Someone has figured it out, modern life has made us dumb or dumber than, well, something
Human beings are getting dumber | News.com.au (http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health-fitness/human-beings-are-getting-dumber/story-fneuz9ev-1226581222526)

I would have thought this was obvious to us all, there have been some very dumb things done lately and technology has robbed us of the need to remember, to use our grey matter and actually think, to talk to each other without a phone plugged in our ear.

Politicians have proven they can't talk to each other any more, original ideas come from where? Does anyone know? Has anyone had an original idea in yonks?

Good news the author of this article thinks the problem will be solved in, say, 300 years

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/5/54/Are_We_Not_Men_We_Are_Devo!.jpg/220px-Are_We_Not_Men_We_Are_Devo!.jpg

Sometimes you worry me Tom

http://us-mg4.mail.yahoo.com/ya/download?mid=2%5f0%5f0%5f1%5f12339347%5fACIpR9AAAC wVUSOVuAyqpkHJ%2bWk&pid=1.10&fid=Inbox&inline=1&appid=YahooMailNeo

I've been complaining about the dumbing down of America for years. Another consequence of liberal/progressive policies in my opinion.

Another consequence of liberal/progressive policies in my opinion.Is there a magical place on earth that has conservative policies where the people are all smart?

You could try Singapore

I've been saying it for years... there is a lot more truth in this movie than fiction.

http://pascalsbettors.com/sites/default/files/amn/posters/idiocracy-2006.jpg

Is that comment on the state of play in america or life generally

Is that comment on the state of play in america or life generally

Mankind in general... WORLD WIDE.

Yes we are seeing it play out in government at the moment

I blame educators they teach the same dumb courses year after year

And one can only use so many art history and parapsychology majors, but I digress. Speaking of the bleeding obvious which I've alluded to several times recently, USA Today gets it right - fix the family. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/02/20/universal-preschool-state-of-the-union/1934361/).


In the eyes of many parents and most educators, starting a child's schooling before kindergarten is an indisputable virtue. Your kid acquires learning and social skills that give him or her an advantage.

So it's hardly surprising that President Obama used his State of the Union Address to call for extending that middle- and upper-class habit to all children, at government expense.

But before the checks go out, it would be wise to consider a broader question: Can the middle-class experience be replicated that easily? The evidence says universal preschool alone won't get the job done.

A few small, high-quality programs have shown enduring benefits for at-risk kids. But intensive study of Head Start, the nation's largest and oldest preschool program, finds that the beneficial effects, which are real, wear off by third grade.

The probable reason is not hard to deduce. Children are most likely to succeed in school when pushed by parents who provide stability, help with schooling, and instill an education and work ethic. But for decades now, the American family has been breaking down.

Two-fifths of children born in the USA are born to unmarried mothers, an eightfold increase since 1960. Many succeed thanks to the heroic efforts of strong, motivated single parents and other relatives. But research shows that children of single parents suffer disproportionately high poverty rates, impaired development and low performance in school.

Ron Haskins, an expert on children and families at the Brookings Institution, calls single parenthood a "little motor pushing up the poverty rate." In 2011, the rate for children of single mothers was more than four times greater than that for children of married couples.

Researchers at Princeton and Columbia, following 5,000 children born to married and unmarried parents, have found that the effects of single parenthood seep into every aspect of kids' lives.

A typical pattern in these "fragile families" looks like this: When a child is born, most fathers and mothers are in a committed relationship. By the time the child reaches 5, though, many fathers have disappeared. As the mothers move on to new relationships, the children face more instability, often with new siblings born to different fathers. Boys without strong male role models are more likely to turn to gangs and crime.

Single mothers read less to their children, are more likely to use harsh discipline and are less likely to maintain stable routines, such as a regular bedtime. All these behaviors are important predictors of children's health and development.

It is a tragically familiar pattern. In 1965, Daniel Patrick Moynihan, then a Johnson administration official and later a U.S. senator, warned about an alarming rise — to nearly 24% — in unmarried births in the black community. His prescient warning created a furor among liberals and civil rights leaders, who accused him of blaming the victim.The rates are now 73% for blacks, 53% for Hispanics and 29% for whites.

