The lost decade in America
Posted by Mike Sylvester - 11/23/09 @ 5:00 am - Filed Under Featured, Local Politics, National Politics
We always hear a lot about the lost decade in Japan. In fact Japan has now pretty much lost two decades of economic growth…
What you are not hearing is that America has lost the last decade as well. The news media should focus on this rather than how low President Obama bows to the Japenese Emperor and rather than trying to destroy Sarah Palin.
I thought I would look back at the last ten years or so so see how America has done. The results are not pretty…
Below are statistics relating to the US economy over the time period April 1999 - November 2009.
- The DOW Jones has produced an average annual return of three tenths of one percent per year. This is obviously terrible and indicates that those invested in the somewhat typical DOW stocks have lost money since the miniscule stock gains have not kept up with inflation. Inflation averaged 3% per year over this same time period so the average investor in DOW stocks LOST an average of 2.7% per year in real terms.
- The average six month CD over this time period returned an average of 3.2% per year. After inflation is considered the average insvestor in six month CD’s earned an average annual return of .2% per year and was able to preserve their capital.
- The average mortgage rate over this time period was 6.4%.
- The median home price over this time period (even with the recent and necessary plunge in real estate prices) increased by an average of 2.8% per year. After inflation is considered the median homeowner lost an average of .2% per year in their median home.
- The consumer price index shows an average annual increase of about 3% over this time period.
- Median household wages increased by a paltry 2% per year. This means that after inflation is considered the median household lost an average of 1% buying power per year.
- Due to all of the debt incurred by consumers, businesses, and Government Gross Domestic Product grew by an average of 4.6% per year over this period. By any measure this is strong GDP growth; the problem is it was fueled by debt.
- The average American’s consumer credit debt increased by an average of 5.5% per year. Note this is what fueled the large GDP growth discussed in #7 above.
- The average American’s mortgage debt increased by an average of 8.5% per year. Note this is what fueled the large GDP growth mentioned in #7 and it is why the real estate market has plunged. This is largely due to people using their homes as a “piggy bank” and taking out home equity loans.
Mike
Comments
76 Responses to “The lost decade in America”
Leave a Reply
I would also include the Bush Tax Cuts for the wealthy and the War in Iraq into the United State’s “lost decade” scenario.
Remember the infamous Bush Tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 ? In 2003, Bush Treasury Secretary John Snow boldly stated in regards to the tax cuts, “The bigger the (tax relief) package, the better,”.
Secretary Snow went on to predict President Bush’s proposed half-trillion-dollar-plus jobs-and-growth plan, centered on massive tax cuts, “will lead to job creation and higher economic growth rates” for “all regions of the country.”
http://deltafarmpress.com/news/farming_tax_cuts_boost/
What I think is interesting, is in this same article, the comparison between Japan’s Lost Decade and the potential for the U.S. economy to mimic it, is brought up. But - Treasury Secretary John Snow rebuffs this scenario and views any comparison between the U.S. and what took place in Japan as “inappropriate”:
“I don’t think there’s much risk of anything like Japan,” he said.
Keep in mind the year was 2003 when Secretary Snow made this statement.
Based on the tax cuts and Secretary Snow’s assessment, shouldn’t this past decade (the Bush years) have been a period of growth, investment and new jobs in the U.S. ?
A 2009 study conducted by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities questions the long term wisdom of the Bush Tax Cuts:
“The 2001 and 2003 tax cuts added about $1.7 trillion to deficits between 2001 and 2008. Because they (were) financed by borrowing — which increases the national debt — this figure includes the extra interest costs resulting from that additional debt. This figure also includes the cost of ‘patching’ the Alternative Minimum Tax to keep the tax from hitting millions of upper-middle-class households, a problem the tax cuts helped cause. Over the next decade (2009-2018), making the tax cuts permanent would cost $4.4 trillion, assuming that the tax cuts remain deficit-financed.”
And what about the war of choice, the Iraq War ? This would qualify as being in the proposed U.S. lost decade. The Congressional Budget Office has indicated the War in Iraq could easily total more than 1 Trillion dollars.
http://americanobserver.net/2008/03/19/cost-iraq-war/
Quite a chunk of change for any country to borrow to pay for a an unnecessary war to find WMD’s that never even existed. Not to mention the thousands of lives lost in the process.
That’s one way to look at it. You could also attribute the good times during the Clinton years to “irrational exuberance” while the last ten years have just evened things out. Maybe Alan Greenspan was right about that much.
