General discussion

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #2148732

    Gas Prices

    Locked

    by rkuhn040172 ·

    You know, I really just want to puke.

    After reading the following two articles, I have come to the conclusion that the granola eating, hairy armpit, tree hugging crowd along with the professors, ’60’s flower power, and theoretical BS crowd just don’t get it.

    http://biz.yahoo.com/nytimes/080620/1194786578804.html?.v=19

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080619/sc_nm/fuel_efficiency_dc

    I would agree as I think most would that we have to end our dependence on oil. For security reasons, for environmental reasons, for lots of reasons.

    But what these people just don’t get is that the rapid and largely unexplained raise in oil (gas, heating, electric…this is just the beginning) is killing the lower income crowd.

    You know, as a hardcore independent, conservative (I’d be a Republican but they too like the Democrats have screwed everything up) I’d like to say “oh well, that’s the free market”.

    But this is different. Poor people’s lives are being screwed with. Imagine for a second (hopefully most of you are like me and aren’t lower income, after all we are supposedly in a higher paying field). But imagine for a second that the one thing you can’t do without (oil) is breaking the bank.

    Imagine living in a city without a meaningful mass transit system. Imagine living in a city where your current home value has depreciated to the point where you can’t move.

    Imagine paying 20% of your income just to drive to work and keep the power on. Then, insult to injury…cereal, bread, milk…they all go up.

    Imagine telling your son or daughter that there won’t be any presents under the tree this year because all your present money went to some Saudi king.

    What’s next? Where’s the next hurricane?

    Imagine being a single parent with two kids making $30,000 a year. Imagine for a second.

    What the hell have our “leaders” been doing for the last 30 years? It’s time to kick them all out of office.

    Where’s the solar power? Nuclear? Where the hell is all the sources of power we need without paying the towel heads (sorry) all the money we give them so they can finance the guns, bombs and other crap to turn around and kill us?

    I’ve had it. My ballot in November will be all write in’s. No voting for the freaking Democrats or Republicans.

    How did we get to this point? I’ll tell you. We got here because all of our “leaders” are too busy being greedy, self serving and worthless. To them, it’s not about what can I do for my country, it’s about how many times they get get their ugly face on TV and how many special interest dollars they can get.

    They need to stop talking and start getting something done.

    I work my ass off for a living. I manage my house pretty darn well. All I ask is for our “leaders” to do the same.

    P.S. Many books have been written about the next world war. It’s not going to be about politics, nationality, race, whatever.

    It’ll be about resources. Prepare yourself.

All Comments

  • Author
    Replies
    • #2910944

      Well you do have a good point

      by tearat ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      Dependence in any non domestic fuel is bad
      So what do we do?
      You could walk, but that is to far for most
      The main problem is mobile energy sources

      In every car we have a power plant
      One of the easy solutions would be to cut down the number of power plants or install a smaller version

      We could look at joining the cars into a train but how and who pays is a problem

      Anyway some driving tips

      Slowly accelerate
      Brake as little as possible
      Do not fill the car up any more than you have too (why carry around the weight of extra fuel)

      Wear more or less clothes depending on the temperature
      (AC costs, heating costs)

      Try to keep the weight of your car to a minimum
      Check the cars aerodynamics (cut down on air friction)
      Silly stuff like shiny paint can help

      Most of that is obvious anyway
      Wonder how much I lose carrying around hubcaps
      I will keep the spare tyre

      Good to know your MPs are no worse than ours

      I don?t have to imagine living in a city without a meaningful mass transit system

      Solar power needs to be researched it will get there
      Wind is too unpredictable
      But sails may help especially with getting away from the hurricane

      I don?t have any kids to worry about thank god
      Now Neil don?t take that the wrong way it is just a saying

      $30,000 a year is that all IT pays over there?
      Damn

      May have to move

      Want to hear something funny

      We will be having elections here this year
      It makes no difference who gets into power
      They will be spending the time covering their Asses

      Fuel is up
      Power is up and the supply will fail at some time this year
      Interest rates are up
      Food is up
      Unemployment is up
      Wages are down (yay opps no boo)

      Not the best time for any government
      Gen Y will be a big help too
      How I don?t know
      But they are young let them walk

      Rick the war is not that far away
      Supply or resources much the same thing
      But it is hard to fight a war without them

      • #2910910

        A couple more tips

        by neilb@uk ·

        In reply to Well you do have a good point

        from our nice people at the Ministry. What they would REALLY like is for us all to walk everywhere.

        Keep the tyres – that’s tires to you guys – pumped up to pressure.

        Open the window and turn off the aircon in town or below 40mph. On the motorway – freeway – windows up and on with the aircon.

        Keep the air filter clean.

        Make sure that the engine – lube – oil is clean.

        if your cars a manual gearbox – stick-shift – watch the revs and change up before 2,500rpm.

        Avoid short journeys as the catalytic converter won’t warm up.

        Thank God I live near a main-line train station. 🙂

        • #2910625

          Thanks for the Tips Neil

          by tearat ·

          In reply to A couple more tips

          I am sure you are a godsend to some people

          Cheers Steve
          PS I will pray for you
          Now where is my wallet

        • #2910192

          Great tips, but not enough

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to A couple more tips

          Your suggestions are helpful, but not enough.

          What we need is a more comprehensive solution. One that includes more drilling, more nuculear, more solar, more biofuels, more of everything.

          The probem is that the solution does require a little of everything but there is always some group that will kill each part of the solution.

      • #2910190

        $30,000

        by rkuhn040172 ·

        In reply to Well you do have a good point

        I wasn’t referring to my salary (I make alot more than that).

        But imagine being a single parent, having a kid or two, and maybe working as some minial office worker making $30,000.

        Think about this for a second. Over here, the Democrats are typically the party of the “poor”.

        Yet the Democrats solution so far seems to be “grin and bare it” or “suck it up”.

        Sort of iroinic.

        I really don’t think rich people get it.

        Let’s do some math. Say you drive 12,000 miles a year (probably average). Say your car gets 25 miles per gallon (probably average). That means you’ll use 480 gallons of gas a year. If gas has gone up $2 a gallon recently, that’s an additional $960 a year out of your pocket.

        Multiple that by two if you’re married.

        Ouch!

        Now, $960 to me is an inconvenience. $960 to some people breaks the bank.

        And that’s $960 a year only for gas in the car. Add on increased food costs, increased heating and cooling for the home, and increased inflation.

        The real income of most people in society today is shrinking. Bottom line, you make less every year. End of story.

        • #2909405

          Sorry

          by tearat ·

          In reply to $30,000

          I thought it was a bit low

          Since I am not a US citizen
          I would not try to influence your vote
          Unlike some of the TR members who live on the northern side of one of your borders

          AS a rule I see politics as a waste of time
          In NZ we have two main political parties
          Labour and National

          Labour has its origins in the labour movement
          National the older is more towards the business side

          Both are trying to occupy the middle ground
          So we have very little choice

          The minor parties hold the balance of power
          The last two governments have been coalitions

          But thanks for the info

          Yes I think it is real stupid to be dependant on 1 source of fuel
          There should have been real competition to oil 20 years ago

          What we are seeing now is the result of low oil prices for too long
          Every part of our societies will have to adjust
          But it is always the people on low incomes who foot the bill

        • #2905671

          30000????

          by stever ·

          In reply to $30,000

          Rick,
          Your points a very good however, not sure where you are but I have friends and family that don’t make $15000.00 a year and some with from 2-6 kids. These are families that both parents work. And they make to much money for assistance. I can tell you they do go without alot.
          I am just barely over your 30000.00 mark and I am an IT Manager. Here in the midwest where I’m at, what I make is considered good. To bad they don’t consider the fact that with fuel, food, utilities, medical, etc what I make frankly sucks.
          This is a crisis and a shame in one of the Best countries in the world.
          Oh, some of the suggestions on saving fuel are lame if you look at the actual savings they would create. And they don’t help with everything else that has inflated.
          Best solution would be to release the fuel cell technology. Of course that has the potential of actually putting the oil companies out of business. I have been following the fuel cell technology since it’s early days and although the real promising ones were bought by Utility Companies and Oil companies and now most of the exceptional systems patents are locked under their control.
          I wish I had the know how to create a system. Unfortunately, chemistry or the means to build are not within my expertise or ability.
          I know maybe some of you could do it?? From what I read here I know some of you could.

        • #2905440

          Some of the patents were sold

          by tearat ·

          In reply to 30000????

          to the oil companies by the vehicle manufacturers

          Guess we know where they sit on the subject

        • #2904949

          sad

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to 30000????

          It’s been over thirty 30 years since I’ve been in the Quad City area, (I went to college, one of them, in Oskaloosa) and I see some things haven’t changed. It was the same then, only at that time there was hope. Sad. Iowa has always impressed me as having a population with a higher level of inteiegence than the rest of the US. How did they get left off the gravy train? Or were they smart enough to stay off the credit train?
          BTW there are some smart people working on the problems. But, that’s science and you won’t hear about in the media. They’re too busy with their noses up the polico’s butt, or panty watching in Holywood. These are sad times indeed. -d

        • #2904620

          Again, double standards by oz

          by danlm ·

          In reply to $30,000

          I marked 2 of your posts as spam. One where you addressed Techrat directly in your insult.

          Get with the program Oz… Your comprehensive reading skills suck. Your retention of the materal read is even worse.

          Mutiple examples of both throughout this conversation.

          And oz. Your offensive.. I respond and mark as spam only what offends me.

          Your a bigot. That offends me greatly. Always has. I could care less if your a stupid moron that can’t remember what people say and rant about completely off topic subjects.

          And oz, as an example of retention capabilities being in the crapper. I did mention that I had bad eye site now didn’t I. You do remember that don’t you.

          You can follow this logic now can’t you. I have problems trying to see within the small space of this posting window. Gee oz, eyesite. Seeing within a small confined space. They are completely related now arn’t they.

          Ever wonder you bigot if that may a part of the reason not all sentences are laid out in order. That I can not scroll back easily and review?

          So, whats your problem with your typing. I have noted your retention abailities over any period of time on what people say. That is why you miss quote others. That may explain why you can’t type worth crap.

          Oz… Your an aragont prick that could care less about anyone or anything. You crizisze and offer nothing. You shove your nose in other people’s buisness. When they point out the faults of your position. You resort back to the only thing your good at. Being a bigot.

          And bigottry is the only thing you have been consistant with in this thread and many other thread. If all else fails when your arguing, you insult a complete nation of people.

          People like you with attitudes such as yours should be shot. That is the type of attitude that gives us war in the middle east. That is the type of attitude that gives us riots… Your attitude Oz. Your the sick pup, not I.

          Id love to see you have the balls to state your very same positions in public where others can see how much of a bigot you really are. Wonder how long it would take before you were removed from the place on a streatcher.

          And no, that was not a threat. So don’t miss quote me. Just an observation that I think your also a coward.

          Dan

        • #2904390

          I didn’t even post that time! LOl

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Again, double standards by oz

          Oh no everyone, it’s policeman Dan to the rescue. I don’t know what these poor people without a voice would do without you. Just continue to send Tammy work, I am sure she thanks you for wasting her time.

          I could go back and tag ALL of your posts as spam as you break rules in each and every one of them, but I don’t want to inundate TR staff with work, they already know you are a loser and others don’t bother with your BS anyway. Give me your worst, you are just wasting people’s time and pi$$ing people off now, well done. I’ve seen this before, believe me crying wolf is not going to get you anywhere but eventually ignored for “Mrs. Posting”, oops sorry, thats MISS posting to you.

          Oh my god, you’re an an easy one. I’ve seen far better here than you, you aren’t even [i]somewhat[/i] good at this.

          But you just do what you feel is right for America and leave me out of it. Free the poor, helpless, voiceless people here from my wrath.

          You being a moderator is as hypocritical and ridiculous as Firemarshall Bill giving fire safety tips. 😀 good luck with that.

          “Offither Daniel! To the rethcue! Ith there a problem here, thir?” Yuk yuk yuk. :p

        • #2906639

          You are taking this to far

          by tearat ·

          In reply to I didn’t even post that time! LOl

          There is no reason to keep poking someone

          It is obvious you are doing it for your own sadistic pleasure
          Time to stop the BS
          Time to grow up

          What you are doing lowers the opinion others have of you
          Stop acting like a child

          I know you can do better than that

          Really some people
          This is a public forum
          There are other people reading this
          The real subject is important

        • #2906631

          Your alias is Techno Rat

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to You are taking this to far

          Not TR.

          If DanLM decides to follow me throughout every forum and comment on every post I make, whether with or against someone’s comments, while telling me to fk off, calling me a bigot etc., he can take it right back on the nose.

          I agree, nobody needs to read it and I also think he has gone way over the line, I oppose and agree to people’s comments, that’s what a discussion is all about, not simply being a yes man that agrees with everyone as he would expect one to be.

          There are enough people here that know me, some like my comments and some don’t. Those that don’t just leave them alone and move on to what interests them. As for DanLM, he’s tried speakling out for you and others as if it is his job, well actually he alrady said he would be the site moderator whether people like it or not.

          Fine, want to be a moderator, I suppose I would be your best target.

          I am not abotu to let someone re;eated;ly tell me to foff without any recprocal comment though, i am not one to walk away from taht crap.

          I am honestly quite sorry that you had to get dragged into it, simply find other links to click I suppose and I’ll let DanLM hang himself as he seems to do so well at it, I know where this goes.

        • #2906534

          There is usually

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Your alias is Techno Rat

          A reason for people the go off the hook

          I find there is always something that has been done by both sides that sets the other off
          Even if they don?t remember what it was

          I have no intention of being moderator
          So don?t start with the policeman crap with me

          There are other people reading these posts
          There is no need for them to sift through the garbage just to find something worthwhile

          Yes I can be a rat if you like and I am not talking about rodents

          I suppose I will get some smart ass or arrogant reply it would be typical

        • #2906636

          Dan give it up

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Again, double standards by oz

          He is not going to listen to you
          I have to wonder if he respects anyone enough to listen to what they have to say

          Chill out it?s not worth getting upset over something you read in a forum
          Your taking it way to seriously

        • #2906629

          Actually techno,

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dan give it up

          I respect a lot of people here, and I agree to disagree with them. Even in ties where I opose their comments, a efw posts later we generally find middle ground.

          Maxwell Edison and I would go at it for hours and hours, thousands of posts. But I have a whole new respect for him since running into people like Dan. Max was at least very clever and kept challenging me with his replies, now when we get pissy with each other, we’ll offer a few jokes about it and both walk away. Dan has chosen not to do that though, he has folloed my posts in other discussions and offered more of the same. I have no patience for losers like that at all and he can expect to get smacked for it.

      • #2909524

        Resourceful

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Well you do have a good point

        Nice to see that you find more in being resourceful than most do. Well done, you would fly through the 1 tonne reduction program by Suzuki.

        Your comments:

        “Dependence in any non domestic fuel is bad”
        Is Canada really condsidered foreign these days?

        anyway, I agree with most of yoru post, though the filling up less is not such a great idea. Keepign your tank topped up provides two benefits.
        1) longer vehicle life and lower emissions. Running low (1/4 or less) on gas makes your vehicle burn sludge from teh bottom of teh tank, this harms your injectors, thorwing off the emission system and also kills teh fuel filter, gums up the fuels lines, fuel rail and makes the injector pins stick. Your vehicles engine works harder with a low gas level than it does pulling the added weight of a full tank.

        2) Safety, if in an accident, your vehicle has a far greater risk of fire, or explosion with a low or near empty tank of gas than it does with a full tank of gas.

        There is no real benefit to running with a full tank of gas, however there is a greater safety risk and damage to the vehicles emission control system by running lower on gas.

        Cheap gas doesn’t burn efficiently, so regular doesn’t cut it, supreme has FAr too many additives for most of todays motors and especially really old ones (where the added detergents in the gas will actually start causing gasjket leaks) a mid grade is usually the best option, even at a higher price, you will benefit in teh long run and it will run a little better in the short term too.

        • #2908822

          Is Canada really condsidered foreign these days?

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Resourceful

          Yes
          North America is a long way from NZ

          Most cars are designed around half a tank I believe

          So ? to ? is right for most cars
          Good mechanics will check the filters regularly

          ?longer vehicle life and lower emissions?

          You will have to explain that one
          You would think a lighter car would use less fuel
          Less fuel used would mean fewer emissions as a whole
          Less weight would reduce the load on the vehicle components
          But you may know something I dont

          One other thing if you have sludge on the tank you may want to look at changing where you buy fuel

          From memory
          We have regulation that determine the level of impurities in fuel
          So I guess you dont have those

          Anyway a rough road will shake up the tank
          Starting and stoping will cause the fuel to slosh around the tank
          I think you may be a victim of a myth on that one

          ?Your vehicles engine works harder with a low gas level than it does pulling the added weight of a full tank.?

          Well that makes no sense to me

          ?2) Safety, if in an accident, your vehicle has a far greater risk of fire, or explosion with a low or near empty tank of gas than it does with a full tank of gas?

          Well it is impossible to keep the tank full but I guess safety costs like it always has
          Again you may be a victim of a myth
          Most of the time petrol needs to be compressed to explode

          But overall the full tank thing is not that important
          People can make up their own mind

          One other thing OZ
          Where does the fuel line leave the tank in your car?
          Top or bottom?
          Or if you like
          At what level is fuel to low to be sucked from the tank?

        • #2905985

          You will have to explain that one

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Is Canada really condsidered foreign these days?

          Okay, longer vehicle life and lower emissions. ALL gas, whether high grade or not, gums up after only a short time in the tank, that’s wjy stations try to never run dry and fuel trucks constantly keep gas stations over the 1/4 tank level. This gum, a result of additives in the gasoline such as detergents and anti-knock additives create a sludge in the bottom of the fuel tank. This is why manufacturers say to never run your car dry and if possible, refill at 1.4 tank. If you do run a fuel injected car dry, you should always replace the fuel filter as it becomes gummed up with that sludge, as do the fuel rail, injectors, valves etc.

          As far as fuel contamination, Canada does have slightly stricter guidelines than the Us, that’s why it has always been ‘sketchy’ or not recommended for Canadians to buy Us gas. Unless it is REALLY cheap, and yuo full with super, many Canadians would rather stick to our gas. It was more important during the days of the leaded gas vs unleaded but still stands today for some.

          ALL gasoline has additives, these additives are mainly detergents and some anti-knock additives, supreme gas has a higher amount of detergents in order to purify the fuel by killing contaminants, however in older cars, the detergents can actually eat away at gaskets and seals that are reliant of grime to hold together (even on a 5 year old car). this obviously causes leaks and expensive repairs.

          As far as better mileage. If you run yoru car low on gas for extended period of time, or as a habit, you will pick up grime off the tank. This then clogs injectors, burns hard carbon deposits on the back of the valves causing them to remain partially open, clogs the fuel rail and slows down/impedes the injector pins, this causes a sick burn which also results in a clogged PCV valve and hardened vacuum hoses due to excessive heat. This not only results in poor combustion and greater emissions, it also means that you get poor mileage.

          “I think you may be a victim of a myth on that one”

          Actually I am a licensed mechanic, alternate fuels certified and a member of the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE).

          “Well it is impossible to keep the tank full but I guess safety costs like it always has
          Again you may be a victim of a myth
          Most of the time petrol needs to be compressed to explode”

          Well your almost right. Fuel VAPOUR needs to be compressed in order to explode. You can toss a cigarette into a 5 gal pail of gas without the gas igniting, it will just put the cigarette out.

          A quarter tank of gas running with a 7lb vapour lock gas cap is like a bomb waiting to explode. On impact it takes all of the cars millions of dollars in engineering to stop it from exploding. With a full tank, there is less vapour to compress and combust.

          This is all high school automotive 101, thought, pretty basic stuff.

          “Where does the fuel line leave the tank in your car?
          Top or bottom?
          Or if you like
          At what level is fuel to low to be sucked from the tank?”

          Depends on the car, but usually the pickup screen sits just above the bottom of the tank with one pump attached just above it. The pump outlet has spigot that fits through a locking cap that is usually at the top of the tank, though that again does vary by manufacturer.

          As far as siphoning fuel, it depends on the restrictor placement and also if the tank is baffled In which case you’d need a robotic snake. Sometimes you can suck it dry but for that last 15 or so years, they have been getting better at thwarting siphoning.

        • #2905960

          Well all I can say

          by tearat ·

          In reply to You will have to explain that one

          Is you must have different type of fuel to us

          Because I heard a different story from the auto engineers I talked to
          But like I said the full tank myth is something people will have to make their own minds up about

          No I was not talking about siphoning fuel
          But it shows how you are thinking

          detergents and anti-knock additives
          Still using those are you

          Ps qualifications don?t make you smarter
          They just give you more things to be wrong about

        • #2905891

          Gotta Take Your Side

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to Well all I can say

          I have to take Techno Rat’s side on this one.

          Seems to me I’ve read an article in our Sunday newspaper dispelling all Oz’s myths.

          Unforunately, I can’t find it on-line right now.

        • #2905701

          Sure

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Gotta Take Your Side

          And I can dig up 20 dispeslling those MYTHS. Instead of buying into newspaper hype, why not think logically about it.

          DO yuo really think that a properly runnign car with a full tank of gas is less efficient that one that has been running on a qurter tanmk for a few months? Give your head a shake and get prepared to pay the mechanics bills.

          I don’t min, I get people like you all the time. They read it in a book once, but why is their car in MY garage today while they are trying to get me to sign off on a conditional Air Care pass?

          I’ll pull the filters and throttle body, show them the crap they sucked off the bottom off the tank and them hand them the bill too.

          If you want to argue with a mechanic, go ot yoru shop and tell him your BS. I don’t have time for this crap, unless you want me to pull your car apart and show you the problems you are ignoring.

        • #2905705

          According to yoru post

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Well all I can say

          You must be highly qualified then.

          Common antiknock additives include:
          Tetra-ethyl lead
          Methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl (MMT)
          Ferrocene
          Iron pentacarbonyl
          Toluene
          Isooctane

          They still use burn rate modifiers that reduce ping and post-ignition conbustion that they were using in leaded gas in eth 70’s.

          Detergents are a main additive, detergents for cleaning injectors (stopping them from gumming up).

          You have clearly displayed absolutely no knowledge on the subject at all, that’s okay nobody expects you to know about fuels if you have not studied them,and even with facts put forth, you STILL continue to tirelessly drone on and on about absolute garbage without a clue.

          If you have a plethora of engineer friends, why are you asking me? I am an automotive engineer, and I am tellign you the plain facts that you can look up yourself anytime. if you want to argue about something of which you admittedly have no knowledge, go for it, but you are on your own.

          There are others on TR that share this knowledge too, I wonder why they haven’t piped in to correct me?

          As for teh US havign better gas than Canada, think again. We have stricter guidelines than most US states, the only one that is close to Canada is Califronia after the emissions act of 1986.

          As for which grade or what the best is in the US, it varies by state and can’t be determined, the fact that you even mentioned it tells me you have no idea what you are trying to debate.

          For someoen with a host of automotive engineers ot talk to “from the auto engineers I talked to” you should be a little more aware, its surprising. I’d say you were probably talking to Automotive mechanics, when I was in school most accepted that certification as opposed to another 3 years of school. Out of every 60 mechanics I’d say perhaps 1 or 2 go on to become engineers or members of the SAE.

          If you want to learn about gasoline: http://faqs.cs.uu.nl/na-dir/autos/gasoline-faq/part1.html

          I feel like I’ve just given a child an automatic gun, just read it carefully before extracting single sentences to throw out as your argument.

          if yuo want to know more, pay the cash, put in the time and go to school yourself. I don’t get paid for arguing automotive with clueless people on internet forums.

          I offered you teh facts, you seem to not want to accept them. Go talk to your engineer buddies and argue with them instead.

        • #2905434

          Pay attention dummy

          by tearat ·

          In reply to According to yoru post

          I am from New Zealand not the United States of America

          Yes we have a different fuel to you
          They use different additives
          Duh its not that hard I am sure you can remember who you are talking to if you try really hard

          I wrote in my first post
          Do not fill the car up any more than you have too (why carry around the weight of extra fuel)
          Well you screwed that up
          I did not say run around with an empty tank
          What does extra mean?
          Take reading lessons you seem to need them

          You lost the chance of a meaningful discussion right there

          But in the next post I wrote
          So ? to ? is right for most cars
          Still not saying empty

          With your reading lessons get some help with your spelling

          One other thing
          Just in case scenarios mean nothing to me
          They have been distorted by sales and marketing so much it is a pointless argument now

          I did not ask you
          You got on your soapbox and started preaching

          My original post
          http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=267053&messageID=2528622

          Was an attempt to help someone with the rising price of fuel

          You do go on and on and on
          Talk about off topic

          Lets see if I can get this right
          The Internet is a game
          The real world is outside
          Try life you?ll like it

          Now who was it that said that

          Why the others have not piped in

          Well they may think it?s a waste of time arguing with someone who conveniently misreads a post just to start an argument
          I think you do it on purpose

          Maybe they think an off topic rant is not worth responding to

          Your posts are so much like trolling it?s not funny

          But that?s life
          Loony?s are a part of life

          PS your hatred of the yanks is making you blind
          New Zealand remember not yank
          Got it now?
          The clue
          Its on the map

          My engineer buddies laughed when I showed them what you wrote
          I joined in

        • #2905006

          Sure they did

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to According to yoru post

          I stated several times over that you shouldn’t run less than a 1/4 tank. I didn’t say empty either, perhaps a few comprehension skills upgrades would help you, but I did say why manufacturers don’t recommend running too low and, if empty, the need to replace the fuel filter. So if fuel does not gum up your tank and sludge as well as other contaminants commonly found in fuels, why would they recommend replacing the fuel filter? Does it help strain the kiwi juice or something?

