text stringlengths 1 330k |
|---|
Consider these facts : |
1. Most of the billions of taxpayer money devoted to the creation of this scheme goes overseas to foreign turbine manufacturers. |
2. Billions and billions are being spent to upgrade power lines to bring wind generated electricity from places far from the cities and industries which create the overwhelming demand . Billions to be paid by all electricity users. |
3. Because of the unreliability of wind and the intermittent production of electricity from them, many more conventional generators are placed in stand-by mode. When the wind isn’t within the range of speed to produce, these stand-by generators are required to start. An emergency situation with emergency pricing taking... |
4. Spain, one of the biggest developers of this “ green energy “ has a hurting economy and can no longer subsidized the wind projects. An example of the disastrous results produced by this scheme. |
5. All of wind developers will tell you, they would never venture into these projects if it wasn’t for the taxpayer handouts they receive. Handouts which are subject to the whim of the politicians. Government is notorious for it’s “ subject to change “ attitude. |
The many details and nuances involved in this scheme are overwhelming for us, the average American citizen, to understand. Mostly, we are left in the dark as politicians bombard us with their double speak and the profiteers devise their strategy beyond our sight. This is no “ gift horse “ we are presenting to our futur... |
Karen Pease's picture |
Room to Breathe |
Hi Candiceanne. I hear your pique, and I understand it. However, I believe if you think about what the Carthage vote is for, you'll give the townsfolk who are pushing for a moratorium some understanding. A moratorium is not a NO vote. It is simply a means of protecting the town and its people. Small towns often don't h... |
Tom Olds's picture |
Vote for a moratorium. |
The residents of Carthage are propably not aware that the other towns in their school district (I assume they're in a district/union) could get together and vote to "not honor" Carthage's TIF with the wind company. As you are probably aware, a TIF cheats these other towns out of a share of the taxes Carthage would have... |
In Jackson, where I live, there was a movement in the other towns in our district (SAD 3) to do just that if we put in turbines and TIF'd the project. Even our selectmen, who were very pro wind, didn't want a TIF for that very reason. In the end, Jackson voted for a “thirteen times turbine height setback” (with mitigat... |
If that happened to Carthage, they would be liable for the several hundred thousand dollars their town should have paid the school district each year. Do you suppose the wind company would let them out of their TIF contract? I doubt it. If Carthage couldn’t get out of the TIF, their millrate would skyrocket and stay th... |
TIF's are figured by multiplying the town's present mill rate by the total value of the project. The resulting figure is near what the wind company would have to pay under "regular" taxation. Of course, under “regular” taxation most of that money would be gobbled up by the county and the school system, but a little is ... |
If Carthage decides to go for the TIF, then the negotiations begin with the wind company's lawyers. Eaton Peabody has done all of First Wind’s TIF’s and are very experienced. Most are negotiated so that the town gets 40% of the TIF money and the wind company keeps 60%. Lincoln and Burlington managed to negotiate a 50-5... |
TIF's save the wind companies millions in tax dollars over the life of the project. I don’t know what the millrate is in Carthage, but if it was .0200 and project was worth $43,000,000, and the wind company got to put 60% of that figure back in their pocket, then the wind company would save $8,000,000+ in the twenty-tw... |
Carthage’s share would have to be spent on “economic development” projects within the TIF district. They couldn’t spend it on a new community center, new town hall, swimming pool, or ball field. Most towns just reconstruct a few miles of road (within the TIF district, of course) at $250,000 per mile and leave it at tha... |
Towns seem to jump on the TIF's every time, even though a TIF guarantees absolutely no reduction in their taxes. If I lived in Carthage, I’d be voting for a moratorium so people had a chance to slow things down and look at everything very, very carefully. And if I lived in one of the other towns in the school district,... |
Lisa Lindsay's picture |
Vote for a Moratorium |
If the folks at Patriot Renewables can't give you the answers to the questions you've asked repeatedly within the last year, perhaps they will take you more seriously once you've voted for a moratorium. If this is such a wonderful, beneficial project with sound financial backing (that is undisclosed), then six months w... |
