Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
The Attic
Coal Country....
Page <<first <prev 3 of 6 next> last>>
Mar 31, 2017 18:33:01   #
Frosty Loc: Minnesota
 
Steven Seward wrote:
I guess you don't really know.


You are the one that wanted to know why Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize. The subject was about Klugman and coal. I am not here to do off topic, or any other research for you.

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 18:34:40   #
BigWahoo Loc: Kentucky
 
Twardlow wrote:
Obama did NOT pull the plug and he did NOT screw those people. Coal magnates and black lung screwed those people.

Coal is dead, and it ain't coming back, and that has nothing to do with politics.

Trump misled those people, lied to them, for the votes and in order to help coal magnates.


"We can see the huge discrepancy in coal mine productivity between Western and Eastern mines. Montana (with 942 coal miners) produces more coal than Virginia (with 5,262 coal miners). Wyoming (with 5,837 coal miners) produces more coal than West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Alabama, and Illinois combined (with a total of 58,995 coal miners).

Due to this discrepancy, the coal mining industry has increasingly moved production to these Western states (especially to the Powder River Basin), and has dramatically cut its workforce in Appalachia.

Since 1900, technological developments in the coal mining industry have dramatically increased miner productivity; thus, while U.S. coal production is currently at a record high, mining employment is a fraction of what it was during the heyday of coal mining in the 1910's and 20's."

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 18:38:17   #
Steven Seward Loc: Cleveland, Ohio
 
BigWahoo wrote:
"We can see the huge discrepancy in coal mine productivity between Western and Eastern mines. Montana (with 942 coal miners) produces more coal than Virginia (with 5,262 coal miners). Wyoming (with 5,837 coal miners) produces more coal than West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Alabama, and Illinois combined (with a total of 58,995 coal miners).

Due to this discrepancy, the coal mining industry has increasingly moved production to these Western states (especially to the Powder River Basin), and has dramatically cut its workforce in Appalachia.

Since 1900, technological developments in the coal mining industry have dramatically increased miner productivity; thus, while U.S. coal production is currently at a record high, mining employment is a fraction of what it was during the heyday of coal mining in the 1910's and 20's."
"We can see the huge discrepancy in coal mine... (show quote)

Interesting!

Reply
 
 
Mar 31, 2017 19:03:11   #
Leica User Loc: Western North Carolina
 
Twardlow wrote:
So you dispute his numbers? You dispute that natural gas is cheaper than coal? You dispute graphs demonstrating persistent and perpetual decline in use of coal over, say, the last 100 years? You dispute the number of miners in West Virginia, compared to the total population, or compared to health and service workers?

In West Virginia Coal WAS nearly the only issue on the ballot, if you remember--that's precisely the story Paul addresses.

On the other hand, Hillary seems to totally own you: the election was nearly five months ago, Hillary lost, and you can't forget her. You ascribe every bad thing that happens to Hillary, who Wasn't elected five months ago. She, of course, IS the reason Obamacare wasn't repealed, and she insisted on General Flynn being part of the Trump administration. She also insisted upon 100% communications and submission to the Russians, and also insisted that nepotism and corruption be a major part of the administration, and that the primary activity of the President be playing golf--paying himself to play at his own golf club at public espense and also paying a million dollars a day to keep his wife in NYC.

Those damn liberals--Hillary expecially!--they ruin everything.

BTW we seem to have missed the new battle plan against ISIS, which was guaranteed 30 days after inauguration.
So you dispute his numbers? You dispute that natu... (show quote)


You need to pay attention you moron. Damn are you stupid. The battle plan against ISIS, stupid, is that they are dying everyday. Killing more of them every day. That is what is happening you decrepit moron. You need to look at some news for a change instead of having your deformed head stuck up paul krugman's ass.

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 19:07:20   #
Leica User Loc: Western North Carolina
 
Frosty wrote:
**********
What is U.S. electricity generation by energy source?

In 2015, the United States generated about 4 trillion kilowatthours of electricity.1  About 67% of the electricity generated was from fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and petroleum).

Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2015:1 

Coal = 33%
Natural gas = 33%
Nuclear = 20%
Hydropower = 6%
Other renewables = 7%
Biomass = 1.6%
Geothermal = 0.4%
Solar = 0.6%
Wind = 4.7%
Petroleum = 1%
Other gases = <1%

1 Preliminary data; based on generation by utility-scale facilities.

Learn more:
Energy Explained: Electricity in the United States
Electric Power Monthly: Chapter 1: Net Generation
Monthly Energy Review
*******
It seems that coal only produces only aboutt 33 percent of the nations electricity, not as stated in this article that it produces over 50 percent. Forevermore. A lot of the electricity is produced by cleaner western coal, not dirty eastern coal. ,.
********** br What is U.S. electricity generation ... (show quote)


What is the matter loser? Trump is reversing the obama insanity and you cannot handle it can you loser? There are other data sources that say it is more than 50%. Does not matter though moron, if it is not used here, your favorite place Communist China, will buy it. They are opening two NEW coal fired plants a month. Why don't you criticize them shit for brains?