Greenspan is an idiot. He did not speak his mind in 1983 on the Social Security Reform Commission he chaired. He also failed to adequately understand what companies were doing just prior to 2000 when the thought was computer orders would not go through. Rather than be without inventory to build, companies bought more than needed, leading to an artificial surge. But Greenspan saw it as a long term run away economy.
Mike — you failed to mention one small detail: the Dow is UP 17% since Obama won the election in November 2008. At least a few people don’t share in all the gloom and doom.
Andy,
No one who has studied the facts could possibly think that the Bush tax cuts only favored the wealthy. That is a Democratic talking point and it is not true. Numerous Republican think tanks claim the tax cuts affected everyone evenly and numerous Democratic think tanks claim they solely helped the wealthy. If you read these studies you will notice that both of them use different data in their studies… In my opinion neither point of view is true if you ignore the hyperbole…
I am a CPA and my firm prepares several hundred tax returns each and every year. In my opinion the Bush tax cuts favor EVERYONE; however, I would agree that they tended to favor the wealthy and the poor more than the middle class.
I opposed the Bush tax cuts when they were enacted and I still oppose them today. It is INSANE to cut taxes while you ncrease spending and increase deficits.
The Bush tax cuts will always be associated with President Bush; however, we have had a Democratic Congress for the last three years and notice that they have extended the Bush tax cuts; also notice President Obama has left them alone as well.
The Democrats can stop the Bush tax cuts any day they want to…
If you mistakenly think they favor the wealthy then convince your elected Democrats to repeal the tax cuts; they certainly have the votes to do it.
Mike Sylvester
Andy,
I also opposed invading Iraq.
In fact I think we should pull all of our troops out of both Iraq and Afghanistan within 18 months.
Note the Dems have been in charge of Congress for three years and we have had a Democratic President for almost a year.
Yet our Democratic President wants to escalate our involvement in Afghanistan…
Mike Sylvester
Zman,
Why do you think I “forgot” to mention that the stock market is currently up over the last ten months?
I am analyzing the last ten and a half years in aggregate…
Mike
Hey Mike, I’ve got a way to save money. Kick all the handicapped and elderly out of their publicly funded housing. What do you think?
Craig,
I support abolishing all local, state, and Federal housing programs. If I were “king” I would end them over an 18 month time period…
At the end of that time I would kick everyone out of Government housing; I would even kick out the lazy people who could work if they chose to; however, find it easier to live off the Government…
I would not be surprised to find out that Craig lives in Government housing…
Mike
I work two jobs Mike and last time I checked you’ve never paid any of my bills, you just act like you have.
By the way, what’s with ending your sentences with elipses (…)? I guess that accounting degree doesn’t include any English classes.
Craig,
Sure you work two jobs it you count “complaining” and “art blogging.”
Mike
Craig,
If you don’t like my English then don’t feel the need to read my posts…
You should stay over on your blog and post your normal hate filled and somewhat incoherent rants…
…
…
I wonder how many times I can use “…” from now on?
Mike
Craig,
I don’t recall Mike ever claiming he was a journalist.
And, speaking of the proper use of language, I would suggest downloading a free spell checker. It’s “ellipses.”
Ouch…
Hmmmm…..lost decade….with Bush in the White House for 8 of those years…….hmmmmm…..should tell you something.
Kevin Knuth,
You need to open your eyes and stop being completly blind.
I agree the Republicans have 40-60% of the blame for the current financial crisis. The Democrats also have 40-60% of the blame. We have re-hashed this over and over on this blog.
Almost every reasonable person on this blog and that I have talked to in person agrees that the Republican and Democrats created the financial mess we are in together with a lot of help from banks, consumers, the failure of regulators, etc.
Heck the Democrats have been in charge of Congress for three years and they have not implemented changes that will help prevent this mess in the future.
The Republicans and Democrats created this mess together and only the most partisan hacks actually feel that the fault lays with one party of the other.
Mike
Bottom line is, we, as voters have continued to elect farking liars, idiots, thieves, morons etc. from both sides of the aisle forever.
None of these problems happen in a vacuum, they happen with the help of all of us not taking enough initiative to hold representatives accountable (from both sides of the aisle).
Mike, I think YOU need to open your eyes.
You want to blame Republicans and Democrats. I agree there is plenty of blame to go around.
But on Fox News all I hear is that Obama has screwed up this country. Democrats are to blame. Funny, he has only been president for 11 months.
In comparison, Clinton was President for 8 years- but the good economy was NOT HIS DOING- that was carry over from Reagan. Apparently, there is no carry over from Bush, and the new economy started in late January of this year.
Kevin, try looking at the big picture..one news outlet (which I’m sure you don’t even watch, you just read or see excerpts) actually points out questionable decisions made by The Obamessiah while the rest of the worldwide media openly fellates him.
