Bob55

SunPower Gives Optimistic Outlook for 2010, Plans to Launch Gen 3 Cell

When you're finding companies meeting and often beating expectations quarter after quarter and you have major price drops time and time again, manipulation appears to me to be the more likely cause than simply someone with a large position liquidating their position. As for future outlook, it did not look so bleak as to warrant such a huge price drop. Sorry but something just isn't kosher in this market.

SunPower Gives Optimistic Outlook for 2010, Plans to Launch Gen 3 Cell

In agreement with Road Runner about possible stock manipulation here and most other solar stocks including FSLR's previous quarter earnings release. Nothing disclosed accounts for this big of a price drop.

Climate Change: How to Invest for the Possibility

It's precisely because China is an environmental disaster due to industrialization that they have to do something soon on a grand scale. Think their growing economy doesn't have a price? Look at the smog and polluted rivers that is decimating their people and landscape.

Like I said, it was a first step. A first step is better than not taking a step at all.


On Sep 29 12:42 PM HardwoodFlooring wrote:

> China is an environmental disaster...I can't stand the whole "China"
> is ahead BS. They are still making AC on a Freon(sp) platform. Have
> people that bang on about China's environmental record actually been
> there? They are a g-damn disaster.

Climate Change: How to Invest for the Possibility

And labeling global warming as "bad science and faulty reasoning" is not sensationalizing? Let me ask you something. You admit that it is important that decisions be made "as our knowledge improves" meaning global warming "could" exist but so many like yourself would not admit to it at the current time. Likewise, an increasing (not decreasing contrary to some's belief) number of AGW-believers could change their views in the future if the scientific community could prove undeniably that its cause is not man-made. You're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you, but in the meantime, real things are happening in our environment that will have dire effects on humankind. I don't care what's causing it right now. It's happening. Do we take the approach of doing nothing and watch the coastal areas of the world sink to rising waters or do we try implementing something on a worldwide scale and see if it makes a difference? I take the approach of doing something because to do nothing especially if we have the means to is to give up and accept disaster.

Climate Change: How to Invest for the Possibility

Very sorry - correcting another typo.

"We just have to see which way the wind blows in Washington this time around."

Climate Change: How to Invest for the Possibility

Perhaps it is for the same reason that the U.S. have not committed for so many years and why China and India have yet to agree to commit. Growth of the economy at all cost.

At least in the last summit, China has taken some steps in the right direction by announcing concrete investments in renewal energy, a large-scale tree-planting project, etc. but it is a mere first step. Should the U.S. finally make a commitment, it would be a huge step towards acknowledging that the science is real and not mere religion as you say and it will be a matter of time that other uncommitted nations will follow. We just have to say which way the wind blows in Washington this time around.


On Sep 29 10:00 AM concrete guy wrote:

> Bob: When CFCs were shown to be depleting the ozone layer, every
> country on the planet immediately discontinued their use. Why?....because
> the science behind the concern was compelling and indisputable. So
> why then are the vast majority of these same countries not responding
> to the AGW concern? Because the science is anything but compelling.
> AGW is not science, it's religion.

Climate Change: How to Invest for the Possibility

Strange isn't it that other countries across the globe are willing to hurl themselves off this green cliff (as you put it) because the leaders of their countries see global warming as a very credible threat with very serious consequences. Or perhaps these leaders are misguided as those of us who put Earth and the environment first and foremost over corporate profits and the economy? We, in the U.S., can continue debating this till the cows come home while the glaciers continue to melt and world water levels rise.

Climate Change: How to Invest for the Possibility

Sorry, a typo:
" I hope very much the same ploy is not used here regarding global warming. "

Climate Change: How to Invest for the Possibility

A huge danger when an article like yours come out is when it makes the suggestion that we should do nothing to stop global warming, that it is simply a natural cycle of warming and cooling throughout the Earth's history, and mankind has neither the resources nor the true volition to do anything about it. The arguments bear similarities to when cigarette companies deny claims that their product cause everything from emphysema to cancer. They might try modifying their products a little like suggesting low-tar cigarettes, but in the end, their products is just as dangerous. I hope very much the same ploy is used here regarding global warming. Today, cigarettes are forced to have health warnings on their label, and after adding all the tax surcharges the cost of a pack of cigarette is close to $10 a pack. The same can be applied here. Yes, there will be a cost to world governments and industry to combat the problem, but if left unchecked, I foresee the cost in the future will grow substantially. We have the technological means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and if survival is at stake, I believe mankind will be more resilient than you give them credit for.

Climate Change: How to Invest for the Possibility

When doctors tell you today that smoking is bad for your health, people listen without contesting the empirical evidence. Likewise, when the majority of the world's scientists say there will be very imminent consequences if we don't cut CO2 emissions drastically in our immediate future, we should listen seriously. This conclusion if from the vast majority of those who are climatologists who know their business far better than you or I.