          Why would that be, do you think?

          Perhaps your engineer buddies can help you with that one.

        • #2904855

          Re: Oz – Fuel Guidelines

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to According to yoru post

          You said, “As for teh US havign better gas than Canada, think again. We have stricter guidelines than most US states, the only one that is close to Canada is Califronia after the emissions act of 1986.”

          One question for you:

          It’s an established fact that the various chemicals added to fuel in places like California and Canada (year round) and elsewhere (typically in summer months) to help fight ozone and smog actually decrease gas mileage. Usually by 1-3%.

          Now the question. Don’t you think that while decreasing the pollutants put out is good that decreasing the gas mileage is bad?

          I mean really, so I put out less pollutants per gallon but I end up using more gallons.

          Nice! Who was the freaking genius that came up with this idea?

        • #2904834

          too true, but consumers demand cheap crap.

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to According to yoru post

          It is actually vehicles in North America that are most responsible for poor fuel combustion. Our vehicles are built cheap, the engines are of the absolute minimum to pass specs. This is how they keep car prices low so that people here will buy them.

          It seems that people here are far more concerned abotu the bottom line when buying a car than the quality of engineering.

          that’s why identical models in Europe are actually nuilt way better than out here, even with North American manufacturers products, European versions are built better that North American.

          Additives are ALWAYS in gas, summer, winter, fall in all countries, additives were initially used to stop knock and ping due to pre and post ignition combustion. In North American this is even mroeso due to lighter weight materials where the engines run hotter, thus causing ignition in the exhaust process. Ford designed a thermactor system for reburing emitted gas as so much fuel was wasted creating higher emissions.

          GM used a similar system but just a check valve to recycle exhaust into the manifold again. and so on for various manufacturers.

          With the poorly designed, cheap engines we face here, we have no hope for getting a full burn and getting maximum fuel efficiency.

          Just take the compact spare tire for example.
          they put a cheap, steel stamped rim with a 60km tire in the back (apparently) to make the car lighter and improve mileage.

          While is does reduce trunk weight a slight bit, the key advantage was the cost of a compact spare compared to a full size tire and rim. Again, it merely keeps the consumers bottom line lower, while offering a meanial fuel advantage.

          While people around teh world think we live in prosperous and rich countries, everyone has a heap of money from such lucrative enterprises in North America, the reality is people are just too cheap and demand cheap crap of teh lowest quality.

          Just look at our retail environment, same thing. Cheap crap manufactured merely for offering lower prices to entice North American consumers.

        • #2906632

          From your comment titled Resourceful

          by tearat ·

          In reply to According to yoru post

          ?1) longer vehicle life and lower emissions. Running low (1/4 or less) on gas makes your vehicle burn sludge from teh bottom of teh tank, this harms your injectors, thorwing off the emission system and also kills teh fuel filter, gums up the fuels lines, fuel rail and makes the injector pins stick. Your vehicles engine works harder with a low gas level than it does pulling the added weight of a full tank.?

          Note the statement (? or less)

          No you didn?t say empty
          I did not say less than a ?

          But thanks for all the info you posted it helps people to understand why manufacturers do what the do
          It is well known the US cars are of low quality
          I did not think Canada was the same
          How many carmakers are there?

          PS I did not say what we laughed about

        • #2906627

          See what I mean?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to According to yoru post

          We didn’t actiually disagree, we just couldn’t see the middle ground. You accused me of stating something I didn’t and vice versa, but you have seen the difference and we actually don’t even have any argument in our posts about it.

          Fair enough on taht then,

          As for car makers in canada, I am abotu to leave so i can’t look it up, but we do have quite a few in the eastern provinces, that also make cars for teh US market. From what I know they are the same with the exception that we have to follow emissions guidelines similar to California, but that is pretty much everywhere now.

          Now if I had said the USA makes crappy cars, that would be anti-American wouldn’t it?

          We don’t build anything, not just cars, as well as they do in Europe. But times are changing, Europeans are starting to feel an economic crunch and are seeking price over quality in many areas, not just vehicles.

        • #2906529

          I am under no illusion

          by tearat ·

          In reply to According to yoru post

          That I make no mistakes
          I will apologise if necessary
          It is part of being human nobody is perfect

          But there is a type of person who takes great enjoyment in rubbing peoples faces in their mistakes
          Some of them will go on and on until the victim explodes
          Then the creeps act as if they are innocent

          Try not to be one of those will you
          No I did not call you a creep
          That would mean you were being paranoid
          I know you are not

          Also comparing character flaws is stupid

          Anyway there is always a need for cheep things
          Sometimes its all people can afford

          ?Now if I had said the USA makes crappy cars, that would be anti-American wouldn’t it??
          Maybe you are paranoid

          It is very difficult for first world countries to compete with the third world
          Some of the poor will work for food
          I know I can?t compete with that

          Damn some of that looks pompous
          Never mind just another flaw
          Its good to be human

        • #2904943

          Full tank is no ‘Myth’

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to Well all I can say

          While it might not matter to you kiwi’s down there, in the Northern Latitudes it is important. Canada is rather North if my maps are correct, as is most of Europe, and that is even taught in the driving schools. Why you ask? Because of condisation. Gasoline is made up of water as well as oils stuff. (hence: Hydro-Carbons.) When a tank is kept near full there is less condisation and there full less water in the tank. In winter the water aclumulating in a tank kept at less than ⅓ full will acumulate enough water to freeze the fuel system. (As in car don’t work.) Your engineer friends should have known this.
          As for the additives, you haven’t got a clue here as to the chemicle make up of modern petrolem products. Yes they do have additives, all of them do, and yours does too. They actual mixture will depend on the climate area where they will be consumed. Basic Fuel Management Courses cover this. -d

        • #2904937

          No Myth – continued

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Full tank is no ‘Myth’

          There is also a difference in the fuel additives for the different seasons, to help with freezing and such.

          Another big problem with the empty tank is for the long term life of your car.

          There is the condensation previously mentioned that makes your car run like crap, but it also causes the inside of the tank to rust. The flakes get knocked off when you fill up and settle to the bottom of the tank.

          The further down in the tank you get, the more of the particles you are sucking into your engine. When is the last time you changed your fuel filter?

          I consider 1/4 as empty. I can’t do 1/2 because I would have to get gas every day instead of every other day like I do now. (700 miles a week minimum).

        • #2906628

          Now you guys are making things up

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Full tank is no ‘Myth’

          This is a very important off topic discussion
          What is not needed is more people fooling around

          You should both be ashamed of yourselves

        • #2906624

          You are kidding, right?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Full tank is no ‘Myth’

          I am sure you are but I figured I’d check, sometimes its hard to tell without voice inflection and so far you have been fairly serious about this issue.

        • #2906527

          You mean you were being serious?

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Full tank is no ‘Myth’

          In an off topic part of the discussion
          With no real importance or relevance to the real subject

          The real subject

          People on low incomes trying to make ends meet and the effect that the rising price of gas has on their lives
          A very serious subject that
          An important one as well

          Some things I know
          They will not be able to fill their cars up very often
          Some will struggle to keep at above the ? full mark
          Car repairs will be impossible
          Maintenance will be nonexistent

          Make this little argument about ? ? and full tanks look pretty stupid

          Bad bad ratty
          No cheese or wine tomorrow

        • #2906474

          No, No I’m not kidding.

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to Full tank is no ‘Myth’

          It just is.

          And Techno, I’m not arguing wither it tough to pay for the gas, but if one can only afford to pay for a ⅛ tank of go-juice it should be the top ⅛ not the bottom ⅛. That also leaves enough for emergencies, such as trips to the Hospital, or Flood Evacuation. -d

        • #2907565

          Nice thinking

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Full tank is no ‘Myth’

          But I don?t see it happening
          The gas stored in the tank is the same as money sitting idle

          They will just use it to try and stretch the budget
          And hope there are no emergencies

          It would be nice to live in an ideal world
          But this is the one we are stuck with

      • #2905517

        Oh definitely

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Well you do have a good point

        In no way do I think the Russian army was not forced at gunpoint to stay for the fight until every last one was dead. They were myrdered by their own as well as the Nazis.

        Germany had almost conquered southern Russia at one point, working towards Caucasan and the oil wells. that woul dhave offered teh German war machine a much needed boost right there.

        But as arrogant as Stalin was, Hitler was too and wanted to make a point by taking our Stalingrad as it held Stalins name. He pulled troops from further south where they were successful and, against the wishes of many a commander whom he quickly let go, he ordered an invasion in Stalingrad.

        They were simply outmatched, Russians had nothign to lose by sitting there in the snow for days while fighting, Nazi’s were not equipped or used to it. Russians weren’t used ot eating well, being warm etc. They had been repressed for too many years already and pretty much just stood their ground wihle being shot en mass. But the retreating and destruction of anythign left behind was a good tactical move, it allowed the Nazi’s to advance but acquire nothing.

        It was such a key turning point, as were the Battle of Britain, Battle of the Bulge and several others. Without Russia, the end would have been much different, if in Allied favour at all.

        Sure, D-Day saw a great insurgence of allied troops. Those troops beat a tiring and overworked army back into Berlin, but should it have happened four years earlier, I don’t think it would have seen the same outcome, which even then was only barely positive.

        • #2905430

          Man are you losing it

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Oh definitely

          Ok I will assume this is placed wrong

        • #2904938

          Had it not been for that diaster of the Russian Front…

          by dawgit ·

          In reply to Oh definitely

          … There most probabley not have been a Battle of the Bulge. The deaster of that missadventure (on the Russian Front) was the single most important turning point of the War in Europe. A stragic blunder from the begining. Lessons learned? Doesn’t look like it. The US’s misadventure in Iraq is proving not much different. Sad times indeed. -d

        • #2904833

          It was misposted

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Had it not been for that diaster of the Russian Front…

          But you picked up the ball anyway, well done.

    • #2910801

      Increased Production

      by thechas ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      I have read and heard several reports from people identified as oil industry analysts that increasing US oil production would have little or no impact on the price of gas in the US.

      Even if they could start pumping oil from restricted areas tomorrow, the limited amount available combined with limits to how fast it can be extracted would make for only a small percentage increase in supply.

      I read once that the total amount of oil available in ANWR is something like a 90 day supply of crude for the US.

      The only way we are going to bring down the price of gas while we wait for alternatives is to reduce global energy consumption.

      Chas

      • #2910621

        Something else to think about

        by tearat ·

        In reply to Increased Production

        Oil pumped from under the land is easy
        The pumps work ok with a minimum of attention and maintenance

        Oil pumped from under the sea is different
        You need a platform
        Workers to run the platform
        You have to ship the oil
        On land you can pipe it

        That is old and I am sure things have changed

        But I doubt it is the same cost for land and sea wells

        It is not an excuse but an observation

        The other thing to think about is the risk to human life

        I don?t think anyone wants cheep oil that puts people at risk
        Sorry I know that is an easy answer and a cheap shot
        Treat the safety part as a separate post
        It is not meant to be a personal attack

        Everyone has different needs
        Some risk their lives all the time

        It is only my opinion
        Damn it I should just delete it

      • #2910193

        So…

        by rkuhn040172 ·

        In reply to Increased Production

        So, just because something would have little impact, we shouldn’t do it?

        Obama’s position so far on US drilling is that it will take 10 years to get to market.

        Ok, if we start now we’ll have it in 10 years. But, the longer we wait, the longer it is until we get it.

        It’s kind of like someone who weighs 400 lbs saying that it will take too long to lose enough weight to have any meaningful impact.

        Well, you have to start somewhere, someday.

        • #2909081

          10 -12 years for the first drop

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to So…

          You can get all the numbers here:http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/anwr/index.html

          Over the last 8 years there have been differing reports on the project, with each report providing seemingly less and less oil each time.

          In essence, IF they get the go ahead today, they won’t see a single drop for at least 10-12 years, and that is for teh initial/largest know reserve. There are quite a few smaller reserves, but each time an exploration project is allowed, it will take another 10 years before oil is produced.

          Regardless if you get to drill or not, the global oil price will remain the same. Even if you pull it out at $3 a barrel, it will still be on the world market at $140 barrel.

          If your theory is correct, in Canada we should be payign less for our gasoline that you do in the. [b]60% of your imported gas comes from Canada.[/b] With refineries just down teh street and a pipeline that runs from Alberta through to IOCO (about 15 mins from my house), we STILL pay a higher price for gas than the Americans we sell it to, and we mainly drill out own.

        • #2909046

          What is better for a country

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to 10 -12 years for the first drop

          use their own products or purchase their products from over seas?

          Which puts money back into the economy and which sucks money out of the economy?

          With Canada as dependent on the US economy as it is, it is also in Canadas interest that we are not getting our oil from over seas.

        • #2908999

          Volume

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to What is better for a country

          Right now you drill your own oil, but you import the bulk of it. Again, most comes from Canada but another 40% comes from many other sources.

          Canada also buys and sells oil, most of our sales are to the USA, and nobody is arguing the importance of our trade with the USA, don’t start getting defensive.

          No matter how much oil you get overseas, you will always get a greater benefit buying it from Canada and yes Canada benefits from selling oil, to whomever it is.

          Canada also has options for oil sales to Europe though, which the US does not at this time, nor can you provide a supply as your own supply falls short of your own demand. the difference is, we are not dependent on your oil, incomes yes but that can be replaced with trade within the commonwealth and other allied nations.

          What you and many others fail to recognize is that drilling ANWR is not going to reduce the cost for gas at the pumps.

          Even if drilling started in ANWR, there is still going to be the same, ever increasing level of demand for at least 10 – 12 years until you can start producing your own there.

          While it has been suggested that just the knowledge of your drilling would bring down prices, this is very hard to believe as nobody is going to be scared out of gouging by something that WILL be in the future. It will take a good 8-10 years later that other competitors start to see any increase in supply.

          With the number of new vehicles put on the road each month, to think that a small increase in your own supply would have any effect on gas at the pump is a bit far fetched. By th etime you actually start seeing any oil out of teh ground, your demand will be so high that it will probbaly be worse than today.

          The resolutions are to reduce the demand, reduce the need for oil and STOP FIGHTING THE DAMN WAR. War has been responsible for almost every unrealistic hike in history.

          With the Taliban sabotaging the Afghan pipeline all the time, and a thinning force there to protect against sabotage, there is no way you’ll see a price drop for a long time.
          I know you are thinking that if you drill ANWR you would reduce/eliminate your demand in Saudi Arabia, but that’s absurd; with the amount of oil you import compared to the amount you’ll get from ANWR, when you need even more than you do today, they are simply not going to balance each other out.

          ANWR is NOT the answer, it is a temporary solution, and even then it doesn’t work because it is not an immediate temporary solution. It is just a stupid idea.

          Drilling ANWR may be neccessary one day, it may produce some valuable oil for you, but it sure as hell isn’t a solution for the current problem. That’s just silly

        • #2908969

          40%

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Volume

          if nothing else, is what I am concerned about.

          Another note, just being silly here, but if it DOES take the alleged 10 years, at what point should we START?

          I was not getting defensive about trade, or putting Canada down. We both benefit or we both get hurt.

          If that 40% is taking our money and putting it into over sea markets, that is less money that stays in our system, and weakens us financially. When we are hurt, Canada is hurt.

          We need to drill, just like Canada needs to drill.

          No, it won’t lower the price now, but it does work for the future.

          It would be nice if SOMEONE would come up with an alternative for transportation, leaving that oil for industry instead by the time it comes on-line.

        • #2908946

          Thay had a good try anyway

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to 40%

          “It would be nice if SOMEONE would come up with an alternative for transportation, leaving that oil for industry instead by the time it comes on-line.”

          Not quite but getting closer:
          Brazil is using 25% less gasoline in most vehicles (as mandated) with a great portion of them becoming entirely Ethanol based. This makes Brazil the world’s first oil independent country.

          ANWR is NOT going to provide 40% of your oil consumption. At todays standards it would provide less than 10%, based on predicted number of barrels per day. By the time 12 years runs by, for EACH of the DOZENS of smaller exploration projects, not just from the word ‘GO’, how many more cars will you have on the streets and how much MORE oil will you need and how LITTLE of that would be produced by ANWR? We are talking a very insignificant number, especially after the billions spent to get there, and even then the amount of ANWR oil has changed a great deal over the last 8 years, so the projected numbers are way off base. You produce 85 million barrels a day in America, with an additional million per day, will you get that 40% you are looking for? Nope, not a chance in hell!

          In short, NO, you will NOT see 40% of your consumption taken care of 12 years down the road. You will be in the same mess you are today, except 12 years behind in doing something about it.

          As far as Canada is concerned:

          “Canada’s energy minister said Sunday he pushed at an emergency meeting of oil producing and consuming countries for more transparency in global markets to allow supply and demand to be the biggest influences on oil prices.”

          “Although Canada accounts for less than three per cent of the world’s oil production, it sits on 15 per cent of the world’s reserves — second only to Saudi Arabia — mostly concentrated in northeast Alberta.”

          “Despite its relatively small share of the world oil market, Lunn noted that Canada is one of the few countries in the world that is capable of significantly increasing production.

          The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers said last week that Canada’s oil output will nearly double to 4.5 million barrels per day by 2020. More than $100 billion worth of investments is on the books to triple oil sands production, which now supplies slightly more than one million barrels per day.”

          Right now, production costs for drilling in the Abertan oil sands are the worlds highest, yet you feel that by building new refineries or expanding existing ones which are already at capacity, and shipping oil from ANWR to the US, you will see lower prices from a little pittance of available oil?

          I’d say that it is just a bunch of oil hungry Americans opposing change, not exactly a realistic or viable argument when it has been proven to help in other parts of the world. Most nations outside of North America have been recycling and using better resource management practices for decades, and they are much better off for it too.

        • #2909051

          How much does cutting back save?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to So…

          Will it be “enough”?

          If everyone trades in for a hybrid TODAY, how much oil will be saved? Will it be enough to make sure we don’t use it all up or that the price will never go up, or make a REAL difference in emissions?

          Funny, how people don’t realize how stupid their argument of “it won’t be enough” or “it will take to long” really is, because it is not a valid reason for NOT doing anything.

          That is EXACTLY how we got into this situation, people not willing to think long term or look at a bigger picture.

          I still wonder why, with prices the way they have been in the UK, why no one over there ever invented anything using an “alternative fuel”. Why hasn’t Canada come up with this solution? Both are more liberal leaning countries, and both have bought into the whole man made global warming thing, so why are THEY not leading the way?

          A bunch of small things add up to a lot. Ricks 400lbs example of a woman didn’t get that big overnight. It was one twinkee at a time, over years.

        • #2908989

          Don’t be ridiculous

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to How much does cutting back save?

          “Funny, how people don’t realize how stupid their argument of “it won’t be enough” or “it will take to long” really is, because it is not a valid reason for NOT doing anything.”

          It is NOT enough to solve today’s problem, TODAY’S problem is what everyone is trying to solve. Undoubtedly your demand is going to increase to a point where you desperately NEED that oil, but it is nothing of value today. You need an immediate solution, ANWR is NOT it and therefore it is VERY relevant that it will not BEGIN to be available for 10-12 years.

          That’s just one well project too, other projects, far smaller will take about the same amount of time after each exploration contract is approved. It’s just not a solution, end of story, not gonna help.

          YOu want to explore and drill for future demand, which will be needed no matter what happens, then do so, but this is not going to solve or even help the existing problems.

          Why don’t you address the issue with the high prices today instead? High prices due to reduced supply available from the Middle East?

          Why are prices so high? Because the pipelines are constantly being targeted by the terrorists. They know how to hit an American, in the pocketbook.

          If you were not at war in the middle east, the oil problem would have less impact. If more troops were focused in Afghanistan still, perhaps the number of attacks on that pipeline would be reduced. Perhaps there would be a smaller Taliban and AlQaeda force.
          Perhaps there would actually be some progress seen in the Middle East. That’s not the case though, Americans were told to forget about Afghanistan because Iraq was the new threat. Well done, you can thank your BS leader for that one too.

        • #2905867

          Oz the Radical

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to Don’t be ridiculous

          Dude, chill out!

          First off, please explain to me exactly how the US getting out of Iraq would solve anything.

          Would you really prefer a nuclear armed Iran and Iraq? Why not throw in Syria and North Korea too?

          Let me tell you something Ozzie boy. Perhaps you don’t get foreign policy because Canada hasn’t ever really had one.

          Get over your anti-American attitude. Please stay on topic.

        • #2905726

          Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Oz the Radical

          as you said, chill out.

          “First off, please explain to me exactly how the US getting out of Iraq would solve anything.”

          i don’t remember suggesting you get out of Iraq, yuo can post a link to where I did though if I missed something.

          The point isn’t gettign out of Iraq, the point is, WTF are you doing there to begin with when ALL signs pointed to teh fact that it was just a pile of BS being fed to Americans. If you had stayed teh course, with full force along with your allies in Afghanistan, you would be addressing a more realistic problem.

          As for nukes, the CIA had already confirmed that Saddam had NOT sought out nuclear technology and that he did not have teh resources available to him for refined uranium. As far as Iran and Syria go, look on a map, they are different countries and you still have no proof that there was any “imminent threat” as GWB stated it, against the USA.

          You are telling me to stay on topic and yet you also go off about nukes in Syria and North Korea? Uh, stay on topic then.

          Canadian foreign policy includes?

          >The Promotion of Prosperity and Employment
          >The Protection of our Security, within a Stable Global Framework
          >Projecting Canadian Values and Culture
          >International Assistance

          If you think Canada, being a commonwealth nation, has no foreign policy, then it explains your clueless reply anyway. Canada participates on a global scale just as much as America tries to, except we are welcomed into that forum and work with allies instead of making up rules, changing our minds and saying they are either with us or against us. We actually have allies, not just people who are forced to put up with us.

          Anti-American? look outside your borders one day.

        • #2905652

          Ouch!!!

          by stever ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          Oz, Rick, Techno, PEACE guys. None of this helps and is definately off topic. Why don’t you all try to actually get together and come up with a solution or an idea for a solution. Heck Oz as an Engineer surely you could come up with something that could maybe cut fuel consumption in half. Personally I believe the Fuel Cell is our ticket from oil. $4.00 a gallon Gas SUCKS(pardon my language). Guys your all of above average IQ’s get off trying to bash each other.
          (off topic but I’m old)I served with some canadians in the Army and my son did in a joint effort in Iraq and Afganistan (he was a combat medic)So I’m glad we have you Canadians as neighbors.

        • #2905639

          Sorry, Steve

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          Your right, way off topic. Thanks for the kudos I know most Canadians get along with most americans, its just the few who think they run the world and are above the rest that get to me.

          as for being an engineer, it is the SAE (like teh oil grading system) Society Of Automotive Engineers, I am neither a civil or marine engineer bt trade, just an auto engineer who is certified in Air Care testing and alternate fuels.

          I have been watching Ballard do the fuel cesl thing and they are definitely onto something, it seems that half of our city busses use them now.

        • #2905507

          2 kinds of canadians.

          by locrian_lyric ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          The Gordon sinclair kind, and the OZ kind.

          Thank the allmighty the former outnumber the latter

        • #2905490

          Who knows

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          I’ve had my time of being a man slut too. God only know how many little Oz’s are runnign aroun dout there. You’d be happy to hear that my son is not much like me, he has a knack for fixing things and seems to have some of my mechanical aptitude but he’s more like his mother than me.

        • #2905423

          Re Ouch and stever

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          OZ_Media has a habit of turning meaningful discussions into a full-blown argument
          Rickk has been called a troll in the past but I do like his new avatar

          There are many people working on solutions
          Who does not matter?
          It will take time a lot of time
          It will be to late for a lot of people

          But there are things you can do
          Even if you don?t need to save fuel
          Saving can help someone else
          Helping someone else may stop them using crime to supplement their income

          So even if you are rich
          Saving can help you

          I have no problem with the people of North America
          Trying to remember if Mexico is central or North America
          But Mexicans are fine by me
          OZ_Media is not Canadian
          So he says

          Thanks for the IQ bit
          Rick will like it I am sure
          OZ already knows it

        • #2905004

          Its third party haiku guy

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          Well done
          he’s a poet
          and didn’t know it

          do you feel a need
          to share
          your personal
          opinions with others

          so that you
          can strengthen
          your own argument
          in
          your
          o
          w
          n
          m
          i
          n
          d

          LOL, nice post, what a maroon!:D

        • #2904875

          Re: Oz

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          You said, “i don’t remember suggesting you get out of Iraq, you can post a link to where I did though if I missed something.”

          I found these comments from you:

          1) “If you were not at war in the middle east, the oil problem would have less impact.”

          Sounds like a withdraw comment to me.

          2) “If more troops were focused in Afghanistan still, perhaps the number of attacks on that pipeline would be reduced.”

          Pure foolishness. The amount of oil going through the Strait of Hormuz dwarfs that amount being transported thru Afghanistan.

