Tuesday, October 22, 2019

Selected Questions & Answers From All Experts Astronomy Forum (The Saros Cycle)

Image result for brane space, blood moon
Diagram showing conditions for partial and total lunar eclipse.  These, as well as lunar eclipses, can be predicted using the saros cycle.

Question: Can you please explain the saros cycle and how it can be used to predict eclipses? - Rafael G., San Francisco, Calif.

Answer:  The "saros" represents a period which has been used as far back as the ancient Sumerians to predict eclipses.These predictions depend on: (1) Understanding that eclipses can occur in a series, i.e. such as one that commenced in 1599, and (2)An understanding of the relative motions of Earth and Moon and specifically observations of the Moon's period of rotation relative to: (i) the phase (synodic month) and ii) the position of the nodes or the points at which the Moon's and Earth's orbits intersect, and iii) the times of perigee, or the position at which the Moon in its orbit is nearest Earth.

For example, in order to get two identical lunar eclipses the Moon - in each case - would have to be:

a) At the same phase (e.g. full, as shown in diagram A)

b) In the same position in its orbit with respect to the nodes

And:

c) At the same distance from Earth


Now, since the lengths of the months (periods for Moon's rotation) are different, i.e. synodic = 29. 5 days, nodical = 27.3 days and anomalistic = 27.5 days, then the resulting lunar eclipses will be of the same type only if an integral number of synodic months is nearly equal to anintegral number of nodical months and an equal number of anomalistic months.

This also applies to solar eclipses. For example, in the diagram shown below:


We easily see why a total solar eclipse would only occur in the lower configuration with New Moon aligned to Earth and Sun as shown. In the upper case, the New Moons are slightly out of alignment because of the difference in synodic (29.5 days) and sidereal (or nodical= 27.3 d) months.  In this best case then we have the geometry:
Image result for brane space, total solar eclipse

So as the Moon moves relative to the Earth observer, the phases are observed as seen above.

Now, in the saros period it turns out there are 223 synodic months, 242 nodical months and 239 anomalistic months - each of which add up to approximately 18 years, 11 days.   This is an intervsal of the saros. Thus, at such intervals identical eclipses can be expected to occur. Also, successive eclipses separated by this interval are said to belong to the same "saros series". (Note that because the limits for umbral lunar eclipses are smaller than for solar eclipses, a saros series of lunar eclipses runs through only about 50 cycles, which requires about 870 years.)

Obviously, many differing eclipses can occur during the 18 -odd year period - meaning several distinct series are actually going on at the same time. Call them Series 1, Series 2, Series 3 etc.  Each series takes about 1, 200 years to complete during which time the eclipse paths gradually shift from one pole of the Earth to the other.

From what has been written it should be possible to see that the first solar eclipse in any series belonging to the saros cycle is a partial eclipse that occurs when the Sun and the Moon are at an eastern ecliptic limit.  (An "ecliptic limit" denotes the maximum angular distance the Sun can be from the nodes of the moon's orbit and still cause an eclipse.) 

If it is the descending node the eclipse is just barely visible near the South pole of Earth. If the eclipse is at the eastern limit of the ascending node, it is just visible at the North pole. To fix ideas as to the situation the diagram below is useful.

Image may contain: text
Note here the Moon's highest and lowest points in its orbit around Earth. The node that intersects the ecliptic plane (the plane of Earth's orbit) on the way up to the highest point is the "ascending node". The node which crosses the ecliptic plan en route to the lowest point is the "descending node".

After 223 synodic months the next eclipse in the series occurs, with the Moon just about 1/30 of a day's journey (or slightly under 1/2 degree), west of the same place relative to the node. Thus the eclipse occurs with the Sun and Moon about 1/2 degree farther inside the ecliptic limit. After about 70 successive eclipses separated by saros intervals, e.g. 70 x 18 yrs. (or about 1200 years) the positions of Sun and Moon at the times of the eclipses have shifted through the node to the western ecliptic limit and the series ends.   The first and last dozen eclipses are always partial ones, visible first at one polar region, then the other.

