BigRedBuster

Isn't their ridiculously low labor costs a much bigger factor than their lax regulations? Both But which do you think is a more significant factor? (Genuinely curious . . . I no longer have any manufacturing ties.) I think that is a very difficult thing to answer. It's all a very complicated web. Yes, their labor costs on a per hour they pay their worker basis is extremely low compared to ours. But, when you consider how cheap power production is if you don't have to worry bout pollution, it's ridiculous. Many of their newer plants are automated just like ours. So, the labor cost factor is probably less now than it was say 20 years ago. I know of a company that used to produce huge amounts of product in the US. Their plants they no longer use are extremely contaminated due to the processes they used to clean and finish steal. The ground water under these plants can no longer ever be used and that company is still paying out millions of dollars in maintaining the remediation. Now, that company should be required to pay out those huge amounts of money. I'm not saying they shouldn't. HOWEVER, now compare that to being able to just dump crap where ever you want with no regulations forcing you to even clean it up. The figure is huge. I know my example is ground water contamination and we are talking about carbon emissions. BUT, problem is the same. Rightfully so, we have stiff regulations in this country on what industry can and can't do to the environment. The problem is, that isn't the case elsewhere and the difference in costs is a major factor.

i guess f#*k middle class jobs till then. Hey...I said it's a good thing they are at least talking.

Isn't their ridiculously low labor costs a much bigger factor than their lax regulations? Both

So, we reduce ours and they increase theirs. I'm not saying at least getting them to the table isn't a step in the right direction. But, my jumping for joy mechanism just isn't kicking in. So, we put more regulations on our industry and probably increase the cost of our electricity to our industries. China is allowed to keep building crappy manufacturing facilities that can manufacture cheaper than we can due to these regulations. American public demands cheaper and cheaper crap from Walmart (who will buy them from China). We lose more and more jobs to china. Everyone looks at those big mean evil American business owners and blames them for all the problems in the world. Meanwhile, I'll bet anything that come sometime around 2025 - 2030 China gives us the big middle finger on this and says screw you. But....at least they are starting to talk about it.

I heard this this morning on TV and became very interested. On the surface, it sounds like great news. If we can reduce pollution and at the same time put environmental regulations on china's manufacturing similar to what the US has, it's a winning situation. However, before I get all giddy, I need to know more about this. To me, this reads that the US is going to drop their carbon emissions by 25% while China is allowed to still grow their emissions till 2030. If I'm reading that right, I might not get to that "giddy" point.

Total domination.

You have selective memory then.

I don't know that it would extrapolate but in this specific instance the answer is yes. I've never blogged a day in my life. I don't (and you don't) need to know his history. Sen. Barrasso is entirely irrelevant to the question of whether what you're claiming is accurate. There is an entire world of knowledge outside of Sen. Barrasso's history. I'm not sure why you're so fixated on him? I'm really not fixated on him specifically. As I questioned another poster earlier...who exactly IS an unimpeachable source? Either side is suspicious of either Fox or Msnbc or Huffpo or most any source not agreeing with a particular stance. I offered (as an alternative source), an encounter with a sitting Senator responding to a specific question, and you categorically state that he is either lying or spinning. To which I ask.......Who or What or Where is a source that both sides of a discussion can agree is legitimate? Actually, this discussion becomes a proxy for the larger question of why so many on here (recognizing, of course that the majority of posters are liberal and probably unhappy with the results) immediately interpreted the outcome of the election with certitude that ......the Repubs will do this, or they will do that, or whatever negative charge justified impugning them. And I ask again.........why not wait and see what they actually DO ? Is it simply not possible that some politicians are actually honorable men and women actually trying to solve some issues? Why is that such a foreign concept? IF, after being given an opportunity, they fail to meet expectations........certainly throw them out and castigate at will. But to assume their failures before they are given a shot is not only fatalistic and unfair, it probably discourages others from seeking office. Remember there is a difference between a politician and a statesman. We shouldn't reflexively assume there are no statesman left. I have been searching for this for years now. I can't say it enough. The media in this country is more dangerous to our futures than anything any one man or woman or party can do in Washington.

Kind of off-topic but I wish we could get rid of this and things like it in this forum. Rethuglicans, 0bama, etc. Generally speaking things are kept pretty civil in here and name calling does nothing for the discussion. Sorry dude but things are only civil on here if you are a demoncrap I do find it interesting that when Republicans are called names in here (for which it's well known I have no love for right now) nothing is said. But, call Democrats something and posts like this show up.