          With Iraq and Iran doing everything they can to try to control the strait, I think our priorities are well aligned with the real threats.

          3) “Americans were told to forget about Afghanistan because Iraq was the new threat.”

          Are you implying that the US can’t fight more than one war at a time? Give me a break.

          4) “Well done, you can thank your BS leader for that one too.”

          Nice political commentary. Is that the best you can do?

          Do I need to remind you that George Bush was elected twice. That his popularity is at a all time low but is almost double that of Congress.

          Glad to hear you don’t like our President but it works both ways. There are plenty of Americans who don’t approve of yours too.

        • #2904788

          You just make assumptions though, based on what you want me to say

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive


          1) “If you were not at war in the middle east, the oil problem would have less impact.”

          Sounds like a withdraw comment to me.”

          Does it? I didn’t mention withdrawing, but perhaps the entire premise for that invasion was flawed and shouldn’t have happened to begin with. I didn’t mention anythign about withdrawl, it’s too late now you are in it and must stay the course. Actually, anyone who has followed my comments for a while knows that is exactly my view as i have specifically said so numerous times.

          2) “If more troops were focused in Afghanistan still, perhaps the number of attacks on that pipeline would be reduced.”

          Pure foolishness. The amount of oil going through the Strait of Hormuz dwarfs that amount being transported thru Afghanistan.”

          Foolishness? Well you seem to think THAT comment also refers to you leaving Iraq, again I said nothing of the sort. You shouldn’t be there at all, and should have stayed in Afghanistan where little has remained changed but the opposition is much stronger than every before, when you were lead to believe to had stopped or even slowed the Taliban, which is not the case at all, they just moved back into their Kandahar safe haven.

          ***On a side note, here’s an interesting article from AgfhanMagazine, to show what THEIR thoughts on America’s actions since teh cold war have been. They apprently don’t see anything but betrayal and backstabbing from America.
          http://www.afghanmagazine.com/2004_07/articles/pipeline.shtml

          “. Had the US not neglected Afghanistan in the first place and later on, the country would not have turned into an operational terrorist base for Bin Laden and Al-Qaida to mount major attacks against the United States. ”

          anyhow back to pipelines, from various sources:
          “Saudi authorities arrested 701 suspected al-Qaida-linked militants in 2008, some of whom planned a car bomb attack on an oil installation, the Interior Ministry said Wednesday. ”

          “Al-Qaida has called for attacks against the Saudi government, criticizing its alliance with the U.S. and hoping to disrupt the flow of oil to the West. The group has also labeled the government un-Islamic, even though the kingdom follows a strict interpretation of Islam known as Wahhabism.”

          “In the latest incident to spell trouble on Pakistan?s border with Afghanistan, suspected Taliban militants attacked check posts, kidnapped Pakistani policemen, and blew up oil tankers destined for US and NATO troops in Afghanistan on Tuesday.”

          “Armed men attacked four checkposts on Sunday in the troubled region, where militants blew up 36 tankers bringing fuel for US and NATO troops across the border in March, wounding 100 people. ”

          I can go on and on with similar news from eth area, but the key is, as long as oil is a target of war, it will cost more. That’s pretty basic economics.

          “3) “Americans were told to forget about Afghanistan because Iraq was the new threat.”

          Are you implying that the US can’t fight more than one war at a time? Give me a break.”

          No but the US can apprently only FUNd one war at a time. An issue that has resulted in many Afghani’s resenting America is teh funding to offer security to members of th government was removed, thus reverted. The security to protect women who wanted to attend school and work in hospitals was handed back to tthe same terrors that you were protecting them from, so that has also reverted into a repressive and violent condition, women simply stopped going to schools and working hospitals. The only remaining member of government, her name slips me now, was exiled and fled to the safety of UN troops before being taken to America for her safety. So the hreat party about a women serving in government, her key role to support womens rights and freedoms,was a short lived victory also.

          The point is, and this can consist of endless examples too, when the US removed teh bulk of its troops, Afghans saw it as teh second time they were betrayed by America and left to deal with it themselves when that financial support was imperative for rebuilding a new country.

          There are not enough troop and there is not enough money in Afghanistan, as it has been diverted to Iraq now. I supopse in essence that means that you are NOT able to fight two wars at the same time afterall.

          “4) “Well done, you can thank your BS leader for that one too.”

          Nice political commentary. Is that the best you can do?

          Do I need to remind you that George Bush was elected twice”

          That isn’t teh greatest reply is it? I think teh bulk of the world sees you as cluless for electing him teh first time, that fact that enough people actually believed in him for a second term just shows the world that you are absolutely clueless and easily lead by the hand to be mislead because you want him to be right, whether he is or not. His entire career is a failure, failed at the oil business over and over again, yet he can still be president?

          as for your concerns about Canada’s PM, believe me, MOST Canadians don’t like the PM no matter WHO is is or what party he represents. We don’t give a toos about our own politics because our leaders aren’t out there invading countries and trying to convert the world to our way of thinking.

          If Canadian leaders did mroe than simply screw up Canadian politics, there would be mroe of a reson for people to care, but they pretty much sit on their a$$es and do nothing anyway.

          Poltics, keep your politics out of my face, off of my daily news and out of teh world’s media and I have no concern at all who you elect or what he/she does.

          Thrust yoru politics down my throat, try to change the world and have an adverse effect on OUR security and all of a sudden it IS my problem too.

          get it?
          Not in my face, I don’t care.
          In my face, I do care.

          Canadians in general don’t give a crap about politics, unless it is someone else’s politics that are effecting Canadians.

        • #2906938

          yes I did spam button you. For your biggoted comment to TechRat

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          By the way oz… I did hit the spam button. Not because of your rude language… But because again you reference peoples place of origion in your slander of them. It’s not even specific to the person. You just catagorized a complete nation in your insult to Tech Rat. Good job Oz.

          That Oz… Is why I hit the spam button. Thanks Oz… It took one day for you to prove my point about your biggotry…
          Your a biggot. And Oz.. Look hard.. find anywhere where I slandered you based on your country of origion. I don’t like you. But I do not judge a nation by your actions. Or the people that live in it. You, on the other hand do. With numerous nations… And you chose the most insultive way of catagorizing those citizens. Go for it Oz… Even when I reference the rulers of Iran, i do not slander their citizens.. You on the other hand constantly do it with what now appears to be numerous nations.

          Bigot.

          Glad to see your a bigot with more then one nationality. It just shows how sick you are.

          Dan

        • #2906811

          re: your crap about oil indepence through drilling

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          Show a link where I said that oz.

          Again, you miss quote me. I said from the very beginning that I wanted both alternate energy AND drilling

          Do you need the link again oz where I corrected you the first time?

          This is now the third time you have miss quoted my position.

          If you can’t get it right, then don’t reply.

          And oz… My point about it taking 30 years for Brazil.. My position was that it would take 30 years for ALTERNATE FUELS(no matter what kind) to become widely avaible for everyone. Your post, just gave me a bench mark to back up my position.

          Again, if you can’t follow the logic. You do know what logic is oz, don’t you. Then don’t bother replying.

          And again oz.

          Use the search… Need a lesson in how to do it? I provided both a link and highlighted my very first post stating that position.

          Know how to read a time stamp oz. You know, last modify date. Look at that also, and you find it has been way before every miss quote of my position by you.

          You should be a politician oz, you miss quote people enough.

          Dan
          [edited to add] I have no idea where the hell this post was spouse to appear in this thread. I totally lost where I had to post at the high level to reply to oz.

        • #2904671

          LOL, get the net, I found a live one! :D

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          First of all, “You just catagorized a complete nation in your insult to Tech Rat” Exactly, I didn’t directly insult Tech Rat did I ?

          You also noted that I am equally “bigoted” towards other nation, which means I do treat everyone equally and don’t target a specific nation, well done!

          It’s also nice to see that you have become TR’s new volounteer moderator, does Tammy know you have acquired her position? I am sure you could have been hired to clean up MacDonalds parking lot or crush boxes at WalMart instead of assuming someone else’s job.

          Then again, I didn’t bother reporting all of your other posts here which are well outside of TR’s allowable practices, so I suppose a quick review of the discussion will quickly show exactly what your focus is and how you completely ignore the site rules while bitching like a little girl (actually, most little girls are far more mature and literate than yourself). But that is always taken into consideration by the moderators here.

          You have also proven to have no comprehension skills to speak of, even after having your atrocious spelling mistakes pointed out, you continue to post like someone just learning to write English, proving you ingest nothing that you read and simply troll for argument’s sake.

          How typically American it is of you to decide to become the police for others who choose not to speak for themselves, I am sure they are all quite flattered to be supported from such a clueless perspective.

          No, you definitely are NOT very clever. are you?

        • #2904618

          Ozzy, you really can’t deal with more then 1 point in a post can you?

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          Of all the things covered in my post, you addressed one. You refuse to acknowledge or prove me wrong about your miss quoting me. You have not come close to addressing the cost factor of moving to alternate fuels..

          And oz… For your little itty brain. I say 30 years to become affordable for everyone… That was also pointed out in my BENCH MARK post to you about brazil.

          Oz, you need to go to a doctor and have some tests done. Your reading retention sucks. I think it also is why you can’t type worth crap.

          I will no longer bust your balls about how bad you type… But wait, I haven’t but once or twice. And only in response to your rants about my spelling skills.

          So oz… Shut up unless you can address points raised. Double check your links you are replying to before you reply. Because you are taking things completely out of concept.

          And oz.. You moron. At least reply to more then 1 point of a post when you reply. I’ve see it, you can do it.. It might take you hours to think that far ahead, but I’ve seen you do it… Or what oz, you’r not man enough to respond to points that your wrong about? I am, even to twits like you. I will even admit where I’m wrong, even to twits like you. Your scum oz, but even scum gets some things right. Your just not doing it today.

          Oz, I hate biggots. Truely hate biggots. They are the worse example of a human being there is. You are a biggot. I truely hate you for that reason only. I will always be the first to point out biggoted comments in this forum. Remeber big jake, mechanic man. I delt with them exactly as I deal with you.

          So, oz.. Yes, I will become a monitor with regard to issues like that. And oz, your the one that I currently am monitoring because I think you are exactly like those 2.

          Dan
          [edited to add] A scum biggot isn’t worth the trouble of spell check or rereading of a post. Deal with it.

        • #2904440

          Here’s an excercise for you

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          First of all, if you can’t articulate your thoughts into a sensible post without teh constant name calling (not that it bothers me to hear what you think, again your comments are so insignificant anyway, but you sound like a small child, I would be shocked to find out you have reached grade 8 yet). In the end though, nobody actually cares what you do, say or think.

          You remind me of a silver fish, “the damage caused by silverfish is negligible and they have no direct effect on human health beyond psychological distress to those who are frightened or disgusted by their appearance.”

          When you touch them they merely disintegrate into nothing but a little silver skid mark.

          another point, do you really think ANYONE on TR is actually reading your posts? People give up pretty quickly on these sensless rants, I just have a soft spot for teh weak minde and am drawn to see if there is ANY signs of intelligence when I run across people likes yourself.

          As for monitoring, you can pretend you’re all grown up, you can buy some toy handcuffs and a sherriffs badge, you can wear daddy’s boots or mommy’s heels if you prefer, but you are still the most miniscule skid mark of a person that your constant and relentless whining over nothing relevant is completely lost on people. I am sure that with your record of posts that are outside of TR’s guidelines they will be mroe than happy to accomodate your whining. LOL, I just feel sorry for those who have to listen to your BS and try to reply politely. If they were to try and delete yoru offensive posts, had I decided to report all of them, you’d have no TR presence at all and there would be no trace you actually existed, kinda like when you actually do die.

          I have NO obliation or interest in replying to your demands, I think I just do it for kicks sometime because you come up with such stupid comments, its almost amusing, but gets tiring real fast too, I wonder how people in your life deal with it, if you even HAVE people in your life outside of mom’s basement.

          Anyway, as I have said before, and proved myself wrong, you are nto worth my or anyone else’s time, do yourself a gfavour and go make up a new imaginary friend or two to hang out with, you sure need it.

          oh yeah I forgot, ahem….. I hate you, I hate everything you say, I hate people just like you, people like yuo suck, you should burn in hell, damn you DanLM!

          I am going to help everyone out, whether they like it or not, and stand up for them and jolly well give you what for because I hate you, I hate you, I hate you, I wish you were not my mommy, I wish you were dead! I’m running away to a better place!

          get a life. 😀

        • #2904430

          re: Here’s an excercise for you – yawn… what ever.

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          nt

          Dan

        • #2904418

          OMG, no way!

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          YOu actually tired of teh discussion?! What is it beyond you now? You don’t stoop THAt low, etc. Way too cool for this, aren;t you?

          LOL

          Nah, I think you are just out of uncreative BS to throw out and finally gave up.

          hey I just flamed JD, why don’t you do some digging, it’ll give you something to send in as SPAM so you an toot your little horn and get a woody playing rent-a-moderator. LOL 😀

          You really are a slow one, aren’t you?

        • #2906714

          Point proven. You did stoop that low. I knew you would

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          Dan

        • #2906690

          Wel done

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          Yuo just made your first point, now if you roll up a cone of paper you have a hat to fit it.

          Your point was that I will stoop low enough to reply to you, unfortunately I now have a mouth full of gravel and a need to get off the bottom of the tank, don’t worry you’ll get to the surface one day, after you pass away and float to the top.

        • #2906619

          Well OZ

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          If you?re talking about me

          That would be haka not haiku guy
          No I don?t do much dancing
          I have some Maori blood not much

          Some info for you

          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Zvs4T4RU30

          The haka that you see the All Blacks use is a war haka
          The All Blacks are the national rugby team
          There are many types
          Some are a lot like rhythmic dancing

          I think the war haka is insensitive to other cultures
          But it is tradition

          Anyway I have to go
          Haere ra

          Ps I am not very good at Maori so don?t laugh

        • #2906528

          nope

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          definitely haiku, or some form of it judging by your sentences

        • #2906516

          Re LOL, get the net, I found a live one!

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Dude? Don’t be so defensive

          Could you girls get the alias right
          It’s Techno Rat not Tech Rat

          ?while bitching like a little girl (actually, most little girls are far more mature and literate than yourself)?

          That is extremely offensive to little girls
          I think all the parents of little girls should join in blowing you a big raspberry
          I would ask you not to think or talk about little girls and bitches in the same sentence

          You have no grounds for criticizing the spelling of others
          You should leave that alone

          Re nope

          What do you have against poetry?
          Or is it because it?s Japanese

          Gosh am I going to get the bad spelling and grammar treatment now
          You are so good at it
          Go on let me have it
          It don?t matter I?m just a lowly rat anyway

        • #2905444

          At least one of your points doesn’t fit the facts.

          by captbilly1eye ·

          In reply to Don’t be ridiculous

          [i]”Why are prices so high? Because the pipelines are constantly being targeted by the terrorists. They know how to hit an American, in the pocketbook.”[/i]

          Although it may be true that terrorists target oil refineries and pipelines to target the US. Their prime reason is to disrupt the economy of the country and its government that owns those resources.

          Oil prices are not increasing due to a reduction in supply from the Middle east. In fact, of the top 15 crude oil suppliers to the US, every country in the middle east has supplied more to the US in 2008 than in 2007… to the tune of a total of over 400,000 more barrels per day.

          Of the top 15 countries supplying crude to the US, the reduction of supply has actually come from Mexico, Venezuela, Russia, Angola and Algeria which has dropped by over 670,000 barrels per day.

          I’m not aware of terrorist attacks to those country’s pipelines.

          In reality, the price of crude has not risen so much by a lack of supply as it has from a increase in demand from quickly developing countries such as China, the lower value of the US Dollar, speculators, and the fear by suppliers of what may happen in the near future with Iran and, to some extent, Syria.

          I know it’s very difficult to find anything but liberally-slanted, anti-US news in Canada. But the facts are not hard to find if you look.

          The main argument I will give for increasing refining and drilling in the US is to better our energy independence. This in order to keep from being controlled by third-world countries and rogue dictators that serve no good purpose by being in our “pocketbook.”

          Yes. The benefits from building more refineries and drilling for oil off-shore as well as ANWR will not be felt for many years to come. But, the possibility of a more renewable and cost-efficient energy source taking the place of oil is even farther off. The US has been near-sighted in respect to oil for far too long due primarily to the failures of eight years of Clinton and the ignorance first fostered by the Carter administration. Like it or not, industry and the economy here and in Canada are overwhelmingly dependent on oil. I see this as a necessary tact to ensure economic strength in the interim.

          To be fair, the problems we’re experiencing today are the result of something that started four decades ago. Prior to 1970, The US was the world’s #1 supplier of crude oil. Since then our production has dropped by over 35%. This primarily due to a lack of more drilling and no new refineries.

          The current ‘fuel crisis’, as the Media likes to call it, does not have a quick solution. Although reducing gas taxes would help. The focus needs to be more on where we will be in the next 10 to 15 years. I see such targeted plans to be very “relevant.”
          Quite frankly, I’m not that shocked with the current fuel prices and expect them to go considerably higher before we see any substantial reduction. We’ve enjoyed gas prices that have been much lower than most other countries for longer than I can remember. As we now live in a world where the economy and prices are driven more by the world rather than a few countries, it only makes sense to see some ‘leveling.’

          Lastly, it is not my intention to aggravate. The last thing I want is to have a Canadian pissed at me. After all, Canada is our #1 supplier of oil as you did correctly point out.

          BTW, … how much of the price per gallon in Canada goes to taxes? Here it is appx. 50?. California is the highest at 75? and here in SC it’s 35?. (State & Federal combined).

        • #2905431

          Oversight or dishonest?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to At least one of your points doesn’t fit the facts.

          Am I to understand that our problems with terrorists is all because of President Bush?

          There were not any terrorists attacking the US and US interests before the Iraq war?

          How simplistic to try to pass this off on Iraq.

        • #2905001

          Many issues of course

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to At least one of your points doesn’t fit the facts.

          Oil prices can not be equated to a single factor, of course, as no product usually can.

          Oil production in the Middle East is up because it was so low before due to constant destruction in the early years of the war and has been slowly getting up to speed again. Of course new figures are expected to trump he former years, again, Canada has just finished talks with Saudi’s to up the oil production. They promised 200,000 barrels per day but that is still said to be just playing lip service and nothing substantial.

          Supply and demand, if oil production is down elsewhere for various reasons, would that not also equate to an even greater need for full capacity in Iraq and Afghanistan where pipelines are targeted, making oil from the world’s largest supplier to be in greater demand during a war?

          Oil prices always go out of control during war.

          “I know it’s very difficult to find anything but liberally-slanted, anti-US news in Canada. But the facts are not hard to find if you look.”

          Actually I find news here is more thorough than news in the US. Besides watching countless hours of US news in various hotels in the US, we get many Us channels here too, local (detroit, washington etc) and network. We also get BBC News, Islamic news, Asian (Korean, Chinese news)etc.

          Quite often you see video footage of press conference comments, public events etc. and in Canada and some other broadcasts a 2 minute clip is shown, airing several opinions. That same video clip, broadcast on some of the US channels is edited and clipped of any “unhealthy” news and is broadcast to show a completely different side.

          Its safe to say, and hardly contestable, especially with the White House having imposed media control since WWII, that all news is biased in some way. However I see far more extreme right spin or extreme left spin with no middle ground coming from the US.

        • #2904854

          Oz: You inadvertently validated my comment…

          by captbilly1eye ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          Sighting Detroit & Washington as sample US media sources serves to strengthen my belief in your unfortunate sources of information. You could not have made worse choices unless you added San Francisco, Seattle or Denver. The ultra-liberal, socio-political disaster that is Detroit is the major reason I moved from there two years ago.

          Having lived in Detroit for 19 years, I am very familiar with most of the news coming out of Canada. If you sincerely believe it is “more thorough than news in the US” then I can very easily understand the source of your clouded judgment. That also clearly explains your stance on Iraq and Afghanistan.

          But I see misinformation in a similar way as I do religion: if it makes you happy and feel secure, I have no problem with it. That is as long as you don’t threaten my personal happiness and security. And since you’re from Canada, there’s not much threat of that. 😉

          sideline: The only thing I miss from living in Detroit is being able to cheer on the Red Wings whenever they stomp a team from across the border. Go Wings! 😀
          (…too bad they have to do it with ex-canucks on the team)

        • #2904841

          Still curious…

          by captbilly1eye ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          How much of the cost of a gallon (or litre – I can convert) of fuel in Canada goes to taxes?

          I believe it used to be appx. 30%. Is it the same or more now?

        • #2904825

          Gas Taxes in Canada

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          Vary from region to region:
          http://www.fuelfocus.nrcan.gc.ca/fact_sheets/gasprice_e.cfm

          But the national average:
          For Gas at 105 a litre (January 2008)
          59.4 cents to crude costs
          14.9 to federal taxes
          16.9 to provincial taxes
          14.3 to refining/marketing/retailling

          James

        • #2904784

          Only if you focus on a specific which wasn’t presented.

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          You seem to miss that I cited many sources, US news was just one of them.
          Obviously, by my comments, I explained that I don’t rely on a single source or even a single country’s sources, so your diving in on the specifics of local US news is absolutely irrelevant and narrow sighted.

        • #2904774

          Only if you focus on a specific whish wasn’t presented.

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          You seem to miss that I cited many sources, US news was just one of them.
          Obviously, by my comments, I explained that I don’t rely on a single source or even a single country’s sources, so yuor diving in on teh specifics of local US news is absolutely irrelevant and narrow sighted.

          The funny part is that you say you lived in the area and watched Canadian news, completely failing to see the exact same argument you just made against Detroit news.

          As I explained before, if a thre eminute video in Canada is only shown as a 1 minute video in the USA, how is it that you suggest we don’t get the full story?

          Yes some Canadian news is rather slanted, just as with US news. That’s wh I rely on multiple sources, including those most Americans would never consider as they are “the enemies news, so it must be false”.

          Just try to think abotu what yuo are reding next time instead of just quickly saying “AHA !! “and then running with it, you’ll fair better in the long run and not look so blind as to what you read.

          “Glad to hear you don’t like our President but it works both ways. There are plenty of Americans who don’t approve of yours too. ”

          Well there are plenty of Canadians if nto more than Americans that don’t approve of our Prime Minister too, as I have already said. But our Prime Minister isn’t plcing you in greater danger, he is not screwing up the economy and spending billions of dollars tryign to change someone else’s country etc.

          There’s a HUGE difference between the two. We KNOW that all politcians lie and cheat, there’s no way anyone would support Canada’s running off to Iraq to invade on false premises, that’s why we didn’t support the Iraq war from the get go. In teh US, people stoo dbehind a proven moron and supported his lies, his decit and everything else, when knowing full on that it was all completel horsesh1t but it was a cool cownoay way of standing up, people figured you’d just waltz in a wipe our Iraq, these boards were full of such comments at the time. Hindsight is 20/20, prhaps listen to allies and actually consider what is being said next time, instead of spitting at them, calling them traitors and finding out the hard way.

        • #2904729

          Thanks for the info, James.

          by captbilly1eye ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          That’s alot in taxes. No wonder some conservatives there are fighting for tax reform. Are they making any head-way?

          and thanks for the laughs, Oz.
          It’s funny to see how poor your typing becomes when someone gets your goat and objectively knows more about a subject than you do.

          Relax… you can’t [b]always[/b] be right.
          I have faith your ego will survive.
          Count to 10….

          🙂

        • #2904718

          capt. Hindgrinder

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          Sorry old joke.

          Ever been to sea Billy?
          Ever been blown ashore?
          No? Well bend over and I’ll give you a taste of my old fish stick.

          Anyway, if you feel you have somehow corrected me or made point, that’s fantastic, it must have been moot as I missed it though.

          But hey, it’s all about how good you feel about yourself, not whether you are wrong or right. As long as you feel good that’s fine by me.

          If a one legged man wins the para-olympic gold medal, he’s still in winner in his eyes.

        • #2904706

          Feel better now? :D

          by captbilly1eye ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          …and I thought I was conversing with an adult. Well, unlike you, OZ, I can see when & admit when I was wrong.

          Thanks for making my day.

        • #2904680

          Taxes in Canada

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          The GST which is a federal tax applied to goods (including Gas) and services (professional services), has gone from 7% to 6% to its current 5%.

          Federal Income taxes have gone down a number of times since we first balanced the federal budget in 1998. Most provinces have balanced their budgets as well.

          To quote from a government study in 2005:
          This brief summary paints an overall picture of the tax situation inherited from the Liberal governments since the budget was balanced in 1998. The budget surpluses freed up since then have given the federal government considerable financial flexibility, which has enabled it to make substantial tax cuts. As we estimated for the purposes of this paper, the full range of tax reductions introduced since 1998 provided for lower individual income taxes and higher tax‑based transfers to individuals, and totalled $36.9 billion in 2005 alone. Corporations have also benefited from significant tax reductions, estimated at $4.6 billion for the 2004‑2005 fiscal year.

          http://www.parl.gc.ca/information/library/PRBpubs/prb0640-e.htm#ageneral

          Now those numbers may seem small to an American, but remember our country is roughly 10% of the population and GDP of the US.

          It becomes harder as we got to get more tax cuts, there is more pressure to increase the social spending that was cut to balance the budget in the first place.

