Skip to main content
Log In | Register

TR Memescape


Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - RAFH

1
But was the chemist able to get home to his her family safely every night?
FYP
2
That is really not that funny, Dave. Why do you have this pathological need to be such an asshole?
Because he's so committed to avoiding honest dialog.

Why are you so committed to avoiding honest dialog?
Because he has this pathological need to be such an asshole.
3
The main ongoing expense in the hair sheep business is land lease. The Hoppings reported lamb sales this past Feb at $150 per head wholesale at the sale barn ... no marketing effort at all which is a big deal ... these were lambs that were born in April of 2016.  They also sell quite a few breeding ewe lambs each year for about $230 each last I checked. They wean an average of 1.5 lambs per ewe each year so I think their revenue per ewe is north of $250. Land leases are typically $20 per acre so the $200 net per ewe is fairly conservative I think.
This sounds like a detour from the subdivision idea. Is it?
You really do not read my posts do you?  Setting up regenerative agriculture on the land is the first step for me toward starting a "sustainable subdivision."
so, these subdivisions will include sheep? Every one acre gets its own hair sheep?
Lol

You get kudos for trying to keep up. Its hard with all the spam.

Step 1:  Set up a regenerative agriculture system with animals. My first choice would be sheep to start off with. 

Step 2: If it works well and is profitable for myself and for the investors then we start having serious conversations about housing, infrastructure, and common areas.
Oh, those sheep, never mind, that was just a hair-brained idea.
6
We've been through this before.

From the only source Hawkins has (to my knowledge) ever cited on the subject of % rainforest canopy cover:

Quote
Our results document that the conversion of rainforest to extensive cacao agroforestry with high shading levels strongly impacts plant biomass and carbon storage as well as diversity of forest-using plant and insect species.The transition from forest to cacao agroforestry resulted in a loss of ~60% of the forest-based species with plant species being more strongly affected than mobile insect taxa. It seems reasonable to assume that rare, specialized, and endangered species are represented disproportionately high in this fraction (6), underlining the limitations of agroforestry for conser- vation of forest species (16). ...

In summary, our findings imply a concave, nonlinear relationship of canopy cover in agroforestry systems with biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. A doubling of income goes along with reduction of shade cover from ~80% to 35-50%, most likely resulting only in limited losses of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. In contrast, the conversion of forests to agroforestry systems in the first place as well as the complete removal of canopy trees as the final step of land use intensification, each result in disproportionate ecological losses.
Hawkins's own source
You're not supposed to read that stuff literally, but you should take it seriously. It's part of a massively complex 8D chess strategy. Too massively complex for anyone to actually understand, you just have to take Bluffy's word for it.
7
Correct

          [citation needed]
You don't need citations.  You need a new attitude.  I've given you citations in the past from experts who are in a position to know and you dismiss them based on God knows what


No, you haven't.  You've "shoo'ed me off to a link" to use your phrase.  But you've evaded all questions as to even what your criteria are for "better" for the forest if it's opened up, let alone defended the case that it's a good idea. 

Sure it's a good idea, if you want to grow crops, or change the ecosystem in some other way.  It's a terrible idea if you want to preserve the ecosystem.  And if you are talking about the rainforest, then it's a terrible idea because it's a really important ecosystem, for many reasons, only one of which is the huge amount of sequestered carbon.  And yes, I've given you evidence.

... your superior intelligence I guess.

Possibly.  Possibly because I don't go around only seeing what I want to believe, which is what you do, even if you have to make it up.

If I am smarter than you, Dave, it's simply because I haven't addled my brain as you have by refusing to consider evidence that contradicts your preferred conclusion.  Which you could do something about.
No he can't.
8
Now we know who to blame.
Anybody notice there's British fingerprints all everything to do with this entire mess.
Could it be the Brits are just having one on us? To provide the world with a country that fucked up worse than they did?
Probably still laughing about it even now.
9
Dave,
Do you understand the concept of competitive advantage?  It goes part and parcel with economies of scale (it's usually a precursor).

Also, resource rich countries, like The Republic of the Congo, are not always the best places for manufacturing.

The cost of transportation may not make sense in an efficiency argument (total energy required for production), but if energy is cheap w.r.t. the product then transportation is only a small incremental increase in cost and the savings come to importers via labor,  location or competitive advantage (usually a combination).

