Climate Change

I think that was more like continental drift than rising and falling oceans.

Or in some areas it might have been due to rising and falling oceans due to ice ages. I'm not sure.

Climate changes THAT drastic would be even worse than what has been projected or speculated upon for the next 100 years or so. I recall reading about tropical plants frozen in glaciers at one of the poles.

That's one thing that puzzles me when people say "there have always been changes in climate and always will". Such changes (if you include meteor-induced climate change) wiped out dinosaurs and replaced them with mammals, or reduced the human population in "temperate" latitudes down to tiny numbers during ice ages.

Is that supposed to be re-assuring?

Notice that the site says "can freeze" faster. Aside from the goofy "snap" argument offered by the high school teacher--clearly ridiculous--the freezing of hot water faster than cold water generally involves a "trick" of some kind. Hot water has less dissolved air, therefore it has less mass or evaporation leads to less water mass, convection currents in hot water lead to faster cooling, etc. I've heard others. Apparently, some of this phenomena is poorly understood--my education on that one. Nonetheless, the fact is we all SHOULD have learned in high school that water can't begin to freeze unless it is at 32°F (at normal pressures). In order for hot water to freeze, it needs to cool to 32°F first. A claim that hot water freezes faster than cold water should be met with derision first, based on basic science. After that, we can investigate and learn about exceptions, fine details, or whatever. Also, even if tricks can be done to make the hot water cool faster, in every case--and always--it will take consume more energy to cool hot water than it will cold water. Your freezer WILL consume more energy if you use hot water.

Y'all are welcome to first heat the water that you intend for ice--I'm starting with cold water.

Ken,

Elevations of land can change over time as well. Land can both rise in elevation or subside...as we know very well from GreenhouseGals observations. What is at 300' now could have been lower at one point.

Willy I agree with everything you say in your last post! I just did an experiment in my freezer and the cold water froze first.

Focus should not be on the exceptions.

Perhaps the teacher wanted to get the students attention or to make them think. Science has a lot of bias and challenging the status quo often leads to new ideas.

Science by the way is always changing. It changes more rapidly than our climate. Which is why I have a hard time putting much faith in it. This is especially true about things that cant be experimented and replicated...the whole idea of theories.

And I am a scientist! I realize there is so much we don't know. Not only about what has happened...what is happening and even less than what will happen let alone what to do about it.

Whether burning fossil fuel affects climate change or not it makes sense to use what we have wisely. Be more efficient and when cost effective use alternate forms of energy.

But even the alternative forms will have unintended consequences...wind mills are decimating eagles...

True, land masses change elevations over eons, particularly where tectonic plates are involved. As far as I know, the southeastern US has no tectonic plate movement and never has. I could be wrong about this, since I know little of the science of land movement.

Ken

Wow! If those two statement were true...the problems might be solved...or not. well at least if people would agree to take care of the planet since it is our home.

Politicians cannot agree and scientists many times do not agree. Still the ice is melting at the South Pole and California is getting closer to drying out completely if we do not get enough rain. There is an obvious change in weather patterns. Even going to any weather site or NOAA will will tell you this. But can they tell you the future of the weather? They are constantly updating weather forecasts.

We were "destined" to be in the biggest drought in history, and still it may come to pass. A late night radio host (who has over a million listeners) conducted an experiment, and asked the listeners to pray or visualize for California to get rain. The next day we had a "gully washer"! Surely it was not enough to solve any long term problems, but is it possible for many like-minded people to meditate on these problems and have a lot of people bring our climate into balance.

It seems as the earth seems to be reflecting the state of humankind right now. There are cruel dictators and there are people rioting in the streets...many people are being murdered senselessly and of course, wars everywhere. An also corporate greed, companies wanting to dominate all the people and keeping the people dependant on them, while the CEO's make millions and the peons make minimum wage. Oh, yes, raising the minimum wage will sacrifice jobs.

I have to agree with Corey on this one aspect...if our race would develop into an intelligent species, many of the problems would be solved. I do not have the answer. Still, we DO have to wake up, and not be a part of the status quo.

Yes ~ "...to find the right way to nuture individuals' potential to bring out the BEST NATURE in large groups...like political partes..."

