Sunday, January 22, 2017

Re: [AvC] Re: MAY, MAY AND OR MAY NOT INFUENCE DONALD TRUMP.



On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 8:25:28 PM UTC-5, LL wrote:
Sensible people wanted single payer for the ACA. It was the Republicans in Congress that wouldn't vote for it. That aren't any more likely to vote for it now. Not enough money in it for insurance companies. Trumped up care will will be a royal mess. Just wait. It will be another pay or die program--the kind Republicans like best and the only kind they will vote for. 

L

On Jan 22, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Timbo <thcu...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:



On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 6:50:33 PM UTC-5, LL wrote:


> On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:39 PM, Timbo <thcu...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> This morning my wife says: "I sure hope he helps those people he said he was going to help" I replied: "You have not been paying attention. Those promises are invalid. He cannot build a multi billion dollar wall, he cannot send back 400,000 illegal workers, those mass manufacturing jobs don't exist. The truth is that those unskilled laborers will continue to suffer if they never learn a new skill and they will always need tax payer support"

He also can't replace the ACA with something that will offer better coverage to more people and will cost less than the ACA. But that never stops him. He'll continue to make empty promises and the boobocracy will believe him.

If they were to leave most all of the ACA intact and open purchase across state lines it could help those group employer accounts. I doubt if the insurance rates would lower. They have already slowed the rate at which they are rising. The next step is more stability in the market. Across state lines would be a good thing. I don't want anything short of single payer. I have always hated group insurance. The employer takes part of their wages and pays for part of their insurance for a tax write off. Just scamming the employee and raising the national debt by not paying taxes. The employees should get the raise and write off their own 100% health costs. Trump keeps talking about insurance savings plan. Hell they have been around for 8 years or more. They work well for people who have money to save and low family health expense occurrence. I thought about it and ran the numbers. My savings does better in the stock market. If I were raising a young healthy family and had the savings income, I would do it. That is not the position of most struggling families.

I know, incorrigible people keep voting their own demise. ("I think ,there for I am")
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[AvC] Re: Inauguration Crowds



On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 11:13:58 PM UTC-5, Tex wrote:

On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 6:44:23 PM UTC-6, Timbo wrote:

I found out that those pics were from the stock photo agency Getty Images. I have purchased from them on occasion and have an account with them. They have billions of photos and graphic images. They have deals where we can trade our photos and design images for credits to purchase their images. Basically the highest quality cost more and they give us free images that may not be so great of quality or subject matter. But sometimes it may be just what we need for a project. 

So, I found you some better quality photos at different and similar time of event.


Patrick Semansky/AP took an early shot close to the similar time as that Getty image. The shot is from the opposite end and taken at a much lower horizon. You can see the same open spaces as with the Getty arial but they may or may not be filled in with more folks. I would say it is likey that the two shots were taken within the same hour to hour and a half. Carolyn Kaster/AP provides us with a shot that is no doubt at the actual start. The dick-head is approaching his thrown. Again, it is lower on the horizon but it does give us a fairly good idea of how many folks are on the grounds in comparison to the major marches.

We have a saying in graphic design: "garbage in garbage out" These AP photographers did a good job of taking the shots and sharpening them without doing damage. The Getty photos, who knows where they got them, likely a news agency of sort or anybody who could be at that arial view at that time. But you can see that it is simply garbage photography in comparison. That NYC, Washington Post,  Huffington and others used this crap with the funds that they have for an event of this scale says something about their priorities. IMO.

Timbo, I found some more images myself. Reuters displays a 2009/2017 comparison crediting Lucas Jackson for the 2017 image and Stelios Varias for the 2009 image. See http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-media-idUSKBN15600I.

Notice that according to the Media Bias/Fact Check site at https://mediabiasfactcheck.com, Reuters shows little bias. Their assessment of Reuters is as follows:

A highly reputable news reporting service. Reuters has a policy of taking a "value-neutral approach."  Reuters' editorial policy states: "We are committed to reporting the facts and in all situations avoid the use of emotive terms. The only exception is when we are quoting someone directly or in indirect speech."  (Wikipedia)  Reuters does not offer opinion and just reports news.

The images that Reuters published are their own and not images purchased from Getty. The photographers either sold the images to Reuters or worked for Reuters in some fashion. Given the Reuters reputation for objectivity, it is high unlikely that they photoshopped either image to make Trump's crowd look smaller than it really was or to enlarge the crowd for Obama,

There is more information about these pictures in a New York Daily News story at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/reuters-editor-defends-photo-president-trump-inauguration-article-1.2953125. The story quotes the Reuters editor, Jim Bourg, as follows:

I am seeing a lot of inaccurate talk and allegations online about the crowd photos from Friday's Trump inauguration that are simply not borne out by the FACTS. Now I see my own friends reposting this disinformation on Facebook. 

Only one news organization had a still photographer atop the Washington monument for the inauguration and I assigned him to be there. This photo by Reuters News Pictures staff photographer Lucas Jackson was taken at 12:01:18 p.m. on Friday and not much earlier as many people are trying to claim.


