Yea i am in favor of this also. Everyone gets a basic income. Everyone. If you get a job you pay tax, but still have this basic income. The idea is you don't need a massive Social system that probably spends more money working if you are allowed unemployment etc, than if just everyone got the base income.

Also if we believe some of the above posts. Some people are so stupid we should not give them a job since they are crap at everything and it would be cheaper to give them a base income, and let the machine do the job anyway.

I think perhaps you don't understand Fractional reserve banking. If there is contract law you *can* do with anything else. And it sometimes is.

You know what else! Buggy whip manufactures are all out of business as we speak. Oh wait we don't want those anyway. Ah, i got it. Potato pickers are all out of work. Work where they would intereact with each other and have income. And now all replaced by a few machines. Rise up and, wait what?

The idea that we need to keep menial unsatisfying jobs around to "keep people employed" is stupid. Seriously stupid. If your version of human interaction is ordering a bugger at McD's you are a sad person.

If this is what you want. Join the Amish.

If your take on human interaction is to wait in line to be served by a pretty girl who says almost nothing and tells you to pay... then i pity you. Try and spend your time better and get a hobby/sport or something where you really interact with these other people you seem so fond of.

I know when i want facts... I use the internets as well. Cus its on the internets.

Oh wait, no i don't. I read the peer reviewed papers on the subject. IPCC is not that. I personally know scientists who have contributed to the report in the past. They won't do so again.

What do you think climate models use as input?

Then why is CO2 is added to greenhouses to increase growth rate of crops? Depending on local conditions growth is limited by one factor (basic ecology). Where there is sun and its not too cold ie in the summer for large parts of earth, it is typically CO2 limited for many plants. Even now at 400pm there is very little CO2 is the air. That is a lot of diffusion to absorb a decent amount.

Only in that the debate contains no science.

Whats cute is you think your being a free thinker.

Like hell they are. What is done in these highly politicized reports, is take the 5% extreme case, say in California and report that. Then take the 5% most extreme case in NY and report that.. So on and so forth. Now even if these "confidence" things could be interpreted as probability of the event occurring, which they can't. They present all of these 5% things all over the world as if that is what could happen, while even with this poor interpretation of data, its a million to one that even a dozen of these predictions to come true. Its total misrepresentation of the model/data at best and scientifically dishonest.

Nothing is ever inconsistent with AGW predictions. Because it predicts everything.

This is not how a CME effects earth at all.

CMEs cause the earths magnetic field to buckle and fold thereby inducing currents in conductors. But to get any kind of voltage/amps that affect anything, you need loops of wire hundreds of km long or more. ie power lines. Its nothing like an EMP.

No one wants your silly facts in this discussion. The only pertinent facts is that corporations are evil and care only about profits. GE crops are morally wrong.. for some reason. Anything or anyone promoting either is EVIL. Like shifty eyes evil.

Now take your facts elsewhere.

You can't change the laws of physics or chemistry. We know these laws really well. Its not experience with life around us that has taught us these rules. But the Universe around us.