Maybe we could just destroy both parties and everyone would be happy. LINK

I was frustrated when I first saw this but in the end, the only thing that really matters is the final poll. Yes, some things just don't make sense but it's time to just play football. I do like how they have the top 4. If the season was over, I would be happy with those 4 in the playoffs. Those would be some fun games to watch.

Now I just need a day warm enough to do it.

SWEEEEEET!!!!!!!!! Not a bad set of players.

Thanks guys.

I have a problem that hopefully someone can help me answer my question who knows about detailing and cleaning cars. I have, what I consider, a very nice pickup. It has a Rhino type liner in the bed. Over the weekend, I was cutting and splitting firewood. I had a new jug of chain saw bar oil in the back. At the end of the day, unbeknownst to me, the jug didn't have the cap on and was knocked over and completely emptied in the bed of my truck. When i noticed, this the next morning, I put oil dry (kitty litter type stuff) on it and it soaked up most of it. I then took it to the local car wash where at least it would have warm water and I used the soap/foam brush/power rinse to wash it out as best I could. However, It still has a greasy feel to it. I also noticed I have ti on my back bumper. So.....how is the best way to clean this out? Thanks,

That's about as honest as Bo has ever been ref an injury. Who knows. It would be nice that he's using this to make Wisky game plan for 3 different backs.....Sadly, after 6 years of Bo and Co, I have yet to see Bo or this staff really do anything strategically early in the season to set up something later on. From the "vanilla" play on D (thought we were holding back) or the vanilla on O (ready to unleash the red storm and still waiting) etc....... I think its Bo being honest. I'll be shocked if AA has secretly been going full speed the past few days and is ready to unleash the beast. Would love it, but doubtful.... Then you haven't paid attention.

Probably still forking out $50 to watch games on friggen pay per view.

I honestly don't understand a fan who thinks ranting against a program like that is enjoyable for either themselves or anyone who even hears it. What purpose does it really serve other than showing how absolutely immature and idiotic the fan is.

The more I think about this, the more I honestly don't like it. I'm usually not someone who cares about this stuff. But, this is just a horrible idea of a trophy and a forced issue with the game. "Freedom Trophy". This game, these teams, this trophy has absolutely nothing to do with "Freedom" and quite frankly, I think it actually cheapens anything that pertains to what freedom and our military stand for. It's two organizations trying to make more money off of the entire thought.

Have you even watched our D line play this year or are you just reiterating arguments from past years and assume they are true now?

He is not a starter and will likely only get 10-20 minutes per game. He gives us depth, but he lacks any shooting range. Of course, we may see more of him once we play against more physical teams in conference. Yeah...but, with even just the 8 minutes he got, I was hoping for more than 2 rebounds and no points. It's his first time on the floor with this group. He has time to develop and get chemistry with the other players.

It's not that the GOP won't make it easy for them... it's that they make it damned impossible for anything to get done. Obstructionism is their sole goal, and then you seem surprised that the Democrats didn't get more done. I'm talking about more than just the last 3-4 election cycles. I'm talking long term. Neither side really wants to "fix" anything. It is all wedge issues that both sides really really want to keep going to motivate their base and get votes.

Ummm....no.....me wanting out had very little to do with that particular game.

Stuck in neutral....with the #9 rushing offense in the country? Averaging 6 yards a carry Is beck running for those yards that make us the #9 rushing offense in the country? A lot of it is the fact that we have a running back who is just that good...I think I could call an offense with AA and have them ranked #9 nationally in rushing. Wow....you need to go get a coaching job then.

I'm a bit more cynical than that . . . I see the Republicans winning more elections when people see that government isn't working. Republicans can make sure that the government doesn't work . . . and the media will still play the "both sides" game. So the GOP short circuits the government and then campaigns on the claim that the government doesn't (and can't!) work. The Democrats have a more difficult path in that they actually have to make the government work. It's rather ingenious actually. Similar things can be said about many issues. The Dems win the more poor people their are if they can convince everyone it's republican's fault they are poor. The Dems win if racism is still front and center in the media and they can convince everyone it's those mean conservatives that are keeping them down. The Dems win if there are major problems in the environment when they point to the Republicans supporting those big evil corporations. The Dems win on these issues even though when they are in office, nothing ever really gets accomplished to make them much better. When it doesn't happen, they just cry and point to the other side as the big meanies that prevents them from doing anything. The poor, black, environmentalists then race out to the polls to vote for them and the Dem politicians laugh all the way to the bank. There will always be poor people. There will always be black people who are affected by racism. There will always be an environmental issue somewhere. The Dems love it. Why do you think that is? Is it because the Dems didn't try to do anything? Or is it because, for example, the GOP and their propaganda television station make the EPA seem like it is headed by Hitler himself? Hey....I didn't say the Republicans don't make it easy for them.