Monday, October 21, 2019

Bill Maher's $1 Million Offer For Trump To Resign May Be Best Way To Get Rid of the Loathsome Orange Cockroach

Related image

Wonder of wonders, President Donald J. Trump, aka Capt. Bonespurs,  said on Saturday that he would no longer hold next year’s Group of 7 meeting at his luxury golf club near Miami, a swift reversal after two days of intense criticism over awarding his family company a major diplomatic event.

Did Donnie Bonespurs do this out of a sober acknowledgement he was violating the domestic emoluments clause against presidential self- dealing?  I.e. selecting his own property as the venue for a major diplomatic event, and thus a "decision unprecedented in modern American politics with a president awarding himself a massive contract." (WaPo, Saturday).  

Of course not. This pinhead spouted about the "phony emoluments clause".  What do you expect from a dolt  that  has never read the Constitution and struggles with a 'Garfield' comic?  All Dotard knows is self dealing and hence actively embraces his own narcissism directed to self- enrichment. That is the sum and substance of his miserable existence.  If he can't make a deal that benefits himself he wants no part of it.   And bear in mind, like most grifters and criminal con men his "deals" are always inflated, exaggerated.  An AP examination of Trump's Twitter feed turned up 1,200 mentions of the words "biggest,", "smartest",  and "best".  (Denver Post, Oct. 20, p. 7A,  'With Trump It's Always 'The Art of the Big Deal'")  In his most recent transgression Trump claimed a crowd of 30,000 for a rally crowd in Dallas.  The Dallas Fire-Rescue Dept. made an actual count of 18,500 or below the 20,000 capacity of the American Airlines Center and 38.3 percent less than Trump claimed.

Why does this deranged man-baby employ such excess claims, hell outright LIES? Because like all practicing con men he understands that employing them is the best hook to sucker the gullible, lower IQ segment of the populace.  Thus, rather than offering solace to the Kurds slaughtered in the wake of his unseemly withdrawal of U.S. troops in N. Iraq, he chose to brag on his "deal"  as a "great day for civilization".  In fact, it was among the worst, and put a rubber stamp on allies' justified suspicion of the U.S. as credible partner in most global initiatives.

But as odious as Trump's withdrawal from Syria, it was not an impeachable offense.  However, his self- dealing to enrich himself via his Doral resort was.  As blogger Robert Weissman put it on smirkingchimp.com:

"President Donald Trump no longer sees fit even to pretend that he is constrained by the law or the U.S. Constitution. It’s hard to imagine a more blatant violation of the Constitution’s anti-corruption provisions than the president steering foreign governments to stay at his luxury resort.."

Nevertheless it took a firestorm of outrage to get  him to retract his decision, and even then it was done grudgingly and rife with serial insults and complaints at any critics.

 Trump wrote on Twitter  over the weekend, interspersing one tweet with the usual hyperbole, exaggerations and BS:

“I thought I was doing something very good for our country by using Trump National Doral, in Miami, for hosting the G-7 leaders.  It is  big, grand, on hundreds of acres, next to MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, has tremendous ballrooms and meeting rooms and each delegation would have ...its own 50 to 70 unit building.  Would set up better than other alternatives."

Let's pause here to note this is all horse manure   As Chris Hayes' guests pointed out on 'All In' Thursday, all the costs vis-a-vis Trump's Doral resort are already "sunk" - meaning underwater. In debt up to Miami's tallest condo. The Doral has struggled financially since the Trump family bought the resort out of bankruptcy in 2012, reportedly paying $150 million for the property. More than $100 million in loans to help finance the project came from Deutsche Bank. The property itself - as noted by Hayes -  has also been plagued with "flying vermin"  and had some not too good inspection reports of its facilities.

