Comments by gaetani
Posted on September 12 at 11:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I know that climate change did not cause the creation of the seven continents. I didn't write it the way The Gazette printed it. I wrote that there was climate change at the time it happened. When comes to the age of the planet, I know it is more than millions of years old. Again what I originally wrote was not what was printed. My original sentence was "...just like there has been for millions of the years this planet has existed." not "...just like there has been the for millions of years this planet has existed." Professor I didn't say that the dinosaurs died off from global warming. I contributed to climate change regardless of what caused the climate change. That just goes to prove my point that you climate changers are really still just global warming alarmists.
Maybe it is you who should read some books, history books about Greenland. Or why don't you try the Internet. I am sure you have heard of that. Why do you think it is called Greenland? In reality, I was a little bit off about ice covering the vegetation on Greenland. It actually occurred a little over 700 years ago during the beginning of the Little Ice Age that began around 1300 AD (CE for you modernists). You are right one does not have to be a scientist or for that matter a professor of the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at RPI to find these things out. In fact, I suspect my fifth grade daughter could find this out. Are you smarter than a fifth grader professor?
Yes, I know the CO2 levels have been higher and lower than now. I don't know what extremely rapid increasing temperatures and CO2 you are talking about. The latest data I have seen shows that the Earth's temperature has not risen in 16 years. And your assertion that we should be in a global cooling period is flat out wrong. We have actually just come out of a Little Ice Age two decades ago. I read Mr. Hollocher’s letter. Why do you think I wrote mine? I disagreed with his explanation because I remember reading the article in Newsweek in 1975 that because of CO2 there was global cooling. If you were alive then you would remember the 70's were a cold period.
What I have to say Ms. Katz is if I were an RPI student taking one of your classes, I would drop it and ask for a refund. If you are the type of professors they have there, no wonder our young people are in so much trouble. You are feeding them a load of garbage.
Posted on September 9 at 10:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
tonijean613, You are very naive. You don't know what it means to be a Progressive at all. You had better search history to find the real meaning of what a progressive is. They don't care one bit about the climate. What progressives believe is that people are too stupid to make the right decisions for themselves and society as a whole so they have to make the decisions for everyone.
tonijean613, climate change and pollution are not one and the same. I don't believe that we should pollute anything but CO2 is not pollution. It is a necessary gas for all living things, especially plants to survive.
Liberty to me is ones ability to live their life without anyone telling them what to do and when to do it as long as it doesn't harm anyone else's life, liberty, and property. tonijean613, if you live by a motto of "Live simply, so others may simply live", you are not a progressive at all. You may be Amish but you are not a Progressive. tonijean613, so you would have no cars, no electricity, no central air and heating, no appliances, and on and on. My, my, my, what a wonderful world it would be.
Posted on August 21 at 11:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Bill, you have just hit the tip of the iceberg. The cost of government over regulation is the ruination of this country. Average Americans cannot afford the invisible tax and the direct outlays imposed by these burdensome regulations. That is one reason why the wealthy are doing better while the middle and lower income people are losing ground.
Posted on March 18 at 9:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't know why there are conceal carry permits at all. If everyone was allowed to open carry, there would no problems like we have now. justapo, you had better reread the 2nd Amendment and then go read why it is in the Bill of Rights. The reason it is there is at the time there was no standing army or marines. In order to ensure that our nation and the individual sovereign states remained sovereign, everyone needed to be able to own arms and be trained on their use. Now you might be thinking, so now we have a standing army and marines why do we need this amendment. Well, I will tell you. Our Constitution and country is based on these basic principles. That all citizens in this nation are sovereign individuals and all of the states are sovereign. Therefore, we need the right to bear arms to protect our sovereignty. Plain and simple.
Posted on February 8 at 8:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Linda Neil, there you global warming people go again! When confronted with the facts about it, you have to deny them and come up with some innocuous supposed facts that do not refute the arguments against you and don't even support your own position. Just because carbon dioxide has increased over the last 55 years doesn't mean that it is caused by human's use of carbon based fuels. Do you know what the historical levels of carbon dioxide have been throughout the billions of years history of the planet? I have done some research and what the levels are now are not high by historical standards. There really isn't any global warming. Many scientists and climatologists. many of whom were once global warming supporters, now say there isn't a man made created global warming. Don't you get it? It is just another way for Progressives to take control of our lives.
That being said, I do care about pollution and I have been a proponent of alternative energy sources for 35 years. Solar energy has been around for more than 50 years but the technology hasn't advanced too far. Wind energy cannot be used to generate large amounts of energy. What can be done for both solar and wind is for each person to generate their own energy for their personal use.
Have you ever heard of Nicolai Tesla? He was the genius who invented AC electricity and the radio among other things that we take for granted today. He spent most of his life trying to figure out a way to generate power from the atmosphere - induction. I heard recently that someone has figured out a way to do that. It will be used to power you appliances, light fixtures, and electronics devices. Now how is that for reducing pollution and carbon dioxide.
