids face the wrath of the people he betrayed..

Harry,
Humanity has a really good chance of going another 10 to 20 thousand years. In that time-span, we will have another glacial period where their is more than a mile of ice over north America. Yellowstone will erupt.

Just because I don't fall for the Trump Derangement Syndrome does not mean that I think he's a great president, I have seen plenty of proof that the Democrats (Barack Obama and Hillary's Team especially) attempted to stage a coup after 2016. That should never happen. Judge Trump on what he does, not the Russian Collusion Delusion.

The current scheme to battle C02 IS A PROBLEM. Those programs are created by people who are not out for our best Interests. Just look at what happens every time a C02 solution comes around that doesn't involve cap and trade. It gets ignored.

As far as Stalin and China are concerned, it isn't production, it's the problems with the mode of production. Do you honestly believe that the Heroin/Opiod problem has anything to do with the availability of those drugs? It's the IDEA of socialism that is the problem.

JP

Re: Paragraph 1

Why limit humanity's future to 20,000 years? I can imagine our descendents spreading out through the Milky Way for millions or billions of years. However, after a few thousand of the early years, other than our original DNA we and our descendents may seem radically different.

I barely have any influence on today so that unknown future is only of academic interest to me. On the other hand my grandsons deserve to have me take care of the Earth until its theirs to pass on.

As for a new ice age. I have no doubt that the pace of science and technology will have a huge effect on whether a new ice age comes to pass. In thousands of years humans will have powers that seem almost God-like by today's standards - if we survive ourselves.

If our ability to turn back an ice age comes after 50 percent of Greenland's and Antarctica's ice has melted we may not want to reverse course even to recover lost coastlines. Of course, if those coastlines are lost due to human politics there will be hell to pay. Just imagine how many people will want to beat a path to our shores if that comes to pass. Today's central American exodus will look quaint by comparison. Already Duluth is being touted as a great future refuge as the coastal population seeks safety. Lucky realtors.

I am not happy at anyone assuring an increasingly skeptical Ametican population that global warming is BS. If I am right, and I may not be, people will look back on today's Republican Party as Earth's plague.

As you can see I am just getting wound up. 3 paragraphs to go and I am one thumb typing into an incredibly small hard to proof read box. I am going to break for breakfast. Maybe I will respond to your other paragraphs, maybe not. I will add that this is a good conversation compared to the closed minded tripe I often see people throwing at each other elsewhere on the Internet. Thanks for your seriousness.

Harry

JP

re: paragraph 2

I first recall "derangement syndrome" being applied to Democrats over George W. Bush. I can't recall if this was after Gore v Bush or the Iraq War. If it was the former I can't blame them after the Supreme Court overruled a Florida Court to guarantee a Republican's election. If it was the later that's ironic because no less a personage than Donald Trump made hay about lies and non-existant WMDs that led Ametica into a war that has had so many disasterous consequences. That means he must be a victim of Bush Derangement Syndrome too, albeit of a PTSD variety.

I've heard Democrats accuse Republicans of Obama Derangement Syndrome and while I don't recall hearing of Clinton DS (Either for Bill or Hill) that would not be an inaccurate description of what I've seen.

Your not thinking Trump is great sets you on the more rational side of his supporters. But don't presume to think I see him with an irrational mindset. I understand the argument that a change from current dysfunction could be an improvement. His challenge to China has some pros as does his focus on rethinking unmonitored immigration. Ditto paying heed to long neglected blue collar America. That said, he is still a disaster and he is normalizing a lot of hideous aspects of America that had lain dormant for a long time. And that's just the tip of the iceberg for me.

JP

Re: paragraph 3

I am not sure how much we disagree here. Believing in market forces I think taxation is a powerful tool to reach a solution. Make polution more expensive with fuel taxes and alternative energy more attractive to advance through science and innovation and make it cheaper. I am not a fan of low taxation for it's own sake. Republicans have made a religion out of this.

Cap and Trade was a GHW Bush idea. Republicans haven't done much with it. And Obama deserves credit for encouraging drilling to weaken the old oil states power over us. But he also pushed alternatives. It helps that Texas loves wind power.

JP

Re: paragraph 4

Socialism is an old idea that got confused in the post Marx world with communism. It is perfectly suited to democracy. Capitalism fails where no profits can be found. Why should big pharma spend beacoup bucks finding drugs for orphan diseases when it can mass produce viagra and get the government to subsidize it in Medicare? Why should private industry run public prisons?

I believe in regulation and I believe in applying cost benefit analysis to regulation. Finding the sweet spot for efficiency and efficacy will always be a moving target. But today's Republicans put an irrational faith in money making. They have allowed pay day loans to loot the poor. The Koch's enterprises need regulation. Trump's ethos makes this problem ten times worse.

I'm hopeful that the people of Duluth have a nice big gathering in mind for when Gronseth packs his bags. Im thinking pitchforks, torches, and other accoutrements outside of Historic Central High School that lets folks know just how sincerely they wish to see this man depart. What a scumbag. That he wears a suit makes it even more tangible, what an ass this man is

I hope a special counsel is appointed to investigate the next president just before they take office, and the counsel goes on for two years and investigates all of that president's associates and tries them for process crimes, at the very least, bankrupting most of them as they can't afford attorneys, and the government gets to put theirs on credit. Is that the new standard going forward for our democracy?