You don't understand history so you are destined to repeat it over and over.  Look at the UK in the 1800's, they were once the largest steel producer in the world (along with coal).  They imported all that cotton (resource rich southern states, that went far during the US Civil War) and wool (resource rich Australia and Scotland, again world powerhouses) to all those clothing factories that then re-shipped the product world wide (India and China).
* Steel production fell after Industrialization, US took over THEN Russia started producing more steel.  Today it's China.
*Coal production fell after Industrialization, US took over production THEN Russia THEN China and other resource rich nations.
*Clothing factories closed because of competition from cheaper labor in the US (Carolina's, etc.).  Then production moved from the US to overseas (China, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Phillipines).

Have you learned anything yet?
I'm way ahead of you. I know all that but I'm asking bigger questions which you apparently haven't even considered.
Which, apparently, you cannot articulate.

Meanwhile: is Canada doing the right thing, preferring Canadian milk?
Or is Trump right - and that is a disgrace?
Yes, Canada is doing the right thing.  Trump is wrong on this.  No one should be buying MILK from another country.  That's utterly ridiculous.  Cars, sure.  But milk?  Hell no.
Bluffy, how about when one family lives on one side of a border, and their friends, another family, right next door, live on the other side of that border?
Wouldn't make more sense for them to trade milk for eggs directly across that border than for each of them to drive to their respective nearest town to buy or sell eggs or milk?
Borders should be no more significant than zip code boundaries.
Well... there's the problem of dumping. Subsidised over-producing American dairies have been flooding the Canadian market with highly processed filtered milk protein, so Canada made some regulations to reduce that flood, and it is those regs that set the Americans off in the first place.

Canadians as a rule don't want American milk products because of the growth hormone and excessive antibiotic use permitted in the US, which are illegal in Canada.

You might eliminate borders, but you can't eliminate regions, and one region can ruin another region if there are no rules at all.
And this is why the EU has miles of red tape about everything. Because if you want free exchange of goods then you need to agree on standards for what those goods should be like, which everyone has to sign up to and enforce.
You mean, like, having a common language? Where no matter where you are, in what culture, whenever, if you tell someone something, they will actually understand what you meant and they can use the exact same words to tell the next person?

That would be cool, but ultimately impractical or otherwise unnecessary or something like that because of various reasons to do with things you are not allowed to understand.
10
TR Embassy and Animal Shelter / Re: The Cat Thread
Pretty kitty. :mason: I love Maine Coons. I wish my dummies had a skywalk and various cat shelves for climbing. Those are really neat.

Princess cat wasn't eating much yesterday, so I gave her the rest of the leftover tuna, which she immediately spit up again. I gave her some famotidine, but she spit up clear liquid overnight with a little bit of frank blood. This happened back in December, and she went straight back to eating, so given her history, it's not as worrisome as Hamulus going off his feed. Today, she was obviously hungry but only ate a few bites of her dry food and a lick of the wet food I offered. Ended up boiling her some chicken and serving it with a little bit of broth. She wouldn't eat it by herself but chowed all of it down when I offered it by hand. No vomit anywhere.

Goddamn cats doing cat stuff. :whyyou:
Yep, there's not much discussion when #12 of cat decided to ricochet off you with her front paws as she's flying over the bed from the door to the french doors, you have no  choice but to pay attention. Otherwise, she'll go up on the catwalk and play "dropcat", which in that weight category is difficult to ignore.

We're lucky, there's an older family cat. Tora. Attack cat. Big, grew up eating with a pit bull. Used to be mean, but in the four years since I've been around, she's mellowed. So far, the two kitties are in observational mode. Both are about the same in size, but Tora has experience while Tinker has seriously dense fur and more muscle and bone mass. Plus she's just pure stupid when it comes to other cats. Fortunately, Tora doesn't seem interested in a fight. Just the opposite. Cats seem to work that out most of the time, if not, then they fuss about and figure it out. Occasionally, they need to actually live up to their claims because both decide, well, they've had enough. Then it gets expensive.
11
TR Embassy and Animal Shelter / Re: The Cat Thread
Here's Tinker:
 