According to the New York Daily News story, the Obama photo was taken at 11:30 AM before Mr. Obama left the Capitol building. This information should dispose of most claims that the images were somehow faked. 

BTW, it is worth noting that according to ABC News, the Obama crowd had to stand in freezing temperatures to watch the inauguration. The Trump crowd enjoyed temperatures in the 40's.

Tex

I went through Getty's stock of the "2017 inaugural"   They had 700 related and that pic was not in them. Likely it was bogus that it was a Getty image. Unless someone spent the money and purchased seclusive rights to the image. If a news team did they would have water marked it so no one else could use it. Every news team seems to be showing it with the same story.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[AvC] Re: Inauguration Crowds



On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 11:13:58 PM UTC-5, Tex wrote:


On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 6:44:23 PM UTC-6, Timbo wrote:

I found out that those pics were from the stock photo agency Getty Images. I have purchased from them on occasion and have an account with them. They have billions of photos and graphic images. They have deals where we can trade our photos and design images for credits to purchase their images. Basically the highest quality cost more and they give us free images that may not be so great of quality or subject matter. But sometimes it may be just what we need for a project. 

So, I found you some better quality photos at different and similar time of event.


Patrick Semansky/AP took an early shot close to the similar time as that Getty image. The shot is from the opposite end and taken at a much lower horizon. You can see the same open spaces as with the Getty arial but they may or may not be filled in with more folks. I would say it is likey that the two shots were taken within the same hour to hour and a half. Carolyn Kaster/AP provides us with a shot that is no doubt at the actual start. The dick-head is approaching his thrown. Again, it is lower on the horizon but it does give us a fairly good idea of how many folks are on the grounds in comparison to the major marches.

We have a saying in graphic design: "garbage in garbage out" These AP photographers did a good job of taking the shots and sharpening them without doing damage. The Getty photos, who knows where they got them, likely a news agency of sort or anybody who could be at that arial view at that time. But you can see that it is simply garbage photography in comparison. That NYC, Washington Post,  Huffington and others used this crap with the funds that they have for an event of this scale says something about their priorities. IMO.

Timbo, I found some more images myself. See the ABC News page at http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2009-2017-comparing-trumps-obamas-inauguration-crowds/story?id=44927217. They show the Getty comparison images about 5 paragraphs down from the video at the top of the article. Further down you will find the Getty 2009 image credited to David Stephenson of the Lexington Herald-Leader. Below that you will find a picture of the Trump crowd taken from almost the same location at about 12 PM, that is, after the oath, but before the inaugural address. That image seems not to be from Getty, and it is credited to Lucas Jackson of Reuters. The first Trump image is credited also to Getty, but the second does not mention Getty although it looks much the same as the first one, so that they might be sequential shots from the same photographer.

Do you think that the Reuters photo is a fake? Could and would ABC photoshop the image and still credit it to Reuters without mentioning the manipulation?

Notice that according to the Media Bias/Fact Check site at https://mediabiasfactcheck.com, Reuters shows little bias. Their assessment of Reuters is as follows:

A highly reputable news reporting service. Reuters has a policy of taking a "value-neutral approach."  Reuters' editorial policy states: "We are committed to reporting the facts and in all situations avoid the use of emotive terms. The only exception is when we are quoting someone directly or in indirect speech."  (Wikipedia)  Reuters does not offer opinion and just reports news.

By the way Reuters itself displays a 2009/2017 comparison crediting Lucas Jackson for the 2017 image and Stelios Varias for the 2009 image. See http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-media-idUSKBN15600I.Those images are therefore not from Getty and seem to have been shot by individuals who either work for, contract with, or sold the images to Reuters. Those images are unlikely to have been photoshopped by Reuters.

Tex

Yes Tex, that Reuters image looks original. That is quiet a distance from the Smithsonian with a telephoto lens. I was visiting The Smithonian back in the mid eighties the same day they was having a Clan march. We walked two blocks and we were still to blocks away from the massive riot that was going on. If you compare the Reuters original to the NYT one you posted above, you can see the crapy attempt. Deterioration of pixels from "sending it through the pipes" is what we call it, will show up on the entire image. This is not the case for what NYT posted up. 

I'm not sure if Reuters would attempt to mislead or mistaken on the hour of the photo taken. I have not had any reason not to trust Reuters.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [AvC] Re: Moments from a historic day of worldwide protests



On Jan 22, 2017, at 5:41 PM, Timbo <thcustom@sbcglobal.net> wrote:



On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 7:49:31 PM UTC-5, LL wrote:

The power sees it as a one time event, it will go away. If they don't keep it up all year with those kind of numbers, Congress won't act.  

It probably is a one-time event, but ot git their attention. Maybe they won't be so quick to denigrate women's vote and women's issues. But they are Republicans so we shouldn't expect too much. They'll have to be constantly reminded in other ways. They tend to fall asleep. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[AvC] Re: Inauguration Crowds



On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 6:44:23 PM UTC-6, Timbo wrote:

I found out that those pics were from the stock photo agency Getty Images. I have purchased from them on occasion and have an account with them. They have billions of photos and graphic images. They have deals where we can trade our photos and design images for credits to purchase their images. Basically the highest quality cost more and they give us free images that may not be so great of quality or subject matter. But sometimes it may be just what we need for a project. 

