On Monday, May 29, 2023 at 3:45:20 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/shanghai-hottest-may-day-100-years/

https://countercurrents.org/2023/06/global-temps-not-just-off-the-chart-but-off-the-wall-the-chart-is-tacked-to/

On Monday, May 29, 2023 at 3:45:20 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/shanghai-hottest-may-day-100-years/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRtqOTtsCr8

On Monday, May 29, 2023 at 3:45:20 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> https://www.cbsnews.com/news/shanghai-hottest-may-day-100-years/

https://countercurrents.org/2023/06/why-is-the-north-atlantic-breaking-heat-records/

On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 at 6:21:05 PM UTC-7, gggg gggg wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 at 8:57:09 AM UTC-7, Andy Evans wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 13 June 2023 at 02:06:12 UTC+1, gggg gggg wrote:
> > > > > "Homeowners SCREWED As Vast Swaths of US Uninsurable | Breaking Points"
> > > > Don't insurance companies give new meaning to the expression FAIR WEATHER FRIEND?
> > > https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/extreme-weather-causes-major-insurance-providers-to-pull-coverage-in-california
> > Of course more and more things are going to be "uninsurable" - that's the penalty we pay for causing the climate emergency. Parts of the world will have frequent floods, parts will have forest fires, and so on. We caused it and it's too late to go "boo-hoo" now. Actions have consequences, as they always say of Wagner's Ring Cycle.
> Frequent floods, forest fires and let's not forget something we'll all soon be facing and complaining about--blistering heat.

https://news.yahoo.com/nearly-100-die-india-struggles-115115539.html

On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 10:01:26 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> > > > > > "Homeowners SCREWED As Vast Swaths of US Uninsurable | Breaking Points"
> > > > > Don't insurance companies give new meaning to the expression FAIR WEATHER FRIEND?
> > > > https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/extreme-weather-causes-major-insurance-providers-to-pull-coverage-in-california
> > > Of course more and more things are going to be "uninsurable" - that's the penalty we pay for causing the climate emergency. Parts of the world will have frequent floods, parts will have forest fires, and so on. We caused it and it's too late to go "boo-hoo" now. Actions have consequences, as they always say of Wagner's Ring Cycle.
> > Frequent floods, forest fires and let's not forget something we'll all soon be facing and complaining about--blistering heat.
> https://news.yahoo.com/nearly-100-die-india-struggles-115115539.html

https://news.yahoo.com/power-outages-continue-across-southern-163439076.html

On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 10:01:26 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> > > > > > "Homeowners SCREWED As Vast Swaths of US Uninsurable | Breaking Points"
> > > > > Don't insurance companies give new meaning to the expression FAIR WEATHER FRIEND?
> > > > https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/extreme-weather-causes-major-insurance-providers-to-pull-coverage-in-california
> > > Of course more and more things are going to be "uninsurable" - that's the penalty we pay for causing the climate emergency. Parts of the world will have frequent floods, parts will have forest fires, and so on. We caused it and it's too late to go "boo-hoo" now. Actions have consequences, as they always say of Wagner's Ring Cycle.
> > Frequent floods, forest fires and let's not forget something we'll all soon be facing and complaining about--blistering heat.
> https://news.yahoo.com/nearly-100-die-india-struggles-115115539.html

https://news.yahoo.com/scores-die-northern-india-heat-074916284.html

On Monday, June 19, 2023 at 10:56:22 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> On Sunday, June 18, 2023 at 10:01:26 PM UTC-7, wrote:
> > > > > > > "Homeowners SCREWED As Vast Swaths of US Uninsurable | Breaking Points"
> > > > > > Don't insurance companies give new meaning to the expression FAIR WEATHER FRIEND?
> > > > > https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/extreme-weather-causes-major-insurance-providers-to-pull-coverage-in-california
> > > > Of course more and more things are going to be "uninsurable" - that's the penalty we pay for causing the climate emergency. Parts of the world will have frequent floods, parts will have forest fires, and so on. We caused it and it's too late to go "boo-hoo" now. Actions have consequences, as they always say of Wagner's Ring Cycle.
> > > Frequent floods, forest fires and let's not forget something we'll all soon be facing and complaining about--blistering heat.
> > https://news.yahoo.com/nearly-100-die-india-struggles-115115539.html
> https://news.yahoo.com/scores-die-northern-india-heat-074916284.html

https://news.yahoo.com/mexico-bakes-under-killer-heat-142540243.html

When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the other way around.

On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
> When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the other way around.

No idea what you mean by device. Being relatively safe from the extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich. You buy safety (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff. If there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.

On Tuesday, 20 June 2023 at 15:36:26 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
> > When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the other way around.
> No idea what you mean by device. Being relatively safe from the extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich. You buy safety (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff. If there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.>>

Don't stop when you're on a roll....

If there were no poor people everyone would be rich.....

If there were no women, everyone would be men....

Go for it!