This message was edited Feb 22, 2014 7:27 PM

We're doing well. We've debated on politics AND religion and I've yet to see a single profanity...though I suppose some may have been muttered under someone's breath!

ditto- kudos everybody

I just completely resist making any statements about trends- look at the Dust Bowl in the US; surely those people thought it would never get better, many times.. Nor did they imagine it ever getting that bad, before hand…..

Humans are complex and diverse. I can understand a desire for them to develop into an intelligent life form to solve all the worlds problems. But what one person thinks is intelligent isnt the same as another. Some think GMO crops is a miracle...a God send to improve our lives. Others think it is immoral and a threat to our health.

Because of these differences in thinking there is always going to be disagreements in politics and everywhere else. There always have been disagreements and there always will be.

I think it begs the question, "What is truth or what is real or how can we know anything? We have only our perception with which to grapple with those questions. Our perceptions are shaped by the sum total of our experiences plus the condition of the perceiving senses. Science to me is our attempt to grapple with the question of "how can we know?" It is a SYSTEM developed to try to get outside our biases, to get outside our perhaps flawed perception. We say in science, "I think this is what is happening". Then we test that with the most rigorous experiment we are able to design, controlling for all the variables we can imagine, hoping to find out, "Does my hypothesis appear to be correct? Then we attempt also to quantify what the probability is that it is correct. Then we invite other scientists and students to replicate our experiment and see if they get similar results or they find we made an error or we failed to control for some important variable. It is very difficult, as we can all observe., to get around our own biases. The only way we know to get at the truth, to get outside our biased perceptions is some kind of system with rules that must be obeyed, that makes us "test" what we think, in the most rigorous way we know, and then to say cautiously, the probability of our being correct is about 95% or 99%. It is very difficult to get at the truth in some instances.

Rick, The thread has moved ahead so far in the last three days that I am only going to respond to two or three of your comments where we left off last week.

>>>>My understanding of what I read is that the group that you think is a small, dleuded minority includes most climate scientists, NOAA, NASA, people with not much poolitical agenda, etc. I understand that we disagree about that.

eeee I would add to that the fact that all of our Scientists that have attended college the last forty years have been taught and indoctrinated very liberal faculty. Most students buy whatever their Professor is selling, and as some Professions like the Media are heavily biased towards Liberal thinking, it is reasonable to assume most of the Climatologists will also be liberal, as it is well documented that most Professors are decidedly so..

>>>, …….. but I think that what is even more lacking is wisdom and willingness to make several kinds of effort. One effort is to do hard reading and hard thinking. Education can proba help develope those muscles and the habit of expecting to work for it if you wnatto understand anything more complicated than celbrity scandals or political party slogans.

eeee The way I have been phrasing my thoughts on this matter for a long time is this: “Knowledge can be taught and learned,and bought and sold, but Wisdom must be acquired by thinking and digesting that Knowledge and Experience.”So we now have many highly educated people in positions of power that have not acquired Wisdom commensurate with their Power. And that can lead us into very expensive mistake.

>>>>>Ernie, when you say "climate change", do you mean natural fluctuations such as we have historical experience with, not much affected by CO2 changes, or do you mean climate CHANGE to unusual extremes of weather such as are NOT historically normal (which some people think are caused by man-made greenhouse gases

eeeee Yes, Historical, as that is the time honored definition of Climate Change, and the term Global Warming, which was the proper term for what this is about, was only changed when the Warmies found out their product was not selling with that name, so they changed the label.

Rick, somewhere you asked me what I think is a reasonable time frame for comparing the Climate Changes, and I believe, since your main concern is the problem of humans adapting to the new climate as it undergoes changes, I think the basis for comparison should logically be set during the Ice Age, maybe 20 or 30,000 years ago when the Siberians walked to Alaska on the Bering Sea floor to the present time. So much water was tied up in ice back then, that the ocean levels had dropped that much.
It is pretty well accepted that some of the Siberians, after crossing, adapted to the Ice, and evolved into Eskimos, some moved to where you live, and evolved in to the Coastal Indians. Some went East, some went South to the Deserts, adapting to whatever they found. And some went on to South America, with the Mayans adapting to the Jungle and the Inca adapting to the high altitudes, And they did all this with just Stones and Sticks for tools. So I just do not have any doubt that humans can continue to adapt to whatever is required for survival.