Even today, solutions are undermined by ideological warfare. Liberals blame poverty. Conservatives blame the culture. Both are right. The problems are intertwined, and defy easy solutions. Fighting poverty, promoting marriage and stable relationships, intervening with home visits, and improving education all help, but there is no magic answer.

So, sure, explore Obama's plan to expand quality preschool, and make sure kids aren't then dumped into failing elementary schools. But don't miss the core problem. The primary engine of social advancement has always been the family, and it is breaking down.

I'd say we're way past "breaking down", kids need a mother and a father more than anything else. But go ahead, let the whining begin.

I would say you are past the whining stage but there is a racial component to this, ssssh, we have to be careful. Could it actually be that this is the result not so much of the family breaking down but of disadvantage being spread abroad and a breakdown in religion. The society has lost its anchor point

I believe you're correct on the religion aspect, another negative result liberal policy and culture (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/current-events/gun-control-past-debates-724058-67.html#post3386067).

There is also a cultural component which is obvious in the statistics, some things are more acceptable in some communities/cultures than they are in others

Being religious does not make one a better person.

You miss the point entirely it is not about the individual but a belief system anchors a society, this situation we have today where you just believe whatever, or perhaps nothing, breaks down the cohesion. One thing for sure becoming your own god serves no one.

When you have a belief system there are boundries, one of those boundries is usually related to sex outside of marriage. The major religions have one thing in common, they have rules about relationships that doesn't carry over into a secular society, and if these rules are followed we don't have large scale abortion, divorce, birth outside of marriage, so yes religion can make a better person or at least a happier one

The major religions have one thing in common, they have rules about relationships that doesn't carry over into a secular society, and if these rules are followed we don't have large scale abortion, divorce, birth outside of marriage, so yes religion can make a better person or at least a happier oneBut it's the religious ones who are also divorcing, having abortions, having sex outside the marriage, etc. Are you turning a complete blind eye to that?

There are so many religions and gods to believe in, you and I are very similar, I just believe in one less god than you do. If belief is the only thing stopping you from screwing your neighbour's wife or killing someone or wallowing in unhappiness then by all means believe because you need to! I just don't require that to act morally in a society.

No when the breakdown begins it affects everyone and the breakdown may very well have started among the religious, we have seen plenty of examples of this recently. Religion is not a guarantee simply a system and in any case my belief system is founded not in religion but in relationship. Acting morally is a matter of degree and I have found that my morality is anchored in what I was taught as a child, but being committed makes it easier to stay on the path because there is someone I have to be accountable to besides myself.

You believe in what you know which is yourself, I believe in who I know so there is a difference, you have an opinion I have a certainty

I have found that my morality is anchored in what I was taught as a childExactly the same here.
It has nothing to do with religion. I'm doing the same with my kids.
To say you have "certainty" is BS though, that's why it's called a "belief".

Exactly the same here.

To say you have "certainty" is BS though, that's why it's called a "belief".

As I said you have an opinion

No, I have certainty!

No, I have certainty!

You sure about that? What if you're wrong?

It's Ok speech he is free to believe whatever B/S comes his way

You sure about that? What if you're wrong?Wrong about what?
Pascal's wager? That's no way to run your life.

Ockams Razor

Wrong about what?
Pascal's wager? That's no way to run your life.

Neither is faith in certainty.

Agreed. To each his own.

Speaking of the bleeding obvious... guess where the economy is adding jobs?


Texas Dominates The Best Cities For Good Jobs (http://www.forbes.com/sites/danielfisher/2013/02/25/texas-dominates-the-best-cities-for-good-jobs/)

Earlier this month, Texas Gov. Rick Perry made a quick tour of California to remind business owners that life’s a whole lot easier in the Lone Star State. Perry’s California critics called him “Governor Oops” for his miscues during the presidential debates, and Gov. Jerry Brown dismissed the Texan’s recruiting drive as “not a burp,” and barely even a certain bodily release of gas.

Laugh away, Californians. But Perry is playing the stronger hand here. Texas trounced the rest of the country our latest survey of the Best Cities for Good Jobs, with five metropolitan areas in the Top Ten, including the four best cities to find jobs in the next few years.

