2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

The very fact that we're having this discussion, and that the Copenhagen talks failed and the Cancun talks are failing, is indicative that the movement to stop climate change by greatly reducing  carbon emissions has failed.  If countries (starting with the U.S.) had gotten serious about reducing carbon emissions just 10 years ago, we wouldn't even need to be having this discussion.  And the U.S. needed to take the lead on this since we grew and got wealthy by polluting and morally needed to take the lead to transition out of fossil fuels.

I consider discussions on adaptation a waste of time.

Better to discuss is what will be the fate of civilization down the road with no action on global warming.  I don't see action ever being taken to reduce carbon emissions.

I've also noticed, that as signs of global warming get more and more obvious, and failure to even start reducing carbon emissions continues, more and more people I know seem to be losing concern over globa warming.  Ten years ago, I would have thought that the reverse would happen, that as signs of global warming became clearer, the political will to reduce carbon emissions woud become much stronger but, in fact, the reverse is happening.  People seem to be rationalizing our changes in climate as a natural cycle, even those who previously believed that man may be affecting the climate.  Maybe it's just too hard for people to want to believe that man is changing the climate this much.

Emily, please have a show with some ecotherapists on how to psychologically deal with climate change, and the knowledge that nothing is being done, and the serious consequences of that.  There are some local Portland therapists that do have knowledge of this (Thomas Dougherty is one).

posted 2 years, 5 months ago
view in context

Sorry I'm getting to this discussion late (I work in Corvallis during the week and am unable to listen to Think Out Loud then).  But I wanted to respond to this, since I recently read an article by the investment columnist Malcolm Barko who I feel has a lot of good advice, although I'm not sure I agree with what he wrote about for-profit colleges).

What he wrote was that for-profit colleges are a great investment and recommended the person who wrote to him, and others, invest in them.  He said they educate students for a fraction of the per-student cost of not-for-profit or state colleges.  He said the not-for-profit, traditional university model is way too expensive and outmoded for these times, and that nowadays everyone should go to a for-profit college because they teach so much more efficiently.

But after reading through these comments, I see how they achieve their efficiencies, and that's at the cost of some of the quality of instruction. 

Fortunately my husband, who recently had to go back to school to change careers, was able to get into the pharmacy tech program at Clark College, which was excellent, and very affordable, and didn't have to go to Appollo or Western College, both of which were offering that program at the same time.  Employers liked hiring pharmacy technicians out of the program, and he found a job soon after graduation.

I'm going to listen to the show online now.

posted 2 years, 6 months ago
view in context

Changes I would like to see in unemployment:

1.  Allow people to attend school while receiving unemployment.  Right now attending school or training isn't allowed while receiving unemployment benefits.  In some industries, such as software, continuous learning is a requirement and it is counterproductive to not allow unemployed software developers to take evening classes or get other training while unemployed.

2.  Have a more clear system on what constitutes a job search.  Washington State allows people receiving unemployment to count WorkSource classes on their list of job search activities, and they only require 5 be provided on the list.  Requiring 8 (and it isn't clear from reading the requirements if even 8 is enough) weekly contacts doesn't work when you are not able to find 8 jobs that you qualify for, and can encourage people to submit resumes for jobs they're not really qualified for and know they'll get rejected for just to add the contact on their unemployment list.

posted 4 years, 1 month ago
view in context