Another of your worries that I do not believe will happen is sudden massive deaths. If the climate reduces the crops, it will be gradual, and as the food base shrinks, Pregnancy rates of all mammals will decline, so fewer babies will be born, and weaker older people will die first, leaving the stronger ones to adapt and survive. That is the way it has always been and will always be.

I have not addressed the Carbon factor, because we have no historical basis yet of lasting damage. So until it is proven or disproven, no one can be sure. But we do know that what I have said above has happened so it can well happen again.

And the term you use sometimes of “Deniers” no longer has any validity. Many of us did, and do, deny that Global Warming is, at this time, a reasonable threat, but I, nor no one I know, has ever denied that the Climate will Change.

I became frustrated trying to make this response within the confines of the DG program as I could not keep my ducks lined up, so switched to Office Word. If I can enter this, it is sure a much easier way to do it.
Ernie










This message was edited Feb 23, 2014 5:15 PM

This message was edited Feb 23, 2014 6:03 PM

drobarr--I wish I could assume that the teacher was trying to get the students to think, but my conversation with him regarding energetic molecules more easily "snapping" into place dispelled me of that notion. We are a woefully ignorant society when it comes to science.

Ernie, have you ever asked yourself, "Why" all the professions seem to be more liberal? (as you stated above). If it is the case, then surely it is worth asking why this could be this way.

Steadycam3...why the professors are more liberal?

http://rosemeadcenter.blogspot.com/2006/01/why-are-college-professors-liberal.html?m=1

Steady,

Actually, i mispoke and will go back and edit my post tp say....... some professions like the ones listed below.........

I believe some professions are decidedly Liberal, with Educators and Media predominately. But many doctors and Civil Engineers that i have had as friends are conservative. I also think the majority of the Professionnal people that choose to work for Government, rather than private enterprise, are more likely to be liberal, as there seems to be a pretty clear line between the type of person that seeks the security of the Civil Service and the ones that choose the less secure but possibly more lucrative private enterprise.

I have long recognized our opinions and beliefs are based on our experiences and observations. And of course, we sometimes accept those experiences and sometimes we rebel against them.

I grew up during the depression, and my Father ruined his health working to raise us six kids, and refused to accept Relief, as Welfare was known then. He and his friends disdained both the relief and the people that accepted it. I understood and absorbed that culture for better or worse.

Those are just two examples of hundreds of different things that influence us.

We probably subconsciously choose our Role Models, and then follow there examples. I know my role models were all men i respected for their intellect and their independence, but i have strived to never be too dependent on others.

But, if I had been raised in a family that accepted the relief, or been educated by a teacher i liked that convinced me dependncy, and demanding other people should pay for what i want, was better, i undoubtedly would have a different feeling about it.

Ernie

Steady,

Thank you for your comment. My statement was poorly worded, and i would not have wanted any of my conservative Professional friends to have seen that. Most of them are dead of old age now, but one never knows.

Drobarr,
Thanks for the link,, as that help clarify what i was saying about the Liberall Bias our College Students are exposed to.

Ernie

Ernie,

I am only 39 but I was raised like you. I come from a family of 8 kids. My parents were born during the depression so that event impacted them. I have always been taught to be self sufficient. And not to depend on anyone including government.

I will admit some government welfare programs help...most also cause harm. They take away from the producer and give to those not producing with nothing expected in exchange. To me this takes away a persons dignity...not only the producers...but also the receivers.

It also creates an entitlement mentality and a whole class of people that expect something for nothing.

Now I understand people need help...but our government expenses with these programs are way out of line. But most disturbing are the lost opportunities that will never materialize for this growing underclass of dependents. They will choose dependency over hard work and education and risk taking or coming up with ideas.

I think most people that are in the real world in business for a number of years and understand what it takes to make a dollar...to make a payroll etc they tend to lean conservative. Those in education or government tend to be more liberal because they are not in that reality. They arent worried about production, or regulations, and the practicalities of the real world.