Your neighbors in Wilton just passed a wind ordinance covering both small and industrial sized projects. Towns like Dixfield, Weld, Rumford, Phillips, and Buckfield are working on theirs. Many other towns have ordinances in place. Why not Carthage? |
I'm interested in ... |
ANALYSIS AIR DATE: Dec. 1, 1998 |
Truth or Consequences in the Impeachment Hearings |
The House impeachment inquiry focused on the consequences of perjury for the day. Margaret Warner gets reaction from two members of the Judiciary Committee. |
Truth or Consequences in the Impeachment Hearings |
MARGARET WARNER: Joining us are Republican Bill McCollum of Florida and Democrat Thomas Barrett of Wisconsin. |
Did today's hearing, do you think, clarify the issue of perjury as it relates to possible impeachment? |
REP. BILL McCOLLUM, (R) Florida: I think it brought it home to the American public in the form of an average citizen, in the form of the court system, in the form of the military. I'm absolutely convinced at this point - having reviewed the evidence - that barring something else forthcoming, the President committed per... |
MARGARET WARNER: What do you think today's hearing added to this debate about perjury? |
REP. THOMAS BARRETT, (D) Wisconsin: Well, I think it shows that this remains a very political issue. There's no question about that. Perjury is wrong. People who commit perjury and are convicted should be punished. If the President committed perjury and the United States attorney or the special prosecutor chooses to in... |
MARGARET WARNER: Several of the witnesses did mention that as an alternative; that the Congress would simply censure the President and then leave him open to prosecution in the courts. Does that hold any interest for you? |
REP. BILL McCOLLUM: It holds no appeal to me at all. First of all, I don't think we have any constitutional authority to censure in any way that is meaningful, that is, that there's any punishment that goes with it, it's just a resolution, if we do it like you could pass a resolution condemning Saudi Arabia or Iraq or ... |
There's nothing in the Constitution that says that if we impeach in the House, the Senate (a) has to try the president or (b), if it does convict him, they have to remove him from office. There are two things they can do if they convict him. One of them is remove him from office, and the other one is to disable him fro... |
But it does not mean necessarily removal, and, in fact, as Mr. Barrett points out, I don't know that you'd get the vote to remove. Nor do I even believe necessarily you'd have a trial in the Senate if the votes might not be there, if the leadership over there didn't believe it was going to occur. But, again, impeachmen... |
MARGARET WARNER: Can impeachment serve that function, essentially as a form of censure? |
REP. THOMAS BARRETT: Well, certainly it can, and I think that no matter how you slice it, the president is left with a mark on his record, and that's the way he's going to be treated by history, that he committed something - did something wrong, and he's not going to walk away from this. But my whole point is that I di... |
REP. BILL McCOLLUM: And that was the point of the hearings today, Karen, because I think - |
REP. BILL McCOLLUM: Margaret. I'm sorry, Margaret. I think that we have the obligation to go forward. I think if we don't go forward with this, we have terrible consequences to not doing it, and that's really the difference of opinion here. |
MARGARET WARNER: Okay. Let's shift gears and talk about the motion you made today, which was to subpoena these documents involving campaign fund-raising and Attorney General Reno's investigation. Why do you want to look at these documents? |
REP. BILL McCOLLUM: Well, we've been told by very high level government officials that in the Labella memorandum, in the redacted part we've not been able to see with regard to - |
MARGARET WARNER: This is a memo from the man who was the head of her campaign investigative task force. |
REP. BILL McCOLLUM: That's right. He's the prosecuting attorney she brought in from San Diego to look at this and give a recommendation to Reno, and we've been advised that there is something in there that is very incriminating to the president. I don't know if there is or not, but I think at this late hour, having - i... |
MARGARET WARNER: And you voted against it. Why not look at this? |
REP. THOMAS BARRETT: It's fishing time. That's what this is. This has nothing to do with anything Ken Starr has done. This is simply an attempt to drag in whatever can be dragged in at this point, and it is - Mr. Hyde has said he wants to complete this by the end of the year, and, here, four weeks before the end of the... |
MARGARET WARNER: How much can you do in a week? Let's say you get the memo, which is still open - those memos - it's still open to debate, is it not, because the Judge has to agree to release them. |