On 6/20/2023 11:17 AM, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 June 2023 at 15:36:26 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
>>> When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the other way around.
>> No idea what you mean by device. Being relatively safe from the extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich. You buy safety (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff. If there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.>>
>
> Don't stop when you're on a roll....
>
> If there were no poor people everyone would be rich.....
>
> If there were no women, everyone would be men....
>
> Go for it!

Except if you think about it for two seconds, my statement had content to it and yours doesn't. Brilliant comeback.

On 2023-06-20 14:36:10 +0000, Frank Berger said:

> On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
>> When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device
>> that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd
>> see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the
>> other way around.
>
> No idea what you mean by device. Being relatively safe from the
> extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich. You buy safety
> (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff. If
> there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.

Yes, but a lot of the stuff that rich people have bought has been
oceanfront real estate, which means that sea level rise, and resulting
high water damage, will most likely affect them more than the
less-rich. You can't really buy your way out of a hurricane.

-Owen

On 2023-06-20 9:17 a.m., Andy Evans wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 June 2023 at 15:36:26 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
>>> When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the other way around.
>> No idea what you mean by device. Being relatively safe from the extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich. You buy safety (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff. If there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.>>
>
> Don't stop when you're on a roll....
>
> If there were no poor people everyone would be rich.....
>
> If there were no women, everyone would be men....
>
> Go for it!
and almost 50% of the American population is of below average intelligence.

On 6/20/2023 12:08 PM, Owen Hartnett wrote:
> On 2023-06-20 14:36:10 +0000, Frank Berger said:
>
>> On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
>>> When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the other way around.
>>
>> No idea what you mean by device.  Being relatively safe from the extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich.  You buy safety (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff.  If there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.
>
> Yes, but a lot of the stuff that rich people have bought has been oceanfront real estate, which means that sea level rise, and resulting high water damage, will most likely affect them more than the less-rich. You can't really buy your way out of a hurricane.
>
> -Owen
>

It's the rich who move society isn't it? If they have so much to lose, why aren't they, as a group, climate activists. Possible answer: As a percentage of their total wealth perhaps the beach-front property is not a huge factor. Or they have convinced themselves the disaster will not come. I don't know. Andy does, though, and will tell us, no doubt.

On Tuesday, 20 June 2023 at 21:01:33 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
> It's the rich who move society isn't it? If they have so much to lose, why aren't they, as a group, climate activists. Possible answer: As a percentage of their total wealth perhaps the beach-front property is not a huge factor. Or they have convinced themselves the disaster will not come. I don't know. Andy does, though, and will tell us, no doubt.

What are you doing on a thread about climate change? You've never shown the slightest interest in it and all you do is attack people who actually take it seriously?

On Wednesday, 21 June 2023 at 00:36:26 UTC+10, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
> > When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the other way around.
> No idea what you mean by device. Being relatively safe from the extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich. You buy safety (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff. If there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.

If there were no rich people a decent and caring society would have ensured nobody was poor, but well enough off and reasonably contented.

Ray Hall, Taree

On 6/20/2023 6:15 PM, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 June 2023 at 21:01:33 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
>> It's the rich who move society isn't it? If they have so much to lose, why aren't they, as a group, climate activists. Possible answer: As a percentage of their total wealth perhaps the beach-front property is not a huge factor. Or they have convinced themselves the disaster will not come. I don't know. Andy does, though, and will tell us, no doubt.
>
> What are you doing on a thread about climate change? You've never shown the slightest interest in it and all you do is attack people who actually take it seriously?

Attack people? That is term for questioning or, God forbid, disagreeing.

On 6/20/2023 7:35 PM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 June 2023 at 00:36:26 UTC+10, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
>>> When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the other way around.
>> No idea what you mean by device. Being relatively safe from the extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich. You buy safety (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff. If there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.
>
> If there were no rich people a decent and caring society would have ensured nobody was poor, but well enough off and reasonably contented.
>
> Ray Hall, Tare
Mind boggling wrong and naive. I can't even believe an intelligent human being could believe that. Possibly the stupidest statement I have ever read. I could go on.

On 6/20/2023 6:15 PM, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 June 2023 at 21:01:33 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
>> It's the rich who move society isn't it? If they have so much to lose, why aren't they, as a group, climate activists. Possible answer: As a percentage of their total wealth perhaps the beach-front property is not a huge factor. Or they have convinced themselves the disaster will not come. I don't know. Andy does, though, and will tell us, no doubt.
>
> What are you doing on a thread about climate change? You've never shown the slightest interest in it and all you do is attack people who actually take it seriously?

Attack people? That is you term for questioning or, God forbid, disagreeing.

On Wednesday, 21 June 2023 at 00:49:46 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 6/20/2023 6:15 PM, Andy Evans wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 20 June 2023 at 21:01:33 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
> >> It's the rich who move society isn't it? If they have so much to lose, why aren't they, as a group, climate activists. Possible answer: As a percentage of their total wealth perhaps the beach-front property is not a huge factor. Or they have convinced themselves the disaster will not come. I don't know. Andy does, though, and will tell us, no doubt.
> >
> > What are you doing on a thread about climate change? You've never shown the slightest interest in it and all you do is attack people who actually take it seriously?
> Attack people? That is you term for questioning or, God forbid, disagreeing.

