al-in-chgo Well, perhaps the time is gone during which everything didn't have to be related in terms of money . . . I for one am a tree-hugger on a practical as well as an idealstic level. I actually won second place in 4-H for "Foresty Appreciation" when I was 12 -- part of the appreciation, along with identifying and collecting deciduous leaves, was planting close to 100 saplings on an open (and rather windswept) plot. County agents in those days loved to give away saplings--not a dozen, but a hundred minimum. (Recall that 4-H is a federal program but involves the cooperation of county agents, at least to some degree.) Also, Chuck and I still occasionally see the old "shelter belts" on Illnois farmsteads when we drive over the old federal highways. This came as history even to me, but in the 1930s the county farm agents were encouraged (probably with the help of some New Deal program) to plant pine trees in a nice tight row to protect the north or west side of the farm house. Gave shade and protected from those howling Prairie winds in cold weather. Some of them are 70, 80 feet tall, but they still provide some shade and a wind break. Somewhere between "do it because it will be of benefit to you," and "do it because it's just a good idea," a lot of good was done--and other than the cost of the trees, it cost the federal government very little and the obliging farmer only a relatively small amount of time. What amazes me is how constant a height the crowns are--you don't get that with maples. If this turned into a sermonette, I apologize. - al
Well, perhaps the time is gone during which everything didn't have to be related in terms of money . . . I for one am a tree-hugger on a practical as well as an idealstic level. I actually won second place in 4-H for "Foresty Appreciation" when I was 12 -- part of the appreciation, along with identifying and collecting deciduous leaves, was planting close to 100 saplings on an open (and rather windswept) plot. County agents in those days loved to give away saplings--not a dozen, but a hundred minimum. (Recall that 4-H is a federal program but involves the cooperation of county agents, at least to some degree.)
Also, Chuck and I still occasionally see the old "shelter belts" on Illnois farmsteads when we drive over the old federal highways. This came as history even to me, but in the 1930s the county farm agents were encouraged (probably with the help of some New Deal program) to plant pine trees in a nice tight row to protect the north or west side of the farm house. Gave shade and protected from those howling Prairie winds in cold weather. Some of them are 70, 80 feet tall, but they still provide some shade and a wind break. Somewhere between "do it because it will be of benefit to you," and "do it because it's just a good idea," a lot of good was done--and other than the cost of the trees, it cost the federal government very little and the obliging farmer only a relatively small amount of time. What amazes me is how constant a height the crowns are--you don't get that with maples.
If this turned into a sermonette, I apologize. - al
Eleanor was a prophet. Over 70 years before CO2 was made an issue, she was doing her part.
Bucyrus It would be utterly foolhardy and irresponsible to the taxpayers for a city to be planting trees on the taxpayers’ dime if they did not know the value of the offset. For one thing, the cost of planting the trees might be higher than the value of the offset, so it would be a losing proposition.
It would be utterly foolhardy and irresponsible to the taxpayers for a city to be planting trees on the taxpayers’ dime if they did not know the value of the offset. For one thing, the cost of planting the trees might be higher than the value of the offset, so it would be a losing proposition.
Convicted One Bucyrus: It would be utterly foolhardy and irresponsible to the taxpayers for a city to be planting trees on the taxpayers’ dime if they did not know the value of the offset. For one thing, the cost of planting the trees might be higher than the value of the offset, so it would be a losing proposition. I suspect you may be overlooking the (likely) covert agenda in play. The city's 50% contribution is out of the taxpayer's pocket, and the (each) resident pays the other 50%, so we now have a system where the cost of entry is nil to the local authority. This authority, however, will be entitled to 100% of any net proceeds obtained from the eventual selling of carbon credits resulting from the program. The authority is then able to spend this money on WHATEVER they deem fit. So, it's an ideal vehicle for securing funds for alternate priorities on which the payers will have no ultimate say whatsover how it's disbursed Eleanor's husband woulda been MIGHTY proud. .
Bucyrus: It would be utterly foolhardy and irresponsible to the taxpayers for a city to be planting trees on the taxpayers’ dime if they did not know the value of the offset. For one thing, the cost of planting the trees might be higher than the value of the offset, so it would be a losing proposition.
I am not overlooking that agenda. And I agree that it is a lose-lose proposition for the taxpayers to pay for the trees and not reap the reward of the carbon offsets. But that is a little agenda compared to the mind-boggling agenda of the carbon trading system itself. You could say that the tree-planting agenda is a mini-agenda wrapped in the greater agenda.
But the residents who will pay for trees won’t mind. They won’t see the agendas. They will buy the trees just to be green. And taxing authorities are already on the receiving end of the carbon-offset system. So they don’t have to do much to reap the benefit. I would submit that a city would pay more for the accounting just to keep track of the carbon offset than they would earn from the offset.
Who is actually getting hurt by this? Seems to me the homeowners are getting a nicer looking city and the city gets some offset which may reduce the tree price.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
"WASHINGTON — A Congressional report released today accuses Class I freight railroads of charging higher rates to shippers without competitive rail access, the Associated Press has reported. The industry quickly blasted the report, which comes from the Senate Commerce Committee."
Trains News Wire 9-15"
The N. R. A., the W. P. A., the T. V. A. etc. etc. etc. had FDR and Eleanor written all over them. Would Eleanor agree railroad rates are too high? Would she say a new I. C. C. is in order?