          James

        • #2907036

          Very interesting. Thanks for that.

          by captbilly1eye ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          Over the past two years, I’ve lost touch somewhat with what’s been going on up there politically. It appears, tax-wise, things are moving in the right direction. I wish I could say the same thing here.

          At a time when economic growth needs to be at the forefront, it escapes me how most liberals see taxation (and conservation for that matter) as a wise direction. Neither ever strengthened the economy.

          Case in point – There was a Congressman in Michigan that recently proposed an additional 50? per gallon tax increase to “force people to conserve” and earmarked the revenue to go toward preventing Global Warming. This when gas was already over $3.50 and while Michigan is in the worst economic condition of any of the states. He seemed to ignore how strongly dependent Michigan is on the automotive industry and trucking. Fortunately, it was killed (so far) or many more companies would have gone belly-up or left the state.

          Additionally… every time someone suggests just a [b]temporary[/b] reduction or staying of the fuel tax, it gets nowhere. Once a tax is implemented, it is extremely tough to cut the programs that were set up to use the money.

          But we ain’t seen nothin’ yet!
          If Obama gets elected, what we pay now will look like chicken feed!

        • #2907024

          I will add

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          Even the NDP (socialist) governments in the some of the provinces pushed for balanced budgets.

          Of course our taxes were higher to begin with, the gap has closed somewhat though.

          Once you balance the budget there are huge pressures on subsequent governments to not run up a deficit.

          We of course do still have a significant long term debt, but it is being reduced by the surpluses. Some people suggested that we not reduce the GST, just direct the amount we would have reduced against paying off debt.

          James

        • #2906962

          No worries

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          You’ll learn

        • #2906958

          And a new BC Gas tax of course

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Many issues of course

          As of July 1st, we will see an additional 2.4cents per litre, which is a little over 9 cents per gallon.
          Glad to see they are doing something to save the environment, well done. 😀

          At least BC translink has stopped getting a raise in road taxes every years or so, that was insane. A crown corporation gets deregulated, a new “private” organization takes over and starts pushing for a percentage of road taxes and other handouts that the former crown corporation was entitled to.

        • #2908980

          Alternate fuels? People are too cheap

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to How much does cutting back save?

          Well Brazil does and they are completely self sufficient now, they all use Flex Fuel vehicles and burn Ethanol which is produced from the corn fields. Yeah I know, there is not enough land in the USA for you to do the same, therefore do nothing instead.

          England, Canada and Europe are very big on alternate power.

          Homes in Europe are FAR more energy efficient than home out here. People are FAR more resourceful but that is seen as socialist crap by most Americans…because it wasn’t America’s lead.

          Vehicles in Europe have FAR smaller engines than in North America, vehicle engines are also more efficient that equally sized engines in North America.

          As Neil pointed out, a focus here (econo box junko car) is available with a 2.0L as the smallest motor. In England the 2.0 is the largest motor. English versions also get better mileage, burn fuel more efficiently and last longer due to better engineering and build quality. Even my SUV, with a European motor is more efficient and puts out more horse power than the exact same SUV with the North American motor.

          It costs more so they don’t build them here, not only do people want better vehicles, they want the at a lower price. Can’t be done, so they don’t do it. In Europe people are used to paying a bit more for better quality and engineering in most products, therefore the manufacturer’s meet a quality and efficiency demand instead of a cheap price demand.

          This doesn’t just go for cars, it holds true for clothing, homes, furniture and pretty much everything else manufactured. We buy Chinese, they buy German and Swedish and British.

          We just don’t get the same quality here, because people aren’t prepared to pay for it, while WalMart and Target stores exists.

        • #2908965

          Brazil also drills for oil

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Alternate fuels? People are too cheap

          but all your examples show is high prices just means more economical cars.

          These other countries that have had the outrageous prices intentionally inflicted on them by their governments hasn’t brought about innovation to get off petrol. Why?

        • #2908934

          intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Brazil also drills for oil

          Links

          Again you take an ounce of truth and run with it until it becomes a mountain of hope for you.

          Brazil drills for oil, if you took even a second to look into it before arguing your point, you’d see the difference.

          It’s not about whether or not Brazil drills for oil, in any way shape or form. That argument is 100% irrelevant…forget it..no such problem..not what I am talking about.. clear it from your mind.

          Okay now?

          Brazil is the only country on earth that has become oil independent.

          First the government mandated all cars be 15-20% more fuel efficient, burning more Ethanol based fuel, then it was 25%. Guess what, manufacturer’s did it with relative ease, makes you wonder how doesn’t it? not.

          Now, they have the bulk of new cars run on pure Ethanol made form wheat mixed with smaller and smaller portions of oil.

          Again though, this is impossible in the USA, you don’t have enough grain and you have far too many cars, therefore why even bother, right? Let someone else make a difference, I;ll just keep oding what I’m doing until I am told to do otherwise, hang on, they can’t TELL me what to do, that would be a violation of my personal liberties. What a circular discussion you guys make just to substantiate your dream of rilling more oil and ignoring the environment until someone else does something about it and forces you to follow.

          You all seem to have the “Why should I change” attitude, and then the “I better not be forced to change, I’d rather accept personal responsibility because I am an American!” attitude at the same time. Nice how that works for you.

          You’ll take personal responsibility? Prove it. What have you done this week, month to help curtail the world oil crisis?

          You refuse to accept people who try to act on it, you refuse to accept any alternative, (even in Brazil where it has proven to be beneficial) and you refuse to be told to change.

          In other words, you are just going to do f-all and anyone who forces you to be responsible is stepping on your rights as an American. If you only had an idea just how retarded that all sounds.

        • #2908816

          In one of the small towns here in the Waikato

          by tearat ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          A local town council added 15% of alcohol to the fuel of its fleet
          15% was the highest level they could use because of the increased risk of corrasion

          Alcohol will sit on the top of the engine oil
          It does not prevent corrasion like oil
          Alot like water

          That was along time ago
          Today?s cars may not have the same problems

          From reading your posts
          You are showing a great deal of arrogance
          It may be from past arguments you have had with JD

          Canada is not perfect
          In fact no country is perfect
          But it costs nothing to cut the crap

          I guess Canada is full of arrogant people
          Or is it the French language

          Gee I can?t wait to see what kind of reply I get

        • #2908803

          I don’t understand

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          how a country that still drills and uses oil can be considered by you to be “oil independent”, unless you mean they only use their own oil.

          I never said Anwar would lower prices today, you are confusing me with someone else.

          I never said Anwar was the only place we should be drilling, so it doesn’t HAVE to be 40%.

          What do I do? I drive 60mph instead of 75mph. it adds about 10 minutes to my travel time each way, but I am getting just over 40mpg with my little saturn.

          Maybe some country out there will decide to lead by example instead of complaining that the US hasn’t found a solution yet.

          Inflicted via taxes. Do I really need to show you a link of how much of the price of gas (petrol) in the UK is taxes?

        • #2905983

          Alcohol?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          Who was talking about adding alcohol?

          If you want to learn about Brazil becoming the only oil independent country on the planet, http://tinyurl.com/2c9np

          I have also not stated that Brazil is the answer to the problem, just used it as an illustration of what full commitment is able to accomplish if it is wanted.

          As far as your other comments, Canada has many flaws, too many to reiterate in one post, but it sure as hell isn’t America and we are thankful of that in so many ways.

          As for JD, he’s not a pu$$y and can hold his own, don’t you worry about him.

        • #2905982

          Jd

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          As for brazil drilling oil, ”
          “It’s not about whether or not Brazil drills for oil, in any way shape or form. That argument is 100% irrelevant…forget it..no such problem..not what I am talking about.. clear it from your mind.”

          Oil independent in that they have no need for imported oil anymore, you had it.

          As for taxes, I think you too were thinking of someone else, unless I was on a bad trip or something. Never take the brown acid, I shoulda listened to Woodstock!

        • #2905958

          Re Alcohol?

          by tearat ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          Hmm
          You don?t seem to know as much as you say you do

          How nice for Brazil
          It?s good that solution works for them
          But it does not mean that same solution will work for every one else

          So what is Canada doing?
          Tell us its much more fun being a critic
          Being a critic means you don?t have to come up with solutions
          So much easier shooting everyone else down

        • #2905865

          You Still Haven’t Answered 2 Questions

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          1) If gas prices are so much higher in Canada and Euprope, why haven’t you all taken the lead in developing alternatives?

          2) Your higher prices are for the most part only because of your governments. Taxes for socialized medicine is one reason.

          How do you plan on continuing to tax gas so high if prices reach say double what they are today?

        • #2905860

          Oz, Please Answer This

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          You keep saying Brazil, Brazil, Brazil.

          Ok, and you’ve made the point that the US doesn’t have enough grain to go the pure ethanol route like Brazil because in your words, we don’t have enough land and we have too many cars.

          What will happen to Brazil when they start growing like China? Brazil is already growing like a weed year over year.

          What happens to their whole sugar cane ethanol industry? Will it be able to keep up?

          I doubt it. As more and more Brazilians get cars, drive, have larger families, develop suburbs, want air conditioning…sounds like China doesn’t it.

          Believe me, even Brazil won’t be self sufficient forever.

        • #2905832

          Rickk

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          1) As evidenced by my time driving US roads and Canadian roads, and by the dealer statistics that I am familiar with, Canadians buy smaller vehicles than our US counterparts. Yet we still run farms, construction business, camp in the wilderness etc. Don’t get me wrong there are still lots of people driving luxury SUVs in the city commute, but on average, we drive smaller.

          2)Most of the funding for health care comes from a direct tax, differs from province to province – my employer pays it, same way your emplyer would pay an HMO.

          3) There is funding for alternatives. You may recall that the biggest fuel cell company in the world is Canadian (Ballard), and they work with many car makers around the world. Our government gave them substantial R&D grants, tax breaks etc. Our government also subsidises ethanol production(before it became an issue), and mandating minimum 5% ethanol in all gas in a few years.

          We aren’t perfect by any means (we make low speed electric cars that are popular in the US but can’t be licensed in Canada, for example).

          But we have taken some steps.

          Many Americans make assumptions based on what they hear or don’t hear in their media about Canada – you know what they say about assuming…

          James

        • #2905697

          Did you even read yoru OWN post?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          My god, what hypoccrisy!

          First of all, I am not your mechanic. It is not for me to prove anything to you, I posted links to sources of eth information I provided, if you haven’t checked them Google it, search back through the thread and look at it yourself. If you have a problem with what is presented, offer some alternate proof, don’t just expect OTHERS to prove themselves over and over again because you don’t believe them, that is not my burden but yours.

          I have NEVER EVER said that the solution is the same as Brazil’s, why have you raise dthat question twice? If you don’t believe it, that’s one thing, you can write to Brazil’s and question their claims? If you don’t understand it, get some help. The burden is not on me, I already provided the info, you can check it yourself.

          See, where you are wrong is taht you simply don’t believe what someoen says, then you ask them to prove it and that they are unsubstantiated claims. When in actuality you should simply find proof that YOU are correct, that the facts presented are incorrect and then provide links to THAT information.

          You just aren’t very good at this, it’s like debating with a small child who just says “no it isn’t” to everything you say, not exactly clever, are you?

          Prove me wrong if that is your goal.

        • #2905693

          rikk

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          As James has already pointed out, your posturing and poking simply makes you look uninformed and is quite stupid.

          As far as Brazil is concerned, your only retort is that it can’t last forever, a ncie speculative reply based on a guess of their economy and the clean air mentality of the people. Your insight into their mindset is astonishing, you should get a gig in Vegas with that one.

          Th only reason I have mentioned it more than once is because people have denied it; well you simply have to look it up on the internet, they got here but they can’t figure out how to Google it? Gives me an idea of the mental midgets I am dealing with ayway.

          As far as Canada’s actions, as James mentioned we do have Ballard power, they have been retrofitting old and building new city buses for years now that run on Ballard fuel cells, they are the most forward thinkign and progressive ocmpany of its type in the world. More people ride to work here, more people take teh skytrain (rapid transit) in and out of town now. People here are surrounded by trees, mountains, pure lakes and streams. They have seen what turmoil US companies have created for our once protected lands and they certainly do not have an appetite for resource gluttony. It’s in our faces, we can’t ignore it as easily as most Americans seem to.

        • #2905578

          How about your constant use of the word Pu$$y to describe

          by danlm ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          anyone that disagree’s with you.

          Your choice of words used within this thread.

          Fk off oz… Your a hypocrite.

          You think your above it all… Your worse then the rest.

          Dan

        • #2905575

          delete, duplicate

          by danlm ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          nt

        • #2905560

          still don’t get it, do you?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          Why I bother to reply to your anymore is beyond me, I guess I’m just a sucker.

          as for me calling someone a pu$$y, there’s a difference between saying “k off, Dan, you’re a loser” and saying “Don’t be a pu$$y” or “only a “Pu$$y would do that” etc.

          Saying someone is a Pu$$y is hardly as insulting or rude as telling someone to f_k off.

          As you seem to not understand how a sentence is structured makes a great difference in how it is perceived, I’ll just leave you to it.

          Your post was pulled for a good reason, it was full of direct insults, fk off, fk you etc that had no bearing on what you were trying to say, added no emphasis to your comments in any way except to be a direct insult with no direction. And you’ve continued to do it, without my saying anything.

          My comments have been reported and left alone after review more than once.

          If your comment doesn’t stand up to a moderators review, perhaps you shouldn’t be complaining to me, I don’t delete posts, and should be questioning someone else, while pointing out all of the posts you keep referring to me posting.

          Your dislike for my comments is not my problem, there are people who will review and make that decision themselves upon your request.

          When you get a speeding ticket do you state your case to the cop who wrote the ticket or are you better of telling the judge?

          I’d say your best bet is to just deal with it and clean up your own posts instead of looking to other to do it and then riddling your own posts with direct, foul mouthed insults.

          As for others, they can speak for themselves, they don’t need your two cents and are probably better off without your input to begin with.

        • #2905466

          what a hipocrite. What a total hipocrit.

          by danlm ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          Your a true moron. You have no clue. None.

          You can justify slandering someone with a comment like Pu$$y and consider it much less offensive then me telling you to fk off.

          Your a total hypocrite that has no fkn clue on what is acceptable and what is not.

          At least I’m not that much of a moron you twit.

          I know what I call you is offensive. I do it because you offend me in every post you make that slanders a person not because of who they are but by the country they live in.

          Your a total nut case Oz. You have no social skills at all. You have no seance of what is right and what is wrong.

          They should lock you the fk up and throw away the key.

          Just shut up. That last post of your shows how truely fked up you really are.

          You just don’t give a sht that you offend people. You justify it with what ever lame excuse works best for you, and only you.
          Dan

        • #2905465

          I’ll just post the links where the topic calls you anti american

          by danlm ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          easy enough.

          I don’t have to speak for others. I’ll use their posts to prove my point.

          Oz… You ever wonder… Why, by even your own words… People consider your anti American. Which is bigotry based on ones country of residence.

          Could it be oz, that your a bigot… And again, by your own admission… You have had to defend your position more then once.

          Why is it Oz… That you find it so easy to defend your position, when by your own words. You offend people by that type of comment.

          Your a bigot.

          Dan

        • #2905457

          What I have done to save on gas

          by danlm ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          Oz, you and your anti american rants.

          I have changed the way I drive to work. It saves 9 miles a day. Can you count oz, is this too much past your intellect for you to figure out what that savings is a week? A Month. 9 miles times 5… ummm 45 miles a week… Still with me oz???? Not going to fast for your feeble mind now am i. Times that by 4…. Thats the number of weeks in a month, right? You know that right? You can read a calander right? 180 miles less driving on my normal commute… I always did things my chore driving to hit all places in sequence, so I can’t save anything there.

          I car pool with an individual who’s vehicle gets less gas then mine. We use my car. We do it twice a week, 38 miles a day round trip. Still with me oz? Still able to count? Another 76 miles a week saved… Again oz… Bear with me… Times that by 4… Remember, 4 weeks??? Another 312 miles saved. The route I changed to is less congested and I am able to hold a steady 35/40 mile per hour speed for much longer periods of time then my previous route.

          So oz…. Thats 312 + 180… I save 492 miles a month in driving just by changing my route. My vehicle gets 22/23 miles to the gallon… Hmmm, divide… You can do that right Oz? I save 22 gallons a month in gas. I used 22 miles per gallon to calculate that Oz…

          So oz, what have you done to save on energy?

          Or, again. Are you above that? Do you hold double standards with this also.

          And oz, I bought an E85… When they make the price of it to reflect the difference in miles per gallon… I will use it… I have to side track my route to get to the only station. You do remember distribution not being available, you can remember that far back can’t you. But, I will use E85 to cut back further on the amount of gasoline I use.

          Again Oz… What have you done to cut back.

          Dan
          [edited to add] And oz… single minded anti american oz… I will be monitoring what alternate fuel vechicles are avaible when I turn over this car. Unlike the average citizen, I turn cars over every 3 years. You do remember those numbers in the post you had deleted because you couldn’t back your own arguments because of lack of source material for all to see.

          And yes oz, I do think that is why you marked it as spam. Your a big boy… You can deal with harsh language can’t you. You’ve dealt with by others because of your outlandish attitude, what makes this any different.

        • #2905415

          Thanks Oz

          by tearat ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          I was waiting for the ?your not very good at this? tactic to appear

          You are a true artist
          The number of names you have for people who disagree with you are great
          Keep it up and no repeats
          You will lose points for every repeat

          Go on admit it you love this
          Arguing and fighting insulting everyone
          You live for it

          Get the clue
          Why do you think everyone is arguing with you?

          Remember
          Big Ole Jack
          ManicMan
          May they forever rest in peace

          Your not very good at being human you?

        • #2905414

          Dan

          by tearat ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          Good work Mate

          I hope a lot of people get some help from this discussion
          Despite the efforts of the Oz critic

          To all the people reading this I hope you found some thing to help you
          Even the small things can add up

          I think that was one of the reasons rickk started this discussion

          Good on yah rick

          Damn now I am starting to sound like a aussie
          Don?t think I could ever be as bad as an ozzie

        • #2904770

          Well I supose you better straighten out teh others then

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          I am not the only one who has made this “mythical claim” here.

          If you don’t know, that’s fine. Just don’t bother telling someone who DOES know that he is wrong and then make yourself look even dumber by supporting the initial false assertion.

        • #2904733

          re:Well I supose you better straighten out teh others then

          by danlm ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          Nowhere have you shown any knowledge of about the US. Especially about the amount of conservation in gasoline by it’s population.

          Your supposed knowledge is not backed up with source references for verification.

          It is not knowledge, it is an opinion only. Which you accuse many of offering only. Your opinion is based on bigotry which further reduces any possible acceptance of it. Until you back it up, your statments are nothing.

          And no, I will not prove you wrong. It lies on you to back up your statements.. You made them, prove them.

          What you are Oz is a typical stenotype of a salesman. Lot of talk with nothing to back it up. You redirect topics when you are questioned on specific positions. Just like a salesman. Your just a bigot on top of it.

          Primary example of above mentioned typical salesman b.s. You have been asked by more then one person wtf you do to conserve. You did not address a single person who asked you. Not one. You redirected your comments just like I said you would and do because you have nothing to respond with. Your at a loss for words because you’ll be asked specifics.

          Oz, you said if the shoe fits about your flagrant comments about stupid Americans. Guess what, the shoe fits you about what you had the balls to spam me on. Figure it out moron. You know what I think of you.

          Dan

        • #2906945

          Dan, try the 1 tonne challenge

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          I have been doing it for a couple of years now, and have saved an estimated 4 tonnes of emissions in total now.

          It is now called the nature challenge because they feel saving 1 tonne a year is nice but not enough to really have a positive impact.

          Before you slag Suzuki as a lefty wingnut. He is anything but a wingnut. He’s actually someone who opposes those ridiculous claims from the left, and has a far more realistic approach to the environment. He has an endless list of accreditations, has extensive experience working in the field and is prety much the voice of reason and accuracy in the face of climate change paranoia.

          Your turn to put your resources where your mouth is I guess:

          http://www.davidsuzuki.org/NatureChallenge/join.aspx

          Think your 8+ saved miles a day will do the trick?

          It is a start but only just the tip of the iceberg.

        • #2906804

          re: oz.. and 1 tone

          by danlm ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          Get it straight oz, I didn’t say what I was doing was saving the planet now did I. Again, ozzy… buddy…. is putting words in someones mouth.

          Your post, I replied to. WHAT ARE YOU DOING TO CONSERVE. I stated it, and told you to back it up.

          Here is another point for you oz… You walk to work from your house. I moved to where I live so that I could be close to all major highways. I contract work oz… What, I should move EVERY TIME I get a new contract? You do understand the concept of contract work don’t you.

          You state you travel for your job… I don’t have the link where you’ve made that comment. Same concept oz… But, what I did was place my self in a position that would be more easily accessible to what every area I work. Did you?

          Oz, big deal… YOu take the bus. I moved to the location I am at to be close to that type of transportation. I made it a point. Did you? Doubt it. I took a position that does NOT have access to that unless I am willing to travel hours. You willing to travel hours on a bus oz, to get where your going. But if the position opens up in the inner city… Which is where I EXPECTED to get a job. I will have access to multiple forms of mass transportation. And I will use them. Most likely the RTA.

          Or oz, are you now trying to dictate where I should live. Where I should work. No matter about either the cost of living or the pay I would receive. Is that your statement?(no, I know it’s not). But by your rant, that’s exactly how it sounds.

          Your link. I need to sign up for it.

          I don’t trust you. Never have. I refuse to go to any web site you provide that requires entry of any information. Be it real or not.

          Again, I don’t trust you. Simple as that.

          Dan
          [edited to add]I moved to this area 3 years ago. Prior to the price of energy sky rocketing. It has always been my intention to take mass transportation if the work was so located to allow it. Again, I moved to the most accessible area I knew for the part of Ohio that I live in to be accessible to as many job opportunities as possible and also the transportation system(add mass transportation to this) as possible.

          Again oz… Did you take that approach when you bought your house.

          And oz… No excuses.. It didn’t work the way I expected. I’m not crying about it, but I sure as hell am not apologizing to likes of you for it.

        • #2904651

          Do you actually think you make any sense?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          “Get it straight oz, I didn’t say what I was doing was saving the planet now did I. Again, ozzy… buddy…. is putting words in someones mouth.”

          Oh okay, I thought you would see the relation to reducing driving and oil consumption to being globally aware, sorry I overestimated your intelligence, your posts clearly indicate I shouldn’t have.

          “I stated it, and told you to back it up.”
          So I backed it up by explaining, exactly how you did, just how I go about being more aware of my resource waste. Actually you didn’t do that at all and just went out of your way to explain that to me too.

          :You walk to work from your house. I moved to where I live so that I could be close to all major highways”

          okay, so perhaps you’ll actually have a point coming up soon….

          “I contract work oz… What, I should move EVERY TIME I get a new contract? You do understand the concept of contract work don’t you.”

          Nope, no point made, oh well.

          Do I walk to work? I usually take the skytrain, it’s about a 3 hour walk as I live in the suburbs. should I move to my place of work? Which one? The US, Eastern Canada, the UK? No I don’t have homes all over the world.
          I did live in Oregon for a few months one year because I owned and operated three offices in Oregon and California for a while.

          I do understand contract work actually, I have been under band, label and employer contracts for the last 15+ years now. I am just confused as to what possible point you could be sadly attempting to make?

          “But, what I did was place my self in a position that would be more easily accessible to what every area I work. Did you?”

          Yes, I live in the middle of the Atlantic ocean. in the past year I have worked in Montreal Canada, Cologne Germany, London England, Irvine California, Salem Oregon, Houston Texas, Florence Kentucky and others, where would you suggest I buy a home that would equate to your saving 8 miles per trip?

          “Your link. I need to sign up for it.”
          Its free but regardless of what you suggest, as the website is VERY easily validated, I can guarantee that your concern is making simple sacrifices, I know there’s no way you could possibly pull it off so its easier to discount the source instead.

          “Again, I don’t trust you. Simple as that.”

          Oh my, how can I possibly win your trust ,it would be so important to me? 😀

          “Again oz… Did you take that approach when you bought your house. ”

          On the island yes, I moved over for three contracts and did get a house in a remote area to be closer to work, You don’t pay much attention in other areas of this website I see.

          “And oz… No excuses.. It didn’t work the way I expected. I’m not crying about it, but I sure as hell am not apologizing to likes of you for it.”

          What didn’t work, work? Of course it didn’t, the government only subsidizes companies who hire people with valid mental handicaps, not just people who aren’t bright enough to wipe by themselves. and no need to apologize, I didn’t ask for your nonsense post, I don’t care if you are employed or on the streets or in jail, your life means absolutely nothing at all to me. seriously, NOTHING. Should I hear tomorrow that you were killed in a horribly tragic accident while driving to work, I would simply wonder why someone was wasting my time with it. If your mom kicked you out of the basement and told you to go to school and learn to spell for a change, it would make no difference to the world at all.
          I really don’t care if you were to die right now, your life means absolutely nothing to anyone I am sure. You are just useless keystrokes in cyberspace, which means nothing in the real world. Again, what a senseless comment!

          Give it up, you have proven that you have nothing worth stating.

        • #2904423

          Even though its none of your buisness why I live where I do Oz

          by danlm ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          I moved to Ohio to start over. To be with the woman I am now. I did not have a job. And every job I have had sence then has been easily accessable to travel wise because of where I live. My point was valid. If your too stupid or aragont enough to see it now. Your problem not mine. And don’t even bother trying to dwell into my personal life or insult the woman I love, which is something I expect of you. Your not good enough.

