@messenger, that's wishful thinking. Bloomberg forced a lifestyle choice, people can either conform or not. Having a dialog about it is another matter entirely.

Bloomberg forced New Yorkers to have dialogue.>> ^renatojj:

Fuck dialog, let's force people to understand.

Plan was simple, but the corporations got in the way, so Bloomberg had to compromise and this is what we have right now.

I had to stop reading.

"Man's Inhumanity to Man" is a literary theme that I learned about in High School English class.

Seeing it played out on such a large scale, UNPUNISHED, for years, is more than I can handle.


In reply to this comment by radx:
This marks a whole new level of corruption, if you ask me.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012
-08-28/poor-in-india-starve-as-politicians-steal-14-5-billion-of-food.html

I don't know. I thought canned corn on pizza was pretty horrifying....


>> ^Hybrid:

The worst thing about the UK is that root beer is hard to find.

>> ^ant:

@Trancecoat: Bloomberg link is broken. <img class="smiley" src="http://cdn.videosift.com/cdm/emoticon/frown.gif">


Trancecoat, or Trenchcoach?

>> ^Trancecoach:

Thanks, @ant. The Bloomberg link should be working now.>> ^ant:
@TrancecoaCH: Bloomberg link is broken.



Thank you.

Thanks, @ant. The Bloomberg link should be working now.>> ^ant:

@TrancecoaCH: Bloomberg link is broken.

@Trancecoat: Bloomberg link is broken.

This response proves you didn't even read the page that you are using to "debunk" the video. It doesn't address this video. This page, which contains one paragraph and a broken link to a video, is the one addressing it:

http://www.vhemt.org/pop101-3.htm

Again, you present yourself as the voice of chicken little, as your perpetrate another myth upon the overpopulation myth, which is the myth of peak oil. We are not in danger of running out of oil anytime soon; in fact, because of new technology and methods, such as the fracking boom, our domestic energy production is expected to rise significantly.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-01/fracking-boom-could-finally-cap-myth-of-peak-oil-peter-orszag.html

Since 1976 our proven oil reserves are double from where they started, and new reserves are being found continuously:

http://en.mercopress.com/2010/10/25/petrobras-confirms-tupi-field-could-hold-8-billion-barrels

http://www.albawaba.com/iran-discovers-huge-oil-field-report-415465

There is also evidence that oil fields are refilling:

http://www.rense.com/general63/refil.htm

The fact is that there is an oil boom in the western hemisphere:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/20/world/americas/recent-discoveries-put-americas-back-in-oil-companies-sights.html

The coal oil sands in Canada alone are estimated to hold 175 billion barrels of oil. What I find interesting hpqp, as you do another hit and run, is that you have all the faith in the world that science will solve all of our problems, except when it comes to your favorite doomsday hypothesis.

As I have already proven, we produce more than enough food to feed everyone. The problem is in the inequity of man and in the inefficient and wasteful distribution. We lose over 1/3 of the food we produce to waste. We have more than enough fuel to supply our agriculture, and the research shows that having smaller and more energy efficient farms will increase yields even further, and not significantly impact biodiversity.


>> ^hpqp:
>> ^shinyblurry:
You call one paragraph and a video that doesn't exist debunking this? Let's examine the paragraph:
"Together the world’s 6.8 billion people use land equal in size to South America to grow food and raise livestock—an astounding agricultural footprint. And demographers predict the planet will host 9.5 billion people by 2050. Because each of us requires a minimum of 1,500 calories a day, civilization will have to cultivate another Brazil’s worth of land—2.1 billion acres—if farming continues to be practiced as it is today. That much new, arable earth simply does not exist."
http://www.vhemt.org/pop101-3.htm
Did you miss when it said in the video that we're growing more food on less land, and that there are techniques which can turn barren land fertile, such has been practiced in Brazil and Thailand? Farming is going to continue as it does today; more yield per acre, and more barren land turned fertile, and it will continue to outstrip population growth. You've debunked nothing; you have no argument at all. I doubt you even read the page.
http://www.fas.usda.gov/grain/circular/2004/10-04/hist_tbl.xls
efficiency statistics
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/02/science/02tropic.html?_r=2
Scientists Are Making Brazil’s Savannah Bloom
>> ^hpqp:
Debunking the lies, nonsense and misinformation of this video: http://www.vhemt.org/pop101-1.htm
I disagree with the vhemt's core ideology (I do not want the human race to go extinct), but this page does a good job of exposing this crap.
If you want some real math, watch this series: http://youtu.be/F-QA2rkpBSY


