Branson Wants Government To Tax His Competitors Fuels

Biofuels. He can make extra money and starve people in third world countries at the same time!

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20050804-54.html

About Tony Heller

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

31 Responses to Branson Wants Government To Tax His Competitors Fuels

  1. Tony Duncan says:

    I must say,

    the great thing that has come out of the whole climate debate, is that the extreme right wing has gone from thinking all poor people should just die in misery because they are obviously not productive enough to warrant living, to caring about the 2 billion people in abject poverty, and insisting we have to mobilize financial resources to help them.

  2. Tony Duncan says:

    Sory guys,

    I guess I have forgotten that all the people complaining about helping out them ferners were democrats. that’s right you guys LOVE the UNHCR, UNICEF, USAID, and of course making sure none of those african children get abortions.
    Oh and of COURSE MLK was a republican.

    You are very funny!

    • Latitude says:

      Tony, conservatives and republicans donate more time and money…
      …look it up, it’s true

      If you’re trying to show people what liberals are all about and make them look bad………….

    • I give at least 30% of my pay to charity and find your comments to be as clueless as ever.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Steve I am sure you do.

        I was not talking about private charity however. that is not the major source of support for the starving billions around the world.
        You have not been complaining about the billions of dollars wasted on climate change by private citizens

      • Nobama says:

        Tony, the left doesn’t actually care about those folks. They play the pity card so that government can take
        possession of wealth under the guise of helping someone. The real goal is to direct as much revenue as possible
        into bureaucratic hands, until the ultimate conversion to a central planned, government run economy.

        The real difference between these two parties is not that one cares about the downtrodden and the other doesn’t.
        It is that the left seeks to consolidate power into the government, and the right seeks to keep as much of the
        economy as possible in the private sector.

        Whether they all intend it or not (Not ALL of them do), the ideology of the left, unchecked, ultimately consolidates too much power into central planned government, and leaders become detached from the plight of the governed, and at that point, elections are long since just for show. It becomes nearly impossible to dissolve, and corrupts everyone. Somewhere along the way, all allies used to consolidate power are abandoned. Unions, Teachers, the poor, minorities, etc, etc, etc.

        Marxism is a cult. It grows from within a society, claiming to care about the forgotten. It ultimately becomes a 12 headed monster of horror, and typically results in genocide, just like Jonestown. Just like Heaven’s Gate.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Nobama,

        I really love how the extreme right can filter so much of reality out of their awarenes to fit their ideology.
        It reminds me of the spanish marxists who went to Russia after Franco’s victory and in the midst of Stalin’s horrors pontificated about the superiority of marxism and the workers paradise.
        I see similar slavic devotion to extreme ideology on the left, but it seems about 10x more popular among the right in this country.

  3. bubbagyro says:

    In 1975 I was in tropical medicine for 23 years and invented the #1 antiparasitic drug in the world for humans in the developing world. Parasites take 30-50% of food from humans in impoverished areas of the world. My drug, albendazole, was dosed to 2 million children in Peru recently, at a cost of $0.03 per dose; two doses a month apart are required. I give 10% of my earnings, gross, to charities devoted to children each year.

    Sorry to be seen a braggart, but as a fiscal and social conservative, I put my money where my mouth is. My children and their spouses think similarly. The elitists, who only pretend to “feel others pain”, keeping them in poverty, and keeping them from advancing their plight, are the real blight in the world, IMO.

    Biofuels, AKA food burning, or scorched earth strategies, have to be the number one target for remediation going forward. Some African nations are already waking up to this evil scheme. No wonder the poor are now revolting against these malicious perpetrators.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Bubbagyro,

      that is really wonderful, that your contribution has resulted in such a tremendous positive result.
      I have nothing against fiscal and social conservatives. Both attitudes are important and needed to balance fiscal and social experimentation.
      Many of the elitists who pretend to care about the common folk pretend to be fiscal and social conservatives.
      But again I know and have met many people, quite a few in the UN, and others in government and in NGO’s that I am sure you would consider evil socialists or leftists or liberals, and almost none are anything close to the bizarre caricatures the right paints them as, certainly none of them are interested in keeping people poor, and have done many concrete things to do exactly the opposite. But ideology blinds people to believe propaganda and they are not interested in what people are actually doing. Among extreme leftists, all corporations are evil and executives minions of the devil, putting profit above any moral social or religious consideration among extreme rightists, all government is evil and those that suggest anything that interferes with the “market” are socialists bent on subjugating to the world to lives of slavery. I have traveled in many circles and it is the ideologues that are the ones who reap the most harm, and forestall real progress.