In one breath, democrats screech about Fox News maligning Der Leader while in the next breath dismissing their impact as meaningless. Which is it?
The simple fact is, real life results are beginning to erode the level of confidence citizens have in The One. He can blather on endlessly on ObamaTV 24-7 and “speechify” all he wants worldwide but all of the regular folks out there don’t even KNOW anybody that actually has a “created or saved job” (cuz it’s bullshit)and they also are becoming painfully aware (as Congress keeps passing 2000 page bills that are unreadable, in the dead of night, and writing checks for really stupid shit) that 2+2 is still 4 not 1 as it is in Obama math.
Even us lowly, uneducated citizens know from running our own households that we cannot make the mortgage payments with mastercard and ever crawl out of the financial abyss. You don’t have to be an accountant to see that our country is doing just that. The only way to stop incurring debt is:
SURPRISE: STOP BORROWING AND STOP SPENDING.
Have the intellectual integrity to admit and to realize no matter what may have happened last year, last decade, last century, it doesn’t matter. Right here, right now is what matters. Previous bad decisions by ANYBODY are fun for the blame game, but they make no contribution to bettering the country moving forward.
Tim,
I am sorry- you will have to explain to me who these people are:
1. Obamessiah
2. Der Leader
3. The One
The rest of your statement does not make any sense since I do not know who these three people are.
Surely you are NOT referring to the President of the United States.
Kevin, you are nothing if not consistent. Never address the issue, never answer a question and always obscure the conversation.
Keep that Alinsky handbook close by!
Tim, we all forget the respect that Knuth displayed for President Bush for eight years. He simply expects the same in return.
Knuth’s lack of consistency and clarity, as well as not being to display any objectivity, speaks volumes.
He’s in toe step with Goldner. They believe that every word coming from Obama, the White House administration as well as the DNCC are the gospel truth from up high, and we’re all dumbasses.
A-typical sheeple.
What does the prefix “der” imply???
What makes this interesting, in my opinion: No matter whom is to “blame” for the past, President Obama was elected based on his promise to fix it. Fortunately, the economy will recover despite this administration. But if there is not a significant improvement in areas such as health care or Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan (issues that President can claim has his own,) will voters move swiftly for new hope and change?
TIME magazine just came out with a cover story on the “Decade from Hell”. According to Warrren Buffet, the boom of the nineties was unsustainable. Eventually everything reverts back to the average. (Sorry, I can’t get rid of the first one)
Clinton’s policies on trade and financial deregulation planted the seeds for what we’re seeing now. He should’ve known better and it’s unfortunate that the same batch of clowns that were advising him then are now advising President Obama.
They are proven failures and should not be taken seriously. Obama’s desire to appease the Clinton supporters will ultimately be his undoing.
And before someone chimes in about Bush let me just say that yes I realize he did nothing to address any of these problems but he wasn’t smart enough to ask intelligent questions so I didn’t really expect a lot. Hell, he was claiming everything in the economy was hunky-dory while the frickin wheels were falling off and everybody knew it.
Clinton on the other hand knew better or at least he should have…
Jeff, help out. I don’t believe in blaming any individual for economic circumstances. But could any decisions made by President Clinton have lessened the financial impact that 9/11 had on the country?
Kevin
“der” is the masculine form of “the” in German…
Mike
Mike, that makes no sense…Obama is not German.
Kevin, quit fishing for another inane argument over nicknames, pet names, or assigned monikers. If you have a point about a policy, an issue, or an action taken by this administration, then make it, but quit baiting people over inconsequential stuff for the sake of argument.
The rest of us have left 5th grade,and moved on. I suggest you do the same.
Right Tim… call other people out for being immature after you ruined this discussion by proving Godwin’s Law.
4 million jobs lost since YOUR leader has taken the helm….Kevin…’splain that…..
Kevin,
Are you wearing your “Brown Shirt” today? What really baffles me is how you can walk instep with your “chosen one,” without actually engaging in any kind of intellectual dialogue, short of has Tim puts it, your “inane arguments.”
Perhaps you’re feeling the same thing democratic house members are feeling? Which is, “how in the hell are we going to climb of of the mess this political neophyte has gotten us into?”
2010 is coming. Prepare thyself.
Mark- interesting. You say I cannot engage “in any kind of intellectual dialogue”.
I choose to NOT respond to Zanks attempts to compare Obama to Hitler. Or to God. Or to anyone else. You may call that “intellectual”, but I do not!
Tim, yes, 4 million jobs lost since Obama took office. The economy does not turn on a dime- it takes time.
