Page 2 of 2
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:11 pm
by asiab3
If the anti-science crowd has any more footing in the next decade, we're going to need to lower that 65-year-old minimum a bit……
Robbie
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Fri Dec 28, 2018 1:28 pm
by Amskeptic
asiab3 wrote: ↑Wed Dec 26, 2018 4:11 pm
If the anti-science crowd has any more footing in the next decade, we're going to need to lower that 65-year-old minimum a bit……
Robbie
Why? Because our life expectancy is plummeting?
Colin
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Sat Dec 29, 2018 3:13 am
by asiab3
Amskeptic wrote: ↑Fri Dec 28, 2018 1:28 pm
Why? Because our life expectancy is plummeting?
If enough people continue to deny medical advice and advancements, life expectancy will be taking a downturn in my lifetime.
I am only a few chapters in, but I so far recommend, "Science Left Behind: Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left".
https://www.amazon.com/Science-Left-Beh ... 161039321X
I also think people in positions of influence should be role models not roll models. (Are you reading this, 45?)
Robbie
edit: Zabo et al., thanks for the forum update that shows live Amazon links!
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:41 pm
by Amskeptic
asiab3 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 3:13 am
Amskeptic wrote: ↑Fri Dec 28, 2018 1:28 pm
Why? Because our life expectancy is plummeting?
If enough people continue to deny medical advice and advancements, life expectancy will be taking a downturn in my lifetime.
I am only a few chapters in, but I so far recommend, "Science Left Behind: Feel-Good Fallacies and the Rise of the Anti-Scientific Left".
I also think people in positions of influence should be role models not roll models. (Are you reading this, 45?)
Robbie
edit: Zabo et al., thanks for the forum update that shows live Amazon links!
Now that was tricky slippery questionable over there on Amazon.
First of all, it decided that I must want to read Ann Coulter as well. Well, what sort of sleazy book bar did I just walk into? Then I read some reviews to see who was attracted to this book. Boof! Some guy in Pennsylvania claiming that there is no evidence that fracking causes any environmental damage so thank god that was in this book spanking stupid liberals . . . .
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2019 8:48 pm
by asiab3
The authors are probably working off the the 2016 EPA study, which was a 1,193 page document that took 600+ pages to say that fracking fluid is injected too deep underground for any meaningful contamination. Most of the wells in the U.S. are 2,000 feet or more below any drinking water sources, and the only currently observable environmental effect is spillage of fluid and pipe malfunctions. By "meaningful contamination," I mean the number of spills and accidents far outweigh the issues of polluted groundwater by such a high margin, that the EPA doesn't consider the groundwater issue important.
So yeah, about those district lines…
Robbie
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2019 9:07 am
by Amskeptic
asiab3 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 8:48 pm
The authors are probably working off the the 2016 EPA study, which was a 1,193 page document that took 600+ pages to say that fracking fluid is injected too deep underground for any meaningful contamination. Most of the wells in the U.S. are 2,000 feet or more below any drinking water sources, and the only currently observable environmental effect is spillage of fluid and pipe malfunctions. By "meaningful contamination," I mean the number of spills and accidents far outweigh the issues of polluted groundwater by such a high margin, that the EPA doesn't consider the groundwater issue important.
So yeah, about those district lines…
Robbie
Oh, we'll get to the district lines after this break.
I read of a few taps being lit on fire, you know, like a party trick:
https://www.ecowatch.com/pennsylvania-f ... 66816.html
Buried in Folders: 1,275 Water Complaints
Prior to Public Herald's fracking complaints database (an open source project named #fileroom) which was launched in September 2015, the public had little access to Pennsylvania's fracking water complaints. What was known is that the DEP fracking complaint system was horrendous.
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 12:20 pm
by Abscate
I can't lie that the 5-4 Supreme Court ruling on this has made be ill. Im going to need some love to get through this one.
This statement is absolutely incredible in its audacity..
(from the NYT)
"“I think electing Republicans is better than electing Democrats,” explained David Lewis, a Republican member of the General Assembly’s redistricting committee. “So I drew this map to help foster what I think is better for the country.”
“I propose that we draw the maps to give a partisan advantage to 10 Republicans and three Democrats,” he said, “because I do not believe it’s possible to draw a map with 11 Republicans and two Democrats.”"
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:02 pm
by airkooledchris
Abscate wrote: ↑Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:40 pm
More simple, conservative head-exploding points to consider for the new Year
My favourite
No State shall receive more in Federal revenue than it contributes.
The Senate shall confirm all Judicial appointees with a 2/3 supermajority vote.
No Supreme Court Justice shall assume office under the age of ......(65 proposed, negotiable)
How about we add "No Supreme Court Justice shall continue to serve when OVER the age of ....... ?
Right away, I know there's an argument against that being ageist, but as much as I like RBG - I want people making decisions for us who are going to be around long enough to live with those decisions.
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:24 am
by Abscate
airkooledchris wrote: ↑Mon Jul 01, 2019 1:02 pm
Abscate wrote: ↑Wed Dec 26, 2018 12:40 pm
More simple, conservative head-exploding points to consider for the new Year
My favourite
No State shall receive more in Federal revenue than it contributes.
The Senate shall confirm all Judicial appointees with a 2/3 supermajority vote.
No Supreme Court Justice shall assume office under the age of ......(65 proposed, negotiable)
How about we add "No Supreme Court Justice shall continue to serve when OVER the age of ....... ?
Right away, I know there's an argument against that being ageist, but as much as I like RBG - I want people making decisions for us who are going to be around long enough to live with those decisions.
That or 10-15 year term limit. I can do either/both/ all three
Re: Fixing gerrymandering, electoral college, rural vs urban divide
Posted: Sat Jul 13, 2019 4:37 pm
by Amskeptic
Abscate wrote: ↑Tue Jul 02, 2019 9:24 am
That or 10-15 year term limit. I can do either/both/ all three
Why? If we maintain a proper firewall between the Supreme Court and politics, why would we not honor those with experience who have seen the cycles upon cycles of civic history?
Does Ruth Bader Ginsberg really look like the sort of human being who needs to somehow live through her decisions? I don't even get this. I am going to miss the intellectual rigor of the old crew on the Supreme Court. The new kids hardly inflame my thought processes.
Colin