  4. Mike Davis says:

    The money that goes into most of the Global letter Charities is used for Administrative Purposes. I am sorry to break it to you Tony but they were a scam when they first started and are still a scam today.
    Does it make you feel better knowing your money is going to line someones pocket and about 10% is used for a final result and that is being generous. They were my customers and I observed their operations.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Mike,

      glad you have caught up with all the liberals who have been complaining about this for years. That damn capitalism getting in the way of helping people, you know.
      There are websites that tell you the percentage of overhead and how much goes to actual relief. I can send you some links if you like.. Always willing to lend a helping hand

  5. Mike Davis says:

    Biofuels do more harm overall to the biosphere than digging coal from the ground by Mountain Top Removal.

  6. Justa Joe says:

    “I know and have met many people, quite a few in the UN, and others in government and in NGO’s that I am sure you would consider evil socialists or leftists or liberals, and almost none are anything close to the bizarre caricatures the right paints them as, ”

    You know lots of people in the UN. Did you know the guys that were sexually exploiting those African kids? Gimme a break with the liberal self righteouness.
    http://www.divinecaroline.com/22353/26511-sexual-exploitation-abuse-un-peacekeeping

    It doesn’t matter if you meant well, which is debateable, if your policies result in greater poverty, general misery, and curtailment of freedom

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Justa joe.

      Horror of horrors Everyone in the UN is not an angel.
      I hate to break it to you but, you might want to sit down for this. there are conservatives , even RELIGIOUS ones, who have done bad things. in SPITE of Jesus, and Friedman whispering at them to be good.
      And I am SHOCKED that UN actions have resulted in bad things happening. Imagine that. Conservative movements have never resulted in any bad unintended consequences (actually the negative consequences are often intended so you may have a point after all)
      Of course you would never believe anything the UN did had positive consequences, because it is evil, and therefore incapable of doing any good.

  7. bubbagyro says:

    Tony:
    I just “ain’t buyin’ what you’re sellin'”.

    The UNESCO, UNICEF, left-wing Quangos like Gates, Ford, and Turner Foundations, WHO — I could go on with the alphabet all day— have done more damage to the world’s poor more than any recent fascist dictator I can recall. Damage in both qualitative and quantitative ways.

    When I was involved in the launch of my drug in Abidjan in the 1980s, I met hordes of WHO “doctors” and ambassadors representing every ultra-left think tank you could imagine (all arriving in big Mercedes) at these “receptions” (really expensive cocktail parties). One ambassador from France was citing the achievements of WHO. She then said that she was concerned that my drug was so effective for eradicating intestinal parasites that the death rate would decrease, and so the population would increase in Africa. She was strong in saying she would not launch it for the betterment of Africa. She also said how wonderful it would be if all the world were French! An ambassador.

    I thought at the time, “what a shameless elitist”; who is she to make that population call? I was not a religious person then, an agnostic actually at the time, but I knew what WHO and the UN had in store, with Malthusian population reduction measures.

    To make a shorter story, the punch line came a few years ago. It turns out that, after wide use of this drug and other antiparasitic and antibacterial drugs, the death rate due to parasitism, typhus, etc. did come down appreciably, especially for the very young. But the birth rate also decreased, because people did not have to have 8 kids in order to hope that 2 or 3 survived. The survival rate of infants in equatorial Africa is way up since the 1970s. Not because of birth control, but because a family could have 4 or 5 kids and have most of them survive the early years. Birth rate has leveled off in Africa; it turns out that high population growth rate is due more to individual choice than has been appreciated. Stable families avoid the anxiety that leads to the need to have large families.

    It would be even better if the UN did not accept the DDT ban. People don’t realize that it was not just DDT, but all chlorinated pesticides, like aldrin and dieldrin. What a left-wing fiasco that was! Malaria is flat or down a little because of mosquito netting, but still millions die annually. With DDT, malaria and typhus could be better controlled.

    Now that we have the genocidal “burn the world’s food” policy, approved by UN and other government and NGOs, of corn to ethanol, restrictions on efficient fuels, forced abortion and sterilization policies, it’s no wonder that Africa sees the West still as colonialists. We are! No longer present and accounted for as colonialists, but our liberal, elitist, anti-human policies, are there in force.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Bubbagyro,

      of course you aren’t buying what I am selling. You seem to be an ideologue and therefor only accept what fits your ideology. I am used to it from both the left and right.
      Just keep looking for data that fits your beliefs and you can filter out anything that doesn’t.
      your connection between decreasing mortality and decreasing children is pretty standard liberal fare BTW, and has been for a long time.