          Global awarness? You mean global warming. memory lapse again oz… You ever seen a conversation in ANY post where I bought into that b.s. My postion has ALWAYS been energy indepence. But, I don’t expect you to remember previous conversations when you can’t even remember current ones.

          The rest of what ever you said.. Who knows, it’s not worth replying to. I’m ignoring the rest of your points on purpose. Your not worth the time based on your previous comments.

          And oz, in that I am not a hipocrit. I appolgize for assuming I knew why you live where you do now. I was wrong. Just as YOU were wrong with my reasons.

          f/4 any further oz replies.
          You smart enough to know what that means oz? It’s not a cuss word and it’s not a biggoted comment, so I doubt you have a clue.

          Dan

        • #2904415

          To be with the woman I am now. :D

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          OMG, I didn’t even bother reading the rest, that’s just too good!

          Your posts should be submitted as the Friday Yuk but with a disclaimer that you need to be hosed drunk in order to understand them.

          Hey what happened to being too cool to answer? I though you were on to something there. Again, get a life.

          If you are old enough to remember the movie Breakfast Club, you’d probably relate to Brian when he had to make that elephant lamp. When he pulle dthr trunk the lanp didn’t light up. WAAAAAAAAA! LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSER!

          Try this, make a gun out of you hand with the forefinger pointed forward like a barrel and thumb up like a hammer.
          Now place it, palm out, barrel up, against your forehead and look in the mirror.

        • #2906512

          RE Well I supose you better straighten out teh others then

          by tearat ·

          In reply to intentionally inflicted on them by their governments

          It is possible someone thinks you have conscience
          I think it’s a Myth

          ?If you don’t know, that’s fine. Just don’t bother telling someone who DOES know that he is wrong and then make yourself look even dumber by supporting the initial false assertion.?

          Don’t know what?
          I must have forgotten
          Guess it cant be that important
          A lot like you

          So how is the wicked witch O Mighty OZ
          Did you two get married yet?

          I have been practising my haiku?s
          But I?m not ready for a critic of your calibre

      • #2909514

        You’ve heard propaganda.

        by locrian_lyric ·

        In reply to Increased Production

        First off, the price would drop like a homesick rock before we took one drop of oil out of ANWR, or anywhere else, because the speculators would get out of Oil faster than a boyfriend in an apartment at the approach of a husband.

        Another thing that would happen is that it would end the current shortage of supply, bringing prices down further.

        However, to see a difference at the pump, we would also need to build more refineries.

        Then, if we built more nuclear plants, we could free up coal as a source of gasoline.

        The solutions are out there, and they are easy. It just takes the element of CONTROL out of the hands of the socialists.

        • #2909043

          Take control out of the hands

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to You’ve heard propaganda.

          of people that are intentionally destroying our economy.

          Why are we the only nation in the world that is not suppose to drill for our own oil?

          If drilling is so evil, and we get 60% of our oil from Canada, then they must have sold their souls to the devil.

        • #2908868

          Why are we the only nation in the world that is not suppose to drill ?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Take control out of the hands

          What are you talking about? The US drills and refines at full capacity now. 80 million barrels a day is your own country’s daily production. That 85 million barrels accounts for 60% of your use. Out of the remaining 40% that you import, Canada provides 40%. So we don’t actually give you 40% of your total oil consumption, we provide 40% of you IMPORTED oil.

          Nobody has said you can’t drill for your own oil, people HAVE said that it is not such a matter of great importance to drill ANWR when the focus SHOULD be on finding a better alternative, ,but everyone is just drooling over ANWR is if it will make ANY difference at all.

          the largest reserve in ANWR is expected to produce (on he high side) 7 bbls of oil. Or approximately 1 million per day after about 12 years, that 1 million will drop significantly after the first 10 years. ALL OF THIS IS AVAILABLE FROM THE PROJECT WEB PAGES.

          So if 85 million barrels account for 60% of your oil, which you drill yourselves, how will another 1 million barrels be a solution?

          My point is that’s a long time to wait for VERY little oil that will never make a dent at the [pump nor will it make you oil independent nor will it rid of of dealing with Arabs for oil. The ONLY way around it is to find a different energy source.

          Once you find an alternate source or even a mixed source, like FlexFuel, then you have a chance at working towards oil independence. It won’t happen completely but it will ease the burden.

          You can drill ANWR but it isn’t the little oil mine you seem to be thinking it is. ! million barrels a day, even 10 million is a mere spit in the bucket to what you use each day.

        • #2905710

          Wrong Oz.

          by locrian_lyric ·

          In reply to Why are we the only nation in the world that is not suppose to drill ?

          We can’t drill in ANWR, or 80% of the US coastline, we can’t get the MASSIVE oil deposits running under Colorado and Utah, we haven’t built a refinery in 30 years, thanks to lawsuits from the environmental-whack-jobs.

          et cetera et cetera.

        • #2905688

          You missed that point entirely

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Wrong Oz.

          YOu CAN drill ANWR, but simply don’t like teh fact that the drillign is restricted due to environmental concerns. Sure you get a few drops of oil, but you also run teh risk of screwing up the migrating Caribou in the area. Why should they be displaced so you can drive 4 blocks to WalMart?

          Colorado and Utah, well that would be YOUR problem to sort out, not mine, as is ANWR too but they have explored it and not enough of a case is put forth to justify it.
          Its not like you are sitting on the next Saudi sized deposit. A spit of oil and everyone is chomping at the bit, that’s pathetic, ever seen Mad Max?

          All environmentalists in your world are whack jobs, there is no point in savign teh environment it is all BS.

          I think we all see your point of view. F-k the world and anyone who tries to stop me, I want cheaper gas. Very nice.

          Why don’t you go get a raise instead? That’s what I did when prices went up, my expenses go up so therefore my income must accordingly. It’s not my employers fault, but it sure as heck aint mine and I can stay home and make enough money.

          You want me in your office, you want me to see your clients an build your business, then you have to accept the cost increases of doing so.

        • #2905508

          No, I refuted the point.

          by locrian_lyric ·

          In reply to You missed that point entirely

          You’re quite skilled at ranting, raving and making straw man arguements.

          I spoke of facts, you move to intent. Put down your crystal ball, because your future as a mind-reader is dismal at best.

          The point *you* miss is that we are not permitted to drill in areas that if we did, would keep us going for much longer and bring down the price as a consequence.

          Much as you’d like to make this personal about me or my nation, it’s not.

          Let me explain economics 101 to you.

          High prices = scarcity of item.

          That’s why they are bad.

          So we want cheaper gas, only an idiot would want to pay more for something, especially when that something is within easy reach.

          So, rather than wallowing in your anti-american nescience, try to get a clue.

        • #2905487

          Well you sure told me, didn’t you

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to You missed that point entirely

          LOL, I don’t know why people get off on that so much. Put away teh Kleenex and sit down.

          Anyone knows that demand creates higher prices, but if you think that drilling now will actually allow you to produce the 60% of your consumption that you buy from other countries, you have a lot to learn.

          To think that the global price per barrel would change just becaiuse you started drillign a few more holes is insane. Once yuo have nmroe oil, Americans wil burn twice as much. Once gas is affordable, Americans will cease to care and will just start wasting oil just as with all other resources that don’t seem to matter until unavailable on tap. You will inevitably be back iat square one, over and over and over again. New well and it’s MardiGras, well dries up and it’s time to bitch wnad whine until a new one is opened, up, then it’s Mardi Gras again.

          Leave a dog a whole bag of food when you go away, it wil eat until it pukes and then bark until it starves and dies.

          Leave a cat a whole bag of food when you go away and it will eat, be happy and content and have some left when you return.

        • #2905463

          So offer some source links to prove your point

          by danlm ·

          In reply to You missed that point entirely

          Or are you so above question that we should JUST TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT.

          I think not.

          Dan

        • #2905462

          Anti American link 1 showing that oz has offended by Anti American remarks

          by danlm ·

          In reply to You missed that point entirely

        • #2905412

          RE Well you sure told me, didn’t you

          by tearat ·

          In reply to You missed that point entirely

          ?Americans will cease to care and will just start wasting oil just as with all other resources that don’t seem to matter until unavailable on tap?

          You idiot
          Everyone knows there are different classes in every society

          To insisted that poor Americans waste oil because rich Americans waste oil is stupid

          Get a clue dumb ass

          Ps your acting is not very good

        • #2904692

          Your links

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to You missed that point entirely

          seein gas this has been in teh news and countless reports have been made over many years now, I am shocked that someone of your high calibre cannot seek out the information himself.

          Mind, you , you’d have to know how to spell ANWR, OIL and USA, so I can see your issue there.

          So here are your links: http://tinyurl.com/2c9np

          http://tinyurl.com/yjm842

          have a nice day.

        • #2905663

          Oz, Check your numbers

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Why are we the only nation in the world that is not suppose to drill ?

          You claim that the United States produces 80 million barrels of oil a day? Did that zero sneak in on you? The number is closer to 8 million barrels a day for the U.S. oil production. World-Wide oil production is 80 million barrels a day.

          http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_pro-energy-oil-production

          The U.S. consumes 20 million barrels a day….

          http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con-energy-oil-consumption

          …45 percent of which is attributed to automobile use.

          http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/oil_market_basics/demand_text.htm

          http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/analysis_publications/oil_market_basics/dem_image_us_cons_prod.htm

          Per capita, the United States and Canada (along with Iceland and Greenland) are pretty equal in oil consumption, but neither is even close to being the biggest consumers of oil.

          http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_oil_con_percap-energy-oil-consumption-per-capita

          Oil consumption in the United States has actually dropped 2 percent over the first quarter of 2008.

          http://www.startribune.com/business/18148539.html

          Making a case for drilling at ANWR:

          http://www.anwr.org/case.htm

          [i]DOI (Department of the Interior) estimates that “in-place resources” range from 4.8 billion to 29.4 billion barrels of oil. Recoverable oil estimates ranges from 600 million barrels at the low end to 9.2 billion barrels at the high end. They also reported identifying 26 separate oil and gas prospects in the Coastal Plain that could each contain “super giant” fields (500 million barrels or more).[/i]

          [i] In 1980, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated the Coastal Plain could contain up to 17 billion barrels of oil and 34 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.[/i]

          http://www.anwr.org/backgrnd/potent.html

          17 billion barrels, by the way, at our current rate of consumption, could produce ALL the oil used in the United States for 2.5 years. (Could be doubled – or more.) And considering that ANWR would only supplement current supplies, not replace them, it could be a significant factor for several decades. (This does not take into account the benefits from the 34 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.) Throw-in the off-shore fields and oil shale in Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, North and South Dakota – which estimates have been in the 200 billion barrels range – and the United States has the potential to produce HUGE amounts of oil – even more than the current production of Saudi Arabia and Canada combined.

          The largest oil company in the United States (Exxon/Mobile), by the way, controls only 3 percent of the world’s oil supply. That company is dwarfed by the real players and controllers – state owned companies of Saudi Arabia, Iran, et al.

          No source, but it’s accurate.

          (By the way, good interview with Sonja! And thanks for that shout-out.)

        • #2905641

          You are right about the zero

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Oz, Check your numbers

          It was 8.0 my mistake humbly corrected.

          As for teh drillign stats, as we went through this before,m those stats vary odepending on source, not a great deal but enough to throw off any equations, kinda like measuring a wall 1/16″ out, and having it grow across the wall to be a 4″ gap in the end.

          Either way, my point is that you will nto see enough oil from ANWR in order to make a difference at the pump, drilling is not solving the problem, workign towards a better alternative is. Even if it is in small ways, like better transit etc. ewven the 17 billion barrles is a misleading figure/ Production would start slow, build to apeak and then fall off again to a trickle for another 20 years, you’ve read that exploration report I think, you know what I am talking about.

          It’s not like you will simply tap into a substantial supply, it’ll take 12 years to begin (god knows how much oil you’ll need by then) and will taper off too. It is in your best interests to settle things down in the middle east, and help Saudis increase production to get oil prices down. THEN focus on gettign into Colorado’s secret oil and ANWR etc. as a buffer and future resource, but we are tryign to disuss high gasoline prices at the pump, even beginnign to drill ANWR today will nto help in teh short term, which is really what we are supposed to be discussing here I think.

          As for the shout out:
          How could I possibly speak out on TR without saying Hi to one of the few remaining peers from those times? There’s not too many of us left now, Max, as you can see, there’s a whole new class started now. Time to back up and reiterate my last 4 years of comments again, sigh, gets so tiring being on my side of thr fence it would be so omuch easier just to play dumb and agree with them all.

          Af for a good interview: for what it was, it was fun, Sonja’s always been great, I don’t mind supporting her projects and I hope she suceeds at keeping it alive, but it really wasn’t anything relevant to TR anyway except for people simply putting a voice to a name. Your turn soon, right? 😀

          thanks for pooping in, take care

          As it is, I’ve spent the last 3 hours reiterating myself for the easily confused, and haven’t done a wee bit of work yet, but I threw a huge order in this morning so that’ll keep em quiet for a bit. 😀

        • #2905616

          Quick points

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to You are right about the zero

          no one is talking about only drilling in the anwar, as there are other areas that would/should/could be tapped at the same time.

          The speculation would change, but the oil will not hit the market for 4 to 10 years, depending on who you listen to. If it were a MINIMUM of four years, all the more reason to start today.

          It is not to be done INSTEAD of other measure, but in conjunction with.

          A lot of small things do add up.

          alternate fuels, and changing from oil where we can are also things to look at.

          I am surprised no one is talking about dropping our highway speed limits back down to 55 again. man, did that suckass when it was that slow. (88 km). After all, isn’t that another way government can FORCE us to conserve?

        • #2905612

          Doesn’t fit this topic though

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to You are right about the zero

          How will drilling lower the cost of gas at the pumps even in the long term. You are nto abotu to create enough to supply yourselves and will aways rely on global oil pricing.

          IN Canada we drill heaps of oil from Alberta, it is stoll sold at world market prices though

        • #2905566

          Do you ever work?

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to You are right about the zero

          Oz, no shout out for James 🙁 I even took the time to track you down.

          As for the impact of new oil on prices, its classic supply demand economics.

          In Economics 101 I leared about supply demand and alternatives. If the demand for chunky peanut butter exceeds supply, price will go up, increase the supply price goes down. If the demand goes high enough some people will chose alternatives, starting with something close (Smooth peanut butter) and working out to more distant alternatives (Jams/Honey).

          One of the tricks here is that Saudi is playing the game rather well. When the prices go up too fastand it looks like people will curb their demand or chose an alternative, Saudi opens the taps and voila, things settle down. They keep us hooked on oil.

          Not many, outside of JCK, seem to talk about the other way to bring demand down, which is to use less. Of course while “western consumption” may decrease, it is likely that Chinese and Indian demand will keep on climbing, so our ability to reduce demand will diminsh in the future.

          James

        • #2905543

          Not if i can help it

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to You are right about the zero

          Sometimes I’ll find myself working by accident and have to stop it in a hurry.

          Actually, with some new band developments in the UK I have been as busy as hell lately, only thing is, it is all at night due to the time difference. I have little energy for my day job right now and since I padded my month well, I have a good two months where I can just watch orders roll in and product go out.

          anyhow, enough about my work, that’s boring a yucky. Sorry about missing you in the shout out, after listening to it I realized I should have said HI. But I did say all the others guys on TR, and at the time I was trying to pull names out of my…..well I didn’t come up with it, either way.

          I have also been adamant about a need to reduce our wasting of resources, you know very well that is my stand from previous topics too.

          That’s also why I see no benefit in the US drilling more oil, as if that will lower costs. Demand will stay the same because the US can’t possibly provide enough oil to supply the demand and they are locked into global pricing anyway.

          The issue in Afghanistan now is due to terrorism on the pipelines and wells. Production has been down since the beginning of the war, it has picked up slightly but nowhere near where it needs to be.

          Every war, including WWI has driven the price of gasoline way up. When Hitler gave up on his plans to invade England, he turned and went after Russia. Russia had a valuable region that he ALMOST managed to conquer, but the Russians were too clever and Hitler was all syph’d up by then and was going stark raving mad. against his officers wishes, he got on his high horse and went after Stalingrad.

          Taking over Stalingrad would have seen Hitler in a much more progressive position to win the war. It opened up access to a major sea supply route as well as weakened the German flank making it easier to go after Caucasus.
          Caucasus was the OIL rich corner of Russia, once he had the oil, he had the resources to fortify his armies.

          The battle of Stalingrad, still nearly two years before the D-Day invasion, was the bloodiest conflict of time. With more than 1.5 million killed on one battle and the key goal, was oil. He who has the oil has the lead. But drilling more in the US won’t make much difference in the grand scheme of things.

          Actually that battle was one of my favorite turning points of WWII. the Russians wer brilliant, not only were they equipped and used to the cold weather, but they were constantly pushed back farther and farther into Russia, leaving NOTHING for the Germans. they destroyed homes, buildings crops, food supply houses etc. they left nothing for the Germans to acquire as they advanced, thinning the army bit by bit until they had nothing left and all of Russia’s forces were amassed to defeat the Germans.

          Great warfare, brilliant stories or battles and plans a truly fascinating time in history. I’d say that most Europeans owe it to Russia for helping wipe out the German armies. Britain stood their ground in the Battle Of Britain but Russia stood the test of time and had the tenacity to win that battle and save their valued resources.

        • #2905534

          How the Russians won WWII

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to You are right about the zero

          I do agree that Russia deserves the lion’s share of credit for reducing the German army, but they did so with little respect or value for their own troops.

          The stories about Stalingrad like “enemy at the gate” where they put soldiers into the battle with a rifle and one bullet are only slightly exagerated. At all costs to them meant, with no hope of survival. The west could not have asked that of their armies on a continued basis, but since the Red army had political officers who regularly shot anyone who objected, and since most of Russia knew what Stalin had done to the Ukraine (starved them into submission), they didn’t object to the use of those tactics.

          The Russian failure that lead the Germans to Stalingrad in the first place was due to Stalin’s arrogance and ignorance. He knew Hitler wouldn’t leave him alone forever, but he thought he had more time, and thought the pact between himself and Stalin would buy him a few more years. And Stalin needed a few more years since he purged his army of much of its officers, and hadn’t had time to replace them. Churchill warned Stalin of the impending invasion, and Stalin, being paranoid, thought Churchill was playing a game, so Stalin told Hitler about the letter, and Hitler laughed it off.

          After Stalingrad, when Russian factories went into full gear and the Soviet armies swelled, it was clear that Hitler was doomed. Still Stalin used his troops like pawns to be sacrificed, and wasted many troops. If Normandy never happened, I still think the Red Army would have taken Berlin, but later and at a higher cost. That was how Stalin played.

          James

        • #2905511

          Another point to consider

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to You are right about the zero

          Regardless of how much it’s demonized, and regardless of how much people want to find alternatives to oil, it’s a fact of life that people and nations (and not only in the U.S.) will be reliant – if not dependent – on oil for a long time to come. People can close their eyes, click their heels together, and wish as hard as they want, but the implementation of any viable oil alternative is still a long way out. It simply won’t happen overnight; it won’t happen in a year or two; and it won’t even happen in the 5-10 year range.

          There are upwards of 250 million gasoline-burning automobiles in the United States, and who knows how many world-wide. Even if some magic wand could produce an alternative form of transportation overnight, people won’t willingly throw away that gas-burning investment they’ve made. At best, it will be a gradual phase-out that will occur over the course of decades, not years, and certainly not months.

          Moreover, less than 50 percent of oil consumption in the U.S. can be attributed to automobiles. The airline industry takes up a huge chunk, as does the railroad and trucking industries, not to mention homes that still use heating oil and the production of other petroleum-based products.

          Oil will be a fact of life for a long time to come. So regardless of how long it might take to get new oil fields actually pumping, it’s still a venture worth pursuing. If we could have opened up ANWR when we wanted to, it would be producing by now. If we could have drilled more off-shore wells when we wanted to, they, too, would be producing by now. And now, the longer we put it off, the longer it will take to get production from them. The answer – stop putting it off any longer.

        • #2905501

          The Biggest turning point of WWII

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to You are right about the zero

          The Battle of Alamein at El Alamein, in my opinion (and in the opinion of others), was the biggest turning point (and possibly the first) of the war. Had Hitler taken control of all of Egypt, he had a pact with the Muslim leaders in the Middle-East, and could have dominated in the region.

          Did you know that Yasser Arafat’s uncle was a personal friend and ally of Hitler? They met often, and shared the many of the same views. Hitler even bestowed honorary Arian status upon his Muslim allies. Had that happened (a German victory in Egypt), the holocaust as we now know it to be, would have been nothing compared to what would have been.

          Well done, Monty!

        • #2905491

          Good one, Max

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to You are right about the zero

          That was actually a short in a TV documentary show we get called Turning Points, don’t know if you’ve seen it or not.

          yeah it would have been different, very different.

          One question, what does Mr. Burns have to do with it??

          Sorry, I couldn’t reist.

        • #2905445

          It still seems odd

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to You are right about the zero

          that so many oil producing countries seem to be against the US producing their own.

          We often hear the weak reply of how long it will take, or how little any one spot will produce.

          What advantage to people against the US drilling their own oil, is there for the US to continue to be weakened financially? We have been told repeatedly that the world hates the US for reasons other than jealousy, so why do they want it to continue to struggle? Especially when so many other nations are joined at the hip financially with the US and are hurt with the same actions?

          The US drilling or not drilling will not have any effect on man-made global warming, so what is the agenda?

          Why should we follow the path of doing nothing?

          Answer, we shouldn’t.

        • #2905447

          And YOU never delt with it being longer to get enough

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Why are we the only nation in the world that is not suppose to drill ?

          alternate fuel vehicles, hybrids to the citizens of the nation to not need that. You also never dealt with cost to do that. Distribution for alternate fuels. Affordability to average families.

          Wait, you posted your opinion with nothing but Brazil as an example to back it up. That is spoused to addressed all of the issues. Guess what oz… Here is a link for you.

          [i]The ethanol boom in Brazil, which took off at the start of the decade after a long slump, is not the first. The government introduced its original “Pro-Alcohol” program in 1975, after the first global energy crisis, and by the mid-1980’s, more than three quarters of the 800,000 cars made in Brazil each year could run on cane-based ethanol.[/i]
          Wait, thats when they went alcohol.
          [i]Consumers’ suspicions remained high through the 1990’s and were overcome only in 2003, when automakers, beginning with Volkswagen, introduced the “flex fuel” motor in Brazil. Those engines gave consumers the autonomy to buy the cheapest fuel, freeing them from any potential shortages in ethanol’s supply. Also, ethanol-only engines can be slower to start when cold, a problem the flex fuel owners can bypass.[/i]
          2003…
          hmmm
          [i]Today, less than three years after the technology was introduced, more than 70 percent of the automobiles sold in Brazil, expected to reach 1.1 million this year, have flex fuel engines, which have entered the market generally without price increases.[/i]
          This article is 2006, and still doesnt point them as being self sufficient. My point of 30 years which you wish to ignore or ridicule. 75 plus 10.. 1985… 1985 pluss 10, that makes 20 oz… 1995… pluss 8. 28 year.

          You missed the boat again oz… Where is your link stating they are self sufficient. What date did they become self sufficient. Why did it take them so long to become self sufficient. This means, vechicles on the market. Affordability. Distribution.

          Oz, think it could be what I stated before. 30 years which you so ridiculed.

          Shut up oz… Put up some links to back your position.

          And that was only using YOUR example. Which had a goverment that did not have to go through the leglislative process that other countries do.

          Again oz… wrong, wrong, wrong. Ignoring facts even in the examples you provide.

          Typical oz.

          Now me.. I knew it would take that long. I bought thinking in advance to be able to use something until better options are avaible. I left my options open to be able to use gas in the wait. Remember this whole argument oz… To drill for more oil until other technologies can become available. Your comment oz that Americans would just use more oil. Well damn oz… I just proved you wrong in the argument of alternate sources being avaible, and of Americans.. Yes oz, your hated Americans moving to other sources even if more oil is produced.

          Again oz, you are not stating all the facts. You flat out ignore major issues in your argument.

          Dan

        • #2904996

          I’ve already posted it

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to And YOU never delt with it being longer to get enough

          From wikipedia and quoted directly, to include that they are the first to be considered oil independent.

          As I have said, god knows how many times now, I am NOT stating that Brazil has the right solution for America, in fact it has already been deemed not a viable option by Sir Richard Branson who sunk some 3 million into starting his own ethanol company.

          Your poinr is moot, so it took 30 years for Braxil to get to the oil independent level, which is also clearly stated in the Wiki article I linked to myself, as a gradual effort mandated by the government to push auto makers for more efficient cars,

          How oil independent will America be in that same period by drilling more wells?

          Look it up yourself, I don’t have time for your senseless ranting about nothing anymore, you even post three or four posts in a row, as if talking to yourself or perhaps its the old, ‘say it enough times and you believe its true’ issue? I dont know nor do I care in teh least. Just go get some professional help and get a life!

        • #2904780

          Oz logic: You can’t eat your way out of hunger or drink out of thirst…

          by locrian_lyric ·

          In reply to And YOU never delt with it being longer to get enough

          or drill your way out of an oil shortage…

          I’d love to see some of his code.