Posted on February 8 at 8:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Newsworthy, typical of a progressive who wants the government to control their life. Insult me and offer no facts to back up your point. I have provided research of two highly regarded scholars of economics. What do research of people with credentials do you have? Just as I thought, NADA!
I for the life of me don't understand why people like you want the give up your liberty to the government to control every aspect of your lives. Get your head out of the sand and wake up!
Posted on February 3 at 1:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Bravo! Bravo! Paul and FrankLowe!
Posted on January 11 at 12:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Mr. Sator is forgetting one big thing. If no one has guns, the government won't need those weapons of mass destruction to round us up. Another thing that he is forgetting is I doubt the government would want to incur such destruction in the country just to take some people out who disagree with it. I will have more on this topic in the print version of The Gazette.
Posted on November 21 at 10:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I am not going to argue with your numbers although I would like to know where you got how much taxes the top 400 earners paid. The problems with you tax the rich people are many. Chief among them is envy, one of the seven deadly sins. Who cares how much anybody makes for a living? Do these people somehow harm you? Do they take food out of your mouth? Do they take clothes off of your back? Do they prevent you from living in a place out of the elements? I think the answers to all of these questions are no.
So, what gives you the right to ask them to give up more of their hard-earned money to government? It is not a privilege to earn more money than someone else. It is the abilities of those people that causes them to make more money. Let me explain somethings to you. Your data shows that the top 400 earners paid an average tax rate of 16.6 percent of gross income but that is not what everyone is taxed on. We are all taxed on taxable income. There are nearly 50 percent of Americans that do not pay federal income taxes. There is not enough money made by the top 5 percent to cover all of the money that you and your ilk want to spend. This nation spends more money per student than any nation in the world. It is not money that is needed to improve education. And taxation is not meant to be used to improve one's standard of living. That is just plain ludicrous!
You can not improve someone else's standard of living by taking money from someone else by taxing them. It doesn't work and never will. That is because the only way to improve one's standard of living is to do it yourself by getting a raise, a promotion, a better paying job, starting your own business that nets more money, etc.. Those that rely on others for their livelihood will never amount to anything. They will become lazy and bored and lose their ambition.
One other comment. Your example of the person who nets $3,000 a month in which you speculate that his income taxes are $6,000 and that amounts to 100% is just plain stupid. First of all, you start out with his net monthly pay so his income taxes were all ready taken out of his pay. Second, a $6,000 income tax doesn't equate to 100% tax rate because he nets $3,000 a month which is $36,000 a year. I already explained that net means taxes were taken out but lets for arguments sake use the $36,000 as taxable income, that would make the person's tax rate only 16.7 percent. Hey, guess what? That is just about the same as your mythical top 400 earner.
Posted on November 19 at 12:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As a candidate for State Comptroller in 2010, I was opposed to then candidate for governor Cuomo's tax cap proposal for the very reasons that you have written in your editorial. I know first hand how the tax cap is a false promise from an ignorant politician who has no clue how a local government works. The Legislature is complicit in this charade because they refuse to reduce the mandated burdens that they have passed down to local governments. But they are not alone. The State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli is also very much at fault in this situation. Being that he is the sole trustee of the Public Employees Pension System his mismanagement of that system has created the most significant burden on local governments of all the mandates. He continually raises the amount that local governments have to contribute for their employees' pensions annually. Since he took over the office in 2007, he has told the local governments to contribute an additional 8%, 12%, 16%, 18%, and now 20%. His excuse has been that the 2008 stock market downturn is the culprit. But the stock market had gained until recently almost all of its losses since 2008. What this means is his mismanagement of the investments made for the pension fund have been very poor and that his assumptions for the necessary rate of return were wrong.
Mr. DiNapoli does not have a finance background which is a big part of his problem. But a finance background hasn't been a big plus for past Comptrollers either. Former Comptroller Carl McCall has a finance background but he set all of this mess into motion back in the late 90's when during the tech stock bubble boom on the stock market, he told government employers that they did not have to contribute to the pension fund for several years because the fund was in great shape. Government employers are still paying for that grave mistake. Unfortunately, Mr. DiNapoli has two more years left on his current term in office. We can look forward to higher pension contributions for local governments until he leaves office.
What I proposed when I ran for Comptroller was that an independent board of trustees be created to oversee the pension fund investments. This board would be made up of parties that have an interest in the fund. That is employees, employers, and tax payers not patronage appointees. One public sector union - PEF - did not like this idea when they interviewed me for a possible endorsement. They will reap what they sow.
Until the mandates are eliminated, the local tax burden will continue to rise. We need to pressure the Governor and the Legislature to relieve this burden. Your newspaper could be a great help by calling for action.
John A. Gaetani
49 Cedar Ln