OR, are you willing to admit, that Reagan had NOTHING TO DO WITH the economy under Clinton? You conservatives say that we had 8 blessed years because of what Reagan did….but when Bush leaves the economy a mess, there is no carry-over. Interesting.
Kevin, you are clearly not “engaging” in the debate. You are trying to re-direct the debate by arguing about what Obama’s nicknames might be (who cares but you?) and flinging out a meaningless reference to Reagan & Clinton. This is 2009, we’re looking for answers from our CURRENT administration, right now, today. Whatever the hell Reagan,Clinton,Bush, or Mickey Mouse did in the past doesn’t make a rats ass right now, does it? You elected a “leader”, now teach him how to freakin’ lead already.
Tim, Fine.
the GOP has to quit being the party of “no” if this country is to move forward.
They are not trying to stop Obama because they disagree, they are trying to stop him so they can get back in power.
The GOP does not give a rat’s ass about the the United States or its people.
period.
Kevin,
If no is all about not bankrupting our country, socializing the healthcare industry and tipping our hand to the Taliban, I’m all for it.
You see, we don’t need anything from Obama’s “stash,” we also don’t need Obama cramming healthcare down our throats, we’ll decide if we need it, and if we do, “we” will pay for it. But hell no, we’re not paying for yours, or anyone else.
We don’t want climate control, or cap and trade or whatever you want to call it, it’s all a (now proven) lie and conspiracy anyway.
The tide is turning. 62% oppose a single-payer health care system, democrats are slipping in the polls, people are fed up. Like I said earlier, 2010 is right around the corner and there’s nothing your messiah can do now, the damage is done.
NO NO NO = pay your own way, pull up your damn pant legs and go out and get a j.o.b.
Yes we can = “Hey Bama, got anything in yo stash for me? No? Go get some from Peter, he makes too much anyway. Thanks, Paul.
See ya in November.
Mark, Nice “engaging” debate. I see very few facts, and a lot of spouting the limbaugh/beck/hannity lines of defense.
1. Reforming health care is not “socialization”. In a socialized system, the hospitals would be owned by and doctors employees of, the government. that is not the case in the proposed legislation.
2. Obama ran on a platform of health care reform (NOT single payer- get your facts right if you want to debate) and WON the election. So, the people have pretty much spoken. Remember, it is what the people want, not what Mark wants.
3. The majority of Americans support Cap and Trade. According to the lastest poll I read (abcnews/wapo) 53% favor, 42% oppose.
4. This decade will be the warmest in history- that is a fact and global warming is real. What MAY be disputable is how much effect man has on it- but if you have ever been to China (or Los Angeles for that matter) you would agree that man is adding to the problem.
5. “there’s nothing your messiah can do now”…hope your are wrong. My messiah is God. Are you not a Christian?
6. Getting a job does not solve all problems. As a matter of fact- we tried the GOP way for the past 8 years and it resulted in an near WORLD WIDE COLLAPSE of the economy.
@Mark A.-
“We don’t want climate control, or cap and trade or whatever you want to call it, it’s all a (now proven) lie and conspiracy anyway.”
If the “we” you are referring to in your above statement supposedly represents the majority of Americans views, then you are gravely mistaken. The vast majority of Americans believe climate change is real. (72% according to latest poll)
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/global-warming-report-finds-time-running/story?id=9159815
I’m going to go out on a limb here, but you’re probably relying on folks like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh for your daily source of “news” and/or talking points.
I can only speak for myself, but the endless barrage of childish, name-calling, and “se ya in November” style remarks get really old.
Some of the comments on this thread (yours included) start to resemble juvenile elementary playground-style arguments ( Spider Man can kick Superman’s butt type stuff).
Regarding your statement about Climate Change being a “proven lie” and “conspiracy anyhow”, I hate to disappoint you but the evidence is overwhelming that Climate Change is indeed real and human activity is more than likely contributing in some form to its cause.
For the record, this is not just my OPINION.
Nearly every scientific body/organization around the entire world is in agreement that climate change is real.
The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) issued this statement regarding global warming:
“An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system… There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.”
To be perfectly honest with you, I WISH you were right about climate change.
I WISH that humans could go on mining coal and building new coal powered plants without having any recourse on our planet or on future generations. I WISH that we could go driving trucks and cars without any regard to what kind of mileage standards or emission requirements these vehicles should have.
I WISH us humans could go on acting like our dependence on oil, coal, and other fossil fuels is having absolutely no effect on our planet’s ecosystem or overall health.
But, the cold, hard reality is: we all have to pay the piper someday.