Ernie, I dont think any teacher anywhere would ever teach a child that dependency is better or that other people should pay for what I want. Ive never heard of it if one did. That of course does not mean it hasn't happened but I would be surprised to hear that it did.

You make an interesting point tho when you say that our childhoods really do influence our values. Ive heard it said that by age 5 we have already internalized our parents values and by age 10, we probably wont change our belief system very much. During adolescence we tend to re-examine our beliefs and may refine them but we usually dont change them much. The child is the father of the man does have some meaning.

As for the wisdom thing, there appear to be stages of moral development, just as there are stages of physical or mental development. (Kohlberg, Loevinger, etc). Some people reach higher levels of this in their lifetime than others. Sometimes horrible things happen to children during their younger years and this can cause disruption in the progress toward moral development such that they never develop beyond the "If I want it, I'll just take it" stage and you would find those folks in prison usually. At the other end of the spectrum, Mother Theresa is offered as an example of very high moral development but perhaps not the highest.

I have lived a long time now and I realize that many of the choices that people make were not entirely free choices. Some people were so programmed as a child that some choices never occur to them. If a certain choice does occur to them, they have already been programmed to believe that choice is not one they can make. Like the young Hispanic teen who told me, Mexicans dont go to college! They certainly do but he was not aware of it. We make only the choices our awareness permits. As our awareness expands, we have a larger array of choices. Ignorance means to not know or to not be aware. Education is meant to dispel ignorance or to increase awareness so more choices become visible and better choices possible. For me, the only choice when I look at the world and my brothers and sisters all over the planet, is compassion because I have no idea their level of awareness and therefore what choices they see for themselves. My job is to increase my awareness so that I have a chance to make better choices.

Drobarr, If professors are the link to liberalism, why is it do you think that so many professors are liberal? This is kinda the same question I asked Ernie but drilled down a bit further.

Steady,

These are all generalities. There are many conservatives at Universities...if you look at Agriculture programs, ROTC, business schools, medicine and engineering and some of the sciences you will find many of them.

However in the humanities and social sciences they lean very heavily on the liberal spectrum. I am not sure professors are the link to liberalism...but I think many liberals go in to teaching because they want to influence others with their philosophy. They tend to be folks who because of their educational attainment enjoy the prestige of being a university professor...having an audience to listen to their great wisdom... and being able to spread their way of thinking to as many people as possible. Whether it is in the classroom or through publishing they tend to have an agenda that they would not likely be able to pursue or promote in the private sector.

Of course I really have no clue. I only got three degrees at three different institutions over 10 years so I probably don't know what I am talking about lol.

When I completed my doctorate I had two job offers...professor or industry. I chose industry...but for me it was specifics of the job...location, pay, etc. Plus I hated publishing and the thought of not getting tenure.

Why do you think university professors lean liberal?

So you dont necessarily agree with the article (link) that you posted? In your reply to me you seem to make the case for there being a mix of conservative and liberal college professors, depending on which branch of study. Ive not seen any stats on the subject but I do remember some stats after the last presidential election. If I remember correctly, they sliced and diced the data on who voted for whom and the data showed that people with a high school education or less voted Republican and those with a college degree or higher voted Democrat. (In general). Now I suppose you could interpret that a lot of ways. Conservatives generally vote Republican and liberals usually vote Democrat. I dont know if that means that college people have been liberalized by attending college or that people with higher education tend to vote liberal or that most Republicans dont attend college and therefore have not been liberalized by education. I would love to know how we became so polarized, what is it exactly that separates the two groups.

Steady,
I cannot directly address what Professors actually say, as i only attended the College of Hard Knocks, but i follow the news closely, and i have seen countless occasions where Professors and Teachers are in favor of Big Government, bigger School budgets, with fewer absolute goals or criteria to measure what the students have to actually knoow to graduate, and one thing for sure, whether we know exactly whether a teacher is liberal or not, they and their Unions do support Liberal Politicians.

And the only ones that support the larger, liberal type of government are those that are dependent, directly or indirectly, on the largesse of the Government. So it becomes a symbiotic system that mutually supports each other. But since it is obviously destroying the country, it might be compared to a a circular firing squad, because once the country goes broke, it will no longer be able to support all of its dependents.