The first page I linked to has no video, so I don't know what you're on about with that (my 2nd link, the youtube one, definitely works), but it has much more than "one paragraph" (not that that matters) showing the manipulation and misrepresentation in your video. As for "growing more food on less land", two words: oil and biodiversity. Without going into details, most (if not all) modern agriculture is heavily dependent on fossil fuels, a dwindling, non-renewable resource (fertilization, transport, etc.). The article you link to indirectly makes my second point: with the disappearance of fossil fuels, people are turning to biofuels (e.g. palm oil, mentioned in your article) which destroy biodiversity and cause several other issues ). Meanwhile, the soybeans and beef production (the one to feed the other btw) cause a large amount of ecological damage.
That's the last I'm answering to you (although it's more for the benefit of other readers, since I know how you are with the facts of reality).

THIS IS IT IN A NUTSHELL.

Buffett Blames Congress for Romney's 15% Rate


Warren Buffett, the billionaire calling for more taxes on the rich, said Mitt Romney's U.S. tax rate of about 15 percent reflects poor laws rather than failings by the candidate for the Republican presidential nomination.

"It's the wrong policy to have," Buffett told Bloomberg Television's Betty Liu in an interview today. "He's not going to pay more than the law requires, and I don't fault him for that in the least. But I do fault a law that allows him and me earning enormous sums to pay overall federal taxes at a rate that's about half what the average person in my office pays."

Buffett, chairman and chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A) , supports Democratic President Barack Obama and said Congress needs to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans to close the budget deficit. Romney has agreed to release his 2010 tax return tomorrow, under pressure from Republican opponents, after saying he pays about 15 percent. Romney co- founded Boston-based private-equity firm Bain Capital LLC.

"He makes his money the same way I make my money," Buffett said. "He makes money by moving around big bucks, not by straining his back or going to work and cleaning toilets or whatever it may be. He makes it shoving around money."

To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew Frye in New York at afrye@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Dan Kraut at dkraut2@bloomberg.net

From what I read he just wanted to use his wealth to invest in the local economy and as a bit of a PR stunt for his chain of Sushi restaurants.

Bloomberg's coverage of it was good: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-06/the-sushi-auction-that-cheered-japan-the-ticker.html

I mostly just question the ethics of using the fishing of an endangered fish for consumption as a PR move, but Japan feels differently about some things than other parts of the world and that's their right.

Either way, if you ever find yourself in Japan, definitely swing by the Tsukiji fish market where the sale of this fish took place. The market itself is a crazy sight to behold, there's nothing else like it in the world.

Why is it that conservatards and rednecks get all worked up about a few grand in welfare dollars to a brown person, but shit like this- http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html is no problem?

How embarrassing.

>> ^Sagemind:

I'm thinking you're missing the whole Bat-Point!
The fact that "Occupy", a collection of public citizens are chastised and arrested for shutting down the bridge, yet Bloomburg happily allowed it to happen just previously, only to the extent that it shut everything down as a result, and not just for half a day, but for several days.
The difference between the two groups? One was a group of people exercising their right to protest and the other was Big Business who were willing to pay off the city.
Forms and procedures be damned, the result is the same. Things got shut down and only one of the groups suffered!


Are you saying that Batman is the 1%?