Partial Maine Coon, she's a 21 months old, best as we can determine. 11#, body is over 20" long. With tail, more like 34" overall. She's not supposed to mature for at least another 15 months, perhaps as much a 3 years.
We got her just after New Years, a couple had gotten her for their little girl, who, it turns out, was violently allergic to cat dander. She's just a sweetneart. Totally curious about everything, very adventurous but a bit of a scaredy-cat. Extremely affectionate, especially if she's on the receiving end. Loves being up high. thus her skywalk over the bed. It goes all the way around now.
12
And I would have no problem with neighbors on one side of the border trading milk for some other product on the other side.  But if we're talking commercial sales, I would charge a tariff.
I mean what if the Ford family living on one side of the border and producing cars but lose their starter supplier on that side but have an excellent friendship with the Bendix family on the other side that produces really good starters at a very competitive price, why couldn't they do some trading?
13
And I would have no problem with neighbors on one side of the border trading milk for some other product on the other side.  But if we're talking commercial sales, I would charge a tariff.
What constitute "commercial sales" and why charge a tariff and how much and why that amount? How is any of this different from just import/export?
14
Trump may have realized that if he pushes the deep state too far he may wind up like JFK.
  ::)
If anyone ever wondered if there's a threshold, beyond which all capability of rational thought and evaluation is lost, and the person becomes a mindless fanatic... That's it, right there.

It's when, in one's mind, any and all evidence against their position, become evidence for a conspiracy against their position, and therefore evidence for their position.

There's no hope beyond that point. And it seems dave's crossed it long ago.

Yes.  If you find your position is unfalsfiable it's at least sensible to consider that it might be wrong.
Those who regularly find their positions in falsifiable do not consider the possibility they may be wrong.
15
Trump is wrong on this. 
That's one small step for Dave; one giant leap small step for Davekind.
Bluffoonylvania Forever and Ever and Evermore!
16
I don't know yet
but you seem to have narrowed it down to:
Quote
Why aren't we good enough and smart enough to build our own?
You may want to revisit that.
As usual, Bluffy projects his own characteristics, likes, hates, wants, motivations and behavior on to the world.
17
If so, what do you think happens to US export deals if the US bans imports?
Who said anything about banning imports? I'm not in favor of banning imports. But I am in favor of tariffs so as to protect our own industry.  The United States federal government was financed for most of our history with tariffs  if I recall correctly.

Dave, try to focus.  You set out some kind of principle that it was stupid for countries to import stuff from other countries instead of making it themselves.  If that is some kind of principle, then both exports and imports, in your view, should be minimised, whether by bans or tariffs, right?

That might - possibly - work for very large countries, which are large enough to have enough resources, and a large enough internal market, to be self-sufficient.  But it won't work for countries that aren't.  They need to import and export.

Right? So your principle only applies to very large countries, right?

Or wrong?

And if right, what do you think will happen to US exports if the US raises much larger tariffs on imports?  You think other countries will just suck it up?  Countries that rely on exports and imports?  On trade?
"Try to focus"

Lol

Says the woman who can't focus.

Right if we are talking about things like cars.  I cannot imagine the country of Guyana in South America developing their own domestic auto industry.  I'm not making any blanket statements here ... I just find it odd that a large county like the USA should have to buy cars from Japan.  Why aren't we good enough and smart enough to build our own?
We are.  But we need lots of imported materials to do so.

However, the free market has determined that there's a place for imported cars and cars made in the US by foreign companies.
As well as similar places in other countries for US goods.
Different strokes for different folks.
18
Dave,
Do you understand the concept of competitive advantage?  It goes part and parcel with economies of scale (it's usually a precursor).

Also, resource rich countries, like The Republic of the Congo, are not always the best places for manufacturing.

The cost of transportation may not make sense in an efficiency argument (total energy required for production), but if energy is cheap w.r.t. the product then transportation is only a small incremental increase in cost and the savings come to importers via labor,  location or competitive advantage (usually a combination).

You don't understand history so you are destined to repeat it over and over.  Look at the UK in the 1800's, they were once the largest steel producer in the world (along with coal).  They imported all that cotton (resource rich southern states, that went far during the US Civil War) and wool (resource rich Australia and Scotland, again world powerhouses) to all those clothing factories that then re-shipped the product world wide (India and China).
* Steel production fell after Industrialization, US took over THEN Russia started producing more steel.  Today it's China.
*Coal production fell after Industrialization, US took over production THEN Russia THEN China and other resource rich nations.
*Clothing factories closed because of competition from cheaper labor in the US (Carolina's, etc.).  Then production moved from the US to overseas (China, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Phillipines).

Have you learned anything yet?
I'm way ahead of you. I know all that but I'm asking bigger questions which you apparently haven't even considered.
Which, apparently, you cannot articulate.