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 19:18:19   #
Leica User Loc: Western North Carolina
 
Frosty wrote:
*****
Of course, Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize laureate in economics doesn't know as much about economics as you do. Say again what university you recieved your education in economics.


Here is a news flash for you, you lying prick. krugman is not a Nobel Laureate. That is a lie promoted by you insane lefty sycophants. He won what is known correctly as the Bank of Sweden prize. Dumb ass. Or the Nobel Memorial Prize.

Here is the truth, from one of you lefty web sites no less. Stop lying ass hole.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/4/14/1167782/-Paul-Krugman-Did-Not-Win-a-Nobel-Prize-in-Economics

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2008/krugman-facts.html

http://austrianeconomists.typepad.com/weblog/2008/10/you-cannot-be-s.html

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 19:20:07   #
Leica User Loc: Western North Carolina
 
Checkmate wrote:
Aren't they the same group that gave Obama the Nobel Prize when he hadn't done jack shit and never did. I got my education from the school of hard knocks and hard work.


Don't say the word "work" to him. You will scare him to death.

Reply
 
 
Mar 31, 2017 19:20:52   #
Leica User Loc: Western North Carolina
 
Twardlow wrote:
Too bad you never learned to pay attention.


To bad you never learned to think or spell shit for brains.

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 19:21:52   #
Leica User Loc: Western North Carolina
 
Twardlow wrote:
Obama did NOT pull the plug and he did NOT screw those people. Coal magnates and black lung screwed those people.

Coal is dead, and it ain't coming back, and that has nothing to do with politics.

Trump misled those people, lied to them, for the votes and in order to help coal magnates.


You are an imbecile and a lunatic. Are you institutionalized? If not, you should be. Don't they have places like that in Hot Springs?

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 19:25:25   #
Leica User Loc: Western North Carolina
 
Twardlow wrote:
You neglected to mention just where you received Your education in Economics, as the poster asked.

So, you dispute Paul's education and Nobel Prize, challenge his knowledge and his considered stand, his facts and figures and experience, do you?

Perhaps you could exhibit your qualifications for such an evaluation.

Do you have Any experience in Economics, Any degree, Any published articles on the subject, any Books you've written or any Books You've Read on the subject?

Do you have any legitimate basis to question what he says? Any statistics? Any experience? Anything at all, except unmitigated gall in vomiting forth confusion, ignorance, disinformation and prejudice? Anything more than projecting naive political belief and consternation?

In other words, do you have anything--anything at all!--to add to the conversation among educated people who have formed responsible opinions and backed them up with information and study, and can this be disqualified by the supreme hubris of someone who carries a nightstick?

Really, Do You Have Something To Offer?
You neglected to mention just where you received Y... (show quote)


I will dispute krugman's so called Nobel Prize. PAUL KRUGMAN NEVER WON THE NOBEL PRIZE IN ECONOMICS. There is no such prize you blithering idiot. Stop saying there is you ignorant fool.

Here is the truth, from one of you lefty web sites no less. Stop lying ass hole.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/4/14/1167782/-Paul-Krugman-Did-Not-Win-a-Nobel-Prize-in-Economics

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2008/krugman-facts.html

http://austrianeconomists.typepad.com/weblog/2008/10/you-cannot-be-s.html

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 19:27:13   #
Steven Seward Loc: Cleveland, Ohio
 
Leica User wrote:
Here is a news flash for you, you lying prick. krugman is not a Nobel Laureate. That is a lie promoted by you insane lefty sycophants. He won what is known correctly as the Bank of Sweden prize. Dumb ass. Or the Nobel Memorial Prize.

Here is the truth, from one of you lefty web sites no less. Stop lying ass hole.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/4/14/1167782/-Paul-Krugman-Did-Not-Win-a-Nobel-Prize-in-Economics

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2008/krugman-facts.html

http://austrianeconomists.typepad.com/weblog/2008/10/you-cannot-be-s.html
Here is a news flash for you, you lying prick. kru... (show quote)

Thanks for the info. I didn't know there was no such thing as a Nobel Prize in Economics.

Reply
 
 
Mar 31, 2017 21:53:11   #
Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal
 
Steven Seward wrote:
I think Paul Krugman is full of sour grapes because Hillary lost, and he is looking for excuses, like the uneducated being too dumb to pick the right candidate. Apparently Bull Drink Water agrees with that assessment. Coal was not the only issue on the ballot.


I don't know when you guys are going to out grow your 'We won, therefore we are right and you are wrong" mentality, but as this corrupt and incompetent administration spools out, this thinking is going to get pretty thin. Keep hooting and snorting that to each other if it makes you feel better.

Yes, there were other issues, but the post is about THIS issue and it is another one on Don's cons.

Regulation did not take the coal miner's jobs. Natural gas took the coal miner's jobs. Market forces...capitalism...you know the alter at which the right wing worships.

I wonder what will happen when it finally dawns on all the white working class people who are only trained to do muscle jobs that Trump is not the savior in spite of what he promised them?

There is a restless rooster out there and he is coming home to roost. Get ready.