This year’s winner is Dallas, which shrugged off the Nov. 2011 bankruptcy of American Airlines parent AMR Corp. to rack up 2.1% job growth last year and is projected to continue adding jobs at a 2.8% rate through 2019 – more than 300,000 on top of the 2.1 million already in Dallas and its Plano and Irving suburbs.

Yes, I know what you're going to say, it's all burger flippers and Walmart checkers. Wrong.


One explanation that is definitely false: Texas isn’t growing on the backs of underpaid, non-union workers. While Texas is a right-to-work state, many of the highest paying jobs in the Dallas area are with unionized defense manufacturers like Bell Helicopter and Lockheed Martin, which produces the F-35 Lightning II fighter at a mile-long plant in Fort Worth.

Asked about the state’s reputation for union-busting and low-wage jobs, Dallas Federal Reserve Economist Pia Orrenius said “we get a lot of that.”

“People say it’s all low-pay jobs, so I looked at employment growth by wage quartile,” she said. And guess what? Not only is the Dallas-area per-capita income of $39,548 comfortably above the national average of $37,000, but it’s growing fastest in the top half of wages above $16 an hour.

I hear horizontal drilling and fracking has created many jobs in Tx . Meanwhile ,here in NY ,where the upsate rural areas have been depressed for years ;and are sitting on one of the largest natural gas finds in our history ;the Governor intentionally delays the decision about fracking .

BTW ;the F-35 is a dog .

I don't know why we needed the F-35, but at least it's being built here. Bell has expanded here in Amarillo as well, not only building the V-22 but upgrading Cobras and Hueys as well. And yep, the oil business is booming like I haven't seen in some time.

I And yep, the oil business is booming like I haven't seen in some time.

That's only until Obama can find a way to shut down a private business on private property like he's done on public lands everywhere.

Speaking of the bleeding obvious...guess where the economy is adding jobs?



Yes, I know what you're going to say, it's all burger flippers and Walmart checkers. Wrong.

Top half? Not bad.The bottom half here earns a minimum wage of $16 per hour plus benefits under the National Wage Agreement.

Top half? Not bad.The bottom half here earns a minimum wage of $16 per hour plus benefits under the National Wage Agreement.

$16 an hour with benefits; you fellows are living large over there.

You might be interested to know our state government has now made it illegal to do any drilling for gas, fracking, etc within two kilometers of an urban area and for the record that's a conservative government

Top half? Not bad.The bottom half here earns a minimum wage of $16 per hour plus benefits under the National Wage Agreement.

And how's the cost of living?

And how's the cost of living?

If you are a family on that level you are struggling week to week and the cost spiral from energy is a real impact

let's see

$16 an hour = $640 before tax so $520 take home

Mortgage or rent $300
Food... $150
Car... $100
Medical
Energy
Clothing

Oh yes living large

Let me rephrase, what does $16 buy where Tut is compared to $16 in Texas?

Can't speak for Texas but apparently the cost of living in some parts of the US is lower than here I have given you a sample of costs here if you are in a major city, forget it,

What's a good comparison you can relate to; McDonalds meal $10; Pizza $8 city, $15 country.
Cab Fare $15-$25. Fuel $7 gallon, Bread $4, eggs $4 dozen

can't speak for Texas but apparently the cost of living in some parts of the US is lower than here I have given you a sample of costs here if you are in a major city, forget it,

What's a good comparison you can relate to; McDonalds meal $10; Pizza $8 city, $15 country.
Cab Fare $15-$25. Fuel $7 gallon, Bread $4, eggs $4 dozen

Gas $3.39, McDonald's $5-$6, Bread $2.50, eggs $2.18 for XL.

Gas $3.39, McDonald's $5-$6, Bread $2.50, eggs $2.18 for XL.

So $16 buys a lot more always knew that because Yanks always complained about how much we are paid, it's a market size thing, and the stupid part is our dollar is worth more than yours

so $16 buys a lot more always knew that because Yanks always complained about how much we are paid, it's a market size thing, and the stupid part is our dollar is worth more than yours

I don't complain about how much you're paid, I just know my salary buys a whole lot more than in NYC or California. I can buy twice the home here, with a large lot, as I can in San Diego and for less. Compare...