    • #2910770

      When consumption goes down, will the prices too?

      by mjd420nova ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      Just because the demand will go down, don’t think the prices will go down too. Once they reach $5.00 a gallon many of us will find other ways to get to work or find a job close enough to walk or bike to our jobs. There will always be the jobs that will require that we drive to a customers location to provide the service. This will entail the need for a service charge that includes a high fuel charge. Many of us will just skip these services and learn how to do it ourselves or just junk it and buy a new one. This will increase the amount of serviceable junk in our landfills. Here’s a real misconception that has been perpetrated by the electrical industry. Compact floresent lamps are more efficent. Maybe they use less electricity for the amount of light they give off but you can’t just toss them in the trash when they fail. NO, they contain mercury and are hazardous and will contaminate the land fills in no time. Do they tell you that in the advertising? Not a chance. The country’s laws and taxes are passed and forced upon the middle class by the politicans and upper class people purposely to keep the middle and lower class just where thay are, on the edge of poverty, one paycheck away from homelessness. Will this ever change? No way, the rich are pulling the strings of the large corporations and politicans and will continue to do so until the people can take no more and revolt against the heirarchy that put them there. Politics corrupted democracy, no longer do the majority rule anything.

      • #2910620

        LEDs are cheaper to run (NT)

        by tearat ·

        In reply to When consumption goes down, will the prices too?

        .

      • #2909299

        To your point

        by notsochiguy ·

        In reply to When consumption goes down, will the prices too?

        I read that this past Memorial Day was one of the least traveled ones since they started keeping tabs on what people do.

        So, presumably, you had less usage than anticipated demands had projected.

        Additionally, prices usually spike for Memorial Day, pull back a smidge, and then spike again for 4th of July.

        This year, the prices have just kept on climbing. So, a decrease in consumption (again, I haven’t seen hard stats on this, so it could be erroneous) against projected use had no bearing on the price.

        I also read this morning that oil speculators are probably going to drive the price of oil higher this week; despite assurances from Saudi Arabia that production will be increased to its highest level since the early 80’s. The reasons being that there is a threat to production in Nigeria, and the turmoil in the Middle East.

        So, you have one tangibly substantial claim (increased production), one ‘maybe-kinda’ claim (threat to Nigerian production) and one ‘ummm—what’s the difference between today and the previous 8000 years or so of recorded history’ claim (Middle East Turmoil).

        If this doesn’t constitute price gouging/fixing (especially the Middle East turmoil reason…c’mon, that is just overtly throwing stuff against the wall and seeing if it sticks), I honestly don’t think you could accuse anyone else of ever doing it.

        I have no doubt that by the end of the year, one of the reasons the price of oil increases is because people are using less, so they need to buffer profit margins to equalize them to previous levels.

        Thank heavens for the commuter train!!

    • #2910649

      Well, one solution.

      by Anonymous ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      If you reframe the way you look at war, then all wars have been fought over resources; the resource of food, the resource of peoples thought for religion, the resource of political control. Because resources of some type have been the cause of all war, what would happen if you (we) pressured our politician to place stricter controls on how resources are controlled?

      Energy, oil costs in particular, are not controlled by the Arabs, etc. Oil is controlled by the futures market just like corn and other food stocks. An investor only need to put down one or two percent to purchase a future. Now what happens if laws are forced to be passed by the citizens mandating that an investor put up 30 – 50% of the cost of the future. This would reduce markedly the cost of oil and have the immediate impact of lowering oil and other energy costs.

      Just a thought.

      • #2910194

        We used to have those controls

        by rkuhn040172 ·

        In reply to Well, one solution.

        But in the waning days of the Clinton administration, they expired.

        You used to have to put more down. I think we should revisit that, definitely.

        • #2909383

          one thing that Oboma wants

          by danlm ·

          In reply to We used to have those controls

          Is just what you mentioned rickk..

          I was thinking about this yesterday, you have McCain on one side wanting to open up drilling. You have Oboma on the other side wanting alternate fuels, but he also wants to put a higher deposit on the speculators.

          Me, I want both. And both of those boobs want to heal america. Yea, if so. How about agreeing to do both. Cap the bloody speculators, open up drilling, and give incentives to invest in alternate energy.

          It’s not one single answer, and these morons still think it is. One answer gives us what we are at now. Screwed. It has to be all of the above. With the pushing towards renewable energy being heavily invested in. And when I say renewable energy, I don’t mean just one form of it. All forms.

          Dan

        • #2909324

          Yep!

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to one thing that Oboma wants

          Why do we always put all our eggs in one basket?

          Why can’t we have more than one freaking basket?

          More drilling, more investment in alternatives, crack down on speculators.

          Isn’t politics just ridiculous? They treat us like morons just for our vote then once elected, ignore us.

          I think one election year we ought to do like those stupid internet emails. You know, those ones that say don’t buy gas on a certain day.

          I think the next election, we all should just stay home. That would be hilarious.

        • #2909236

          Just how many of these speculators

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to one thing that Oboma wants

          operate outside US jurisdiction? How many more do you think there’ll be when Obama tries to regulate them?

          In other words, he’s blowing smoke up your a$$ to get votes!

        • #2909225

          While easier said…

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to one thing that Oboma wants

          than done. If the investors choose to operate outside of US jurisdiction, as many American multi-nationals do, then tariff them very highly. If the product cant be sold, the price goes down and less expensive alternatives are sought.

        • #2909753

          And just how many

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to While easier said…

          [i]then tariff them very highly[/i]

          of the less wealthy among us are you willing to sacrifice?

        • #2909726

          Deleted duplicate.

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to And just how many

          🙁

        • #2909725

          Just how many…

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to And just how many

          were sacrificed in any war you can name? How many are being sacrificed now by doing nothing?

        • #2909471

          Shooting yourself in the foot

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Just how many…

          is just dumb. Any tariff or tax is always passed down to the consumer.

          Of course, that could be the intent, in which case I would say “At least have the balls to admit it”… at least we’d know who the real enemy is.

        • #2908957

          Tony…

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to Just how many…

          If you look further down in the forum you will find that I addressed that issue. I hate high prices like you. I am far from being an environmentalist, but I do face facts.

          I do not think this is shooting yourself in the foot. The point was: we and others can die in the energy wars now and in the future, or we can do something about, even if it is uncomfortable.

        • #2909600

          Tariff won’t work

          by rfink ·

          In reply to While easier said…

          Tariff won’t work because on the futures market traders buy and sell contracts not the actual product. The person holding the contract when it expires buys or sells the physical product.

          Second point, tariffs are a cost of doing business and will be added to the price. They won’t affect the tradiing of the contract at all.

        • #2909545

          The point of the tariff…

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to Tariff won’t work

          is to work on the demand side. Less demand, lower price, and greater incentive to seek alternative energy.

        • #2909468

          No doubt,

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to The point of the tariff…

          “for their own good”, he says under his breath.

        • #2908953

          I hate…

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to The point of the tariff…

          self serving, facetious and narrow minded twits who manipulate what someone says into what they want to hear.

          Tony, you are out of line.

        • #2908885

          What, for calling it as I see it?

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to The point of the tariff…

          Class warfare may be taking on a more literal meaning in the near future. It can be avoided, but not by the few imposing their will on the many. You will be resisted.

        • #2909510

          They have to be opposed

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to one thing that Oboma wants

          They can’t share a similar view, it is US politics. In order to have any credibility you must be an absolute opposite party, opposed to all the other is doing with no allowable middle ground. you shoul dknow that by now.

          “open up drilling, and give incentives to invest in alternate energy. ”
          increasing access to your resources does not provide incentive to seen alternate energy, a NEED for alternate energy will though.

          YOu are seekign to solve your own monetary issues by getting a lower priced gasoline (which doesn’t work, we provide 60% of your imported gas, I practically live on a pipeline and the refinery is just down the street, we have plenty of oil to sustain Canada however our prices are regulated by the world oil price so we are forced to pay more anyway, regardless of our resource availability).

          In this case, increased product does not reduce demand or price.

        • #2909086

          you missed my postion completely

          by danlm ·

          In reply to They have to be opposed

          My position is to not rely on any given source.

          I’ll make it easy.
          1). Oil will ALWAYS be a requirement of induystrial nations. EVEN if we do not use it for transportation. It is beneficial to drill for more, otherwise we will be kissing everyones a$$ for it. Period.
          2). Until a CHEAP(meaning that average citizens can afford it) alternate fuel transportation is developed, Oil WILL be needed. My guess, it will take 10 years for your average citizen to cycle into an alternate fuel vehicle. That is after the 10 years have passed to get them massively on the market so that used ones can be purchased. Thats 20 years turn around time. What, we sit with our thumb up our a$$ until that comes around? What, we ignore the resources we already have that we are not touching? Sorry, thats STUPID.
          3). The tree hungers can’t even agree on what alternate fuels to use. Add another 10 years to my second point because of those fkn morons.

          Sorry, drilling is PART of the answer. Not relying on ONE source of energy IS THE ANSWER.

          NONE SHOULD BE IGNORED. I repeat. NONE SHOULD BE IGNORED. All sources of energy should be aggressively pursued.

          Completely disagree with you Oz, and I am not flaming you. Just flat out telling you your position will leave this nation and every other industrial nation like they are right now. FKED. And we will be FKED for 30 years with that position, if not longer.

          Dan

        • #2909062

          Gotta get beneath the surface

          by marlon.lewis ·

          In reply to you missed my postion completely

          Drilling for more oil sounds like a way to increase supply, but that’s simplistic.

          First, oil companies have leases for about 60 million acres of untapped land. They don’t drill because they want the supply low.
          Second, refineries are already near capacity, so without building more refineries, getting more oil thru drilling will bring about next to no gain since the oil companies would have a hard time bringing it to market.
          Third, US uses about 20 million barrels a day, we produce about 5. Even if more drilling DOUBLED our production (ignoring the refinery problem for now), which it wouldn’t even approach, we’d still be over a barrel, so to speak. High estimates say we would get about 1 million more barrels per day.
          Fourth, if we started drilling today (and again, had enough refinery capacity), the first gas from that wouldn’t hit your gas tank until about 2020.

          So what’s the point of drilling again? You are right, oil won’t be going away, but more drilling would be throwing good money after bad, not to mention screwing up the environment more than we already have.

          FYI, FactCheck.org offers support for all of these points.

        • #2908975

          Your point about 10 years to market

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Gotta get beneath the surface

          That is also 10 years to market which leaves time to build or expand the oil refineries.

          This is still shorter then the 20 to 30 years for alternate fuels to be widely available.

          Again, everyone is ignoring the fact that alternate fuel vehicles are not affordable to the general population.
          1). When will they be? 5/10/15 years?
          2). Even when they become so, what will the maintenance costs be? Will that be affordable to the common citizen. I say it will, but the question is when. 5/10/15 years AFTER the market is saturated enough to offer affordable used alternate vehicles and after market products for repair????

          Nobody, and I mean. Nobody has addressed that. Nobody is using this also in their comparisons of drilling for oil, amount of time to market. Hell, nobody address’s how the average citizen is spouse to afford it.

          you didn’t. Oz didn’t. I raise the question.

          Provide an answer WHEN your average citizen can afford these vehicles. provide an answer when the market will be saturated enough to make a difference in new vehicles sold. Provide an answer when the used vehicle market will be saturated enough to provide lower income households the incentive to buy them.

          *** I’m talking estimates.. I know nobody knows this answer, but a realistic estimate.

          Your time 10 years for oil? I say 30 years before other alternatives will be widely available. You say why drill? I say because there needs to be something there to fill the gap until the other alternatives are available.

          Nowhere am I saying not to go alternate fuel or energy sources. Everywhere am I saying that you are ignoring what we have now because you only see the future. I see both the present and the future.

          Dan

        • #2908956

          Your point about 20-30 years

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Gotta get beneath the surface

          I was just wondering where you got the figure 20-30 years to produce a new energy vehicle?

          Branson did try the Enthanol approach but found that there was not enough grain in America to support one city for more than a month, but that aside, it would take less than 7 years to get all new vehicles into FlexFuel burning no oil.

          “There are no longer light vehicles in Brazil running on pure gasoline. Since 1977 the government made it mandatory to blend 20% of ethanol (E20) with gasoline (gasohol), requiring just a minor adjustment on regular gasoline motors. Today the mandatory blend is allowed to vary nationwide between 20% to 25% ethanol (E25) and it is used by all regular gasoline vehicles, plus three million cars running on 100% hydrous ethanol, and five million dual or flexible-fuel vehicles. The Brazilian car manufacturing industry developed flexible-fuel vehicles that can run on any proportion of gasoline and ethanol.[10] Introduced in the market in 2003, these vehicles became a commercial success,[11] and by March 2008…”
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil

          So while the ethanol solution may not be the best, it has made ONE country self sufficient, the first in the world.

          You also suggested: “This is still shorter then the 20 to 30 years for alternate fuels to be widely available.”
          >Please explain where you found these facts.

          “Again, everyone is ignoring the fact that alternate fuel vehicles are not affordable to the general population. ”
          >Again please explain this fact, do people in Brazil earn more than Americans and pay less for vehicles? I always thought you were on the brighter side of the economy issue.

          1). When will they be? 5/10/15 years? >According to your rant, that’s no time at all compared to how long it takes to begin seeing oil from ANWR.

          2). Even when they become so, what will the maintenance costs be? Will that be affordable to the common citizen. I say it will, but the question is when. 5/10/15 years AFTER the market is saturated enough to offer affordable used alternate vehicles and after market products for repair????
          >Again, an argument based on speculation is hardly an argument. Having been a member of SAE for the last 15 years, I’d say it will take far less time than you predict in fact the technology is already there, just not being implemented. how different do you think an alternate fuel combustion engine is? So far there is little difference. If you are talking electric cars, the price, reliability, efficiency, and cost have all come down a great deal over the last few years, a market trend change would force that price down very quickly.

          Do you really think there will be one manufacturer building them? Of course not, demand means competition, competition means lower prices as the manufacturer’s work overtime to drive costs down themselves.

          Your examples are just way off, your conclusions are based on wild guesses that really don’t stand up at all.

          You timeline is a guess (new car and fuel adoption) compared to facts (time to begin seeing any oil from ANWR).

          As a whole, all the ANWR posts are focused on the same thing, we want to drill for oil. We don’t care how long it takes, we don’t care that it isn’t enough oil, we don’t care that it doesn’t solve our immediate OR long term problems, we just want to drill for oil because it is easier for now and we can’t let the “tree huggers and hairy armpit women” be right.

          Not very clever!

        • #2908971

          Your figures and analogies

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to you missed my postion completely

          Well the only validity I see in your argument at all is all based on your GUESSES as to how the automotive industry will develop.

          [i]”My guess, it will take 10 years for your average citizen to cycle into an alternate fuel vehicle. That is after the 10 years have passed to get them massively on the market so that used ones can be purchased. Thats 20 years turn around time.”[/i]

          Why and can you explain how you derived on your claim. I know it’s a guess but even a guess is based on some faction. if not your guess could be 100 years or 5 minutes and it would make no difference.

          Why would it take 10 years to get them on the market, when the average development cycle is about 3-5 years?

          Why would it take 10 years for people to adopt a new technology when past technology adoption shows a much faster adoption rate?

          Those are the guesses I disagree with.

          IF you were to find a fairly renewable resource for vehicles, kinda like Brazil already did, would you roil consumption not drop to the point where you could be practically self sustained by your own supply and a small amount of import from Canada?

          ANWR, looking WAY too fer down the road for this topic, this is about the price of gas today, not that you could actually start drilling your first well 12 years from now, and what do you think your demand would be 12 years from now, you think that ANWR’s first and largest supply will actually support your constantly increasing demand?
          Do you know how many new cars hit the road each month?
          In order to make any difference, you’d have to send a lot more Americans to Iraq so you can cull the herd a bit.

          now if you could state your aggression without the useless tree hugger comments you’d have more credibility, what do TREE huggers have to do with wiser use of nonrenewable resources? Tree huggers are out there trying to save protected forests from being destroyed by foreign company’s clear cutting them. Not too much relation between saving the forest and finding an alternate fuel source.

        • #2908962

          nowhere in your arguemts did you even address it

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          in other words, you never thought about it.

          Your points are invalid until you do.

          At least I address the issue, which is more then you ever did with your position.

          Your arguments are null and void until you do..

          Prove me wrong. I put forward the argument that nobody has addressed WHEN. It’s a HELL of a lot more then you did. You just said deal with it, thats all you’ve done.

          Deal with this. Your wrong till you at least address it.

          And Oz, it YOUR SOLUTION for alternate fuels. Well god damn it, prove its feasible with my concerns. The PROOF falls on you, not me.

          Dan

        • #2908958

          and oz, I drive an e85

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          So don’t give me crap about that. THOSE are the only afforadble alternate fuel cars there are right now.

          The tree huggers are bitching because of the farm land being used.

          The beading liberals are crying about the starving people.

          Both those moron groups don’t get the fact that ethanol can be created numerous ways.

          The distribution system IS NOT IN PLACE.

          it’s still 10 years down the road.

          It still requires OIL.

          B.S.

          It’s a one sided argument on people that want alternate fuels. When you can answer my mother fkn questions on what and how. Then I’ll believe the CRAP.

          But, right now….. It’s like Obama and his liberal pipe dream of peace, love, and harmony. It’s nothing but a dream with not all issues taken into consideration.

          Which is exactly what your argument is. A pipe dream that ignores serious questions.

          Dan

        • #2908921

          What the hell are you talking about?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          Reading your initial post I see many assertions but no real questions demanding answers.

          Your last post makes no sense at all, I don’t have a clue what you are referring to as you don’t reiterate you just use the terms IT as if I know what you’re talking about. What IT needs your approval to be considered valid?

          Judging by the inaccurate guess that was your original post, you have no place asking for proof of anything anyway, you provided proof on NOTHING and yet a bunch of claims, then asked for proof against it?

          What the hell are you on about?

          as for more efficient vehicles, and renewable resources. Europe has more efficient vehicles, as does Japan, South America and most other nations. North America has the cheapest, most poorly built automobile market in the world. Even North American bars in other countries are better than they are here in North America. People here are too cheap and want bigger for less, instead of more efficient at an affordable price.

          When will al alternate be availble? never if we focus on drilling oil and increasing refineries product. Note yo are maxed out now, with a producion of 85 million barrels a day and that STILL equates to less than 40% of your consumption, how do you feel an added 5-10 million barrels per day, which you have no way of refining at this time, be of any help at all?

          Answer: It will not make even the slightest bit of difference, you’ll just find someone else to bitch about being the problem then.

          As it is now, [i]I[/i] am the problem, you have already provided your views, though based on complete garbage with no conclusive proof at all, you still did it and thus I am at fault? You are a screwy one aren’t you?!

          My proof:
          brazil has already become oil independent by utilizing FlxFuel, that sounds like a better alternative than “more of the same unless someone has a better idea.”

          Europe has better, more efficient vehicles but Americans won’t buy them. They don’t have V8’s or even V6’s in most cases, they aren’t large enough, they aren’t cheap enough.

          We can’t develop other means of power because as long as oil barons run the show, there will be no sizable investment into new energy sources, no support from government etc.

          In other words, until you are ready to make a change there will be no change, when you are ready, there are options, you just need to look around you without your arms folded in a huff, waiting for someone to change it for you.

          Personal responsibility, try taking some yourself.

        • #2908908

          As far as yuor nations inability to adopt progress

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          that is neither my problem nor my concern.

          It has been done elsewhere. I have also not said you should be driving an Ethanol burning car. I said that ONE country has made an effort and, based on their resources has become oil independent. They didn’t just bitch and whine about drilling in some remote wildlife reserve, they took action and it worked. the government was in on it too though, whereas in the US the government is pretty much owned and operated by the oil companies.

          YOUR only solution to the world oil crisis is to start exploration and drilling in an area where the greatest estimate would reduce your need for foreign oil supply by minuscule fractions? nice one, great solution I can see why you wouldn’t be open to other ideas, that makes so much more sense!

          Lets see, you currently pull about 85 million barrels a day out of America. This is about 60% of your consumption. If the greatest ANWR reserve estimates are true (at the highest estimate), you will see a million or so barrels per day. That’s less than 1:100 of your daily consumption. Given the fact that it would also require new refineries, the whole idea is just an expensive waste of resources when that same money could be invested into developing a more sustainable solution. Without money there are no alternatives, just the way your government likes it.

          Do you not realize that it is in your government’s best interests to have prices sky high and not lowering? The BS you get fed about pushing to lower prices is crap, they are far better off with the highest price.

          Will the oil companies invest in better solutions? Sure why not.

          So how long will it take? until your government stops relying on oil companies and Middle Eastern money invested into the US economy.

          Nice solution, you are a clever one, aren’t you?

        • #2908777

          As a final point to oz

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          Why the fk shouldn’t america drill for oil.

          If we meet the requirments of being energy dependent using altnerate fuels.

          Why the fk can’t we sell it to other nations.

          Just because we might not use it doesn’t say that other nations won’t. We have just as much right to drill for oil and sell it to the highest bider as any other nation.

          Tree hugers be damned.

          Dan

        • #2905980

          No problem

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          Seeing as I haven’t even mentioned the word hybrid, nor hybrid vehicle that point is entirely moot.

          seeing as I haven’t mentioned Ethanol as a viable alternative, and in fact said it was NOT a solution in America, that point would also be moot.

          seeing as your post is a rude, offensive and personal attack, it has been reported as spam for removal as it certainly does not fit within the allowable boundaries of TechRepublic’s Forum.

          In future, please remember that this is a public forum and such posts will be ignored by me and are offensive to others.

        • #2905978

          Why can’t you drill for oil?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          Nobody said you can’t. as for being energy INdependent (which is what I think you meant), you could never supply your own nation if you sucked ANWR dry tomorrow. There’s no way you’ll be selling it off.

          The part about that being an alternate fuel just doesn’t make sense, drilling for oil is not going to give you an alternate fuel to sell to other nations.

        • #2905934

          Shall I start flagging all of your personal attacks as spam Oz?

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          And all of your personal attacks against individuals.

          Shall I start reporting all your anti American rants as bigotry.

          You better be careful Oz, you have a past history that is easy to find of doing the same if not worse.

          You can’t provide stats to back up your arguments.

          You didn’t answer my answers on the amount of time. Your’s response was as you accused me, nothing but personal opinion. NOTHING ELSE. I provided figures to support mine.

          Both number of years and cost.

          Your argument as you are Oz. Is straight up Bull Sht.

          Your anti American rants will be from this point froward flagged as bigotry.

          Your personal attacks, just like you did against Tony will be flagged as spammed.

          Fk you oz.

          Dan

        • #2905929

          re: Why can’t you drill for oil?

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          Your an idiot.

          Read my first post..
          http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=267053&messageID=2529754
          [i]Me, I want both. And both of those boobs want to heal america. Yea, if so. How about agreeing to do both. Cap the bloody speculators, open up drilling, and give incentives to invest in alternate energy.[/i]

          I want development of alternate fuels. Nowhere did I state or otherwise insinuate that this country would be energy independent with oil.

          Quit making things up Oz. Your not even good at it.

          And Oz, your the only one talking about ANWR.

          Did you fall off the topic somewhere Oz. Did you not realize that drilling has been suggested in many area’s? Off shore drilling, ANWR? What about the Colorodo shale deposits. Just because it’s not cost effective now, doesn’t mean that technology can’t make it so. By not opening them up, we will never know.

          Isn’t that what your country did Oz. Canada? Develop the technology when it was not cost effective? Now it is?

          What you anti American. It’s ok for your nation to do things and not others.

          Your anti American.

          Your a hypocrite for reporting me for spam and personal attack when you have a past history of doing the same.

          You just left yourself open for the same type of reporting Oz. I can’t wait till the next time you go on your little rants and call all Americans stupid. Or call people aholes because you don’t agree.

          The spam button and reporting procedures await what past history shows happens on a regular basis by you.

          So Oz. Put up or shut up.

          You provide nothing in your arguments but your opinion(that’s what you accused me of, remember). You use a double standard when people attack your position when you are known by all to use the same type of attacks.

          So Oz… Stay in Canada, stay being a bigot.

          Stay the fk away from me.

          Fkn bigot
          Fkn hypocrite

          Dan
          [edited to add] You notice the only thing that Oz flagged as spam was where I provided figures? Go figure… When I provided numbers to back my position, he pu$$ed out and cried for mommy.

        • #2905685

          Please do

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          It wouldn’t be the first time but you will be shown a great difference.

          Instead of, as you choose to do, saying fk you Dan, or you are a fkin idiot. I’ll simply prove you wrong, or comment that your assertions are retarded. An personal negative view of your country is not a problem, calling you retarded because you are American is.

          You really need to start understanding what you read.

          the numbers and “FACTS” yuo rpesented were all complete crap. I haven’t said two words about Electric or hybrid cars, I haven’t mentioned anything about it, so your claims and support are for nothing, you are supporting a non argument.

          When you learn to comprehend a bit better perhaps you’ll be up for the task, as for now, just click that spam link and waste some of Tammy’s time.

          have a great day.

        • #2905678

          see that’s where you just get it completely wrong

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          I don’t call people here aholes, I don’t tell people to fk off, I don’t tell people they are fkin idiots, YOU do that, not me.

