[quote][b]grove600[/b] - Mental illness isn't a political issue, but who pays for it is a political issue. [/quote]

True, and in many ways it is the old pay it now, or pay for it later (in other ways).

Not many political figures around that put the society/country interest above politics nowadays.

Got to credit Quick for this, but (not to sound too cynical) I wonder if the expenses of transportation, parking, etc. aren't just put as write offs for business expenses on her taxes? That would allow getting at least some of that back and still make the $0 claim. OK that was cynical I admit, but possible.

[quote][b]Cosmo Vitelli[/b] - http://onlineathens.com/local-news/2013-06-05/athens-clarke-county-manag...
[/quote]

What does this have to do with the food bank in this article?

@TeeWee: your point was no point really, other than expressing the No Nothing attitude of some who post here. I think you confirmed my point as well, someone who does not really understand science but loves to criticize it.

[quote][b]torqinwrench[/b] - Acid[/quote]

Where in this story was "acid rain" mentioned, other than your rant?

[quote][b]TeeWee[/b] - What??? So let me see if I have this correct. Water will cling to dust (naturally occurring) and grow large enough to form rain but soot (which is the same size as dust) does not let water droplets form in size. The airborne H2O seems to know the difference...the H2O discriminates, the water is selective? And now that the Clean Air Act has reduced emissions we have fewer airborne particles so now we get more rain? C'mon man! These guys will float any hair brain story to continue funding. Let's sequester these stupid studies and sent these fools out to flip burgers. Stories like this make me want to run down the street screaming
[/quote]

Quit your screaming and start your thinking by reading this again. What they said was this: "The tiny specks of soot and other particles spewing out of smokestacks at factories and power plants were roughly the same size, resulting in small droplets rather than raindrops heavy enough to fall to the ground.". Simply stated, there were a lot more particles to form, so for the same amount of water in the air each droplet is smaller and less likely to form droplets big enough to fall.

You really need to get beyond ideology, the only fool here is those that use talking points from talk radio (" These guys will float any hair brain story to continue funding."). You read what you wanted to in this, unfortunately that is not what they said.

Mr. Feigenbaum makes many valid points, but also misses on a couple that would confuse his argument.

Particularly on the "environment" point where he states that "High-speed rail creates more pollution than it prevents because building a high-speed rail line is very energy-intensive. " I downloaded and read the full report, and this point was never really proven, just an opinion. He did bring up in that full report the real environmental reason in that it takes 1/5 to 1/3 less energy to move a person from point A to B by rail, which is one reason why these modes are supported in other countries. His counter was that there were more cost effective ways to obtain that pollution reduction. However, I would suspect that his Reason Foundation and the GA Public Policy Foundation would oppose many of these measures, even if they were "market based".

I personally like rail transport and use that in Europe when I can. To counter @Gavalues hearsay point, I will be traveling from Karlsruhe Germany to Berlin next week. Google maps says this is 679 km or 420 mile with a driving time of 6 hours 10 minutes via Autobahn. Travel on Deutsche Bahn for 2 people first class reserved seats is 127 euros or about $165. That would be very competitive or even cheaper than air travel especially if you count driving to the airport cost. At U.S. auto operating costs of about $0.50 per mile, driving cost would be $210 (and it is a lot more expensive in Europe).

That said, I do think that a better investment (for the most part) would be in improving and expanding light rail transport in major urban areas. Here is the US we were kind of stupid to build an entire societal structure around just one mode of transportation within urban areas of the automobile. Europe did not follow that path. No we are stuck with major many urban areas all sprawled out and lots of traffic jams.

@geronimo509: Amen to that. We need a return to real "student athlete" concept and do away with the hoax that we have now of defacto farm systems.

@RightIswrong: it also helps being tall and "good looking " in general

For the sake of maintaining a civil society the trial proceedings should follow all the rules set for anyone. Although in this case there should not be allowed too long drawn drag out of the system of allowing him to pontificate in court.

[quote][b]fixit[/b] - For "liberals," everything that happens is a compelling argument for totalitarian government. [/quote]

Although I question his financing model proposed, I fail to see where this article pushes a "compelling argument for totalitarian government".

Snarkiness aside from the other comments here, many buildings can benefit from energy efficiency improvements, which does save the owners money and helps create jobs (through new products sold, work performed, etc.) The problem is how to encourage or pay for that.

Making remarks about academic quality of other schools...

