OBOF TYMHM & MORE POART 30

 

WELCOME TO OPINIONS  BASED  ON FACTS (OBOF)

&

THINGS YOU MAY HAVE MISSED (TYMHM)

YEAR THREE

 

Name	Published
OVERVIEW
OBOF & TYMHM PART 14	Dec  18, 2012
OBOF & TYMHM PART 15	Jan.  02, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 16	Jan.  08, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 16 EXTRA	Jan.  11, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 17	Jan.  15, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 18	Jan.  22, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 19	Jan.  29, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 20	Feb.  05, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 21	Feb.  14, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 22	Feb.  20, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 23	Feb.  27, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 23 SPECIAL	Mar.  06, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 24	Mar.  07, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 25	Mar.  12, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 25-EXTRA	Mar.  14, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 26	Mar.  19, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 27	Mar.  26, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 28	Apr.   02, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 29	Apr.   08, 2013
OBOF & TYMHM PART 30	Apr.   17, 2013

 

 

IN THIS ISSUE

1.  Opening statement.

2.  A bitter disappointment.

3.  Downsizing Congress.

4.  Cooking the Books - - Keystone XL Pipeline.

5.  Well?  Republicans & Democrats.

 

OPENING STATEMENT

I guess I am just trying to justify myself, when I say why I am a day late again.  First, I sure want to thank all 286 of you who tuned in this last month, for sticking with me. 

It is interesting to note that in the 286 there are those in other countries that are jumping in.  Germany 50, Latvia 30, Poland 19, Russia 11, France 6, United Kingdom 4, Ireland 4, Turkey 4, & Ukraine 2.

I know that all of you have problems that come up keeping you from doing what you had planned.  I am no exception.  Without a great detail, my Son has been back in the hospital two times since I last wrote and I just got him home about an hour ago.  On top of that I have been a little off the straight and narrow my self. 

I sincerely thank you for your understanding.  I think there are some real interesting things in this posting that I think you will find enlightening.  Keep telling your friends about my blog so we can get more information to them. 

~~~

A Bitter Disappointment

as expressed by

 Senator Bernie Sanders

(I) Vermont

“What the president is proposing is going to hurt a lot of people,” Sen. Bernie Sanders said Friday after the White House confirmed that President Obama’s budget will include cuts in Social Security.

Bernie called it a “bitter disappointment” that the White House budget proposal next week will call for changing how annual cost-of-living adjustments are calculated. That means a typical 65-year-old retiree would lose more than $650 a year by their 75th birthday and more than $1,000 a year would be cut from their benefits once they reach 85. Bernie, who chairs the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee, added that the White House proposal also would cut benefits for disabled veterans and their survivors.

The Senate passed a budget resolution that included Bernie’s amendment against switching to a so-called chained consumer price index. By adopting the amendment, the Senate went on record against the change that would cut Social Security benefits for more than 55 million Americans as part of what the White House calls a “grand bargain” with Republicans in Congress.

The president’s position has changed dramatically in recent years. As a presidential candidate in 2008, Obama pledged not to cut Social Security COLAs.

“If Obama is serious about dealing with our deficit he would not cut Social Security – which has not added one penny to the deficit,” Bernie said.  “Instead, he would support legislation that ends the absurdity of one out of four profitable corporations paying nothing in federal income taxes.  He would also help us close the offshore tax haven loopholes that enable large corporations and the wealthy to avoid paying $100 billion a year in federal taxes.”

~~~

A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT

THAT DESERVES

  SERIOUS CONSIDERATION

DOWNSIZING CONGRESS

 

NOTE FROM FLOYD:

 

This article is long, BUT worth your time.  I urge you to read it's full content and give it real serious consideration.  At first, you will probably think that this change can't happen.  There is one way that it can and that is through public pressure. 

 

I don't know who originally wrote this and he/she has gone to great lengths to keep it clean of any names, so that no one can say that it is just a political ploy.  Personally, I think it makes good sense.  It will be a hard hill to climb, I admit, but it could be done if the public got up-in-arms about it and really demanded that it be done.  This could go a long way in solving some problems.  I think you will find this to be very intriguing. 

 

Floyd

 