So, I found you some better quality photos at different and similar time of event.


Patrick Semansky/AP took an early shot close to the similar time as that Getty image. The shot is from the opposite end and taken at a much lower horizon. You can see the same open spaces as with the Getty arial but they may or may not be filled in with more folks. I would say it is likey that the two shots were taken within the same hour to hour and a half. Carolyn Kaster/AP provides us with a shot that is no doubt at the actual start. The dick-head is approaching his thrown. Again, it is lower on the horizon but it does give us a fairly good idea of how many folks are on the grounds in comparison to the major marches.

We have a saying in graphic design: "garbage in garbage out" These AP photographers did a good job of taking the shots and sharpening them without doing damage. The Getty photos, who knows where they got them, likely a news agency of sort or anybody who could be at that arial view at that time. But you can see that it is simply garbage photography in comparison. That NYC, Washington Post,  Huffington and others used this crap with the funds that they have for an event of this scale says something about their priorities. IMO.

Timbo, I found some more images myself. See the ABC News page at http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/2009-2017-comparing-trumps-obamas-inauguration-crowds/story?id=44927217. They show the Getty comparison images about 5 paragraphs down from the video at the top of the article. Further down you will find the Getty 2009 image credited to David Stephenson of the Lexington Herald-Leader. Below that you will find a picture of the Trump crowd taken from almost the same location at about 12 PM, that is, after the oath, but before the inaugural address. That image seems not to be from Getty, and it is credited to Lucas Jackson of Reuters. The first Trump image is credited also to Getty, but the second does not mention Getty although it looks much the same as the first one, so that they might be sequential shots from the same photographer.

Do you think that the Reuters photo is a fake? Could and would ABC photoshop the image and still credit it to Reuters without mentioning the manipulation?

Notice that according to the Media Bias/Fact Check site at https://mediabiasfactcheck.com, Reuters shows little bias. Their assessment of Reuters is as follows:

A highly reputable news reporting service. Reuters has a policy of taking a "value-neutral approach."  Reuters' editorial policy states: "We are committed to reporting the facts and in all situations avoid the use of emotive terms. The only exception is when we are quoting someone directly or in indirect speech."  (Wikipedia)  Reuters does not offer opinion and just reports news.

By the way Reuters itself displays a 2009/2017 comparison crediting Lucas Jackson for the 2017 image and Stelios Varias for the 2009 image. See http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-media-idUSKBN15600I.Those images are therefore not from Getty and seem to have been shot by individuals who either work for, contract with, or sold the images to Reuters. Those images are unlikely to have been photoshopped by Reuters.

Tex

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[AvC] Re: Moments from a historic day of worldwide protests



On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 7:49:31 PM UTC-5, LL wrote:

The power sees it as a one time event, it will go away. If they don't keep it up all year with those kind of numbers, Congress won't act.  

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [AvC] Re: MAY, MAY AND OR MAY NOT INFUENCE DONALD TRUMP.

Sensible people wanted single payer for the ACA. It was the Republicans in Congress that wouldn't vote for it. That aren't any more likely to vote for it now. Not enough money in it for insurance companies. Trumped up care will will be a royal mess. Just wait. It will be another pay or die program--the kind Republicans like best and the only kind they will vote for. 

L

On Jan 22, 2017, at 5:16 PM, Timbo <thcustom@sbcglobal.net> wrote:



On Sunday, January 22, 2017 at 6:50:33 PM UTC-5, LL wrote:


> On Jan 22, 2017, at 3:39 PM, Timbo <thcu...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> This morning my wife says: "I sure hope he helps those people he said he was going to help" I replied: "You have not been paying attention. Those promises are invalid. He cannot build a multi billion dollar wall, he cannot send back 400,000 illegal workers, those mass manufacturing jobs don't exist. The truth is that those unskilled laborers will continue to suffer if they never learn a new skill and they will always need tax payer support"

He also can't replace the ACA with something that will offer better coverage to more people and will cost less than the ACA. But that never stops him. He'll continue to make empty promises and the boobocracy will believe him.

If they were to leave most all of the ACA intact and open purchase across state lines it could help those group employer accounts. I doubt if the insurance rates would lower. They have already slowed the rate at which they are rising. The next step is more stability in the market. Across state lines would be a good thing. I don't want anything short of single payer. I have always hated group insurance. The employer takes part of their wages and pays for part of their insurance for a tax write off. Just scamming the employee and raising the national debt by not paying taxes. The employees should get the raise and write off their own 100% health costs. Trump keeps talking about insurance savings plan. Hell they have been around for 8 years or more. They work well for people who have money to save and low family health expense occurrence. I thought about it and ran the numbers. My savings does better in the stock market. If I were raising a young healthy family and had the savings income, I would do it. That is not the position of most struggling families.
 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Atheism vs Christianity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to atheism-vs-christianity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/atheism-vs-christianity.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.