There was a great radio program last week on Diane Rehm where they talked about Global Warming- http://wamu.org/programs/dr/09/11/30.php#29153
you can listen to the podcast at the link above.
Oh Andy.. I suppose you only get your news from ABC, NBC and CBS. That’ll keep your eyes closed to what’s going on.
None of the above 3 have covered the climate scandal (now called Climate-Gate), that’s been brewing for the last 2 weeks. Emails have proven that researcher’s have been “hiding the decline” in temperature readings in recent decades.
I’d suggest you go to the Media Research Center, click here. They state:
ABC, CBS, NBC Ignore Latest Development in
“Greatest Scandal in Modern Science”
CNN has even covered it. It seems Turner is requiring a little more unbiased news reporting since losing their last conservative reporter and dropping in the ratings.
Maybe you should watch this video. Even though it’s Jon Stewart, the broadcast from CNN is in it.
Have fun in fairy tale land.
@Mark A.
I clicked on the link, which you provided, to the Media Research Center story and immediately saw a flashing banner ad stating, “KICK HARRY REID OUT OF OFFICE” on the site.
Then, just out of curiosity, I click on ‘What Others Say About MRC’.
http://www.mrc.org/membership/kudos.asp
Guess who’s quotes are listed on the site ? Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, Brit Hume of FOX News, Laura Ingraham, etc. All give raving reviews to the source of your link. To say these individuals are ‘fair and balanced’ is truly in the eye of the beholder.
Let me guess, the story will hype the futile claim by a few rogue scientists, and right-wing radio talk show hosts, that Global Climate Change is a hoax, and humans should continue our fossil fuel love fest because emitting CO2 into the atmosphere is having no impact on our environment whatsoever.
Pay no mind to the growing evidence that our ice caps are rapidly changing, the acidity in the ocean is rising, the tropical belt of the Earth is expanding, large glaciers are receding at unprecedented rates, migratory patterns of birds/animals/insects are changing, diseases which normally would be confined to the tropics are expanding into warmer areas, and a whole slew of other ‘problems’ which could effect mankind in a negative way.
I believe human activity is having a profound impact on our planet. To me, it makes sense to switch to other forms of energy (renewables) which are proven to have far less negative impact on our planet.
I realize there are large, well-funded, corporate interests at stake in the oil, coal and gas industry to suppress the fact our climate is in fact changing.
Just as we saw the tobacco industry go to great, great lengths to discredit the research that smoking IS harmful to the human body, so we will see and are seeing in regards to Climate Change.
@Mark A.
Some more profound info in regards to Climate Change. It seems the “fabled” Northwest Passage in the arctic is set to become a viable shipping route (with the help of an icebreaker escort):
From the European Space Agency website:
http://www.esa.int/esaCP/SEMYTC13J6F_index_0.html
The title of the story is: ‘Satellites Witness Lowest Arctic Ice Coverage in History’
“The area covered by sea ice in the Arctic has shrunk to its lowest level this week since satellite measurements began nearly 30 years ago, opening up the Northwest Passage – a long-sought short cut between Europe and Asia that has been historically impassable.”
This is worth a read as well: ClimateGate is right wing wishful thinking!
http://mediamatters.org/research/200912010002
Kevin,
I’ll begin believing Media Matters as soon as someone can convince me the tooth fairy is real.
I may not be able to continue to contribute comments this weekend, I’ve been invited to a polar bear hunt. Not sure if I’m going yet, but since their population is on the increase, someone needs to go kill a few of them.
Maybe I’ll invite Andy and Kevin over for Polar Bear filets and some “green wine.” I might even get lucky and get some baby seal tenderloins.
You knew the House of Cards that is global warming had to come crashing down sooner or later, just like Ted Danson’s prediction in 1988 that the oceans would be gone in 10 years. I’m only surprised that it took this long.
I still haven’t recovered from the trauma of global cooling in the 70’s. I have nightmares!
yeah Mark, I would not believe Media Matters either….oh, wait….unlike you, they cite their sources.
You may not like the truth, but there it is!
Who are the sources of global warming? Al Gore?
Who screwed up the economy? A while back I said if I had time I would try and allocate into three buckets “Legacy costs prior to 1958″, “Republican” and “Democrats” their respective share of the deficits during their presidents years in office. Much to my surprise I find that the national debt of 1957 of $271 Billion up till 2005 is the sum total of accumalated interest on the legacy debt. Had there been no debt at the start of 1958, the trillions of dollars in debt we have today would be basically zero! Who is to blame? From the analysis I did, Republicans spent slightly more than democrats over the years. However, in the years democrats spent less, they also consumed the most in terms of stock piles of materials that were built up in previous years. Similar to filling your pantry with $1,000 in food and not buying as much each money for several months and then buying a lot again later on.