Yes, attack people. You want me to say it again? Attack people. I think that's clear enough.

On Wednesday, 21 June 2023 at 00:48:41 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
> > If there were no rich people a decent and caring society would have ensured nobody was poor, but well enough off and reasonably contented.
> >
> > Ray Hall, Tare
> Mind boggling wrong and naive. I can't even believe an intelligent human being could believe that. Possibly the stupidest statement I have ever read. I could go on.>>>

Ray is a big hearted guy who cares about people. He inhabits a different cosmos from the one you exist in. It's no surprise you don't understand him.

On 6/20/2023 8:08 PM, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 June 2023 at 00:48:41 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
>>> If there were no rich people a decent and caring society would have ensured nobody was poor, but well enough off and reasonably contented.
>>>
>>> Ray Hall, Tare
>> Mind boggling wrong and naive. I can't even believe an intelligent human being could believe that. Possibly the stupidest statement I have ever read. I could go on.>>>
>
> Ray is a big hearted guy who cares about people. He inhabits a different cosmos from the one you exist in. It's no surprise you don't understand him.

What do you or Ray think would happen if you 1000 people on an island, all with equal wealth (supplies, weapons, tools, etc). Would they work together harmoniously and form an early Israeli-style commune and live happily ever ever?

On Wednesday, 21 June 2023 at 09:48:41 UTC+10, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 6/20/2023 7:35 PM, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 21 June 2023 at 00:36:26 UTC+10, Frank Berger wrote:
> >> On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
> >>> When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the other way around.
> >> No idea what you mean by device. Being relatively safe from the extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich. You buy safety (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff. If there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.
> >
> > If there were no rich people a decent and caring society would have ensured nobody was poor, but well enough off and reasonably contented.
> >
> > Ray Hall, Tare
> Mind boggling wrong and naive. I can't even believe an intelligent human being could believe that. Possibly the stupidest statement I have ever read.. I could go on.

So could I. Mostly about your total stupidity. As for my statement, it is absolutely correct, but in your view, as if one couldn't have guessed, quite obviously wrong. What else could one expect from an economist.

Ray Hall, Taree

On Wednesday, 21 June 2023 at 11:13:33 UTC+10, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 6/20/2023 8:08 PM, Andy Evans wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 21 June 2023 at 00:48:41 UTC+1, Frank Berger wrote:
> >>> If there were no rich people a decent and caring society would have ensured nobody was poor, but well enough off and reasonably contented.
> >>>
> >>> Ray Hall, Tare
> >> Mind boggling wrong and naive. I can't even believe an intelligent human being could believe that. Possibly the stupidest statement I have ever read. I could go on.>>>
> >
> > Ray is a big hearted guy who cares about people. He inhabits a different cosmos from the one you exist in. It's no surprise you don't understand him.
> What do you or Ray think would happen if you 1000 people on an island, all with equal wealth (supplies, weapons, tools, etc). Would they work together harmoniously and form an early Israeli-style commune and live happily ever ever?

Why not?

Ray Hall, Taree

On 2023-06-20 20:01:19 +0000, Frank Berger said:

> On 6/20/2023 12:08 PM, Owen Hartnett wrote:
>> On 2023-06-20 14:36:10 +0000, Frank Berger said:
>>
>>> On 6/20/2023 6:25 AM, Andy Evans wrote:y
>>>> When it comes to action on climate change, what we need is some device
>>>> that will affect the rich ten times more than the poor. Maybe then we'd
>>>> see some progress. Right now and into the forseeable future it's the
>>>> other way around.
>>>
>>> No idea what you mean by device.  Being relatively safe from the
>>> extremes of weather is one of the perks of being rich.  You buy safety
>>> (also security sytems, body guards, etc.) just as you buy stuff.  If
>>> there were no rich people, everyone would be poor.
>>
>> Yes, but a lot of the stuff that rich people have bought has been
>> oceanfront real estate, which means that sea level rise, and resulting
>> high water damage, will most likely affect them more than the
>> less-rich. You can't really buy your way out of a hurricane.
>>
>> -Owen
>>
>
> It's the rich who move society isn't it?

Do they really? Rich people seem more like headless nincompoops to me.
They seem to not know what to do with themselves. Society is moved
more by the media, performers and the latest hot thing. Those are the
people who carry the flags. Rich people hide behind the curtains lest
someone ask them for some money.

> If they have so much to lose, why aren't they, as a group, climate
> activists. Possible answer: As a percentage of their total wealth
> perhaps the beach-front property is not a huge factor. Or they have
> convinced themselves the disaster will not come. I don't know. Andy
> does, though, and will tell us, no doubt.

Well there certainly is a group of beach-front owners to which is a
huge factor. But how they got their wealth plays a factor, some worked
for it, some just inherited it from Daddy.

-Owen