Given the conditions and  debt status at Doral,  having hundreds of  personnel from G7 advance teams first arrive to check it out and then return in June with their full delegations,  would merely provide a rescue for Trump to dig his sorry ass out of a financial hole. Problem is that G7 bunch would land in the midst of Miami's worst mosquito season - as noted by Hayes' guest Natasha Bertrand.  So, Trump isn't doing any "good" other for himself.  And as Ms. Bertrand also agreed,  any number of other places would be far superior alternatives.

Trump then carried on in his loopy rant tweet:

"I announced I would be willing to do it at no profit, or if legally possible at ZERO COST to the USA. But, as usual, the Hostile Media & Democrat partners went CRAZY!”

Ok, let's back up again to shovel more horse shit before moving on.  As Bertrand also reminded viewers there is no way profits would not accrue from the choice of the Trump dump. Especially as the arriving dignitaries would need several helipads - likely provided on the golf course. After the conference the helipads would then need to be removed and the golf course restored - all at cost to U.S. taxpayers.   Far from "going crazy" too many realized the fell, unconstitutional nature of Dotard's proposal and took him to task for it. Democrats (and many newspaper editors, e.g. The Denver Post)  immediately portrayed the plan as a blatant act of self-dealing corruption, and ethics lawyers said payments from the visiting delegations could violate the emoluments clause of the Constitution, which forbids the president from accepting gifts and funding from foreign governments.

Democrats in the House and Senate - to their credit- quickly introduced legislation intended to block the use of the Doral, a bill they called “Trump’s Heist Undermines the G7,” or the THUG  Act. The measure would have blocked the use of federal funds for the Group of 7 if the event were held at the Doral.

 The one who is crazy then, is Trump - for not grasping that is how his wacky nonsense would be received.

The fact this deranged  asswipe and certifiable moron could even be serious enough to write this claptrap shows he belongs in a straitjacket.  Do the country a favor? By letting foreign nationals stay at his flea and bed bug, mosquito -ridden dump that passes as a "resort"?  And then making the dignitaries pay for the privilege - to line his own pockets, of course.  (But one wonders if he'd pay their medical bills if they contracted dengue fever from a mosquito bite)

Trump added: “Therefore, based on both Media & Democrat Crazed and Irrational Hostility, we will no longer consider Trump National Doral, Miami, as the Host Site for the G-7 in 2020.”

In the wake of what we've seen the past week, let us accept as a proposition that things will only get worse in the next year - especially with impeachment hanging over Trump's head.   As NY Times political columnist Peter Wehner put it on 'Last Word' Friday night:

"Republicans to whom I've spoken have known from the start that this is a person who's really problematic, psychologically unwell. At the beginning it was wishful thinking that they could contain or control him... What's happening now is Trump's pathologies are getting worse  and the guardrails are disappearing. So what we're seeing now is the worst of Trump, but it's going to get worse going forward."

The problem is that if his Senate cult followers then fail to remove him, he will become vastly more emboldened and make even more atrocious decisions- say than the Kurd betrayal, the Ukraine shake down call to dig dirt on political opponents, and the Doral G-7 self dealing .  As WaPo columnist Ruth Marcus said on 'Last Word' Friday night, when asked if the "dam" would finally break in the wake of the week's events:

"No. The Republican lawmakers will just stick with Trump. They have a 'me first' approach and fear Trump's base and being primaried. Until Republican voters turn against Trump it is very very dangerous - no matter what they privately think, say about Trump giving himself this big contract, or Trump in Syria. So they're not going to break with him in public."