Let's see, latest overall US News and World Report rankings has the following listed schools in his conference or region:

Northwestern #12
Notre Dame #17
Michigan #29
Wisconsin #41
Illinois #46
Penn State #46 (tie)

Ohio State #65

Maybe he was joking on how much ground his school still had to make up?

FYI. Rankings for Georgia Tech is #36 and UGA #63 (just ahead of OSU)

[quote][b]cyou299[/b] - the percentage of Congressmen receiving farm subsidies...is higher than the percentage of Americans receiving food stamps[/quote]

That's because they can't work the farm while being such dedicated public servants (and working the "system")

Time for Holder to fall on his sword, so to speak.

Thank you Mr. Grimes. One party rule never is good as it reduces true democratic participation and ends up with corrupt ineffective government. This holds for the "old South", the "New South" or Russia or China or (fill in then blank here ..)

I agree. Too bad special interest money has bought and paid for our "public servants".

[quote][b]Farmer GA[/b] -
I have seem the same photos of placards. I would say that they are tame when compared to those used to protest Bush. If you are saying that Obama can't be protested in the same way Bush was, who is really racist?
[/quote]

I remember those against Bush as well and think both are despicable. They both are equally vile.

One true reason why we can't seem to address our critical problems now is too many people getting way too caught up in vilification of people with other opinions (on both sides).

@Politically Correct Name: you did not really address the Food Bank issue or do not understand it in your apparent self righteousness.

[quote][b]Politically Correct Name[/b] - It's such a quaint idea that some naive idealist reading poetry to 10 other people in downtown Athens is Earth shattering or an impetus for any change whatsoever. [/quote]

I would not classify the Food Bank of NE Georgia as a bunch of naive idealists.

@Arnold Friend: Translating that "low bar" is anyone who does not agree with a certain ideology, or has been or is now associated in anyway with anyone who does not 100% agree with that ideology. I guess that is a "low bar".

@Logical: Overall I tend to agree in general.
Wish there were a good way to arrange for some tax benefit for charities that have proven to do good work for society.
You are dead on about the reason for the big rush to get 501(c)4 in order to hide the name of donors. That is what the whole ruse of Citizens United was about; it was a way for the plutocracy to get even more control.
I think you judge the Catholic Church too harshly here though. How does it (compared to any other church) spend too much time on political situations? That is compared to their large amount of behind the scenes charity work.

[quote][b]bb80[/b] - "Another, written for $10, went to the Downtown Athens Parking System. The “for” line on that check is inscribed with a serial number that matches a parking ticket issued to a blue Subaru less than a week before the check was written."
Employee appreciation? Stare
[/quote]

Maybe that was to help the employee of the month out? (ha ha)

[quote][b]Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass[/b] -
Take yourself back to Lincoln's presidency. Nastier comments can hardly be imagined, even in the blogosphere.
Still, we manage to keep up these days.

I'm going to point to 24-hour news programming and the "one man, one channel" meme, whereby the pool is so broad that it's necessarily shallow.
Or perhaps it comes down to the fact that a news organization is no longer serving the public interest, rather it is solely tasked with delivering eyeballs to the advertisements.
[/quote]

Yes I agree totally about the 24 hour news media of the day. One could say that in the past the media (basically newspapers and then later news mags) had to sell for advertisement some as well for at least a portion of their revenues. And sometimes papers did go to the sensational to sell copies. But I think they also banked on upholding a good reputation as well, something of which seems to be lost in today's news media on TV and web. Now it is more about feeding a base group of like minded "believers".

And yes true about the politics of Lincoln's ( and other's) era. We all tend to look through the veil of the post WWII era.

@mpd0.59: There are varying degrees of openness. What this person is talking about is taking it beyond that to having the employees into the mindset as an owner. Profit sharing is one method.

From my experiences in the past working at and with several smaller privately owned firms (50 people or less), it is a hard step getting the original owners/founders to give up any control or to share information enough to treat employees as a "partner" even if they don't have any equity stake.

Different models work best for different types of small businesses. I came from firms in the consulting area focusing on engineering and business operations, having worked at 3 and now having helped advise 2 others as startups. That type of organization does seem to be a great place to evolve into a employee owned firm, but it is hard for that person who started it up to make that transition. Some never do and that is what works for them. But many of the most successful firms of that type are the ones where all employees have some sense of a stake in the company through some shared equity and the company is more open and transparent in its operations. But developing this and doing it right is very tough to do.