Eleanor clearly supported the "alphabet soup" agenda in general. A particular favorite of hers was the R.E.A. (Rural Electrification$1***$2n). Definitely fed. gov't intervention, but did you now that in 1930 amost 40 percent of U.S. households did not have power? (The rural parts, mostly, but including some small towns, too.) Compare that to Rural Free Delivery about 40 years earlier.
As for the specifics of who paid for or initiated what projects, I think generally Eleanor was "out of the fray." She and Harold Ickes did not get along, it was generally known; and he was the leading egghead of the New Deal, at least in calculating what was possible and how. (A satirical gibe in Thomas Pynchon's novel Gravity's Rainbow has her and Ickes laughing and quoting the "Who Dat Man" (Why, It's Gabriel)" musical number from the 1930s Marx Brothers movie, A Day at the Races, that they had seen the night before (together??). I don't know if Pynchon meant that to be an example of "humor makes for strange bedfellows" (indeed, almost everyone did get a kick out of that number, at least until some critics started racially tut-tutting about it); or perhaps Pynchon's little scene was meant to underly the sense of absurd and alternate past history that permeates that large and dense novel.
This isn't q-u-i-t-e within the scope of the two history quizzes on these boards (hint), but does anyone know what year Railway Express went belly up?
Anyway, even though there are no trains in it, a sure way to beat a blue mood is to rent or borrow the DVD of A Day at the Races. See it with someone you love, and see if you can resist cuing "Who Dat Man" the entire following day! -- al
Thank You for that.
Was "Duck Soup" a documentary on I. C. C. regulation?
No, that would be "A Day at the Races" (lol).
No, that would be "The Coacoanuts" (lol)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3MtT6FajGI
The state room scene is an interesting analogy to regulation. You pile more and more on until the recipient is unable to function.
Given the general quality of sequels, is the proposed 21st Century remake of the I. C. C. liable to be worse than Nightmare on Elm Street XXXIII?
"Is my aunt Minnie in there?" --
The stateroom scene was very funny, a classic. It was in the Marx Bros.' A Night at the Opera.
Did Aunt Minnie file a rate increase protest?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hEThheuaZLg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9_CJ4I9Klw&feature=related
schlimm Who is actually getting hurt by this?
Who is actually getting hurt by this?
Well, since you ask, I'll paint a hypothetical scenario, suppose the city was Covington KY, and intended to use the carbon credits proceeds to pay Washington Lobbyists to pester the powers that be to make CSX paint their bridges.
Here would be a situation where the funds would be totally immune from political pressure that any pro railroad forces might otherwise try to muster intending to cut the source of funding off,
Lend Lease HSR.
Eleanor and Franklin extended lend lease to "backward" China. China need the tools of war to fight Japan. Will China extend lend lease to "backward" California in their fight against gridlock. California wants high speed rail.
Victrola1 Lend Lease HSR. Eleanor and Franklin extended lend lease to "backward" China. China need the tools of war to fight Japan. Will China extend lend lease to "backward" California in their fight against gridlock. California wants high speed rail.
Apparently California "wants" (or is obligated to pay for) a lot of things it can no longer afford. And Illinois is not far behind.
Would Cal. or any other state want/need HST between L.A. and S.F. badly enough to let a foreign company from a foreign country design the eqiupment, then build and/or operate the line? It has happened elsewhere.
Breaking News!!!!
This Just in....Actress Barbara Billingsley of "Leave It To Beaver" and "Airplane" fame) has died at the age of 94:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/arts/television/17billingsley.html?_r=1&hp
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Atr4yRv27IQ
How sad, another example of decency gone.
"Ward...What did the Beaver mean when he said "Hi Mom?"
Beaver and Wally were such nice boys. They never left logs, or steel pipes across the railroad tracks. June and Ward Cleaver were good parents.
Hope you all are enjoying a fine "Eleanor Roosevelt" Halloween weekend.........
Barrington continues to try to put toothpaste back into the tube through the oriface from which it came out.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Eleanor does not care for NIMBYs...
Have a downright-upright Eleanor Roosevewlt Saturday!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fUNSBvNur4&feature=related
I have been following the story of the mystery missile fired yesterday off the coast of California. I am struck by the fact that the story seems to be shrinking hour by hour. It started out as a confident report of a missile firing. However, I detect a concerted effort to backpedal the story almost to the point that it never even happened. Now they are saying that it was a jet contrail, or that it was the work of a missile hobbyist.
So I have a question for you military experts. Could a foreign submarine have gotten that close to the U.S. and fired a missile without our military detecting the submarine or the firing of the missile?
"In the deputy secretary’s telling, Project Laffarenz involved using U-boats to tow a battery of V-2s across the Atlantic on submersible barges. “Once within striking distance of the East Coast, the V-2 carrying containers would be flooded with water, righting launch tubes,” he said. “The Germans got as far as building a carrying container at the Baltic port at Elbing before the allied assault stopped any deployment.”
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/03/danger-room-mythbuster-nazi-rocket-barge-sunk/
This would have spoiled Eleanor's day.
It was probably not one of these launched off Los Angeles.
Now they are saying that is was an optical illusion, in order to explain why a jet contrail would look like the jet flew up out of the ocean.
All I am asking is this: Do we have a military defense system that will, with certainty, detect a foreign submarine 35 miles off of our coast? And if such a submarine fired a missile, 35 miles off of our coast, would our defense system detect that? If so, how would our military react?
The strangest part of this story is the way the authorities are doing contortions in order to convince the public that this did not happen. How can they tell us that it is nothing to worry about if they can’t explain what it was?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.