This fear is also what led HBO ('Real Time') comedian Bill Maher to warn at the end of September of the potential political ramifications of pursuing Trump's impeachment, but failing to remove him. As he observed:

"If we do this, the country is going to be paralyzed.  I'm not saying don't. ... It's going to be paralyzed for a very long time, and all of the oxygen in the room will be taken by this,
But then voicing the much more ominous danger of the GOP -dominated Senate failing to do its constitutional duty to remove the thug (which requires a two-thirds majority, or 67 votes.)  So what other alternative is there, short of invoking the 25th amendment (even more improbable), or Trump losing the election next year.? (Still not a slam dunk by any means.)  And we know how the Trump cabal will stoke the "fear the socialists" meme.
By Friday night, Maher had conceived of potentially the only real solution to eliminate the orange fungal parasite and blight on the Republic.    He offered to pay  $1 million for the orange mold to leave the office. (Which in truth he ought to seriously consider after Admiral William H. McRaven torched the traitor in a NY Times op ed and accused him of being a "threat to the Republic".)

Maher, a long-standing Dotard critic who actually got a Trump-filed  lawsuit tossed out (after he vowed he could prove Trump was the spawn of an Orangutan) said:
"Just take my check for $1 million. I bet I could get another 1,000 people just from here to the beach — including Malibu, of course — who would pay that much to see you resign," 
Bill  concluded, "Mr. President, it is really very simple. You love money. We hate you."
At first blush I agree with Maher this plan could work - knowing Trump's mendacious nature. But is $1 million enough to get Trump to move his fat ass out of the Oval Office for good?  I doubt it. I suspect it would take at least $100 million - and I doubt all the actors' contributions in Hollywood would make that threshold.   Besides, most would- be contributors would justifiably worry that this slimeball would renege. After all, look how he stabbed the Kurds in the back barely a week ago.  He'd probably do the same for this effort then holler at one of his rallies: "Ya see what I did to them dumb liberals and Dems! I stiffed 'em good!"

So we are stuck with hoping, as Marcus went on to say, that the polls favoring Trump's impeachment and removal hit at least 52-55 % of Republican voters to force the Repuke Senators to have their 'come to Jesus' moment and ditch the Dotard.

Either  that, or find a candidate who can beat him next year in the general.

See also:


Friday, October 18, 2019

Mulvaney "Bombshell" And Walkback Again Shows Media Problem In Covering Trumpies




"The most striking thing I heard is that this was the White House's defense, not the prosecution talking.  The defense was 'Hey, I did it! The President did it! So what?'  We've never heard this before. We never heard the White House confess to a high crime and misdemeanor. Because that's what this is, make no mistake about it. You go back to the Founders and ask what's the quintessential definition of an impeachable offense it's going an asking a foreign government o muck around in your elections. That's what the  Founders, Madison and others, were so worried about.  That's exactly what Mulvaney confessed to today."  -  Neal Katyal, former Acting Solicitor General in Obama White House, on 'Last Word With Lawrence O'Donnell' last night.


House Intel Chair Adam Schiff had to leave a deposition he was getting from Gordon Sondland - another Trumpie in up to his eyeballs with the Ukraine incident - to see for himself Mick Mulvaney openly admitting more impeachable offenses in a White House news conference.  For 39 minutes this pissant slime  turned the press briefing room into a confessional openly admitting that Trump cut off funding to Ukraine in a quid pro quo move to shake down that nation unless it played ball to get dirt on Joe and Hunter Biden.  Then the odious pig had the nerve to respond after his admission that "There is always going to be political influence in foreign affairs, get over it!"

Sorry pig, you just committed another impeachable offense on behalf of your master!  Why 'another'? Because earlier Mulvaney had announced that the site of the 2020 G7 meeting would be at Trump's Doral Country Club site - a fully owned Trump property. That means all the dollars pouring into that property from that meet will go into Trump's pocket, in violation of the domestic emoluments clause in the Constitution.  But to read some of the namby-pamby press coverage it was almost as if the upcoming meet at a Trump establishment had been normalized. The outrage? Next to zero, except on putatively liberal sites like MSNBC. 