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 22:25:43   #
Twardlow Loc: Arkansas
 
Leica User wrote:
I will dispute krugman's so called Nobel Prize. PAUL KRUGMAN NEVER WON THE NOBEL PRIZE IN ECONOMICS. There is no such prize you blithering idiot. Stop saying there is you ignorant fool.

Here is the truth, from one of you lefty web sites no less. Stop lying ass hole.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/4/14/1167782/-Paul-Krugman-Did-Not-Win-a-Nobel-Prize-in-Economics

http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2008/krugman-facts.html

http://austrianeconomists.typepad.com/weblog/2008/10/you-cannot-be-s.html
I will dispute krugman's so called Nobel Prize. PA... (show quote)



((The material below is from Wikipedia, and speaks for itself.))


Paul Robin Krugman (pronunciation: /ˈkrʊɡmən/ kruug-mən;[1][2] born February 28, 1953) is an American economist, Distinguished Professor of Economics at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, and a columnist for The New York Times.[4] In 2008, Krugman was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences for his contributions to New Trade Theory and New Economic Geography. The Prize Committee cited Krugman's work explaining the patterns of international trade and the geographic distribution of economic activity, by examining the effects of economies of scale and of consumer preferences for diverse goods and services.

Krugman was a professor of economics at MIT and later at Princeton University. He retired from Princeton in June 2015 and holds the title of professor emeritus there. He is also Centenary Professor at the London School of Economics and was President of the Eastern Economic Association in 2010. As of 2016, Research Papers in Economics ranked him as the world's 24th most influential economist based on citations of his work. Krugman is known in academia for his work on international economics (including trade theory, economic geography, and international finance), liquidity traps, and currency crisis.

Krugman has written over 20 books, including scholarly works, textbooks, and books for a more general audience and has published over 200 scholarly articles in professional journals and edited volumes. He has also written several hundred columns on economic and political issues for The New York Times, Fortune and Slate. A 2011 survey of economics professors named him their favorite living economist under the age of 60, followed by Greg Mankiw and Daron Acemoglu.

As a commentator, Krugman has written on a wide range of economic issues including income distribution, taxation, macroeconomics, and international economics. Krugman considers himself a modern liberal, referring to his books, his blog on The New York Times, and his 2007 book The Conscience of a Liberal. His popular commentary has attracted comments, both positive and negative.


Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences

The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (officially Swedish: Sveriges riksbanks pris i ekonomisk vetenskap till Alfred Nobels minne, or the Swedish National Bank's Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel), commonly referred to as the Nobel Prize in Economics, is an award for outstanding contributions to the field of economics, and generally regarded as the most prestigious award for that field.

The prize was established in 1968 by a donation from Sweden's central bank, the Swedish National Bank, on the bank's 300th anniversary. Although it is not one of the prizes that Alfred Nobel established in his will in 1895, it is referred to along with the other Nobel Prizes by the Nobel Foundation. Laureates are announced with the other Nobel Prize laureates, and receive the award at the same ceremony.

Laureates in the Memorial Prize in Economics are selected by the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. It was first awarded in 1969 to the Dutch and Norwegian economists Jan Tinbergen and Ragnar Frisch, "for having developed and applied dynamic models for the analysis of economic processes."

(Snip)

The Prize in Economics is not one of the original Nobel Prizes created by Alfred Nobel's will. However, the nomination process, selection criteria, and awards presentation of the Prize in Economic Sciences are performed in a manner similar to that of the Nobel Prizes.

Laureates are announced with the Nobel Prize laureates, and receive the award at the same ceremony. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences awards the prize "in accordance with the rules governing the award of the Nobel Prizes instituted through his [Alfred Nobel's] will," which stipulate that the prize be awarded annually to "those who ... shall have conferred the greatest benefit on mankind."

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 22:39:54   #
Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.
 
Steven Seward wrote:
I think Paul Krugman is full of sour grapes because Hillary lost, and he is looking for excuses, like the uneducated being too dumb to pick the right candidate. Apparently Bull Drink Water agrees with that assessment. Coal was not the only issue on the ballot.


I think that Paul Krugman does not even believe half of the stuff he writes, he has sold his integrity for celebrity status as a progressive celebrity Nobel winning economist who now dedicates his time to writing dribble for the Times.

Reply
Mar 31, 2017 23:10:47   #
Twardlow Loc: Arkansas
 
Blurryeyed wrote:
I think that Paul Krugman does not even believe half of the stuff he writes, he has sold his integrity for celebrity status as a progressive celebrity Nobel winning economist who now dedicates his time to writing dribble for the Times.


That's a pretty bold and irresponsible charge for someone blowing cheap hot air!

When your credentials equal ten percent of those I just posted regarding Krugman, perhaps you will learn a bit of perspective, and some much-needed humility.

You glorify your estimation of your own worth when you preach on what another person believes or doesn't believe.

Your charge that this man sold out, without the slightest documentation or understanding to back up your assessments, belittles you and your considerations.

For shame, Blurry. You lose all credibility and make yourself look very, very small.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 6 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
The Attic
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.