Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

(03-26-2021, 08:37 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-26-2021, 01:01 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]How about if we reduce both.

because I want to encourage the earning of salaries, and discourage the consumption of gasoline.

A reduction in income tax will not motivate those living off the government to suddenly get jobs.  

Higher gas prices increase the cost of doing business throughout the rest of the economy and push inflation.  The best way to reduce gasoline consumption is through the development of viable alternatives.

(03-10-2022, 08:42 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-26-2021, 08:37 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]because I want to encourage the earning of salaries, and discourage the consumption of gasoline.

A reduction in income tax will not motivate those living off the government to suddenly get jobs.  

Higher gas prices increase the cost of doing business throughout the rest of the economy and push inflation.  The best way to reduce gasoline consumption is through the development of viable alternatives.

Wow, it's been a year and he hasn't evolved at all...

(03-10-2022, 08:42 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-26-2021, 08:37 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]because I want to encourage the earning of salaries, and discourage the consumption of gasoline.

A reduction in income tax will not motivate those living off the government to suddenly get jobs.  

Higher gas prices increase the cost of doing business throughout the rest of the economy and push inflation.  The best way to reduce gasoline consumption is through the development of viable alternatives.

Do you think the EITC incentivizes work as it was intended to do? I do.  That is a reduction income tax that incentivizes people to work more.

And I agree we need to develop better and better alternatives.  That's why we still subsidize the purchase of electric vehicles.  That's why we subsidized rooftop solar, although that's going away.

(03-09-2022, 11:14 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2022, 04:52 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Clearly Trump, but you voted against your interests. Because you're a naïve UI.

How is Biden threatening anyone's ability to vote or influence government in the future?
And what does UI mean?

It could mean User Interface, but considering the dialogs between the two of you, I'm guessing Uninformed Idiot.

(03-10-2022, 08:42 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-26-2021, 08:37 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]because I want to encourage the earning of salaries, and discourage the consumption of gasoline.

A reduction in income tax will not motivate those living off the government to suddenly get jobs.  

Higher gas prices increase the cost of doing business throughout the rest of the economy and push inflation.  The best way to reduce gasoline consumption is through the development of viable alternatives.

I have a decent job... but I'm the only one making money. I'm feeding two growing boys.

I refuse to take money from the government because I'm a libertarian at heart and that goes against everything I stand for. I do my best... and I'm genuinely afraid that my best isn't going to matter anymore when goods and gas are beyond my capability to purchase.

(03-10-2022, 09:56 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2022, 08:42 AM)Sneakers Wrote: [ -> ]A reduction in income tax will not motivate those living off the government to suddenly get jobs.  

Higher gas prices increase the cost of doing business throughout the rest of the economy and push inflation.  The best way to reduce gasoline consumption is through the development of viable alternatives.

Do you think the EITC incentivizes work as it was intended to do? I do.  That is a reduction income tax that incentivizes people to work more.

And I agree we need to develop better and better alternatives.  That's why we still subsidize the purchase of electric vehicles.  That's why we subsidized rooftop solar, although that's going away.

As stated in a previous post somewhere, solar is not viable as a replacement for the majority of electric load usage until battery technology achieves massive advances. Heat your water, it'll do a 3rd of the job. Light your home, maybe. Run your HVAC, no. Run your computers? Maybe. Fridge/freezer? LOL. Charge your EV in 2035? Not the way batteries work today. We need either fusion, nuclear or Fuel Cell based on hydrogen. And none of those except nuclear are safe enough yet.

(03-10-2022, 10:21 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-09-2022, 11:14 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]How is Biden threatening anyone's ability to vote or influence government in the future?
And what does UI mean?

It could mean User Interface, but considering the dialogs between the two of you, I'm guessing Uninformed Idiot.

I've been called worse by better.

(03-10-2022, 11:40 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2022, 10:21 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]It could mean User Interface, but considering the dialogs between the two of you, I'm guessing Uninformed Idiot.

I've been called worse by better.

Well yes and no.

(03-10-2022, 10:29 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2022, 09:56 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]Do you think the EITC incentivizes work as it was intended to do? I do.  That is a reduction income tax that incentivizes people to work more.

And I agree we need to develop better and better alternatives.  That's why we still subsidize the purchase of electric vehicles.  That's why we subsidized rooftop solar, although that's going away.

As stated in a previous post somewhere, solar is not viable as a replacement for the majority of electric load usage until battery technology achieves massive advances.  Heat your water, it'll do a 3rd of the job.  Light your home, maybe.  Run your HVAC, no.  Run your computers?  Maybe.  Fridge/freezer?  LOL. Charge your EV in 2035?  Not the way batteries work today.  We need either fusion, nuclear or Fuel Cell based on hydrogen.  And none of those except nuclear are safe enough yet.

I agree with most of that.  I'm a big proponent of us subsidizing more nuclear fission plants.  And I know we (US government) already give a lot of money to the nuclear fusion experiments in the UK and France.  I'm in favor of that as well.
I also agree that there are applications for liquid hydrogen. Liquid hydrogen could be the automotive or aircraft fuel of the future. It can power fuel cells, but it can also power internal combustion engines, which might be less expensive for cars and planes. In either case, we would have to manufacture liquid hydrogen, in plants that will use electricity.  So it could be really important to scale up our electric grid with all sorts of carbon free sources of energy, so we can have a stable supply of liquid hydrogen.