What we have is neither party has the want or need to just say no. The reason is simple, the voters only vote 25% of the time and we continue to vote for the stupid idiots over and over.
Knuth:
“1. Reforming health care is not “socialization”. In a socialized system, the hospitals would be owned by and doctors employees of, the government. that is not the case in the proposed legislation.”
With Medicaid and Medicare rates set by the government, it really does not matter if the own the hospitals or not. They set what the reimbursement rates are. This causes a dramatic cost shift to everyone else.
“2. Obama ran on a platform of health care reform (NOT single payer- get your facts right if you want to debate) and WON the election. So, the people have pretty much spoken. Remember, it is what the people want, not what Mark wants.”
If you want fair reform, then we should not be allowing an individual doctor to charge different rates for the same procedure because they are on Medicaid, Medicare, self pay or insured. This tiered payment system we have is causing the problem.
“4. This decade will be the warmest in history- that is a fact and global warming is real. What MAY be disputable is how much effect man has on it- but if you have ever been to China (or Los Angeles for that matter) you would agree that man is adding to the problem.”
Warmest in history? Do you really believe this? I Guess if you pee in the ocean, you will be responsible for the rising temperature there as well. Volcanos, thawing permafrost releasing methane which has 20 times the effect of CO2.
“6. Getting a job does not solve all problems. As a matter of fact- we tried the GOP way for the past 8 years and it resulted in an near WORLD WIDE COLLAPSE of the economy.”
You are correct, we tried the GOP way. Before that we tried the Democrat way. Before that it was the GOP again. The problem is both parties vote against bills just to make the other look bad. They could care less about the bill, they just want to be in power.
@Mark A. -
Regarding Polar Bear populations, I think its helpful to not just focus on ONE population group as the link you listed from Mitch Taylor did, but look at the entire world’s polar bear population as a whole.
Here’s the latest assessment on global polar bear populations according to the IUCN 2009 report:
“At the most recent meeting of the IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group(Copenhagen, 2009), scientists reported that of the 19 subpopulations of polar bears, eight are declining, three are stable, one is increasing, and seven have insufficient data on which to base a decision—this is a change from five that were declining in 2005, five that were stable, and two that were increasing. “
http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/polar-bear-status-report/
Andy, Heh, what makes you think their “data” is any more accurate or reliable than any other group of zealot ying-yangs with an agenda?
Give it up man, your fuzzy friends AND this rock we call Earth will be around for a few million more years in spite of claims to the contrary.
The credibility of “The Church Of Global Warming” is seriously lacking these days. Like most liberal causes, they always over reach, over-hype, over sell and eventually lie and get exposed. This is no different.
Uh oh! Just realized what time it is, I gotta go start my Suburban and let it run for a few hours to warm up the neighborhood!
@Mark A. -
I also want to point out a few things about the study by Mitch Taylor that need to be addressed. According to Taylor’s study of polar bear population’s on Canada’s northern most east coast, he observed an increase in the population from the 1980’s. During this time, it is important to note a number of things also occurred which could have led to a population increase. The Canadian Government conservation efforts to protect the polar bear were substantially stepped up. Hunting of the Harp Seal was limited, and the clubbing of White Coats (baby seals) was banned altogether in Canada in 1987. Restrictions on the hunting of seals and their pups, means larger seal populations for polar bears to feed from, thus increasing their chance for survival.
Hunting of the polar bear itself was also significantly limited around this time. Neighboring Greenland, first put restrictions on hunting polar bears in 1994. Canada also has implemented restrictions on bear hunts. Limiting the number of bears killed, provided further protection to protect and encourage a healthy bear population.
What also needs to be mentioned about Mr. Taylor’s study is it was bankrolled by the Nunavut government. Its important to point out that the vast majority of the people living and serving in the Nunavut government are Inuit people, who clearly have stated their desire to keep the polar bear OFF the endangered species list. Polar Bear sport hunting is a lucrative business. Estimates are that just one bear hunt alone brings in $35,000 to the area. Since the majority of polar bear hunts occur in the area in which Mr. Taylor conducted his study, and the study was commissioned by the very people who would benefit from increased hunting, its easy to see why many people question the validity of Mr. Taylor’s findings.
@Tim Zank-
“Every truth passes through three stages before it is recognized. In the first it is ridiculed, in the second it is opposed, in the third it is regarded as self evident.”