          The reason your post was removed had nothign to do with the numbers, the numbers you reported had nothign to do with anythign i’ve said anyway. You were ranting on about how long it takes to create a battery for an electric car and how much it takes to build hybrid cars. Now if yuo can also go back and show me where I suggested EITHER electric cars OR hybrid vehicles in ANY of my posts here, I’ll grant you that one, but you can so yuo have NO argument.

          Its no different than me correcting you by going on about the oil drilling figures in Saudi Arabia, it is simply irrelevant as NOBODY has been discussing anything to do with it…wee, except you.

          Here’s an excercise, as you seem to like digging for nothing, go back and find all of these offensive posts where I have used similar terms to describe people as you did in your last post. That’ll keep you busy for some time, I’m sure. there’s a difference between claiming someoen’s opinion sounds idiotic and callign someone a fkin idiot as you have done again in yoru last post, but I’ll let that one go, you clearly aren’t playing with a full deck at this point. Oh, quick report that as spam!

          Don’t bother, it’s not the same at all, not in the smallest way.

        • #2905561

          oz, you better wake up buddy.

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          You didn’t prove me wrong. You didn’t even address time lines with regard to my position or cost.

          Where oh where oz did you prove me wrong.

          idiot again comes to mind.

          bigot just from watching every comment you make to every american that disagree’s with you.

          Just in this thread.

          Oz, stay in canada. Your not smart enough to be in USA.

          dAN

        • #2905538

          First off

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          Don’t tell me to f-k off and then call me buddy, your buddy I am not.

          You asked questions and spewed on and on about topics I hadn’t even mentioned, why would I waste ANY MORE effort with you? Especially providing answers to questions that I have NO idea what you are on about.

          As far as being too stupid to be in teh USA, that must be it. You are very clever, I am sure that makes a lot of sense.

          yup, got a brainy one here alrighty! With a little education and a lot of BS, you can too become president of the USA.

          Why waste your time here, you must be one of them thar fancy book lernin’ ones, aint ya?!

        • #2905523

          re: First off

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          1). You responded to a comment I made to someone else, my points have stayed on topic. You disagreed. You called them opinions only. You offered nothing to prove your rant was anything else but opinions. You got defensive when I pointed out figures to support my position. You offered nothing in return. As usual.
          Your only comment that even REMOTELY addressed my position was Brazil. Guess what you moron. It was not a democracy. I said 30 years. Did you read your own article and link Oz. How many years did it take for them to convert over.
          Your wrong. Your biased. Your a bigot.
          2). You miss quoted me and didn’t have the guts to admit it. You put my comments, my position completely out of context to meet your own biased agenda. My position stated from the START was more drilling AND alternat fuel sources. No where did I divate from that position. You spun the argument off, I can’t help it your not smart enough to keep up.
          3). You want to push me oz on turning you in for biggoted, aragont, off color posts? I’ll just go back to this weekends posts and how you personally attacked other members who disagreed with you. I will just point to your posts that showed a biggoted oppinion about american citizens. I will just point to posts here that show the same. Then oz, I will go back through just a month’s worth of your biased biggoted posts to show a history. And offer to go back further.

          Go for it Oz. Take your leap.

          Your a liar. Your a bigot. And your a hypocrit. You wont back up your positions with source material, but you expect others to. You personally attack people, but get defensive when others do it to you.
          You make comments in response to people that we are just spouse to take your word for. When others state their positions with out sources, you expect sources to support their position. You have double standards in every position you hold. You do NOT expect the same to be applied to you.

          Again Oz… I give you 10 days. Count them you aragont prick. Until I can find more examples of you personally attacking, spouting your foul mouthed(see Pu$$y) responses to people that you disagree with, bigoted comments against US citizens no matter what the topic(religion, law, politics, or national policy). You will be completely aragont in that attitude and will get offended when you are called to the carpet on it for being so Anti American.

          And Oz… I will report every single instance of these outbursts of yours. Because I find them offensive. I can point to posts where people felt you were offensive.

          So Oz… Go for it… Be your normal biased, aragont, bigoted self. Your easy to read, your easy to prove wrong, and your easy to be shown for what you are.

        • #2905499

          Dan you are priceless

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          I have yet to se esomeone so incorrect, so assumptive and so outwrdly ignorant to who he is and how he comes across in my 8+ years on TR.

          the only mistake I keep making is that I find some reason to reply to you, whereas most others have already taken their ball away due to boredom, I’ am still here trying to explain SOMETHING I have no idea what, to you. You’re right, I must be stupid, to waste time with this crap.

          2) misquoted what? Why don’t you explain what you are bitchign abotu for once instead of just bitching.

          3) Your comments were uncalled for, out of line with TR guidelines and completely your fault. You should know better, even this past post of yours should be removed, generally they don’t let kids play here but in our case they have made an exception. See there’s no need to call people foul names, you can always make your point somehow.

          I have poor keyboarding skills, and they are getting better so I make fewer typos. however, you show a complete and utter inabilty to speak, spell or write a single conprehansive sentence. Yet you feel peoeple shoul dunderstand what yuo are saying? Yuo get offended when people don’ tunderstand you?

          And now you are going to do me a favour by giving me time? Don’t make me laugh, let’s make that 10 days into 15 seconds. Go for it, bring the world down around me.

          “(1)Your a liar. (2)Your a bigot. (3)And your a hypocrit”

          Post 1, Post2, Post3, please.
          You can take all the time you want, I’m done wasting keystrokes on you.

          My point: “You make comments in response to people that we are just spouse to take your word for. ” Okay that one I can decypher, but a ‘spouse’ would be a wife or husband. I think you were trying to spell ‘supposed’.

          ‘Spoused’ works in some hooked on phonics classes though I think. Just like ‘axing’ people questions.

          I support sources when asked, I generally provide teh source when I copy one or speak from another source other than personal knowledge. If you are missing a link somewhere, specify which one next time instead of ranting away bewtween illiterate insults, again, I am done with your BS in this thread.

          “When others state their positions with out sources, you expect sources to support their position.”

          that’s the TR forums for you, catch up or be left behind. Usually, the only time I don’t back a comment is when it is from personal knowledge, experience or opinion.

          “Again Oz… I give you 10 days”

          Stop it, now you’re scaring me. I don’t know what I should do, perhaps sell my notebook and sever my internet connection? Oh no, time is runnign out.

          As I said before, don’t bother giving me 10 days, unless you need more time to learn how to spell your post out, lets make it anytime you are ready, how’s that for making your life easier?

          Just don’t expect me to read or take any interest in what you have to say from now on.

          “Count them you aragont prick.”
          Now yuo see, THAT’s where yuo keep screwing up, if you were more eloquent (http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&safe=off&defl=en&q=define:eloquent&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title ) you’d have some credibilty and then when you submit your great list of harmful comments that will bring the fires of hell upon me, you’d actually have something to go on.

          “bigoted comments against US citizens”

          You know that old saying, “if the shoe fits wear it” and all that, you don’t have to go so far out of your way to prove it to everyone, we know you are a bad example of an American and that it is your mindset and obvious lack of education that actually blackens America’s name with the rest of the world.

          “And Oz… I will report every single instance of these outbursts of yours. Because I find them offensive. I can point to posts where people felt you were offensive.”

          Take a number and have a seat.

          I am completely free to offer my opinion on countries of the world, just as so many Americans offer their opoinoins of France, England, Canada, Iran, Iraq etc. There is no special exemption for Americans, though I know you feel there should be one.

          “So Oz… Go for it… Be your normal biased, aragont, bigoted self. Your easy to read, your easy to prove wrong, and your easy to be shown for what you are.”

          Bias, there outta be a law! Anyone who shows bias is unacceptable, except yuo have done just that.

          aragont, I assume you mean arrogant, sure I am arrogant. That’s what makes me succesful in my line of work, I’m not a company drone who is forced into complacency by some company that sees me as a grudgingly necessary expense.

          Bigoted: I find my opinions are supported and firm. I discount ridiculous posts such as the nonsense you spew here, but I show a lot of empathy for people who actually try to have a rational discussion.

          Mind you, for a guy who can’t spell or formulate a sentence worth beans, for a guy who thinks he is actually clever and doesn’t see the constant hypocrisy in his own posts, I suppose it all makes sene, to you anyway.

          You sure know how to make yourself look clever, don’t you?

          again, whine, bitch, rant and complain away, compile a list of teh thousands of posts I’ve made that you don’ tunderstand and submit them to poor Tammy for her review.

          I would think that after reading your last post, she’d probably give it a full three seconds consideration, as that’s all your worth at this point, you’re definitely not worth anyone wasting their time over, and I think most people here already know that.

        • #2905429

          Your response was that I wanted energy independence

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          via oil only. You assumed, you forgot, and you miss quoted my position in your response.

          need a link to find out where it’s at in this thread Oz?

          Using your logic.

          Look it up yourself, it’s not my job to find your mistakes. You do know how to do that Oz, don’t you?

          Dan

        • #2905386

          RE Dan you are priceless

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          ?I am completely free to offer my opinion on countries of the world, just as so many Americans offer their opoinoins of France, England, Canada, Iran, Iraq etc. There is no special exemption for Americans, though I know you feel there should be one.?

          That looks a lot like two wrongs make a right to me
          You will need better reasons than that

          Smarten up
          That argument is stupid
          You can do better

        • #2904993

          actually that’s just how it goes gere

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          Nothing to do with two wrongs make a right at all.

          I am not blaming someone for being American or invalidating someone for being American, I am simply opposed to the US government and their opinions and actions, those who support those opinions and actions are fair game to have those opinions and actions criticized, such as this other tosser here who can’t spell the simplest words or formulate the most basic sentence sentence, yet alone understand debate.

          There are other Americans here I completely agree with, we share very similar political views (you do know that many Americans oppose the war and government policies and Bush too right)and even when I don’t we both share civil opinions or agree to disagree and move on. Which part of that would be considered anti-American or bigotry against Americans as a people?

        • #2906508

          Re actually that’s just how it goes gere

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          What you wrote is in the ??

          ?Nothing to do with two wrongs make a right at all.?
          It looked like it to me

          ?I am not blaming someone for being American or invalidating someone for being American,?
          Yes you have in many of your replies

          ?I am simply opposed to the US government and their opinions and actions, those who support those opinions and actions are fair game to have those opinions and actions criticized,?
          Nice try
          Try writing it a 100 times
          Maybe I?ll start to believe you

          ?such as this other tosser here who can’t spell the simplest words or formulate the most basic sentence sentence, yet alone understand debate.?
          How clever a hidden insult
          what you are really saying is there are two tossers
          Let me guess your saying I am the other one

          ?There are other Americans here I completely agree with?
          I have yet to see it

          ?we share very similar political views (you do know that many Americans oppose the war and government policies and Bush too right)?
          No I had no idea
          Would they be the same ones who didn?t vote for him or his party?

          ?and even when I don’t we both share civil opinions or agree to disagree and move on.?
          Really? You need to practise the civil part
          You?re not very good at it

          ?Which part of that would be considered anti-American or bigotry against Americans as a people??
          You talk a good story
          Shame about the lies

        • #2912526

          The Clean Energy Scam

          by netman1958 ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          You all might want to take a look at this article:
          http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1725975-1,00.html

          Some Excerpts:
          “But several new studies show the biofuel boom is doing exactly the opposite of what its proponents intended: it’s dramatically accelerating global warming, imperiling the planet in the name of saving it. Corn ethanol, always environmentally suspect, turns out to be environmentally disastrous. Even cellulosic ethanol made from switchgrass, which has been promoted by eco-activists and eco-investors as well as by President Bush as the fuel of the future, looks less green than oil-derived gasoline.”

          “Deforestation accounts for 20% of all current carbon emissions. So unless the world can eliminate emissions from all other sources–cars, power plants, factories, even flatulent cows–it needs to reduce deforestation or risk an environmental catastrophe. That means limiting the expansion of agriculture, a daunting task as the world’s population keeps expanding. And saving forests is probably an impossibility so long as vast expanses of cropland are used to grow modest amounts of fuel. The biofuels boom, in short, is one that could haunt the planet for generations–and it’s only getting started.”

          “The environmental cost of this cropland creep is now becoming apparent. One groundbreaking new study in Science concluded that when this deforestation effect is taken into account, corn ethanol and soy biodiesel produce about twice the emissions of gasoline. Sugarcane ethanol is much cleaner, and biofuels created from waste products that don’t gobble up land have real potential, but even cellulosic ethanol increases overall emissions when its plant source is grown on good cropland. “People don’t want to believe renewable fuels could be bad,” says the lead author, Tim Searchinger, a Princeton scholar and former Environmental Defense attorney. “But when you realize we’re tearing down rain forests that store loads of carbon to grow crops that store much less carbon, it becomes obvious.”

        • #2911955

          Well NetMan

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Your figures and analogies

          It?s like this

          Things need to be as bad as they can possibly be before human beings will make the change needed

          At this time things are not bad enough

          The only way they will give up their cars
          Is if they are too scared to drive them
          Fear that someone will put a bullet through the windscreen is one thing that might work

          But we can hope they wake up before then

        • #2908797

          Mobile energy sources

          by tearat ·

          In reply to you missed my postion completely

          That is what is needed
          Many of the alternatives do not suit

          But a good choice would be hydrogen
          Which can be easily produced by fixed energy sources

          Weather based power will always be tricky

          Solar power is a good choice for countries with deserts
          But will need to be stored for night use

          OIL is going to be a problem for along time yet

          You can blame the car companies
          They are the ones responsible for the problem
          Can anyone tell me why there is only small numbers of alternative fuel cars on the market?

        • #2908789

          consumers are why there are not enough altnerantive fuel cars

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Mobile energy sources

          And no matter what oz says, that is a statistic world wide. Only one nation has moved totally to alternate fuels… And that was through Goverment mandate.

          Brazil.

          If the consumer wanted, no matter what nation, alternate fuel vechicles. They would be here. And they would be affordable… Because the consumer wanted it.

          And think about this techno… If say the eurpoen nations were already alternate fuel… The manufacturing process would already be in place, and would only need to be increased. But that is not so. So, guess what… This manufacturing process has to be put in place.

          So no matter what people like Oz have to say… This is a world wide issue… And people like oz, neil, and all the other environmentalist types are not willing to address the issue of price. How the average citizen, reading this oz… Any fkn nation. Can afford these vechicles.

          Please see my post to oz concerning the prices in 2007 of hybrids… The average citizen, and I really don’t give a crap what country. Can afford them. You can’t supply the average citizen, no matter what nation. You will not move the nation to alternate fuels.

          Again, something people like oz are unwilling to address.

          Dan

        • #2908769

          Dan

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Mobile energy sources

          You were not the one I was expecting to answer

          One of the reasons car makers have shown little interest in the electric car and similar technology’s

          They worked out how much they would lose in parts
          Eg oil filters
          Not to mention the lesser need for the oil which is filtered

          Shall we talk about tyres?
          How long before we can forget about pneumatic tyres
          How much fuel could be saved if every car did not have to carry round a spare wheel

          But then you would only be buying four wheels
          And that would affect profits
          But I am sure the price of cars would go down

          If you guys are going to argue about this
          At least blame the right assholes for the problem

          The Car Makers

          Oh one more thing
          Anyone who thinks they have all the answers is an idiot

          And one more thing
          Cars are sold worldwide so no one is off the hook
          Including Canada and its population of critics

        • #2906012

          Techno Rat

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Mobile energy sources

          You see me asking a chit load of questions now don’t you. Which the soposid know it alls refuse to answer.

          So if your insinuating that I think I know all the answers, please think again.

          Dan
          [edited to add]damn, used IE for this post. No spell check. Sorry.

        • #2905956

          Sorry Dan

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Mobile energy sources

          Some times part of my replies are addressed to other people who may read them

          I did say you were not the one I expected to answer
          That was stupid since it was you I replied to you

          What I have noticed
          Since a certain person join the discussion
          The conversation has turned from possible solutions and observations
          To the blame game
          Gosh how clever lets blame someone that will get them listening to us

          Some people cannot be helped
          (That has more than one meaning)

          One more thing
          At least your spelling is readable
          For some of the spelling I would need training in military code breaking to understand

          Cheers Steve

        • #2905877

          One of Dan’s Theme’s

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to Mobile energy sources

          Is that right now most alternatives (solar, cars, whatever) are just too damn expensive for the everyday joe.

          And that was one of my major points as well.

          I’m not going to play the blame game (even though I suppose I already have) because we’re all to blame in some part.

          However, my original rant was that until we all figure this out, the average everyday joe gets screwed (I suppose there is nothing new about this though).

          I am a hardcore free market kind of guy. But there is something really wrong with life when the price of gas and food becomes so ridiculous that people have to choose between putting gas in their car and eating.

          I just ask everyone this:

          As we are all arguing back and forth, please keep in mind all the people less fortunate than you. To them, it isn’t some mind exercise. It is their life.

        • #2905811

          Rick, I appolgize for going off track

          by danlm ·

          In reply to Mobile energy sources

          I will ignore the one that just irritates me with his one cycle theme.

          Back on track, that is exactly my problem with alternate fuels right now and the argument that we shouldn’t drill… You need both being pushed to control costs so that the average citizen can afford to live. And nowhere do I see any of the groups which only advocate one approach(alternate fuels) addressing that. They are more then willing to point fingers and blame what ever group they are unhappy with, but they are unwilling or flat out just don’t care to address cost concerns. Even to those that do advocate alternate fuels also. Because we are advocating a multi pronged approach to energy, we are fools. Or stupid.

          Dan

        • #2905376

          Rick Dan

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Mobile energy sources

          Re One of Dan’s Theme’s
          Rick

          The blame game is pointless
          The mistake being made is people are looking at only one problem and one solution

          As I wrote in an earlier reply even the people who can afford the price rise can help
          In fact those are the people who should be looking at alternatives
          Why?
          Because they can afford them

          I had already cut back on the use of my car before much of the price rises
          I actually did not use it at all for 2 weeks

          I have very little need for a car
          Most of the time I use it for travelling to someone else?s place to help with some problem they have

          I can walk to the shops
          Walking
          The doc does go on about how much he wants me to walk

          Re Rick, I appolgize for going off track
          Dan

          You really must stop letting the one get under your skin
          Most of the BAD Oz is an act
          He needs to feel better than others
          You are letting him drag you down
          Forget about that sort of loser they are so unimportant

          Drilling is one of the many things that should be done
          It will help in the future
          Oil will always have its uses
          As an emergency reserve power is one
          It is very good for heating and cooking

          Price and cost are relative
          It depends on what you are measuring

          Time at this moment is one of the most important

          Cost is not always about money
          Sometimes the cost is lives

          Most of it has been covered already
          So I wont repeat

          One of the groups that want fast change is the greenies
          Need I say more?

          Well its 5:08 pm on a Thursday here in NZ
          I am going to be busy tomorrow and Saturday

          I am getting weary
          So I may not be back till Monday

          Cheers

      • #2909321

        I disagree

        by rfink ·

        In reply to Well, one solution.

        Increase the margin requirement won’t solve the problem. The current margin is $4050 (www.nymex.com) per contract. A contract controls 1000 barrels therefore the margin is 4.05 per barrel or ~3%.

        Increasing the margin requirements or decreasing the position limits will hurt the liquidity of the contracts which will increase the price swings both up and down.

        Most traders believe that “the trend is your friend” and will long or short contracts accordingly. Professional investors and traders take emotion out of the equation, they don’t care which direction oil moves just as long as it does.

        The point being, if you punish the traders you punish the market. The futures market isn’t going away, it serves a very valuable function. Investors don’t cause price increases they react to the world around them.

        • #2909291

          Spinning Wheels.

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to I disagree

          What goes up, must come down; Spinning wheels gotta go round. Blood, Sweat, and Tears.

          Regulation is the friend of no one, but deregulation has caused difficulties for many industries. Just about destroyed several.

          Understand your point, but disagree.

        • #2909597

          I Disagree

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to I disagree

          As do almost all the experts.

          For many, many years we had higher margin requirements. Then, shortly after those requirements were lifted the price of oil shot up.

      • #2909501

        A brief commentary on futures:

        by locrian_lyric ·

        In reply to Well, one solution.

        Any fungible comodity from corn to beans to gold to oil is traded on a futures market.

        Futures markets serve as a kind of breaking mechanism on market prices.

        When a comodity’s supply is disrupted or threatened, futures traders buy up stock in that commodity betting on the worst, which drives up prices to what they *think* they will be when the worst happens.

        The affect you *see* is the prices rising.

        The affect you *don’t see* is what would happen if there was no futures trading here are some examples:

        1)Far more rapid price jumps and drops.
        2)Inconsistancy of supply; shortages and gluts
        3)Greater economic instability.

        A real life example of this was when Katrina hit the gulf coast. Gas prices skyrocketed overnight, there were rampant shortages, gas prices were wildly different from state to state and they yo-yoed up and down.

        Rather than attacking the speculators, we should be attacking what they are speculating about.

        • #2908952

          Thank you, Locrain.

          by Anonymous ·

          In reply to A brief commentary on futures:

          Norm 🙂

        • #2905998

          Is Obama economically retarded or just pandering to populist views?

          by dr dij ·

          In reply to A brief commentary on futures:

          when he wanted to pass laws if he becomes president to curtail speculating in oil.

          If he’s economically retarded and doesn’t know the basics of markets or economics he shouldn’t be president. If he is pandering then he knows better but is lying then he shouldn’t be president either.

          In either case this is a particularly stupid thing he suggested.

          BTW I’m not a Republican.

        • #2905901

          Ah, a trick question

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Is Obama economically retarded or just pandering to populist views?

          because no matter which I choose, I would be right…. :0

        • #2905453

          Personally, I think

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ah, a trick question

          either candidate is going to be bad for the country. Therefore maybe I should support Obama, because I think that’ll greatly increase Republicans’ chances in future elections.

        • #2905442

          The suicide voter

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Personally, I think

          Because I have standards in life, I can not vote for Obama, but I also can’t vote for McCain.

          It will be the symbolic third party wasted vote for me.

        • #2905435

          I don’t think it’s wasted JD…

          by boxfiddler ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          rack that 3rd party percentage up in every election, and maybe, just maybe, the Dems and Reps will get their heads out of their @sses as they watch the voters turning away from them.

        • #2905427

          In my lifetime

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          I honestly don’t expect third parties to ever be more than a spoiler.

          After all, Ross got Clinton in office in the first place.

        • #2905426

          That may be true…

          by boxfiddler ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          but if we’re not in it for the long haul – our kids, their kids – why bother in the first place?

        • #2904945

          I will stick with it anyways….

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          McCain is just to wrong on to many issues and Obama is just to wrong on all the issues.

          America is a great country, and with your help, Obama will “CHANGE” that! And mindless drones are sucking that koolaid right up.

          It will be interesting to see what the effects of white guilt and racism will have. His supporters don’t realize it is just as stupid to vote for someone BECAUSE they are black as it is to vote for someone BECAUSE they are white. Color of skin is not a qualifier or a disqualifier, but people are willing to flush the nation down the drain to have the symbolic “first black president”.

          At least Mitt understood business and finances. Neither McCain nor Obama do.

        • #2904763

          a vote cast in good conscience is never wasted

          by locrian_lyric ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          if everyone who was sick of the big two voted 3rd party, we’d have 3rd party candidates elected en masse.

        • #2907039

          Under the right conditions

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          There isn’t anything constitutional as far as I am aware about 2 parties in the US, but its hard, but not impossible to break the walls down and have more parties.

          What you need to do is have string third party emerge at a time when one of the competing parties is divided and fractious. That had a chance of happening with Theodore Roosevelt who created the Bull Moose party and broke with the Republicans.

          It did happen in Canada. After WWI we had a socialist party created which took some votes from the Liberals, and the Conservatives merged with the Progressive party (Teddy Roosevelt had headed a progressive movement in the US).

          James

        • #2904542

          About right conditions

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          we just might get that perfect storm in four years, because both of these losers are going to screw things up so horribly that the US of A is going to be close to rebellion.

          We have the choice, bad for the country or REALLY bad for the country, if we go with McCain or Obama.

          Vote for Obama, the choice in terrorist nations…. literally.

        • #2904537

          What are you trying to say ?

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          Is Obama an appeaser if he says he wants to talk to Iran?

          If so then I guess tricky Dick was an appeaser too, because he opened up relations with China, who at the time had just undergone the “cultural revolution” and killed tens of thousands of doctors teachers etc. By the way, I don’t like Nixon for the most part, but that was a lasting legecy that he doesn’t get enough credit for.

          There is a huge difference between attempting a dialogue and appeasing. If the Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland though that they should never talk to their “enemy”, they would still be killing each other.

          Some former leaders quit the Taliban in Afghanistan when assured that they would get pardon and that free and fair elections would be held.

          Look at Libya, former sponsor of terrorism.

          Look at North Korea, tearing down their nuclear plant.

          If you hold hard to the “never talk to the enemy” you miss lots of opportunities for peace.

          James

        • #2904519

          That was not what I was referring to

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          I was referring to the people in the middle east that have set up call centers of their own to help get Obama elected, because his ideals match their own.

          I am sure you saw the same reports?

        • #2904516

          No, you got a link?

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          I did hear on the radio about the Muslim groups in the US who are upset that they can’t get any time with Obama. He seems to make time for Christians and Jewish groups but not Muslims. The hint is that he doesn’t want to feed the rumour mill.