There is a moral component to Wisdom, but that is only a small part of it, and Wisdom is really the only way to get much good out of the knowledge we accumulate, however we gather it.

And it seems apparent to me that what is most missing in the plans, and implementation of the Liberal Governing policies is the lack of Wisdom, whether it is in getting improved results from Education, Spending the Stimulus Money wisely, Choosing Alternative Energy Systems, or even the Environmental Movement, All were started with the best of intentions, but directed with the worst of management styles, so the resutls have been dismall failures when actual results are compared to the plans or goals.

I think Drobarr is in a better place to discuss higher education than i am, just as Rick Corey is better qualified to discuss Research methods and practices, and both of them are better suited to discuss the finer points of Science.

I am impressed by what you posted, and i hope you continue to engage in the discussions.
And, since i have tried to answer two of your questions, i would like to ask you one.

If the parents and the teachers are not the source of the Dependency Culture in so many people to day, where does that Dependencty Culture come from?

Ernie

Steady,

Assuming the study you quoted in your response to Drobarr is accurate, have you, in your experience, found Democrats to be smarter and more successful than Republicans?

Or could it be that people educated by the beforementioned Liberal Professors have been influenced by them, as i suggested before.

Ernie

I believe that for one to grow up with a dependent mindset, the family is the most powerful influence. In addition, families often associate with those that are most like them so no "different" mindset is introduced until very late when character and mindset and worldview are already hardened. Once a person has "solidified" in a mindset, they tend to seek information that confirms what they believe rather than to challenge it. So it becomes a self satisfying loop with no new strange input. Once in a great while I see someone who doesn't follow the path laid out for them by circumstance. They defy it all and listen for different views and open their mind to new ideas, new experiences from which they can learn to be different from all those around them. It's a wonderful thing to see but it does not happen often. I wish I knew what the secret is. Ive thought sometimes it could be that special teacher who cared or that coach who took the time or that professor who said, "you could do that". I would bottle it and sell it if I knew the secret.

Ernie, I would venture to guess that there is the full range of intelligence on both sides, the liberal and the conservative, the Democrats and Republicans. I have nothing to base that upon except common sense. When we get to the idea that education (particularly higher education like college) liberalizes people then maybe it would make sense that the more educated, the more liberal. That would explain the data I mentioned from the election. I dont think you could extrapolate that liberals are smarter than conservatives from that data, just that liberals are more educated. (at least the ones who voted).

Think about this: That all those liberal professors got that way by higher education so higher education liberalized the professors and they in turn liberalize their students. Would that explain it?

Steady,

I do not think the Liberals became liberal from the Education. I have been led to believe that it comes from the Educators. In other words, the students are there to learn more factual information about their future profession, but that information can certainly be presented to them either straight or slanted to to the left or right. And since it is clear that more than half of the professors are self identified as being liberal, it stands to reason that being human, they will present those fact with a liberal bias.

I have been a businessman for 60 years this June, and i learned early on, that in order to lead and inspire my employees to help me achieve my goals, i had to understand them, and to teach and influence them to follow my beliefs. I could not tell some one to just go do something, i had to inspire him to do it the way i believed it should be done. So, it is reasonable for me to believe if i was a Liberal Professor, i would be teaching my students to implement what i was teaching them in a Liberal way. Since there are more liberal professors, that means more students will be indoctrinated to believe the liberal way.

I am certaint that i could not teach someone in a convincing way to do things the opposite of how i think it should be done.

Two more questions.for you. What field has your career or business been in, and how old are you?.

The Biggest generational difference i have seen has been between the generations that grew up by 1940, and the generation that grew up after 1960. The generation between those dates was making the transition, and each generation since has trended the same way with incremental differences each year. I am hopeful the trend has reversed in recent years, and maybe accelerated since the recession.

Ernie

http://www.usmessageboard.com/education/168013-republicans-are-better-educated-then-democrats.html

http://www.cfif.org/v/index.php/commentary/54-state-of-affairs/1357-pew-research-republicans-more-knowledgeable-than-democrats

Though many may leave college with a liberal skew after a lifetime of liberal indoctrination...

But most college grads go into private enterprise...not government or University jobs. Once they get into the real world the real education begins...the education of reality....not of the idealist theories they had been taught.