(03-10-2022, 11:48 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2022, 10:29 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]As stated in a previous post somewhere, solar is not viable as a replacement for the majority of electric load usage until battery technology achieves massive advances.  Heat your water, it'll do a 3rd of the job.  Light your home, maybe.  Run your HVAC, no.  Run your computers?  Maybe.  Fridge/freezer?  LOL. Charge your EV in 2035?  Not the way batteries work today.  We need either fusion, nuclear or Fuel Cell based on hydrogen.  And none of those except nuclear are safe enough yet.

I agree with most of that.  I'm a big proponent of us subsidizing more nuclear fission plants.  And I know we (US government) already give a lot of money to the nuclear fusion experiments in the UK and France.  I'm in favor of that as well.
I also agree that there are applications for liquid hydrogen. Liquid hydrogen could be the automotive or aircraft fuel of the future. It can power fuel cells, but it can also power internal combustion engines, which might be less expensive for cars and planes. In either case, we would have to manufacture liquid hydrogen, in plants that will use electricity.  So it could be really important to scale up our electric grid with all sorts of carbon free sources of energy, so we can have a stable supply of liquid hydrogen.

I would love to see liquid hydrogen take root, but its too volatile a fuel at the moment. Hopefully someone is working on it.

Of course, its going to produce a lot of water/water vapor as a by-product. Its also going to release heat. Might cause a similar effect as CO2 (rising tides and temps), just from a different direction. Of course, if the hydrogen is made from water, then the net sum of that might be ok. of course, you need electricity to produce hydrogen that way, which leads us back full circle to the original problem.

I'm with you on nuclear fission/fusion. That to me is our most sustainable long term alternative that will actually give us the results we need, given our current infrastructure of energy consuming devices.

(03-10-2022, 11:40 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2022, 10:21 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]It could mean User Interface, but considering the dialogs between the two of you, I'm guessing Uninformed Idiot.

I've been called worse by better.

We have a consensus!

(03-10-2022, 11:40 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(03-10-2022, 10:21 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: [ -> ]It could mean User Interface, but considering the dialogs between the two of you, I'm guessing Uninformed Idiot.

I've been called worse by better.

Aww.... thanks, pal.

It cost $43 to fill my tank from 3/4. Last year it cost $51 to fill it from empty. I decided I wasn't going to let my tank go below 3/4 before I filled it up again. I don't have to drive much but my husband has to fill up his car every few days and that's putting a dent in our budget.

I saw a semi the other day and wondered how much it would cost to fill it up. That's crazy.

(03-21-2022, 11:07 AM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]It cost $43 to fill my tank from 3/4. Last year it cost $51 to fill it from empty. I decided I wasn't going to let my tank go below 3/4 before I filled it up again. I don't have to drive much but my husband has to fill up his car every few days and that's putting a dent in our budget.

I saw a semi the other day and wondered how much it would cost to fill it up. That's crazy.

Roughly about $1500.00 or so.  Many have a 300 gallon tank and diesel is running around $5.00 per gallon right now.

Twitter is becoming a parody of itself. 

Babylon Bee Suspended on Twitter for Anti-Trans Rachel Levine Post (yahoo.com)

Twitter has suspended the Babylon Bee’s account after the parody site posted an article awarding Rachel Levine, the Biden-appointed transgender health secretary, its “man of the year.”

Twitter locked the Bee’s account, which has more than 1.3 million followers, because the tweet promoting the article about Levine violates Twitter’s policy about violence against or harassment or threatening of other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age disability or serious disease.



Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon followed up his initial post of Twitter’s notification with commentary on other action through more tweets.

He cited Twitter’s generic statement given to media outlets: “The account you referenced has been temporarily locked for violating our hateful conduct policy. The account owner is required to delete the violative Tweet before regaining access to their account.”

“They could, of course, delete the tweet themselves. But they won’t. It’s not enough for them to just wipe it out,” he continued. “They want us to bend the knee and admit that we engaged in hateful conduct.”...

(03-22-2022, 10:28 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Twitter is becoming a parody of itself. 

Babylon Bee Suspended on Twitter for Anti-Trans Rachel Levine Post (yahoo.com)

Twitter has suspended the Babylon Bee’s account after the parody site posted an article awarding Rachel Levine, the Biden-appointed transgender health secretary, its “man of the year.”

Twitter locked the Bee’s account, which has more than 1.3 million followers, because the tweet promoting the article about Levine violates Twitter’s policy about violence against or harassment or threatening of other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age disability or serious disease.



Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon followed up his initial post of Twitter’s notification with commentary on other action through more tweets.

He cited Twitter’s generic statement given to media outlets: “The account you referenced has been temporarily locked for violating our hateful conduct policy. The account owner is required to delete the violative Tweet before regaining access to their account.”

“They could, of course, delete the tweet themselves. But they won’t. It’s not enough for them to just wipe it out,” he continued. “They want us to bend the knee and admit that we engaged in hateful conduct.”...

That last bit explains the progressive/liberal left to a T. Specifically the "bend the knee" part. They are a hateful bunch of people with some serious anger management issues.

Nah. You misunderstand. They wouldn't get so angry if you would just do as your told. Just look at Mikey and Marty. It will always be ok for them because they don't mind conforming to the narrative. Fix yourself, people. Conform. Then the world will be a happy place, because they will have total power.