Indeed, when the SC Republican bootlicker  reversed course a few hours later on the Ukraine admission, much of the media treated it as a simple correction.  Mulvaney had issued a statement that said the opposite of what he had said on camera earlier that afternoon, e.g.
Acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney on Thursday walked back comments he made earlier in the day suggesting that President Donald Trump held up military aid to Ukraine until it moved to investigate a conspiracy involving the 2016 U.S. election.
“There was absolutely no quid pro quo between Ukrainian military aid and any investigation into the 2016 election,” he said in a statement contradicting remarks he made during an earlier press briefing.

Again, as per usual with the Trumpies, the need for the humiliating “clarification,” for lack of a better word, was obvious. Mulvaney announced that the White House deliberately crafted a scheme in which it delayed military aid to a vulnerable ally in order to force the foreign country to participate in a political scheme for Donald Trump. His chief of staff not only confessed, but Mulvaney insisted the White House’s misdeeds were unimportant.  But then he tried to walk it all back after the initial media blowback and hullballoo.

This gave many of the less percipient - and of lower  intelligence-  an excuse  to again attack the media and cheer the most disgusting excuse for a president in history.  For example,  The Financial   Times header  yesterday evening had been: "Mulvaney Admits Quid Pro Quo in Ukraine Conversation"  but after the  Mulvaney walkback several FT commenters barked:  "The headline is wrong! It ought to read: 'White House issues confusing mixed messages!"

No, imp, the headline was correct, and there was no  need to dignify a lie by reporting it as news.  This again gets to the heart of why the press-media has so many problems covering Trump and his disinformation, propaganda cabal.  That includes, as Janice put it this  a.m. - after seeing a news clip- "making false equivalence between what Obama did in Syria in 2014 and what Trump just did in betraying the Kurds."

In another case, at a Trump rally in Big D,  we saw the depraved orange baboon reducing the Turks slaughter of the Kurds - in response to his wholesale withdrawal of U.S. forces - to a school  yard brawl.  Let us note hundreds of Kurds have already been slaughtered, many by use of white phosphorus. many dozens of them innocent kids.  Despite the fact we know Trump opened the door to this mayhem, e.g.


Trump bellowed to his crowd of raving zombies:

"It was unconventional what I did.I said sometimes they have to fight a little while.Like two kids in a lot you gotta let 'em fight, then pull 'em apart."

Rather than condemn this appalling analogy most media outlets (like CBS this morning) simply played it with no commentary as to its depraved nature in the context of what was unfolding before our eyes in Syria.  The least they could have done is played Sen. Mitt Romney's condemnation immediately after,

"The decision to abandon the Kurds violates one of our most sacred duties. It strikes at American honor. What we have done to the Kurds will stand as a blood stain in the annals of American history."

To compound this the press also left Trump off the hook by repeating his claim of a "ceasefire" with the Turks holding up their attacks for 5 days. In fact, they've done no such thing and they themselves refer to the "ceasefire" as a pause, though as Charlie Dageta reported this morning no one knows what the exact terms are or conditions only that later today "Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan will meet with the region's  real power broker, Vladimir Putin."

The media's lukewarm  kid gloves coverage of Trump and his collaborators  bodes ill for next year and the media coverage of likely impeachment proceedings as well as the general election.  Will they get it right or normalize Trump's every tweet,  toxic remark, accusation or claim?  We shall have to wait to find out.



And:


And:


And:

Excerpt:

Gaslighting for Beginners


"The standard GOP gaslighting on Ukrainegate is beautifully exemplified by the columnist Marc Thiessen, a regular contributor to the Washington Post and a living rebuttal to the canard that the media leans left. Thiessen writes: “There is absolutely nothing wrong with asking foreign heads of state or intelligence officials to cooperate with an official Justice Department investigation.”

Thursday, October 17, 2019

R.I.P. Elijah Cummings - Chair of House Oversight Committee

Image result for brane space, Trump and Elijah Cummings
The Hon. Elijah Cummings, Chair of the House Oversight Committee,  died in the early hours of Thursday due to complications from longstanding health problems, his congressional office announced today.

A sharecropper’s son, Cummings became the powerful chairman of the House of Representatives oversight committee, one of the three committees leading the investigation into Donald Trump’s dealings with Ukraine.

