Return To Myopia

9 Responses to Return To Myopia

1. RL CRABB says:

   November 13, 2018 at 7:14 am

   “In the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.” Let’s hope this becomes a new trend… https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/11/dan-crenshaw-forgives-pete-davidson-saturday-night-live/?fbclid=IwAR3SE63V1aTXQJreb4Ha1qcX0dM-iBfLKQ1rbzODPMwEZFaSdMF4SHyNFjE

   Reply
2. Chris Peterson says:

   November 14, 2018 at 9:07 am

   And…we’re back to the equal-position argument.

   Again; one side lies, cheats, and steals to stay in power and keep us in the white-dominated past, the other does not. For the most part, those on the left aren’t wearing any vision-limiting eyewear. Those on the right, if they removed their eye patch, would expose the fact that they indeed have but one eye. They are literally myopic.

   Then again, 90 million of my wife’s ancestors perished when we took over this place, so I can see why a lot of people are worried about ceding control.

   Reply
3. rl crabb says:

   November 14, 2018 at 9:59 am

   If you don’t want to see the shortcomings of the left just because the right is better at blundering in public, that’s okay. At least you’ll save some money on your next pair of prescription glasses.
   The left is much better at masking their intentions. They make promises that they only mean to keep until they can sway enough of the public to do what they intended to do from the beginning. It’s why so many voters turned on them in 2016.
   The Democrats in California have made a deal with PG&E that will cost us ratepayers dearly, as it has already cost the lives of so many. Trump wasn’t entirely wrong to criticize forest mismanagement. His sin was doing it while the fires are still burning and the body count is rising. Once the smoke clears, there will be many questions.

   Reply
   • Chris Peterson says:

     November 15, 2018 at 8:28 am

     ” Trump wasn’t entirely wrong to criticize forest mismanagement.” (Perhaps only 99% wrong, therefore, a true statement.)

     Thank the stars we had a forest management team, back when we were growing up, that could keep the drought at bay, saving us all the pain of a parched forest that would catch fire if you looked at it wrong.

     Reminds me of Hoover blaming the Mexicans for the great depression; something that is being regurgitated today. Growing up; no deep recession, so no blaming the Mexicans. Similarly, growing up; no drought and only normal, sporadic forest fires.

     Then again, if we can accept the fact that the Mexicans are once again responsible for our current, non-existent recession, then it’s no stretch to believe that your forest management team in CA has caused the drought.

     Who needs religion, when everyday people have such god-like powers?

     Reply
     • rl crabb says:

       November 15, 2018 at 9:12 am

       Of course, Chris. California has been a model of forest management. LOL

       Reply
4. rl crabb says:

   November 14, 2018 at 11:38 am

   https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6384559/PG-E-SoCal-Edison-shares-plummet-amid-California-wildfires.html?fbclid=IwAR3r2hVAjkRr-3EpBQN8zP3d0wLNGBBFKYikytMtH5aSHUDyaV80ztEWtd8

   Reply
5. Steven Frisch says:

   November 14, 2018 at 5:15 pm

   Seriously Bob you really don’t know what you are asking for. Let’s play this scenario out.

   Let’s say PGE and SCE go bankrupt. Or let’s say Jerry Hill gets what he wants and the large Investor Owner Utilities are broken up. Who provides power? The answer Hill is proposing is that Publicly Owned Utilities take them over. Publicly Owned Utilities are not responsible for damages. The consumers would get killed in these big fire events AND they would have no recourse for damages.

   More important, if the IOU’s go bankrupt who do you think is going to provide utility service from the private sector? I can tell…no one will want it because the risk is simply too high.

   This is a considerably more complicated issue than you are implying here.

   Reply
   • rl crabb says:

     November 14, 2018 at 6:25 pm

     Complicated is an understatement. This has been brewing since the failed deregulation fiasco twenty years ago, and it’s going to cost all of us plenty.

     Reply
6. Steven Frisch says:

   November 15, 2018 at 11:54 am

   This has actually been brewing since we included inverse condemnation in the requirements under which we regulated Investor Owned Utilities in 1949.

   The fact that many don’t even recognize the role of climate change in this mix of disaster and disruption, and that even those who recognize the role continue to kick the can down the road on the cost of adapting to climate change, doesn’t help.

   Adapting is going to cost money one way or another–whether born by the public in the form of public investments or by the public in the form of lost property and death….period.

   Reply