Socialism is defined as the public control of the means of production, either by the public or the government. That is literally its definition. Always has been. It is what happened in Venezuela when the private farms, farms that produced much of the food for South America, were taken away from the land owners and given to the poor to mismanage. It is that specific bit of socialism in Venusela that is causing those people starve to death, not western interference, and not regulation. I still don't know what you mean by it existing before Marx. If you want regulation, call it capitalism with regulation, but Socialism is Socialism. Marxism is that disgusting philosophy that is taught in all of our colleges under the name liberal arts, which reduces any conflict to wealthy vs poor, and leaves out any nuance, like the other 50 percent of the people (wealthy and poor) who don't live on a coast (or Duluth) and simply want the government to leave them alone.

I'm always confused about the wealthy Marxists. If you need writing material, and want to write an entertaining article, spend some time on that. So the common theme here in all my rants is that I think the Federal government is too big, too evil, too self serving, makes incredible mistakes, and can't collapse fast enough.

BTW, Your grand kids are growing up in a culture where the most inter-sectional victim is the winner. That disgusting location is where this country is headed. (For extra credit, read about inter-sectionalism, and when you're through barfing, write an article on that nonsense.

"Washington, DC – The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) released the following statement in response to the results of 'A Randomized Trial of Induction Versus Expectant Management, more commonly referred to as the ARRIVE Trial, funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units Network and published in The New England Journal of Medicine:

“The ARRIVE Trial studied more than 6,100 first-time, healthy pregnant women across the country. Researchers randomly assigned half of the women to an expectant management group (waiting for labor to begin on its own and intervening only if problems occur) and the other half to a group that would undergo an elective induction (inducing labor without a medical reason) at 39 weeks of gestation.

“The ARRIVE Trial found no statistical difference in the primary outcome, which was a composite of perinatal mortality and severe neonatal morbidity, among the two groups of women. However, notable findings of the ARRIVE Trial include;

A lower rate of cesarean births, the major secondary outcome, among the induction group (18.6%) as compared to expectant management group (22.2%).
Lower rates of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (e.g. preeclampsia and gestational hypertension) among the induction group (9.1%) as compared to the expectant management group (14.1%).
A lower rate of respiratory support among newborns born to the induction group (3%) as compared to the expectant management group (4%).
“ACOG and SMFM have reviewed the published results of the ARRIVE Trial and determined that it is reasonable for obstetric care providers to offer an induction of labor to low-risk women after discussing the options thoroughly, as shared decision making is a critical element. Women eligible for induction must meet the following criteria:

Women who are planning their first delivery, are healthy and have no medical or obstetrical complications.

Women who are 39 weeks pregnant and had an ultrasound performed early in the pregnancy to confirm dating."

“It is important for all inductions of labor, as was done in this study, to adhere to clinical protocols that optimize the chances of a vaginal delivery. Elective induction of labor should not be offered to women under circumstances that are inconsistent with the study protocol unless performed as part of research or quality improvement. As induction of labor involves coordination between the health care provider and the infrastructure in which induction and delivery will occur, it is critical that personnel and facilities coordinate policies related to the offering of elective induction of labor.

For more detailed information, visit the ACOG and SMFM websites.”

"About ACOG"

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) is the nation’s leading group of physicians providing health care for women. As a private, voluntary, nonprofit membership organization of more than 58,000 members, ACOG strongly advocates for quality health care for women, maintains the highest standards of clinical practice and continuing education of its members, promotes patient education, and increases awareness among its members and the public, of the changing issues facing women’s health care. www.acog.org

"About SMFM
"The Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) is a non-profit..."

(my words)

Yes births have been happening for untold millenniums of human history and as time went on, those who do the delivering have passed down knowledge to each successive generation of physicians.

However, we can presume that at one time, C sections were not done, and because they weren't many pregnancies resulted in the deaths of the mother or child, or even of both!

why do you feel the need to deny that many medical doctors have been studying aspects of human birth and have surely been learning from each mistake and each improvement? And no! new knowledge does not just "come about," but often requires years or decades in the making, You are so bent on portraying medical professionals as bogeymen, that you decided to use a totally irrelevant and meaningless hypothetical example to argue with, in which many pediatricians and obstetricians are supposedly among the doctors who commonly recommend vaccines. The fact is that they can recommend what microbiologists and immunologists tell them works best, but often that kind of knowledge is outside of their specialities domain. Most vaccines are prescribed after birth and the guys who delivers children usually focus on the health of those children from that point on, whereas most other doctors focus on providing medical help within their specialities, after a child has been born. So exactly who would want to butcher anyone else for having a "non-cosmetic" approach to medicines? I'm asking you in all sincerity, "what do you mean by a non-cosmetic approach to medicine?"

You may have pain and resentments stemming from bad experiences that neither I nor most people, have had. But that is really is none of my business. The only thing I really have to add to this conversation is that one's doctors do not have the right to shame or insult their patients for voicing honest fears about their children's vaccinations. So if any doctor treats yoiu this way look for another opinion and report that physicians conduct to the AMA.

Dr. Kohl’s,
Your work is admirable. You are so right that activist groups for different causes need to band together. This is the biggest challenge in activism because there are so many opportunists driving the dialogue. To cooperate with another organization creates vulnerability for the “leaders”. I wonder if you are aware of the massive fraud behind “Lyme disease”. I would love to discuss with you, as your expertise in all things touched by Pharma is a necessary backdrop for the true story of sadistic disease denial that we’ve endured for decades. Thank you for your good work. Laura— truth@truthcures.org

https://badlymeattitude.com/2018/09/16/an-institutional-form-of-murder/