I think the brains of liberals and those of conservatives simply have different wiring, and that wiring is present at birth. LOL

I think liberals decisions and beliefs stem more from the heart. Where as conservattives come more from the mind. I agree they are wired differently.

I am however glad we dont all think the same...I think each perspective has its merits and pitfalls.

There has always been these differences political and otherwise and I do not think we are as devided as we were say during the revolutionary or civil war.

Congrats to all here for keeping this thread respectful and civil, for it is in danger of falling into the previously forbidden category of politics. Keep it polite, no one complains, I think it will go unnoticed.

more stats (or fuel for the fire? LOL)
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071020081551AAu0Izm

Drobarr,
Your comment on the value of .....education of reality..... is the first mention i have seen of that, after a life time of myself being a prime example.

It is hard to describe how chaotic our Country was, back in the Spring of1941. We knew we were on the brink of war, jobs were beginning to open up in So. CA. because of defense work and Lend Lease material to send to Europe. Patriotism was at fever pitch, my older brothers and my friends were leaving for the Military or good jobs. Every one was tired of being poor after ten years of Depression and up to 25% unemployment rates. College Educated people had been digging ditches alongside illiterate laborers, and all at once we could see a change.

I was 14 years old, part way through the tenth grade, and i dropped out of school and started working, first as a a laborer in Warehouses, and then, after December 7, 1941, i left home amicably and started working on building Military bases. My goal was to become a heavy equipment operator, but the ensuing overall experience and Education in Reality that i received over the seven years gave me a tremendous advantage over the new College Graduates of my age, that were coming into the work force as the world returned to normal.

That advantage allowed me to start my own Highway Contracting Company much sooner than i could have from spending those seven years in more schooling.

I could surely have used more schooling in higher mathematics and accounting, but such knowledge as i needed was easily purchased simply by hiring Engineers or Accountants.

I am not disparaging the value of College Education, as we all need that knowledge brought down from generation to generation.. But so much of that education acquired by such high cost and effort goes to waste from not being used properly.

One of the biggest hoaxes i see played on young people is the often repeated, but misleading statement that a college degree is a guarantee or at least a requisite of higher income. It is not the degree that leads to success, it is the person, and the type of young person that gets excellent grades, and diligently pursues the education is also the type of person that is most likely to succeed without the college education. It is the work ethic and responsibilty of the person that produces the higher income. Without that basic work ethic, a college education leaves the person with more debt and not more income.

Ernie

I just found an interesting video dealing with the broader issues that are being touched on in the organic, GMO, and climate warming threads. Specifically, it's about politics clouding your objective lens. I've only watched a few minutes so far (it's about an hour long), but I think most of the contributors here might find it very interesting.

It's here: http://theprogressivecontrarian.com/.

Willy,

I watched the entire video, and my primary comments is the first speaker would have been much more impressive if he had put his hands in his pockets.

And my feelings about Science is: I trust Science but do not think all Scientists should be trusted.

Same thing for religious folk. It is fine to Trust in God, but they should not trust all the Preachers.

The video was fairly well balanced, and worth the time it took to watch it, but that was about all it was worth to me. I really did not see or learn anything that was new or captivating.

Thanks for posting the link.

Ernie

Ernie,
Thanks for sharing your experiences. I think people who are successful have certain traits and they will be successful whether they have an opportunity to get Higher education or not. I think that is evident in your case.

You are right that many people need to look at opportunity costs before considering college. One has to evaluate the particular degree one is getting and if that will make that person more marketable or not. In most cases an education will provide additional job opportunities and earning potential. But depends on the field and how much college will cost.

I made it through college debt free. I worked my way with 2 and 3 jobs at a time and riding my bike and eating on 25 dollars a week. I shared a room too. For my masters and phd I had assistantships that paid for my schooling and gave me a stipend.

But the real education began as I took a job. I had to work and produce and learn many many things. And I am still learning. For what I do I had to get the education. And im glad I did. It doesnt make me any smarter or better than anyone. Makes me realize I really dont know very much even about my own field and even less about others.