MARGARET WARNER: But let's say you find something, then you couldn't complete this by the end of the year. |
REP. BILL McCOLLUM: Obviously, I don't think the American public would want you to complete it by the end of the year, and nor would I, if there was really something there that incriminated the president. Now, I'm not expecting that to be the case necessarily. It's not at all the objective here. The objective is let's ... |
MARGARET WARNER: Could this, in fact, put this to rest, I mean, this whole issue of whether the attorney general has acted properly in not appointing independent counsels and so on? |
REP. THOMAS BARRETT: Again, there's a separate committee that's been investigating this. If they want to take action, they can take action. But what it is - it's - again, it's an attempt to bring in another matter to make it look like we have something on the president. I know of nothing in this memorandum that implica... |
MARGARET WARNER: Last -- final question for the two of you - if you go ahead, if the committee has its vote next week - as is expected - if nothing else turns up - will you be considering anything other than impeachment up or down? Is there a middle ground? |
REP. THOMAS BARRETT: It would be a huge mistake for this committee to deny us a vote on censuring the president, because I think at the end of the day, you have moderate Republicans and moderate Democrats who feel that that's an appropriate remedy, an appropriate punishment. So I think that it would be wrong for the co... |
MARGARET WARNER: Will it be denied, or will you have a vote on it? |
REP. BILL McCOLLUM: I do not know. I think that's up to how it's framed and the chairman's rulings with regard to whether it's germane. I just don't know. There's been no policy decision, to my knowledge, about it. But I would say this, that we would all like to do the fairest thing possible. We particularly, though, w... |
REP. THOMAS BARRETT: We can certainly do both, and that's what we should do. |
MARGARET WARNER: All right. Well, thank you, Congressmen, both very much. |
REP. BILL McCOLLUM: Thank you. |
Take the tour × |
I was wondering how to understand the following: |
In other words, can process substitution do whatever pipe can do? |
What can process substitution do, but pipe cannot? |
share|improve this question |
add comment |
4 Answers |
up vote 20 down vote accepted |
A good way to grok the difference between them is to do a little experimenting on the command line. In spite of the visual similarity in use of the < character, it does something very different than a redirect or pipe. |
Let's use the date command for testing. |
$ date | cat |
Thu Jul 21 12:39:18 EEST 2011 |
This is a pointless example but it shows that cat acceptedthe output ofdate` on STDIN and spit it back out. The same results can be achieved by process substitution: |
$ cat <(date) |
Thu Jul 21 12:40:53 EEST 2011 |
However what just happened behind the scenes was different. Instead of being given a STDIN stream, cat was actually passed the name of a file that it needed to go open and read. You can see this step by using echo instead of cat. |
$ echo <(date) |
When cat was passed the file name it read it's contents for us, but echo just showed us the name that it was passed. This difference becomes more obvious if you add more substitutions: |
$ cat <(date) <(date) <(date) |
Thu Jul 21 12:44:45 EEST 2011 |
Thu Jul 21 12:44:45 EEST 2011 |
Thu Jul 21 12:44:45 EEST 2011 |
$ echo <(date) <(date) <(date) |
/proc/self/fd/11 /proc/self/fd/12 /proc/self/fd/13 |
It is possible to combine process substitution (which generates a file) and input redirection (which connects a file to STDIN): |
$ cat < <(date) |
Thu Jul 21 12:46:22 EEST 2011 |
It looks pretty much the same but this time cat was passed STDIN stream instead of a file name. You can see this by trying it with echo: |
$ echo < <(date) |
Since echo doesn't read STDIN and no argument was passed, we get nothing. |
Pipes and input redirects shove content onto the STDIN stream. Process substitution runs the commands, saves their output to a special temporary file and then passes that file name in place of the command. Whatever command you are using treats it as a file name. |
share|improve this answer |
add comment |
I should suppose you are talking about bash or some other advanced shell, because the posix shell do not have process substitution. |
bash manual page reports: |
Process Substitution |
In other words, and from a practical point of view, you can use an expression like the following |
as a file name for other commands requiring a file as a parameter. Or you can use redirection for such a file: |
while read line; do something; done < <(commands) |
Turning back to your question, it seems to me that process substitution and pipes have not much of similar. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.