      • bubbagyro says:

        I am hardly an ideologue. It just seems uncanny that the conservatives, just by coincidence I am sure [/sarc] are always on the side of progress, not regression. Progress (not progressivism) being defined as what increases, not decreases standards of living. As for population “correlation”, it was the left-wingers that predicted in my anecdote that treatment of tropical disease would lead to an increase in population, but it didn’t! And we are, as they predicted, not today facing a warmer climate but a colder one, and that wind energy is a scam, and that biofuels are poison, etc. Face up to the fact that progressives don’t give a damn (though they shed many a tear) about the unwashed masses?

        I intuitively new this leftist position was dead wrong, and my back hairs went up when I heard it. How many times must you face holding a dead (literally and figuratively) position, Tony, until you “man up” to it?

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Bubbagyro,

        I will face up to it when I only listen to propaganda from ideologues.
        You need to actually listen to information from other than right wing sources, of course that tends to piss off ideologues from both ends, and makes one rather unpopular, except with reasonable people.
        Please refer me the leftist arguments that we must not treat disease in the third world for fear of their population explosion.
        I have heard over and over from leftists that decreasing mortality increasing standard of living, and crating stable livable environments for the poor will result in decreased childbirth as families discover they don’t need to replace the children that would have died. Hmm. Where have I heard that recently. OH yes YOU said something to that effect in your comment. Glad that you say the leftist position back when you first heard its opposite.

        of course Steve here is probably upset that you are may have saved those inherently beheading muslim children, because they just breed like rabbits no matter how much you submit to their beliefs and give them aid and drop bombs on them

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Steve,

        and typical Steve doing nothing to refute my comment

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Steve,

        And your mother too!

  8. bubbagyro says:

    Tony:
    Actually, Tony, you are really a throwback. A caricature. We (meaning the whole world) has thrown $Trillions at these problems, unfortunately with the wrong premises, therefore the wrong outcomes.

    Things must change, and thinking people (not reflexive thinkers like you, but reflective thinkers) will have to wrest control from the elitist, caste-conscious ideologues, or the world will get worse, not better.

    Tony, read something besides the bullet points of the far left and ultra far left crowd, like Salon and Moveon and Huffington. I know these are fashionable in Martha’s Vineyard circles, but they are for the beautiful people, and lack content.

    For you edification, I recommend some of the seemingly rational arguments of the socialist and communist newspapers, like socialistworkers.org and Peoples’ World, which will lay out their deceptive argumentation better than you have offered. If you want to live left, at least be proficient at it.

    Go with my best regards, G

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Bubbagyro,

      I used to read those socialist papers, but have little time for them any more. But since I am not of the “left” I have little hope of being proficient at it.

      And I agree that often huge investments in social projects do not have the intended results. Some people actually learn from these things. I have read and listened to much analysis of this sort of thing. My father actually was heavily involved in project evaluation monitoring, and has many stories of brilliant people who managed to make development projects work, as well as bureaucratic idiots in government and private enterprise that undermined any value. He also has documented the overall improvement in how development efforts are conceptualized and implemented. There is a very long way to go, but i have yet to meet these bugaboo leftists intent on world domination by enslaving the people and keeping them locked in poverty.
      Just as I have yet to met a sinister climate scientist intent on destroying the world economy in order to make a 5 or 6 figure salary, willing to lie and just blindly accept “the consensus, because they are too blind,lazy, and self centered to care about the truth.
      On the other side I have also yet to meet a greedy foaming at the mouth executive willing to let people die or suffer as long as he increases profits.

      I actually do find some good conservative reading in American conservative, and especially anti-war.com. Two organizations that have some sense of what conservatism actually means. I even find good points in extreme sites Like Human Events, Commentary and national review, as I find good points here.

      • bubbagyro says:

        Nice. Maybe I underestimated you in some way. Discernment is a rare element today, and, as Jesus said, “you will know them by their fruits”.

        One rule of thumb that we scientists used to live by was that of all innovation and breakthrough achievement, count on the private sector to provide 90%, government 5% and academia 5%. That was way before politics entered into it so that polar sides developed.

        Another thing to note was that the great philosopher Eisenhower said to watch out for the military-industrial complex. What people have attempted to erase, that he said even more forcefully in his farewell speech, was to watch out for the governmental-scientific elite. That real achievement by innovators would be suppressed by huge government grants. (Farewell Speech, Dartmouth College).

        We see the fruits of that now.

      • suyts says:

        In all things, “you will know them by their fruits.”

        How else can we judge them? It is true. The fruition of their works are lacking. It isn’t the intent. It is the fruits.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *