|
Post by Ratty on Dec 24, 2017 5:44:37 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 24, 2017 6:03:47 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 24, 2017 9:23:52 GMT
They were the ones in basement offices with just a hard chair no other furniture, no cell phone signal no internet and blank walls as they 'could not be sacked'.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Dec 24, 2017 12:13:47 GMT
Basement = Swamp ??
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 24, 2017 13:09:42 GMT
Yep. I will give you an example of the EPA Regulations from the basement. I use diesel. I have fuel storage of approx 18,000 gallons. Because I would let $40K of fuel leak (only in some other life), I was supposed to hire an engineering firm specialized in pollution control, to design a d**e system. Cost about $40K. My fuel tanks are above ground, on a cement pad. If one started leaking, I would see it and have it pumped to save the fuel. That isn't acceptable. I also have electronic monitoring to let me know when I need to buy fuel. Some yokel in a basement dreamt up that regulation.
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 25, 2017 23:20:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sigurdur on Dec 29, 2017 7:57:19 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Dec 29, 2017 9:05:33 GMT
That isn't all and it has been going on for years: How China rules the waves FT investigation: Beijing has spent billions expanding its ports network to secure sea lanes and establish itself as a maritime power
JANUARY 12, 2017 by James Kynge, Chris Campbell, Amy Kazmin and Farhan Bokhariig.ft.com/sites/china-ports/“The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.”― Vladimir Illych Ulyanov aka Lenin Progressives provide the rope free of charge. That was the real purpose of TTP and TTIP give complete control of the 'first world' to the globalist entities.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 1, 2018 22:44:02 GMT
This your government Ratty? Can San Francisco Bay be far behind? In 2015, a Chinese firm took out a 99-year lease on Australia’s deep-water port of Darwin – home to more than 1,000 US Marines – for $388 million (A$506m).
|
|
|
Post by nautonnier on Jan 1, 2018 23:35:32 GMT
This your government Ratty? Can San Francisco Bay be far behind? In 2015, a Chinese firm took out a 99-year lease on Australia’s deep-water port of Darwin – home to more than 1,000 US Marines – for $388 million (A$506m).M'Boy - see my post 4 above this. China owns all the major ports on the US West coast.
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jan 1, 2018 23:51:26 GMT
This your government Ratty? Can San Francisco Bay be far behind? In 2015, a Chinese firm took out a 99-year lease on Australia’s deep-water port of Darwin – home to more than 1,000 US Marines – for $388 million (A$506m). We needed the money and, when it comes to money, China waives the rules .... Sorry
|
|
|
Post by Ratty on Jan 2, 2018 2:58:51 GMT
The report was paid for with American dollars, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 2, 2018 3:37:53 GMT
This your government Ratty? Can San Francisco Bay be far behind? In 2015, a Chinese firm took out a 99-year lease on Australia’s deep-water port of Darwin – home to more than 1,000 US Marines – for $388 million (A$506m).M'Boy - see my post 4 above this. China owns all the major ports on the US West coast. Unfortunately, that article is behind a paywall (for me). But that is bad news ... unless of course we foreclose. A very tenuous supply line.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 2, 2018 3:44:51 GMT
This your government Ratty? Can San Francisco Bay be far behind? In 2015, a Chinese firm took out a 99-year lease on Australia’s deep-water port of Darwin – home to more than 1,000 US Marines – for $388 million (A$506m). We needed the money and, when it comes to money, China waives the rules .... SorryPerhaps you need to "waive" your politicians. Hemp works nicely.
|
|
|
Post by missouriboy on Jan 2, 2018 4:15:55 GMT
The report was paid for with American dollars, I guess. There used to be a term in America in the first part of the last century ... "dirt poor". It was a misnomer. My grandparents and great grandparents and great-great grandparents were "dirt poor" ... they owned their own land in a quantity sufficient to feed their families and produce a "small" cash surplus for the extras they could not produce for themselves. These were the standards of the 19th and early 20th centuries ... perhaps exclusive of the migrants that settled in American cities and never left. Today's poor (and mostly everyone else) would choke on these conditions, as they don't meet today's expectations. Poverty is a term relative to time, place and expectation. But perhaps today's urban poor are worse off ... as their means of survival are even further from their own control ... and we won't even mention skills.
|
|