Cummings was a formidable orator who fervently advocated for the poor in his black-majority district, which encompasses a large portion of Baltimore, as well as richer suburbs. Most recently, he came out in powerful defense of his home city of Baltimore after the Swine-in-Chief tried to slime it as rat-infested.  
Cummings invited people to come and see Baltimore for themselves, rather than accept the words of a consummate liar, con man and racist traitor.  
Last summer, Cummings expressed singular  objection to Trump’s tweet barking that four Democratic congresswomen of color should “go back” to "their home" countries. Cummings shamed the thug for his blatant racism and admonished: "You need to represent all the people."  It was in the wake of that reprimand the orange thug attacked Baltimore, otherwise known as "Charm City".
Democratic candidate Kamala Harris tweeted:
 “We lost a giant today. Congressman Elijah Cummings was a fearless leader, a protector of democracy, and a fighter for the people of Maryland. Our world is dimmer without him in it.”
Not only that but I fear the House Democratic impeachment effort will be less robust without Cummings as the head of the powerful Oversight Committee.
At the very least, his articulate and passionate voice for social justice will be sorely missed.
Cummings’ long career spanned decades in Maryland politics. He rose through the ranks of the Maryland house of delegates before winning his congressional seat in a special election in 1996 to replace Kweisi Mfume, who left the seat to lead the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.  Cummings, in summary,earned his place as a leader, unlike Trump who conned his way into power and got the help of the Russians as well. (Which Mueller's report makes clear,)
As chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee, Cummings led multiple investigations of Trump's  governmental dealings, including several in 2019 related to Donnie Dotard’s family members serving in the White House.
Rest in peace, Elijah.  It is a pity that decent and honorable men like yourself die at a relatively young age while a depraved degenerate like Trump keeps fouling the air with his rhetoric and wasting space with his bloated, fungal self. He keeps on, in violation of all the laws of biology and nutrition (given the crap he consumes),  and  contaminates the nation and people with his toxic tweets and effluent.

See also:



Wednesday, October 16, 2019

Elizabeth Warren Displayed Unacceptable Cowardice By Not Admitting Higher Middle Class Taxes With 'Medicare for All'



"I still believe that the candidates with the biggest plans need to level with voters about how costly, painful and disruptive transformational changes are likely to be, at least in the short term. Take for instance the transformation of our health insurance system: Whether we are talking about Medicare for All or an expansion of Obamacare with a public option, there is a sticker price.

In other words, treat voters with respect by telling them the whole truth, warts and all, instead of simply dangling jewels in their faces."    - Charles Blow, NY Times, 'Democrats, Dream Big But Tell The Whole Truth'.

Last night Sen. Elizabeth Warren pronounced:

"Medicare for all is the gold standard. We can pay for this and I laid out the basic principles. Cost are gonna go up for the wealthy, for the big corporations. They will not go up for middle class families,"

Fine, but TAXES WILL go up and she dodged the answer to that question asked by one moderator, NY Times National Editor Marc Lacy.  What Warren ought to have said is that while middle class taxes WILL go up this will be more than offset by reduction in the costs derived from high monthly premiums, co-pays, drug costs.  She didn't. She dreaded use of the T word.  A lack of intestinal fortitude-   or plain courage  - to tell the truth about a policy position.

But at least Bernie Sanders was honest and forthright admitting:

"At the end of the day the overwhelming majority of people will save money on their health care bills.   But I do think it is appropriate to acknowledge that taxes will go up."

To which Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a moderate Dem, replied: "At least Bernie’s being honest here."

So why wasn't Warren?  Why was it so damned difficult to use the T word and admit that yes, taxes will increase but the benefits from lower medical costs will more than compensate for that.   According to CBS correspondent Major Garrett this morning:

"She made a tactical decision she doesn't have to answer this tax question... She had every opportunity last night to just say what Bernie Sanders  said, she didn't. She tactically decided this is not going to make or break her campaign."