2539 Caulfield Dr, San Diego CA 92154 Home for Sale - Yahoo! Homes (http://homes.yahoo.com/California/San_Diego/2539-caulfield-dr:6189716a9cde0724447df6719c8959fd/;_ylt=AknRr3CyftmjGW7229DouWhn47Qs)

7404 Cason Dr, Amarillo TX 79119 Home for Sale - Yahoo! Homes (http://homes.yahoo.com/Texas/Amarillo/7404-cason-dr:a2bc7a0e4b1f061a261c239a8b393e2a/;_ylt=AhW6sadQp8XzOEd7uHOqR55n47Qs)

And how's the cost of living?

Well it would be a lot better if we could reduce the minimum wage to somewhere between $10 and $8 per hour and do away with the 'extras'.

The only problem with that is they would expect to pay no tax and then they would start to ask for free stuff. Ungrateful lot.

Well it would be a lot better if we could reduce the minimum wage to somewhere between $10 and $8 per hour and do away with the 'extras'.

The only problem with that is they would expect to pay no tax and then they would start to ask for free stuff. Ungrateful lot.

You are not serious surely, you want to turn our fair land into a cheap labour rat hole when we already have full employment. Tell you what, ask your asylum seeker/ illegal/backpaker/abo dole bludger to work for $8 an hour

You are not serious surely, you want to turn our fair land into a cheap labour rat hole when we already have full employment. Tell you what, ask your asylum seeker/ illegal/backpaker/abo dole bludger to work for $8 an hour


No, I am not serious. I was just having a cheap shot. I come from a long line of working class people who sweated it out in coal mines and quarry faces. If I had my way it would go up to $18- $20 per hour.



P.S.

Clete, I worked out fuel to be about $5.55 per gallon.

Clete, I worked out fuel to be about $5.55 per gallon.

Tut a rough calculation and using imperial measurement

$1.50 a litre = $6.81 imperial, $5.67 US

I expect it depends on where you live.

The difference between US and Australian pricing is the fuel tax and Tapis to LSC pricing

Gee we could eradicate poverty if we raised minimum wage to $50 hr.. . oh if it were that simple.

Gee we could eradicate poverty if we raised minimum wage to $50 hr. ...oh if it were that simple.


Perhaps we could start by paying the 'ruling elite' less and the productive members of society more.

Now Tut I'm sure you know that such a suggestion is communism to Tom but yes, there is no indication that the CEOs etc are worth their extortionate salaries and many middle level managers are not worth theirs either, this is why they can be let go so easily, so the minimum wage in the US should be lifted to give a more equal distribution of income but sadly it is more likely to reduce the numbers employed

That would be entirely up to the share holders... no ? You want to know why teen unemployment is so high ? Minimum wage laws. Guess what.. entry level work is not supposed to be a career .

You want to know why teen unemployment is so high ? Minimum wage laws. Guess what .. entry level work is not supposed to be a career .

So, what does that have to do with anything? Entry level work I mean.

Tut

I put minimum wage laws right up there with rent controls and farm subsidies for their unintended negative impacts .
All they really do is increase unemployment for the most vulnerable work force.

I put minimum wage laws right up there with rent controls and farm subsidies for their unintended negative impacts .
All they really do is increase unemployment for the most vulnerable work force.


Of course you do. The hide of those Plebs wanting a fair days work for a fair days pay.

What I find interesting is that it's the unions that are always pushing for it.. The reason of course is that if the minimum wage increases ,then they get a better bargaining position for higher union scale. They of course couldn't give a rat's @ss about the lower wage workers and how this really affects their world .
And of course you are completely wrong . The elite corporations love minimum wage laws.Why ? Because it drives the smaller margin, mom and pop small business competition out of the game.

You guys crack me up. On the one hand you want jobs back inside the country ;and on the other hand ,you put your labor at a competitve disadvantage. Meanwhile every consumer in the country shops bargain.