	THIS A TOTALLY NON-PARTISAN MESSAGE--NO 'POLITICS', JUST SUPPORT FOR ALL AMERICANS.  PLEASE READ ...thank you
When a company falls on difficult times, one of the things that seems to happen is they reduce their staff and workers. The remaining workers must find ways to continue to do a good job or risk that their job would be eliminated as well. Wall Street and the media normally congratulate the CEO for making this type of "tough decision", and the board of directors gives upper corporate management big bonuses.. Our government should not be immune from similar risks. Therefore: Reduce the House of Representatives from the current 435 members to 218 members. Reduce Senate members from 100 to 50 (one per State). Then, reduce their remaining staff by 25%. Accomplish this over the next 8 years (two steps/two elections) and of course this would require some redistricting. Some Yearly Monetary Gains Include: $44,108,400 for elimination of base pay for congress. (267 members X $165,200 pay/member/ yr.) $437,100,000 for elimination of their staff. (Estimate $1.3 Million in staff per each member of the House, and $3 Million in staff per each member of the Senate every year) $108,350,000 for the reduction in remaining staff by 25%. $7,500,000,000reduction in pork barrel earmarks each year. (Those members whose jobs are gone. Current estimates for total government pork ear marks are at $15 Billion/yr). The remaining representatives would need to work smarter and improve efficiencies..It might even be in their best interests to work together for the good of our country! We may also expect that smaller committees might lead to a more efficient resolution of issues as well. It might even be easier to keep track of what your representative is doing. Congress has more tools available to do their jobs than it had back in 1911 when the current number of representatives was established. (Telephone, computers, cell phones to name a few) Note: Congress does not hesitate to head home for extended weekends, holidays and recesses, when what the nation needs is a real fix for economic problems. Also, we had 3 senators who were not doing their jobs for the 18+ months (on the campaign trail) and still they all accepted full pay. Minnesota survived very well with only one senator for the first half of this year. These facts alone support a reduction in senators and congress. Summary of opportunity: $44,108,400 reduction of congress members. $282,100,000 for elimination of the reduced house member staff. $150,000,000 for elimination of reduced senate member staff. $70,850,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining house members. $37,500,000 for 25% reduction of staff for remaining senate members. $7,500,000,000 reduction in pork added to bills by the reduction of congress members. $8,084,558,400 per year, estimated total savings. (That's 8-BILLION just to start!) Corporate America does these types of cuts all the time. There's even a name for it. "Downsizing." ------------------------------ Also, if Congresspersons were required to serve 20, 25 or 30 years (like everyone else) in order to collect retirement benefits, taxpayers could save a bundle. Now they get full retirement after serving only ONE term. ---------------------------------------- IF you are happy with how Washington spends our taxes, delete this message. Otherwise, it's time to "downsize" Congress -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Please consider forwarding, if you agree. I have cleaned this e-mail of all other names, By copying and pasting it, I'm sending it to you in hopes that you will keep it going and keep it clean. This is something I believe in and I hope you all read it all the way through. The 26th amendment (granting the right to vote for 18 year olds) took only 3 months and 8 days to be ratified! Why? Simple! The people demanded it. That was in 1971...before computers, before e-mail, before cell phones, etc.. Of the 27 amendments to the Constitution, seven (7) took 1 year or less to become the law of the land...all because of public pressure. I'm asking each addressee to forward this e-mail to a minimum of twenty people on their address list; in turn ask each of those to do likewise. In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one idea that really should be passed around. Congressional Reform Act of 2012 1. Term Limits. 12 years only, one of the possible options below.. A. Two Six-year Senate terms B. Six Two-year House terms C. One Six-year Senate term and threeTwo-Year House terms 2. No Tenure / No Pension. A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office. 3. Congress (past , present and future) participates in Social Security. All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately. All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people. 4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do. 5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise. Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%. 6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people. 7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people. 8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/13. The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen. Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves. Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career. The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work. If each person contacts a minimum of twenty people then it will only take three days for most people (in the U.S. ) to receive the message. Maybe it is time.. LET'S FIX CONGRESS!!!!! If you agree, pass it on. If not, just delete.

~~~

Cooking The Books:  State Department Ignores True Climate Impact of Keystone XL Pipeline

EcoWatch / News Analysis

Published: Wednesday 17 April 2013

 

 

In documenting the emissions associated with the controversial pipeline project, the report makes real the scale of climate impact and the further hurdles the project would create for the battle against climate change, putting the State Department’s “business as usual” scenarios into doubt.

 

 

A new report out today from environmental groups—Oil Change International, Natural Resources Defense Council, 350.org, Environment America, National Wildlife Federation, Friends of the Earth, Sierra Club, Greenpeace—shows that the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline would, if approved, be responsible for at least 181 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) each year, comparable to the tailpipe emissions from more than 37.7 million cars or 51 coal-fired power plants.

In documenting the emissions associated with the controversial pipeline project, the report makes real the scale of climate impact and the further hurdles the project would create for the battle against climate change, putting the State Department’s “business as usual” scenarios into doubt.

The major findings of Cooking the Books: How The State Department Analysis Ignores the True Climate Impact of the Keystone XL Pipeline are:

·                 The 181 million metric tons of (CO2e) from Keystone XL is equivalent to the tailpipe emissions from more than 37.7 million cars. This is more cars than are currently registered on the entire West Coast (California, Washington, and Oregon), plus Florida, Michigan and New York—combined.

·                 Between 2015 and 2050, the pipeline alone would result in emissions of 6.34 billion metric tons of CO2e. This amount is greater than the 2011 total annual carbon dioxide emissions of the U.S.

·                 The International Energy Agency has said that two-thirds of known fossil fuel reserves must remain undeveloped if we are to avoid a 2 degree C temperature rise. Constructing the Keystone XL pipeline and developing the tar sands make that goal far more difficult, if not impossible, to reach.

“When evaluating this project, the State Department should apply a simple test: Does its completion bring the U.S. closer to meeting its climate goals? The answer is clearly no, and therefore the project must be denied,” said Steve Kretzmann, executive director of Oil Change International.

In its 2012 World Energy Outlook, the International Energy Agency is very clear about the impact of climate policy on U.S. oil demand. If meaningful climate policy is pursued, U.S. oil demand would necessarily be cut 50 percent by 2035 and 70 percent by 2050 based on a 2012 baseline.

“Alberta’s premier was just in Washington, DC noting how essential the pipeline is to meeting increased production of the dirtiest oil on the planet. The numbers in this report make it clear that we can’t afford to help Big Oil meet that goal,” said Elizabeth Shope of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

U.S. demand for oil has declined since 2005 by 2.25 million barrels per day—or the equivalent of almost three Keystone XL pipelines.

“Any objective analysis of the impact of building Keystone shows that it would be a climate catastrophe,” said Ross Hammond, senior campaigner for Friends of the Earth. “Instead, the State Department seems ready to buy into the pipeline propaganda of an army of lobbyists who are trading on their ties to Secretary Kerry and President Obama to taint the decision. The president must act in the national interest, not the interests of Big Oil, and reject the Keystone XL pipeline.”

“Today’s report clearly demonstrates that we can’t protect future generations from the worst impacts of global warming while allowing ourselves to become hooked on even dirtier sources of fuel,” said Daniel Gatti, Get Off Oil program director for Environment America. “We need President Obama and Secretary Kerry to say no to tar sands, and no to the Keystone XL pipeline.”

“If he’s to keep his promise to confront climate change to protect America’s wildlife and communities, President Obama should say no to the proposed Keystone XL tar sands pipeline,” said Jim Murphy, senior counsel at the National Wildlife Federation. “Our leaders can’t have it both ways—if they’re truly committed to protecting America’s wildlife and communities from climate change, they need to say no to Keystone XL and massive amounts of climate-disrupting carbon pollution it would deliver.”

Help us speak truth to power. Donate what you can afford to support NationofChange.

1 comments on "Cooking the Books: State Department Ignores True Climate Impact of Keystone XL Pipeline"

Saturn66

April 17, 2013 10:40am

No to Keystone! Every time I read anything about this it's more bad news. On top of emissions, I'm learning that the oil will be sold on the open market and will do little to help us be energy independent. Also the jobs created for Americans will be temporary and not nearly as many as claimed. In fact, it appears that this pipeline could cost us billions if there are ruptures or spills--and, of course there will be. This is a good deal for a few; a nightmare for the rest of us. Thanks for the information.