However the voters, in the general election (if she gets that far), if not in the primary, could make the decision they need a more forthright,  honest candidate (and President)  than Elizabeth Warren.

Warren's deliberate tactic was also not a one off.  Time after time last night, in response to questions on how to pay for her Medicare for All plan, Warren tried to dodge using the T-word: and imposing higher taxes on the middle class.  As we watched I told Janice, if she'd just come clean like Bernie had she could avoid a lot of the  challenges and implications that her math is skewed, or non-existent.

Or worse, that she was deliberately being obfuscatory, even dishonest.

"Mayor Pete" Buttigieg was the first skeptic, a few minutes into the debate, after Mr. Lacy posed the question. He had been asked about Ms. Warren’s support for Medicare for All and her squishy responses to the question of whether middle-class taxes would rise under it.  Buttigieg taunted, “This was the candidate with 'a plan for everything,'except this.”

Warren’s head shot skyward as if beseeching the Almighty for inspiration or deliverance, saying quietly. “We can pay for this,” 

She kept repeating the mantra that “costs” would rise only for the wealthy and corporations   but kept on declining to concede — as Bernie had  — that middle-class taxes would go up.

Lack of courage, lack of candor. And not for the first time here with the Dems.  After Bush Jr. left office in January, 2009,  I screeched long and hard in many posts that it was idiocy to extend his tax cuts for the middle class as well as the wealthy, given all the needs that required income. See e.g.

Bush’s Revenge: Or how Zombie Tax cuts Will leave ...

The Dems never got the message, from me or many other wiser economic commenters - including Philip Stephens in The Financial Times. Instead they opted to keep that segment of cuts and digging deficit holes the Reeps would use to prevent increased funding of Medicare, Social Security.

As I've shown with other large scale liberal Dem plans, such as the Green New Deal, the bugbear or deal breaker in all of them is the failure or avoidance to reckon in the math,  E.g.

Applying Physics (And Some Math) To The Green Ne...

Where I pointed out that omitting nuclear energy from the mix would be a non-starter. As I put it, "Leave out nuclear and the time needed to get to a preponderance of renewables, even using Germany's high standard of adding 0.7 trillion kwh of clean energy per year, would take close to 150 years - by which time this planet would be on the verge of being another Venus. "

The same retreat from reality is evident in Warren's "plans" and defense of Medicare for all.  She seems unable or unwilling to tell voters straight that the choice is one between more taxes or less health care.  So if citizens think higher  taxes (by 15 % even for "middle class")  are the worst thing in their lives, what could happen? Well,  what if they are laid up in a hospital bed with severe disability, pneumonia  or prostate cancer? Is going bankrupt more to their liking?  (Without Medicare I''d have had to cough up over $85,000 for two major prostate cancer treatments:  high dose brachytherapy and focal cryotherapy,)

Again, for most Americans - who are tax hating Pollyannas-  they are convinced they're never going to get to that extreme fate so they make the bet those dire medical disasters won't happen to them.  Hence, why agree to pay higher taxes if the odds are so low in getting a medical calamity? But it's a terrible bet because any cancer, or serious accident can happen to any of us!

Make no mistake that 'Medicare for all'  would be the for profit medical  industry's biggest nightmare because they'd no longer be able to reap profits by invoking medical loss ratios - preventing sick people from getting care instead of delivering it. Hence, they and their  political lackeys and extremists will be prepared to fight like junkyard dogs to prevent it, including the perverse use of propaganda.

In this regard, the citizen needs to inform himself as much as possible about what the real arguments are for and against 'Medicare for all'. And also ask himself if he is willing to pay significantly more in taxes to be assured of better access to health care and significantly lower medical costs. Elizabeth Warren's dodging of the issue doesn't help citizens in making a judicious decision.

See also:



Cody Fenwick's picture
Article Tools E-mail | Print Comments (0)