What I find interesting is that it's the unions that are always pushing for it .. The reason of course is that if the minimum wage increases ,then they get a better bargaining position for higher union scale. They of course couldn't give a rat's @ss about the lower wage workers and how this really affects their world .
And of course you are completely wrong . The elite corporations love minimum wage laws.Why ? Because it drives the smaller margin, mom and pop small business competition out of the game.

You guys crack me up. On the one hand you want jobs back inside the country ;and on the other hand ,you put your labor at a competitve disadvantage. Meanwhile every consumer in the country shops bargain.


I assume when you say, "And you are completely wrong" You are referring to me. Followed up by, "The elite corporations love minimum wage laws"

What cracks me up is the number of times in the past I have asked you for evidence regarding comments I have not actually made. Nothing is ever forthcoming.

So I will try one more time. If this comment is directed towards me. Where is the post that says I deny that corporations favour minimum wages?

OK I'm wrong... you agree with me when I say that "The elite corporations love minimum wage laws.... Because it drives the smaller margin, mom and pop small business competition out of the game. "
Glad we are in agreement .

ok I'm wrong ... you agree with me when I say that "The elite corporations love minimum wage laws.... Because it drives the smaller margin, mom and pop small business competition out of the game. "
Glad we are in agreement .


Yes I agree. I did read the Codevilla article. Didn't you?

Tut

And yet you defend minimum wages... strange

What I find interesting is that it's the unions that are always pushing for it .. The reason of course is that if the minimum wage increases ,then they get a better bargaining position for higher union scale. They of course couldn't give a rat's @ss about the lower wage workers and how this really affects their world .
And of course you are completely wrong . The elite corporations love minimum wage laws.Why ? Because it drives the smaller margin, mom and pop small business competition out of the game.

You guys crack me up. On the one hand you want jobs back inside the country ;and on the other hand ,you put your labor at a competitve disadvantage. Meanwhile every consumer in the country shops bargain.

what a load of old claptrap. A minimum wage is necessary to avoid exploitation, without it business would prosper at the expense of the worker. You want your nation to be competitive with the sweatshops of Asia then devalue your currency and stop profiteering. You want employment opportunity to return, insist on local content in the products sold. Or put tarriffs on cheap goods. You should learn the lesson from those who have had to deal with this problem, enforce standards for products, buy locally produced food and find industries that can't be exported even a high labour cost country like mine can sell products in your market, our minimum wage isn't styffling employment or export industries

what a load of old claptrap. A minimum wage is necessary to avoid exploitation, without it business would prosper at the expense of the worker. You want your nation to be competitive with the sweatshops of Asia then devalue your currency and stop profiteering. You want employment opportunity to return, insist on local content in the products sold. or put tarriffs on cheap goods. You should learn the lesson from those who have had to deal with this problem, enforce standards for products, buy locally produced food and find industries that can't be exported even a high labour cost country like mine can sell products in your market, our minimum wage isn't styffling employment or export industries

So instead of having three people employeed.. they have to get rid of one and have only two employed...

You can only sell product for a certain price... your operating expenses like rent and utilities are a certain amount... whats left you have is for wages... you have one pie... you can have 5 or 6 small slices... or two real big ones...

Tell the people that now don't get to have a slice not natter how small they are better off... and see how far that gets you. Sure the two people that get a bigger slice are happy... but that came at the expense of someone else that now doesn't get a slice at all.

Jack up the prices to keep everyone employed and people stop buying your product, you go out of business and nobody gets a slice then.

Seems to me competing with low wage workers in under developed third world nations is a losers game. Shouldn't they be looking at us and getting more value for their work?

But that would screw businesses looking for cheap slaves... I mean... workers to exploit. Now is that the free market capitalist model, or the slave enriching the master model?

OR BOTH?!

.

Jack up the prices to keep everyone employed and people stop buying your product, you go out of business and nobody gets a slice then.