@Tim Zank -
Regarding your Suburban, try this little experiment:
Instead of letting your Suburban run OUTSIDE in your neighborhood, try backing it into the garage, close the garage door and all other doors/windows and let the engine run.
By all means, do not stay in the garage ( I would hope you are brighter than that), but instead place a thermometer in the garage to measure the temp. Check the temperature BEFORE you start the SUV. Then, after you burn through a couple gallons of gas, a couple of hours later, check the temperature AFTER.
This will give you an idea of what the 600 million cars around the world are doing to the planet.
Andy,
So are you implying we should all buy a bicycle and get rid of our cars? You’re not one of those bicycle nuts that goes on those asinine critical mass rides every month breaking the law, are you?
I too have a big ass SUV, and it’s so freaking big it won’t fit in my garage. I have a remote starter, works great in the heat of the summer to cool it down before I go out, and even better in the winter. It’s toasty warm after running for about 10 minutes before I go get in it.
I would bet you’d have been one of those protesting to save the Delta smelt minnow if you lived in California. Over there, they cut off water to 25 million people to save a stupid 3″ long fish that doesn’t even live a year.
You can’t even eat the damn things. Have to run, I have a mess of leaves to burn. I just love that smell.
“In God I trust, all others bring data.”
Years ago or I should say decades ago, my brother was taking a fortran computer class (punch cards). The program was to model foxes and rabbits in the natural habitat. Each fox ate so many rabbits. Each fox could reproduced based on a set of criteria. The same was for rabbits. Rabbits ate vegetation, reproduced faster than foxes. What would be the equilibrium balance between foxes and rabbits?
When the program began, the rabbits multiplied like “rabbits.” they ate up the vegetation, foxes had plenty to eat and began reproducing. Pretty soon the fox population got so large that they ate up nearly all the rabbits, the vegetation began to come back and the foxes nearly all died off. After several cycles, the fox, vegetation and rabbit population stabalized.
What does this have to do with polar bears? Simply put that life is always changing. We have humans moving into habitats that nature had created a balance. Man upsets the balance. We catch fish that others eat and the food chain gets messed up. We change nature. Are polar bear numbers decreasing because of global warming or because fisherman catch more fish, reducing seal populations, reducing the polar bear food supply? In American we hunted buffalo to near extinction. The Dodo bird was hunted to extinction. There are things man can do to cause havoc on other living things. There are a host of interactions man has control over, but when it comes to overall global warming or cooling, it is small. Think about all the impacts volcanoes have. Melting tundra and methane gas release. how about draining that big sea in Russia. They turned a natural agricultural area into a desert. It was not caused by burning anything, but draining water from the lake.
Do you have any idea of the amount of energy it takes to heat or cool the world? The world has gone through cycles for millions of years. We have been watching weather patterns for 100 maybe two hundred years. People are attempting to develop a model from two hundred years and hope to have it represent millions of years, good luck. Two points equal a straight line. This is basically what they have. The problem is where on the natural curve are we? Looking out my front door looks pretty flat. Get up high enough and you see the curvature of the earth, no where close to being flat.
Andy
Did Ted Danson have “data” when he said over twenty years ago that the oceans would disappear? Did the scientists who advocated “global cooling” in the 70’s have data? Statistically speaking, if I have one foot in the oven and one in the freezer, I should be comofortable. Point: figures don’t lie but liars figure.
Have we really become so partisan that you are going to argue that burning fossil fuels is not bad for the environment? I understand that conservatives and liberals each have their own agenda, but to argue against something as obvious as global warming just makes you look silly.
@Mark A.-
You said:
“So are you implying we should all buy a bicycle and get rid of our cars?”
No not at all. But why not switch to electricity as the primary source of powering our vehicles ? I feel part of the problem is many Americans get stuck into a trap (conditioned through time and a little help from the oil and gas industry) that we need petrol to be a major ingredient in our lives.
If the U.S. switches to renewable energy to power the electricity needed to make our vehicles run, we are removing a helluva lot of CO2 from the atmosphere.
For that matter, by switching to renewable energy sources like wind, solar and hydro, the United States will have enough power to keep going for centuries WITHOUT depending on other countries for our energy needs.
Why on Earth would we want to continue to be dependent on fossil fuels and have our enemies hold us hostage ?
I, for one, get no pleasure out of making the Saudi Arabian kings richer and the Middle East more powerful. Think about the long term effects switching to renewable energy would have on the United State’s economy and overall security in general.
Take the country of Iran for instance. How would Iran obtain its wealth, its power, its ability to quell the opposition within its own borders IF the United States and the rest of the western world, no longer were standing in line to buy its OIL.