~~~

Well?
REPUBLICANS and DEMOCRATS

DISCLAIMER FROM FLOYD:

As you know, the name of my blog is "Opinions Based On Facts."  While I think that the information in the following is probably factual, I am not including it without my saying that it is factual.  It makes sense, but I have not checked the figures and it is not from anyone that I know. 

In view of this I find it very interesting and thought that you might like to see it, knowing that I am not saying it is factural.

Someone please tell me what in the world is wrong with

All the people that run this country!!!!!!
Both Democrats and Republicans.

 

We're "broke" And can't help Our own

Seniors,

Veterans,

Orphans,

Homeless,

Etc.,???????????

In the last years we have provided direct cash aid to

Hamas - 351 M,

Libya1.45 B,

Egypt- 397 M,

Mexico- 622 M,

Russia- 380 M,

Haiti- 1.4 B,

Jordan- 463 M,

Kenya- 816 M,

Sudan- 870 M,

Nigeria- 456 M,

Uganda- 451 M,

Congo- 359 M,

Ethiopia- 981 M,

Pakistan- 2 B,

South Africa- 566 M,

Senegal- 698 M,

Mozambique- 404 M,

Zambia- 331 M,

Kazakhstan- 304 M,

Iraq- 1.08 B,

Tanzania- 554 M.

 

With literally Billions of Dollars and they still hate us!!!!

Our retired seniors

Living on a 'fixed income'

Receive no aid



Nor do they get any breaks while our government


And religious organizations pour


Hundreds of Billions


Of $$$$$$'s and Tons of Food


To Foreign Countries!



We have


Hundreds of adoptable


Children who are shoved aside

To make room for

The adoption of

Foreign orphans.

AMERICA: a country where we have

Homeless without shelter, children going to bed hungry, elderly going without needed medication and mentally ill without treatment -etc.

YET.......................



They have

A 'Benefit'


For the people of Haiti on 12 TV stations,

Ships and planes lining up with food, water, tents clothes, bedding, doctors and medical supplies.



Imagine if


The *GOVERNMENT*

Gave 'US' the same support they give to other countries.



Sad isn't it?

~~~

If the good Lord is willing and the creek don't rise, I'll talk with you again next Tuesday April 23, 2013.

God Bless You All

&

God Bless the United States of America

Floyd