Your answer is a slave economy, don't tell me the exploited illegals aren't part of a slave economy. People will buy your product if it is good quality but you don't always have to compete on price. If you have low wages you condemn yourself to shopping at Walmart because that is all you can afford. I have watched the discount stores always competing on price but when I buy the product price is a secondary consideration, It only determines which store I buy from, I don't want a cheap product that will fail one day after the warranty has expired, I wind up spending twich as much

what a load of old claptrap. A minimum wage is necessary to avoid exploitation, without it business would prosper at the expense of the worker. You want your nation to be competitive with the sweatshops of Asia then devalue your currency and stop profiteering. You want employment opportunity to return, insist on local content in the products sold. or put tarriffs on cheap goods. You should learn the lesson from those who have had to deal with this problem, enforce standards for products, buy locally produced food and find industries that can't be exported even a high labour cost country like mine can sell products in your market, our minimum wage isn't styffling employment or export industries
Oh yeah ,beggar thy neighbor.. that eventually leads to conflict ,and does no good for the nations consumers.

what a load of old claptrap. A minimum wage is necessary to avoid exploitation, without it business would prosper at the expense of the worker. You want your nation to be competitive with the sweatshops of Asia then devalue your currency and stop profiteering. You want employment opportunity to return, insist on local content in the products sold. or put tarriffs on cheap goods. You should learn the lesson from those who have had to deal with this problem, enforce standards for products, buy locally produced food and find industries that can't be exported even a high labour cost country like mine can sell products in your market, our minimum wage isn't styffling employment or export industries

Again ;what you fail to realize is that entry level positions are not supposed to make a career . What you gain in so call 'living wages ' you lose in opportunity lost for the people who could actually benefit from temporary employment at lower entry level wages.. . aka teens ;aka low skilled workers who don't have a job because the small employer cannot afford to hire that one or 2 extra clerks or janitors. What you get is a whole "class " of people who are being denied employment ,the opportunity to learn a skill ;and another whole group permanently dependent on the nanny state for their existence.

Dems want to raise it to $10.10. They have a funny way of encouraging job growth, keep making it more expensive to hire people. Increase wages by nearly 40 percent, explode the cost of health care, regulate the heck out of everything and increase taxes. Sounds like a perfect recipe for economic growth to me.

Speaking of the bleeding obvious again, Maxine Waters said the sequester would cost us 170 million jobs (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001). That's some high quality math there, we only have 134 million (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001) in the workforce.

and yet you defend minimum wages ...strange


Not really. Where I come from minimum wages are set by the Fair Work Ombudsman. It is for the benefit of the employee not covered by awards and agreements.


Tut

Speaking of the bleeding obvious again, Maxine Waters said the sequester would cost us 170 million jobs (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001). That's some high quality math there, we only have 134 million (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000000001) in the workforce.

Someone has to tell her that Sequester is not the cat trying to eat Tweety .

your answer is a slave economy, don't tell me the exploited illegals arn't part of a slave economy. people will buy your product if it is good quality but you don't always have to compete on price. If you have low wages you condemn yourself to shopping at Walmart because that is all you can afford. I have watched the discount stores always competing on price but when I buy the product price is a secondary consideration, It only determines which store I buy from, I don't want a cheap product that will fail one day after the warranty has expired, I wind up spending twich as much

And yet people making arguments like you still shop at the cheapest store despite what they claim they want.

And no its not a slave economy. Any of those people are free to go work someplace else or start their own business... because people get paid for what value they bring. Some people are dumb as stumps and aren't even worth what the current minimum wage is.

Why should an employer HAVE to pay someone who can't even add 2 + 2 and get a correct answer... or complete a taste without screwing things up one out of every 2 tries more than they are now?

Would YOU pay at least twice as much to eat out so the waiters can make $20 an hour... or would you stay home causing the Restaurant to go out of business as a result?

Would you be willing to pay $4 for a green Pepper or Tomato so the fruit and vegetable pickers can earn $20 an hour?

More on the bleeding obvious, the "field of dreams" economic model doesn't work. No Mr. president, if you take taxpayer money and build a $40,000 Chevy Volt or A Tesla Roadster that may or may not get you to your destination people will not flock to buy it. Nor will they come just because you built another solar panel plant to flood the market.