Drobarr,
Your path is the way it should be, and since you are working in your chosen field that will all pay off. You researched the field, before you wasted years acquiring knowldedge you could not sell.

But what saddens me, is to see cases like the children of friends, one that spent years studying Oceanoraphy because he loved the ocean, but never found a job in that field, and another one that was fascinated with reptiles and spent years getting his doctorate in Herpetology, and the last i heard he had never found a job using that hard won knowledge. Education is valuable when it is used, but like anything else, should not be wasted.

With so much information now, I do not believe any one person can master every thing in their field. I have two Medical Doctor friends, a Neurosurgeon and a Dermatologist, and both had to spend so much time keeping up with new information in their Specialties they had no time to learn how to manage their own financial affairs, or to learn about anything outside their own narrow fields.

Ernie

I just finished reading all the links provided. It was interesting and at first I was confused by it but then I realized that if Republicans are the party of business interests then it would make sense that they are the wealthiest people in the country. If they are the party of capital, then it stands to reason they are the party of the top .1% and the top 1%. People who work for wages, employees, might be more likely to be Democrats. I think it bears thinking about that the gap between the top earners in our country and the lowest earners in the country has been widening since the days of Reagan's presidency. This might also explain why there are more Democrats than Republicans. There are probably more employees in the country than business owners. Most of the things I read say that the gap between the rich and the poor is at the widest it has been since the robber barons of the "gilded age". The middle class has diminished to the point that some see it in danger of disappearing altogether.

I was reading recently about the level of business investment tracking business taxation. The idea seemed to be that when taxes are low on business, it discourages investment and encourages businesses to buy back their own stock and sit on high levels of cash. Taxation on business makes investment a better choice because there is possibly a better return on the capital than having it taxed. There was a graph showing the relationship. I will try to find it and post the link. This is an important concern now as taxes on business are at an all time low and investment is also at an all time low.

What I say next is simply my opinion. If the business community, the 1% has most of the money or wealth or capital, they have the most power to influence government and why would they not try to influence government to make things better for themselves? If things get better and better for those with capital, and they decide to not invest the capital but just to roll it making money off the interest on the capital, there is no way for the 99% to gain anything. As the saying goes, "Them that's got the gold, makes the rules" The rising tide that floats all boats does not exist without investment by those with capital. The engine of the economy has always been the consumer who buys what businesses sell. We seem to be in a situation now where consumers do not have anything to spend so businesses are suffering for lack of sales.
It has developed into a catch 22 where businesses dont invest or hire because sales are down and sales are down because employees must work 3 minimum wage jobs just to support a family of 4. They barely make ends meet and if they had any money, they have no time to spend it. I think that is what happened to the middle class. When we had the strongest middle class, in the 50's, we had powerful unions who lobbied businesses for wages that supported a middle class lifestyle. Without a way for employees to have some leverage on big businesses, big businesses have stopped paying good wages and let the government pay for employees' food with food stamps and medical care with medicaid. There have never been so many working people who cannot support a family on their waged as we have now. Capitalism does not have a mechanism to stop it from becoming vulture capitalism, winner take all.

Ernie...I agree. Many do waste a lot of time and money in school instead of actually preparing for a career. Sorry to hear about those who spent so much effort only to not find a position in their desired field. For my field I researched it out beforehand and saw there was a need and a growing need as baby boomers reached retirement age. Its not one of the highest paying fields for the amount of education but I cant complain. Most important I enjoy what I do...I enjoy the people I work with...something special about farmers and people who work with the land. I also dont have to work myself to death like some of my lawyer and doctor friends who have very little life outside the 65 and 80 hour weeks they put in.

Drobarr,
Enjoying your work is the key to a long and happy life. I enjoyed the Contracting, and then when my children were old enough to take over my job, i wound up starting a Ball and Burlap Ornamental Tree Nursery in Idaho, and that was a wonderful job. Then, when i got too old to do that anymore, i came back to the crushing company and ran a Caterpillar Excavator working with our Crushing crews again. It had an air conditioned cab, finger tip controls and was just a big toy to play with. I did that until i was well into my 80's, loving every minute of it. I only gave it up when the recession slowed our work down and the employees needed the work i was doing.

I hope you always enjoy the work you are doing.

Ernie