And here’s the big one…. we have enough wind power alone in the United States to provide 16 x’s our current energy needs.
I believe one day, we will look back on our addiction to oil and coal, and wonder why it took us so long to break the stranglehold both of these had over our country.
Justin,
So, what do you propose I put in my honking big-ass SUV? BTW, it’s a Hummer. Big bright yellow one in case you see me cruising around town.
Go buy some curly-q light bulbs, that will make you feel better.
I am not proposing anything, it is your choice if you want at change your lifestyle because of global warning. That doesn’t mean that it isn’t happening.
Of course, I would hope that you are not one of those people who clamors on about ‘don’t leave a deficit for our grandchildren’ while at the same time not being concerned about the environment we leave for them…
Justin- Yes, we have come that far.
The GOP is in such bad shape, if a liberal says that water is wet, they will say “NO IT ISN’T”
Andy wrote
“For that matter, by switching to renewable energy sources like wind, solar and hydro, the United States will have enough power to keep going for centuries WITHOUT depending on other countries for our energy needs.”
I agree 100% with Andy. I am not 100% convinced we are causing or can influence global warming. I think burning fuel to convert to useful work is just a stupid way to do it and the pollutants are terrible. We live in the 21st century, but continue to convert fuel by burning it which is milenia old.
If you want to truly compete in the world, energy is the key to giving you a leg up. Reducing energy consumption and cost increases the chance of lowering prices and kicking the competitions behind.
We truly need to stop subsidizing companies so that their true costs can be determined. This means no tax credits, TIF’s or abatements.
Lincoln which is moving nearly 200 jobs out of Fort Wayne is doing so because of cost. It would be stupid to have the city or county give them an abatement so that people can keep their jobs. What truly needs to happen is that instead of everyone else paying more in taxes to keep these jobs here is for those who work there to do a better job, for less money. The same goes for GM and every other company. If you cannot compete, then close up shop and let others take a try.
Over the past few days I have now heard many senators and representatives say that what we truly need to do to stimulate growth is cut the payroll tax. This is coming from the democrats as well.
Knuth, the GOP is in bad shape? Have you seen Obama’s approval numbers lately?
And if global warming was so evident, why did the researchers have to load the data with “garbage” and use a “trick” to “hide the decline” in temperature?
The GOP is in bad shape! But President Obama’s approval numbers do show that there is some “Hope,” but only if Republicans win in 2010. Best part about politics? When you WIN, you influence policy.
If you watch the Rasmussen tracking poll, Obama’s had a continuing downward trend.
Another Rasmussen Reports poll taken 11/15 had the following:
Or take Dirty Harry Reid. It another poll taken this week.
And just how are conservative fairing in the polls? A poll that came out this week showed 5% fewer Americans are calling themselves Democrats.
Yeah, everybody sure is happy with the Democrat Party.
Meanwhile, Knuth still lives under a rock.
Not always Paul, sometimes when you lose you influence policy. If we were under a McCain presidency, we’d still be dealing with the same BS but Congressional Republicans would feel compelled to support it.
Mark- I am not under a rock.
You do not understand tracking numbers and their relevance, or how gerrymandering works.
EVERY PRESIDENT since Kennedy has dropped below 50% approval (and all but Clinton dropped below 40%- even Reagan).
Congressional Quarterly predicts, at this time, that the GOP may pick up ONE Senate seat, with six more up for grabs. Dems will continue to control the Senate.
Further, it will be all but impossible for the GOP to take control of the House.
The GOP is not in a position, even with Obama’s falling numbers, to make major strides next year. Period!
Keith, whoever wins influences policy. Which is why Republicans don’t NEED to regain control of the House or Senate… just enough seats to make it even more difficult for the President to further his agenda. Yes if Sen. McCain were President, the Republicans would feel compelled to support his agenda. Why would a person not want to support ideas with which they agree?
“The GOP is in such bad shape, if a liberal says that water is wet, they will say “NO IT ISN’T””
That does seem to be the case, Kevin. But when the liberals claim that water is dry, and people point out the obvious error in their logic, they often have no credible response to this.
If you’re going to claim that being a partisan hack is the prerogative of one party only, then you are completely out of touch with reality.
The truth is, both sides seem less interested in achieving the best solution to our problems than they are in getting credit for winning the argument.
Paul, you ask
Why would a person not want to support ideas with which they agree
Why don’t you ask the blue dog Democrats who are going to lose their jobs next year?
Or the numerous Republican house and senate members who got their clock cleaned in 2006 and 2008 by blindly supporting Bush.
I don’t think anyone supports EVERY idea of any president yet that’s how the votes seem to go down…