Now getting back to my cigarette example, for decades cigarette companies try dismissing the validity of the health claims against them in fear of it cutting into their profitability and it wasn't till decades later that it can be accepted without a doubt that smoking cigarettes will kill you. The consequences of Global Warming may well be vastly more devastating. If the world could be at risk, I ask you why would you even risk it? Sure, there's the possibility decades from now that just maybe, just maybe, Global Warming may not be caused by humans, but I'm surely not going to wait decades as was done with cigarettes that it is, without a doubt, a danger. By then, it will be too late.


On Sep 26 04:28 PM Chad Brown wrote:

> "I am not a climatologist – just a rational man who respects the
> empirical process.
>
> You say your are not a climatologist but that does not seem to stop
> you from knowing the answers to the questions that climatologists
> study. Can you do that also with medical problems? (Perhaps I could
> save on my medical bills with you.) How about foreign policy issues?
> Can you translate ancient languages? I guess scientific questions
> would be a breeze for you given your respect for the empirical process?
> Are there any areas where you don't have all the answers? Also,
> do you need to know the questions first, or is that just a waste
> of you time?

Healthcare: Lawmakers Caught Between Public Trust and the Devil

Hopefully when health care reform finally goes through, the whole concept of pre-existing conditions is a thing of the past as well as coverage linked to employment. When we can have health insurance cover everybody for all illnesses regardless of employment status will be the day Americans can finally have peace of mind.

Healthcare: Lawmakers Caught Between Public Trust and the Devil

I hope there's no misinterpreting of what I wrote. I do agree with the need to help the banks and the car industry, and there will indeed be a payoff to taxpayers for years to come for that help, but it irks me when the same urgency and help can't be provided to the many Americans who currently have no health insurance, many who are in this bind because of the "bad choices" made in these very industries the government is helping.

I am in agreement with President Obama in the need for a public option. Just as rules and regulations have been put into place to minimize abuses from financial institutions (which include everything from banks to credit card companies), the same can be done to minimize abuses within the health care industry. Only through a public option can "real change" be made in a quick enough timeframe. Real cost concessions by healthcare providers (doctors and hospitals) and the pharmaceutical companies won't continue to be made without a government-run healthcare option. Private health insurers alone won't have that pull, but I don't see why they can't they also be the beneficiaries of any cost cuts. Without the "clout" of government, it's just a matter of time before things go back to the way it always is- cost going up year after year without restraint.

Healthcare: Lawmakers Caught Between Public Trust and the Devil

I couldn't agree with you more when you mention the tenuousness of healthcare in this country. With layoffs expected to continue into 2011, the need is more desperate than ever to have a health plan that can finally provide a safety net for Americans who have lost their jobs or who will be losing it. A safety net that can protect American families from losing their life savings and even having to file for bankruptcy because a family member develops a debilitating or deadly illness.

While so many see the value of depending on government to secure our financial system against future abuses by increasing regulation and aiding American industry against collapse like the lifeline that was provided to GM, the notion that government can't be trusted with perhaps the most important asset that each and every American holds dear - their very health and well-being - is a bit puzzling. I am in agreement with those who believe that before anything is ratified that a health plan be done right, but the belief that we can NEVER trust government to "do it right" because it is simply impossible for them to do is taking it a bit too far. If countless billions upon trillions can be spent helping banks and industry until that time they can finally stand on their own again, until that time that Americans and American businesses can finally get loans again, and the American auto industry can finally be profitable again making cars Americans really need, why can't we see them doing the same for America's health care?

We have to ask ourselves where we are placing our priorities. Yes, our financial system is important, so is our industry, but is there anything more important that the health and well-being of you and your family. This is very much a life-and-death issue for so many American families today and hopefully something can finally be done. This should not be a Democrat vs. Republican issue, an issue between rich and poor, young and old as so much of the rhetoric the media is making it to be. Let's just come up with a plan that can cover all Americans and let's do it right.

Avoid the Solar Bears and Invest in First Solar

Just correcting a typo -

"Yes, the Earth may have had its cycle of heating and cooling in the past, but it's never had to contend with mankind and what it has been doing to this world."

Avoid the Solar Bears and Invest in First Solar

The question is what percentage of the world's scientists believe Global Warming is a farce? If even 5% can claim this, you would prefer to ignore the 95% who say it is a grave problem that has to be addressed now.

While you contend the Earth has been hotter in the past, few can question that carbon emissions in the atmosphere trap heat and is a huge source of pollution. Yes, the Earth may have had its cycle of heating and cooling in the past, but it's never had to contend with what mankind and what it has been doing to this world.

While there is a worldwide effort to address this issue, the U.S. has yet to scratch the surface when it comes to doing our part. Who knows whether this will change or whether it will be business as usual? I know there's many out there who would just be happy if we stuck our heads in the sand and pretend this problem never even existed.