Solar Startup SoloPower Undergoes Restructuring, Cuts Workforce (http://www.forbes.com/sites/uciliawang/2013/02/28/solar-startup-solopower-undergoes-restructuring-cuts-workforce/)

It was only last fall when SoloPower began manufacturing at its new solar panel factory in Oregon and aimed to eventually make use of a federal loan guarantee to expand production. Now the company is undergoing restructuring to cut costs and that plan includes layoffs, SoloPower said Thursday.

The company issued a short statement about the plan after The Oregonian reported last night that the Silicon Valley startup is in trouble. The venture-backed company is laying off employees, and top executives have left the company recently, the newspaper reported.

“The restructuring includes a workforce reduction designed to trim costs and address market conditions as the company transitions from an R&D focus to commercial manufacturing and sales,” the company said in a statement.

SoloPower now joins a long line of solar equipment manufacturers worldwide who have struggled mightily to stay in business in the past two years. A glut of solar panels has caused prices to crash and forced dozens of manufacturers to either file for bankruptcies, idle production lines or scratch new factory plans. The impact of this imbalance of supply and demand has affected everyone from industry stalwarts such as First Solar and SunPower to startups such as Solyndra and Abound Solar.

And speaking of Abound Solar...


Colorado health and environment officials have ordered Loveland-based Abound Solar, the bankrupt solar-panel maker, to clean up hazardous waste at four Front Range locations.

The Abound facilities are storing thousands of "unsellable" solar panels and thousands of gallons of toxic liquids, according to Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment reports.

"The Department views these 2,000 pallets of solar panels as a characteristic hazardous waste for cadmium," a report on a Denver warehouse said.

Read more: Colorado orders Abound Solar to clean up hazardous waste at four sites - The Denver Post Colorado orders Abound Solar to clean up hazardous waste at four sites - The Denver Post (http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22666212/colorado-orders-abound-solar-clean-up-hazardous-waste#ixzz2MIimajNB)

Funny how all this "green" technology keeps turning out to be so hazardous for the environment. Maybe if Abound can sell enough of their toxic panels someone can build enough plants to charge all those Tesla Roadsters instead of relying on coal-fired plants to charge their toxic batteries.

Hazardous waste with clean green energy ? Who'd thunk it ? Well fire up my CFL light bulb !

Isn't restructuring part of the free market capitalist business model? Sure it is.


“The restructuring includes a workforce reduction designed to trim costs and address market conditions as the company transitions from an R&D focus to commercial manufacturing and sales,” the company said in a statement.

Tom loves a company that gets mean and lean, he aid so. Screw the laid off workers they can get jobs somewhere else after they use up unemployment benefits, or was that part of the restructuring too? Wonder if the management or board of directors take a haircut like the workers will?


The impact of this imbalance of supply and demand has affected everyone from industry stalwarts such as First Solar and SunPower to startups such as Solyndra and Abound Solar.

WHAAAAAAAT?? Imbalance between supply and demand?? NO SH1T??

Just a point. If there is toxic waste in "GREEN", what about shale oil, and fracking? Where does that waste go?

Don't know what you are talking about... a $20 million tax credit isn't in any business model I approve of .

Just a point. If there is toxic waste in "GREEN", what about shale oil, and fracking? Where does that waste go?

Obviously the irony of the toxic consequences of "clean" energy still escapes you. As for fracking, just pour some of the fluid over ice and enjoy.

I drank fracking fluid, says Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2013/feb/12/colorado-gov-hickenlooper-i-drank-fracking-fluid/)

What a stunt.

What a stunt.

And he's a Democrat.

No initiative has EVER brought more toxic Mercury into every household than the one for Compact Fluorescent Lights...

How many years did we poison ourselves with asbestos, and lead paint before we found a better way? What about coal dust? Still working on that one aren't we?

The difference is the Obama Initiative has INCREASED mercury in the home... not decreased it.

Next he is going to bring back lead paint too. And cadmium plated pacifiers.

How many years did we poison ourselves with asbestos, and lead paint before we found a better way? What about coal dust? Still working on that one aren't we?

I think the point is coming up with a non-toxic solution, not another toxic one.

Green toxins... much better

"Soylent Green is people!"

I think the point is coming up with a non-toxic solution, not another toxic one.

You mean not coming up with another MORE toxic one?