Meanwhile: is Canada doing the right thing, preferring Canadian milk?
Or is Trump right - and that is a disgrace?
Yes, Canada is doing the right thing.  Trump is wrong on this.  No one should be buying MILK from another country.  That's utterly ridiculous.  Cars, sure.  But milk?  Hell no.
Bluffy, how about when one family lives on one side of a border, and their friends, another family, right next door, live on the other side of that border?
Wouldn't make more sense for them to trade milk for eggs directly across that border than for each of them to drive to their respective nearest town to buy or sell eggs or milk?
Borders should be no more significant than zip code boundaries.
19
You're not going to "teach me economics" because you don't understand economics. 
:facepalm:

Says the person who asked:
Are there any fundamental reasons why anybody in the United States should have to buy any  manufactured product from any other country?    I really cannot think of any.
Amazing.
Seventh Law.

Never fails.

I was wondering the other day if there were some sort of physical effect of Seventh Law. Ya know, like entropy or conservation of energy. If there were, presumably Bluffy would be like a Seventh Law Effect (7LE) density anomaly. Either a fountain or a sink. Would a massive enough accumulation of 7LE create like a black hole, that sucks in everything and no 7LE can escape.

Another issue is whether or not there is symmetry in Seventh Law, if Bluffy is a massive sink, does that imply there is someone who is a massive fountain, someone who emanates reality and a total understanding of it?
20
Are there any fundamental reasons why anybody in the United States should have to buy any  manufactured product from any other country?    I really cannot think of any.
Should the US put in place policy to compel Americans to buy American when the product is inferior or costs significantly more?
For Federal projects, at least military ones, there is a law in place that does just that.
I ran into that on one of the projects at Pearl Harbor, a facility to collect, treat and dispose of stuff off the nuke subs that's become irradiated and is emitting radiation. One room of the facility had to be finished entirely in stainless steel: ceiling, walls, floor, doors, every bit, all stainless. And none of it could be less that 16 gauge. Turns out, at the time, there were no US suppliers of 16 gauge stainless. Nearly took an act of Congress to let the contractor get the steel from Korea.
21
Is anyone actually surprised that Dave's views on economics basically mean going back to the stone age?
Would anyone actually be surprised to learn that Bluffy's views on anything and everything basically mean going back to the stone age?
22
Politics and Current Events / Re: Trumpocalypse
maybe he's just delusional
Not sure that's not a given.
23
Dave, there are conservative media/sources which, though they may be biased towards Republicans, are not outright liars and fantasisers. Why don't you do your due diligence and find them and use them to back up your arguments? You keep bringing in blogs and op-eds by these shady over-excited conspiracy buffs; no one takes these guys seriously.
That's not TRUE, Bluffy takes them seriously. It's likely his current hero, The Donald, does too,
24
Well one question Hawkins has answered in this thread - albeit tacitly - is:
How the hell can anyone still support this disaster of a president ? ? ?
The answer is:
By ignoring all the obvious questions.
I.e., sustained, unrelenting, militant, ignorance.
Bellignorance!
25
So let me see...
Would that that were possible!
Quote
The only thing that sunk into  your brains of that long post I made with quite a bit of supporting research was  that Reuters might have been wrong about this months abstention by China being the first abstention of the entire Syrian Civil War?
It STILL has not sunk into YOUR brain that Reuters

did NOT say anything about this month's abstention by China being the first abstention of the entire Syrian Civil War?

That's...
                                                                                        amazing.
This may be the worst he's ever been with that all/some/none problem. He seems to be literally incapable of distinguishing between "vetoed six resolutions" and "vetoed all resolutions."
Hah!
Bluffy is just playing 8D chess using as his guide, "Art of the Deal". He even laid out the strategy being used here in his explanation of how Trump was not actually lying when he clearly stated he was going to officially and legally label China as a currency manipulator during the campaign that was just part of the starting out with the most extremely opposite of what the other party wants or is willing to accept. When he was speaking during the campaign, Trump was already plotting deviously against the Chinese, faking them out with his belligerent talk, then "giving" in on some small details in order to gain major concessions. Trump simply wasn't speaking to his potential supporters, he was talking directly at China. You don't take his words literally, but you do take them seriously.

In any case, we'll never be able to figure out the brilliance of Bluffy's high-speed mind running circles around us.