          James

        • #2906618

          link

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to The suicide voter

          http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/05/14/palestinians-phonebank-for-obama/

          surprised you never saw this?

          As for Obama refusing to see the muslim groups, I had heard that as well, since we have such a large muslim community in Michigan. Will he continue to discriminate if he gets into office or do we get to see the “real man”?

          The way his positions are changing now, he IS starting to show he is just another washington politician. already.

    • #2910615

      Triage

      by santeewelding ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      Mentioned above: resources, resource war, resources required to fight war.

      Nasty. Disagreeable. Number One.

    • #2909246

      This could be a portent to a lot of things.

      by tonythetiger ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      I think we’re heading to another great depression. I think there ARE people who are manipulating the world’s economies… ALL of them… to their own end. Control of resources is just part of it… I think it’s control of PEOPLE that is the goal.

      Socialism is wrong. Liberalism is wrong. Ask yourself this:

      Why aren’t the people who are proposing that we all should live as paupers not doing so themselves?

      Obviously they think they are better or more important than the rest of us, including those who they’ve duped into supporting them.

      World war? I don’t know about that… but there are some people that will need to be “put in their place” if anything remotely resembling personal liberty is to be had in the future, and there are people who are more than willing to put them there or die trying.

      Prepare myself? Well, I have a garden, and some chickens, a good well and some canning supplies… Oh, and about 36,000 rounds of ammo so far 🙂

      • #2909519

        Who are these people?

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to This could be a portent to a lot of things.

        okay, its a heated rant, btu at least try to make some sense or offer a logical complaint.

        Socialism is wrong. Liberalism is wrong.
        So are democrats and republicans if you want to pick apart singular itens on an agenda. make sense for once.

        “Why aren’t the people who are proposing that we all should live as paupers not doing so themselves?”
        Missed that article, please post a link or be more specific, such a blanket statement doesn’t hold water.

        “Obviously they think they are better or more important than the rest of us, including those who they’ve duped into supporting them.”
        Why? Who?

        “personal liberty ”
        So you feel that it is your right to do as you please, there should be no laws or enforcement of such, there should be no essential community services such as healthcare, firedepartment, police force.

        If people aactually WERE responsible, then we wouldn’t have issues with resource management, would we. If we did, how would that be any different than the possible crisis that we are looking at today?

        “Oh, and about 36,000 rounds of ammo so far”
        Oh that’ll be handy, been watching Deliverance? “git awf ma layand!”

        Go sit by the crick and blow into your jug some more, Zeek. Billy Bob and Dusty’s Boys will be along with the washboard, spoons and banjo shortly.

        • #2909118

          Pretty much

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Who are these people?

          [i]So you feel that it is your right to do as you please,[/i]

          as long as I am not harming anybody else.

          [i] there should be no laws or enforcement of such, there should be no essential community services such as healthcare, firedepartment, police force.[/i]

          Each should be responsible for his own health(care). Fire dept is infrastructure maintenance. Law enforcement is to investigate, try, and punish the reported violation of one’s liberties by another.

          If you (personally), think that I (personally), am violating one of your liberties, or are causing you any harm, then investigate, prosecute, and punish me (personally). Do not attempt to punish me for the alleged misdeeds of another person, unless you are willing to bear the consequences.

          As this pertains to the subject, that means suing or taxing or fining a business is stupid, as all of the punishment is borne by the consumers, who are doing nothing except buying perfectly legal products or services in order to live their perfectly normal lives, and eventually, at least some of those consumers are going to react, in some cases fiercely, to what they see as blatant unfairness. Just be prepared is all I’m saying, because this is going to get dangerously close to many (more than you even have an inkling of) people’s
          definition of [b]enough![/b]

        • #2908941

          Responsibilty

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Pretty much

          The reason something NEEDS to be forcced upon people is that people are NOT talking on their own responsibility to do something about it themselves.

          If people were driving less, eating locally grown produce, using less heat and electricity etc. We would be seeing some benefit, but as long as there are people, such as yourself, who feel they won’t act responsibly if they are forced to and yet don’t act responsibly anyway, then there is a need to impose rules.

          The issue is that people DON’T do anything about it, and I can’t count the number of times people on here have said they do something about it when everyone else did too.

          Well there you go, wanna do f-all? Fine, now you and everyone else has to do it anyway.

          Lazy rock suckers.

        • #2908902

          Again,

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Responsibilty

          [i]The reason something NEEDS to be forcced upon people is that people are NOT talking on their own responsibility to do something about it themselves[/i]

          Mixing people who are doing right with those who aren’t is a recipe for a costly disaster. Obviously you don’t see it, or don’t believe it. Sorry, but there’s nothing I can do about that but wait.

        • #2908888

          Ahh sit on your hands

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Again,

          Always the best resolution, too bad you didn’t have that insight/core value before the Iraq invasion.

          People who are doing right? Which one?

          You won’t take action, YOU don’t give a toss, YOU just want cheaper gas. You are at war, which drives prices higher. End of story.

        • #2908837

          Nah,

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i]People who are doing right? Which one?[/i]

          The ones who ARE conserving and the ones who ARE creating alternatives.

          [i]End of story.[/i]

          Nah, there are just pages missing from your copy of the book.

        • #2906037

          Well we are not at war

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          New Zealand
          You know
          Little islands in the south pacific

          Our price for oil is going up

          Nope wrong if I remember right
          We sent some doctors and nurses
          So that must be why it’s up

          And damn it we have one of the biggest oil fields off our coast

          Ps don?t bother trashing New Zealand
          The Aussies are much better at it than you North Americans

        • #2905981

          Settle down

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          I didn’t realize you weren’t a Skank, you sure sound like one.

          As for slamming New Zealand, why? What have you ever done?

        • #2905954

          Oz_Media

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          ?I didn’t realize you weren’t a Skank, you sure sound like one.?
          So which side of the border is that?

          You North Americans are all the same anyway what difference does a border make
          Think yourself lucky our nearest neighbour is Australia

          ?As for slamming New Zealand, why? What have you ever done? ?
          How rude
          As if to say we haven?t done anything
          Do you think we are a nation of under achievers?

          No I don?t need to list the things achieved by New Zealanders
          But the Internet is your friend

          PS you don?t want to know what the Aussies call the Yanks

        • #2905872

          People who are conserving

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          would not suffer from imposed guidelines for conservation.

          Only the insufferable masses of psuedo-well-to-dos in this country who think having a Platinum or Centurion card is something that makes them better and gives them the right to spend and do as they wish.

          Most people who conserve would just be living within the imposed standard that they already most likely have for themselves.

          It’s the selfish, wasteful, gluttonous, pious ilk who would whine and puke their speel about how they’re being wronged.

          I love vanity…it suits so many of the intellectually insignificant.

        • #2905854

          “Imposed standard”

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          and who would set these standards and what would the standard be based upon?

          Tell me again how you consider yourself conservative in any way, shape, or form?

          I have determined that since you do not NEED it to survive, I am going to come take your amplifier and guitar, because they needlessly waste electricity. No dishwasher or powered lawn mower for you either. I have decided that you don’t NEED them, and it is gluttonous of you to waste resources like that.

          Having a house and an apartment is also wasteful, because you gluttonously need to have duplicates of many of the things in life we need to get through the day.

          Lets shatter that glass house you are lording from. No one has any right to infringe on other peoples lives, as you have claimed you believed in before.

          Stop and think about what imposed standards would mean and where it would lead. Where does it stop and who controls it?

        • #2905847

          Ozzie, Relax

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          People like you before the war said George Bush went to war for cheap oil.

          Now, after the war started, you all say he did it to raise the price of oil.

          Could you please make up your mind?

          George Bush went to war for one main reason whether you agree with it or not and whether it was a good reason or not.

          George Bush started this whole thing to prevent the Middle East from being nuclear armed along with biological, chemical, etc.

          You do realize that there are some people in this world that would like to kill you simply for the fact that you are not a Muslim right?

        • #2905826

          who sets the standard

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i]and who would set these standards and what would the standard be based upon?[/i]

          a panel of reasonable people…and hopefully, not a government agency.

          I still can’t believe you and Tony espouse that it is ok for you to do whatever you want to do even if it pollutes or causes others discomfort or inconvenience.

          [i]Tell me again how you consider yourself conservative in any way, shape, or form?[/i]

          I don’t go driving when I want, drinking when I want, smoking when I want, and don’t go thinking i can do anything I want whenever I want just because it’s not illegal. That is true conservativism. Living by the minimum. Not being a free-spirit in every opportunity. Not indulging in everything i have the means to do.

          [i]I have determined that since you do not NEED it to survive, I am going to come take your amplifier and guitar, because they needlessly waste electricity. [/i]

          I play acoustic guitars, Mr. Know-it-all :p lol steeeeeeeeeee-rike one!

          [i]No dishwasher or powered lawn mower for you either. [/i]

          I don’t have a dishwasher either Mr. Assumption :p …steeeeeeeeeeee-rike two !

          BTW…I’ll give up my lawnmower as soon as all golf clubs and bars shut down in your area. They’re unnecessary too. :p lol

          [i]I have decided that you don’t NEED them, and it is gluttonous of you to waste resources like that.[/i]

          2 of 3 things you assumed were wrong. I guess I’m 3 times more efficient as you thought. I expect and apology. Thank you. lol

          [i]Having a house and an apartment is also wasteful, because you gluttonously need to have duplicates of many of the things in life we need to get through the day.[/i]

          #1) I had to take this job. I needed the money. I have to buy a car sometime, since mine is 8 years old and they do not know why it is running bad. I have made it last as long as I could. Sorry that doesn’t meet your expectations

          #2) Actually, having a house and an apartment is for more green and efficient than me running 85 miles each direction 5-6 days per week. I have everything shut off in my house during the week, save for the AC that I set to 83 (solely to prevent mold growing in there that could KILL ME…but i guess you’d like me dead).

          I now drive 10% of what I used to when I first started here, and I make sure that things are powered off and the least amount of power is consumed when I am not in residence at one of them.

          [i]Lets shatter that glass house you are lording from. No one has any right to infringe on other peoples lives, as you have claimed you believed in before.[/i]

          Sounds like someone peed in your cereal…and, my glass house is safety glass…so throw away at it! :p lol

          How am I infringing on your life, if I have to live by the same standard as you?

          If a guideline is set by a body who analyses and determines a correct path, it is across the board…fair to everyone. So long as it is a reasonable standard, then why do you have a bone up your butt about it? Are you afraid it might cramp your life just a little? That you might actually have to…CHANGE?? *gasp!*

          [i]Stop and think about what imposed standards would mean and where it would lead. Where does it stop and who controls it?[/i]

          Well, it couldn’t be anywhere worse than where we are now, JD.

          Look at what letting corporate America run footloose with our economy has done to our country:

          -Housing glut
          -Poor economy
          -Higher unemployment
          -Highest home foreclosure rate in over 20 years
          -People losing jobs left and right

          Corporate America took advantage of the housing market 5-6 years ago. Home prices skyrocketed. Then 3-4 years ago, it started to tank. They ran with their profits, often leaving consumers stranded. Now, they have their monies. And many people got sold into a corner.

          Corporate America has exploited the oil market. There are millions of gallons of refining capacity available in the USA, but oil companies don’t want to spend a penny of their 4 years of record breaking profit to upgrade them and refine more. That doesn’t benefit them.

          Corporate America exploited the mortgage market. Corporate lenders went out and made loans to people who they knew could not afford them, and now after they’ve taken 2-4 years of their money they are foreclosing on them and taking the property back. They haven’t lost a thing, but the consumer has lost everything.

          So tell me again, JD:

          why should i trust business more and let them set the standards for pricing in my life since they have been screwing me and you so bad for the past 5 years and who i have no say so on who runs it, instead of my government who i vote into office and has to represent all people?

          I think your view is distorted. You seem to believe that personal [b]indulgence[/b] is a freedom. It’s not. It’s a privilege. Just like that driver’s license you get issued. Just like the copy of Microsoft running on the computer. And, abusing privilege often gets them revoked.

          You seem actually scared and (surprisingly) paranoid about government actually setting standards to try and improve the way of life that doesn’t directly benefit you greatly.

          Are you really that scared of change?

          Do you really think that government is going to botch things up any worse than American business has done to our country?

          Honestly…just sit back and think about it:

          How free are you to go out and spend your disposable cash now at the end of the Bush administration’s tenure after letting corporate America prosper while most working individual Americans have been made to suffer financially?

          Were you having to spend as much at the end of Clinton’s administration when the national budget was in balance and unemployment was at one of it’s lowest times in history?

          I’d rather let government consult educated individuals from a wide array of talents and determine a right path for our country, than to entrust selfish, money-hungry, capitalist business persons who have no motivation other than to create a schema for the American way of life that will most benefit them monetarily.

          I put people before money or self-indulgence.

        • #2905796

          “Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness “

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          I DO have a RIGHT to what I decide brings me happiness, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others.

          You do NOT have a right to infringe on others.

          The basis of our country, dude.

          And you know very well that there is no group out there that is going to save us without putting forth their own selfish agendas. Junk science, emotions, and guilt are not a license to rule.

          Politicians are not to be trusted, which is why there are so many limits to what they can do.

          If you choose to turn yourself into a shut-in out of guilt or shame, that is your choice.

          mold, do you run a de-humidifier to help with that? The dampness combined with heat, right?

        • #2905781

          Conserving (jck)

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i]People who are conserving would not suffer from imposed guidelines for conservation.[/i]

          It depends on how it’s implemented, and how you define conserving. Almost everything I’ve seen proposed will increase the tax on fuel, which will be detrimental to the less than wealthy who are more than likely already minimizing their optional fuel usage, while allowing the likes of Al Gore to continue flaunting his hypocrisy by burning up 45,000 gallons of jet fuel every month.

          [sorry, hit submit too soon]

          [i]It’s the selfish, wasteful, gluttonous, pious ilk[/i]

          How do you propose to define these terms? and under what legal concept?

        • #2905763

          foundings of our country

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          were based on the escape from tyranny and being downtrodden and the right to a better life. not to behave however gives you the most benefits and fun.

          i guess you get persecuted for your religion daily, eh?

          [i]I DO have a RIGHT to what I decide brings me happiness, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others.[/i]

          True. I guess you’ve never infringed on anyone else’s rights tho. right? ever speed? ever had just one beer and drove? ever had a piece of trash blow out of your car and not stopped to pick it up? those all infringe on other’s rights. both legally and morally.

          [i]You do NOT have a right to infringe on others.[/i]

          True too.

          [i]The basis of our country, dude.[/i]

          No, the basis of our country is our constitution…which also states in its very roots that we endeavor to:

          “…establish justice, ensure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote [b]the general welfare[/b], and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity,…”

          Guess you and all the “let me do what i want” folks aren’t so patriotic after all, are ya? ME ME ME = against the founding principle of creating a more perfect union.

          [i]And you know very well that there is no group out there that is going to save us without putting forth their own selfish agendas. Junk science, emotions, and guilt are not a license to rule.[/i]

          Nope, but I think an assembled panel of people from various different parts of professional, educational and government areas could come together and make the best informed decision.

          You seem to think I want to put it in the hands of one special interest. That’s not what I want. I want government to get information from educated, credible people. Not just from PACs and SIGs and lobbyists.

          [i]Politicians are not to be trusted, which is why there are so many limits to what they can do.[/i]

          To quote Carlos Mencia: DUR DUR DURRRRRRRRR! That goes without saying. lol

          [i]If you choose to turn yourself into a shut-in out of guilt or shame, that is your choice.[/i]

          I’m not a shut-in. I just don’t think I should indulge my every whim just because I have a job and earn a paycheck. Lots of Americans work, and I have no more right than them to pollute and use resources and create refuse.

          And just because I don’t go and paruse bars for women every time I have a free minute doesn’t mean I am a shut-in.

          It means I’m not a slut like you!! lol :p j/k hehe

          [i]mold, do you run a de-humidifier to help with that? The dampness combined with heat, right? [/i]

          running a dehumidifier in florida is like the captain trying to save the titanic by scooping out water…with a Dixie cup.

          There are forms of mold here that, if they infect your lungs, you have a 75% chance of dying. Hence, why I run my AC. It keeps them from ever growing and me from being worm food 😉 lol

        • #2905725

          conserving (Tony)

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i]It depends on how it’s implemented, and how you define conserving. Almost everything I’ve seen proposed will increase the tax on fuel, which will be detrimental to the less than wealthy who are more than likely already minimizing their optional fuel usage, while allowing the likes of Al Gore to continue flaunting his hypocrisy by burning up 45,000 gallons of jet fuel every month.[/i]

          but by the same token, you say that being able to do what you want and prosper in your life is okay.

          isn’t okay for al gore to prosper too?

          [i]How do you propose to define these terms? and under what legal concept? [/i]

          those that every other proposed term has been defined under…law.

        • #2905722

          re: “I still can’t believe” (jck)

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          “I still can’t believe you and Tony espouse that it is ok for you to do whatever you want to do even if it pollutes or causes others discomfort or inconvenience.”

          If you believe I (personally) am harming you, or violating your rights, take legal action against me (personally). It’s called Due Process. Prove that I am doing something wrong before you attempt to penalize me. Otherwise, my rights are being violated.

        • #2905708

          re: “penalize me”

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          The IRS never has to file against you in court to penalize you. You should sue them.

          BTW, not everything that is wrong to do, say, or entice is part of a process of tort. It’s part of that personal responsibility thing, not legal code.

          Hence, why I guess you don’t understand it. Everything that is wrong is only what is written in a lawbook and will get you a fat settlement in court.

        • #2905666

          Okay one more

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          For Techno Rat: sorry but there’s just too much to post to here now, the focus of teh topic is long dead and people are just arguing fo rteh sake of arguing. If peopl ewere actually debating stats and figures, showing relevant issues etc. it would be different but there are a coupe here that are just a pure waste fo anyone’s time to even try and open up discussion with.

          But for you: [i]”You North Americans are all the same anyway what difference does a border make”[/i]

          You need to get outside once in a while, there is a MASSIVE difference between Canadians and Americans, as recognized worldwide, except in some parts of New Zealand I suppose.

          [i]”?As for slamming New Zealand, why? What have you ever done? ?
          How rude
          As if to say we haven?t done anything
          Do you think we are a nation of under achievers?[/i]

          No, that is just YOUR interpretation of what was said, you simply read into it what wasn’t actually there. I said, “Why, what have you done?”
          Did you do something wrong that we should all know about?
          Are you just upset that I am missing a valuable flaw in your country?

          [i]No I don?t need to list the things achieved by New Zealanders
          But the Internet is your friend[/i]

          It most certainly is, unless I spend three days talking in circles with people who simply argue due to misunderstanding what they read, not yourself in that case but some of the others that are simply tiring.

          This is so far off base onw that i am arguing fuel compenents with someone who admittedly knows nothing but insists I am wrong even when postign links to facts. Some people just have to argue for the sake of arguement, even when they have nothing relevant to contest.

        • #2905649

          Re law books

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i][inserted: Tony thinks that] Everything that is wrong is only what is written in a lawbook and will get you a fat settlement in court.[/i]

          If it’s not in the law book, it’s rightness or wrongness is a matter of non-enforcable opinion.

        • #2905646

          Rikkie, at least I can get it right

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          “People like you before the war said George Bush went to war for cheap oil.”
          People like me? No, you can search back through several thousand posts I’ve made since teh war began, I have NEVER said that it was to get cheap oil. I agree that that is a motivator for the US to get into Iraq and change things up, but not as a reson for teh war, not once in 8 years and thousands of posts. People like me? What do you know about people like me? nothing.

          [i]”Now, after the war started, you all say he did it to raise the price of oil.[/i] agsain, dreaming up things i haven’t said. I HAVE said that it is in GWB’s BEST interests to have the US pay more for oil. Yuo rely ono Arabian investments hevily, they own a large part of America in teh form of land, properties, corporations etc. The mroe money THEY havem the more they spend in America, America needs money right now, BIG TIME. The alternative is that they start trading in PetroEuros and pullign US investments for investments in their new European market. Again, you NEED Saudi money, rich Saudi’s are good investors in your country and right now that is desparately needed. This sdoesn’t mean you went to war for low priced oil and it doesn’t mean you weant to war for high priced oil. It means exactly what it says, you NEED their money right now and can’t afford for them to earn less of it.

          I HAVE seen others say it was about low priced oil, however that is senseless as this war just as any other, drives gasoline prices skyhigh. In this case due to terrorists damagign pipelines and restricting teh number of barrels the Saudis extract each day.

          Canada just had a good discussion with them about increasing production, hopefully it wont be merely 200,000 barrels per day.

          [i]”George Bush went to war for one main reason whether you agree with it or not and whether it was a good reason or not.

          George Bush started this whole thing to prevent the Middle East from being nuclear armed along with biological, chemical, etc.[/i] No he didn’t. wellalmost.

          gwb first tried to suggest he had proof that Saddam was harbouring WMD. The inspectors were successfully finishing inspections at the time and their last report was that no such metarials had been found, they were approx 6 weeks off of completing the inspections at the time.

          They had been kicked out several times by Saddam, who was retaliating at America for witholding shipments of medical supplies and food for Iraq for reidiculous amounts of time (sometimes shipments sat fo r9 months before inspection, andy perishables were destroyed, including medicicne which had expired), due to DPG insteactions.

          In order ot complete inspections, GWB met with leaders of other nations and had agreed that the USA and other allied nations would use force if necessary to COMPLETE INSPECTIONS, not to invade Iraq and topple Saddam. (This is what Kerry originally agreed to that everyone incorrectly said he flipped on when he didn’t support a full scale invasion).

          GWB removed weapoins inspectors, nto allowign them to finish and launched an invasion anyway.

          He had claimed it was due to “imminent threat from WMD”, which was complete crap, had not been proven and was in the process of being DISproven. He also claime dhe had proof that Saddam had sought out nuclear technology. His CIA members that were there to check into these claims had JUST finished repoting that Saddam had NOT been seekign teh ability to refine uranium to weapons grade material but had sought out nuclear power, which even at that time had failed and was unavailable to him.

          His speechwriter, in an interview, had said that he was instructed to leave that out and just have it that there was proof that Saddam had sought out nuclear technology. A bit misleading, but americans bought it all the same.

          Then there was undeniable proof that Saddam had WMD again, this time it was proposed by an ‘informant’ in the area nicknamed “Cueball”.

          In order to launch a full scale invasion and take focus away form Afghanistan, allies demanded more proof as they had already found out that cueball was not reliable and that he had ulterior motive for saying as much, he wanted saddam goen too.

          GWB refused to wait for mroe proof, he had support of the Americans he had mislead and was off to invade Iraq, well at least to send thousands of Americans in to die for his cause anyway.

          some people had the wherewithal to suggest doing what the allies suggested and seeking otu proof, but GWB turned Americans against one another by saying you are either with us or against us. If you wanted more confirmation, you were deemed against the US, anti-American and even a terrorist by many, especially here.

          now that the truth is seen, we can all agree that perhaps there should have been firther investigation, after looking at teh state of Afghanistan now, perhaps you should have stayed teh course there, with allies. Perhaps the allied coalition would now be in control enough to focus an allied effort on Iraq and neighboring countries.

          But we’ll never knwo becaus eyou were either with us or against us and now you are at war. Americans die all teh time for no logical reason, nobody is any safer than before Saddam was removed, nobody is any better off, yuo don’t see benefits in aAmerica, your dollar has dropped in value to become a quetsionable investment, your properties are being foreclosed all over as america just isn’t as prosperous these days due to suc hja huge deficit on the books.

          All in all a terrible move, a terrible idea all terribly executed.

          But at NO TIME AT ALL, did I say that you were going in for cheaper oil, that was said by some but sure as hell not by me.

        • #2905632

          non-enforcable opinion

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          vs what? non-enforcable crime?

          the only difference is when legislation makes it criminal, i.e. [b]legally[/b] wrong.

          because something is not criminal, does not make it right.

          and just because something is not against a written law, it doesn’t it’s not wrong.

          And the opposite is true.

          In Kentucky, you can marry a 13 year old girl. That’s legal. Is it wrong?

          Do you condone and say that it’s absolutely fine since it’s on the law books as legal marriage??

          By your way of thinking, law makes something absolutely valid or invalid.

          So, I guess child molestation is not wrong, as long as a state or county or country passes a law saying it’s alright.

          Next thing you’ll say is that gay marriage wasn’t honorable before CA actually passed a law making it a legal union.

          I rest my case.

        • #2905605

          By my way of thinking?

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i]By your way of thinking, law makes something absolutely valid or invalid.[/]

          No. Laws prohibit, or modify other laws. Right and wrong are opinions unless and until legislated or adjudicated.

          So if you think me driving 300 miles once a week to visit my mother is wrong, you can sue me in order to try to force me to cease and desist, or contact your legislator and tell him you’d like him to create a law banning a. driving 300 miles in one week; b. visiting one’s mother; or c. banning driving more than 299 miles to visit. Any one of those, or any other you can likely think up, is going to violate at least one constitutionally protected right.

        • #2905603

          nonsense

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i]No. Laws prohibit, or modify other laws. Right and wrong are opinions unless and until legislated or adjudicated.[/i]

          Laws prohibit nothing. They establish the means with which law enforcement can detain individuals, and guidelines for prosecution and sentencing in the jurisdiction’s court of law.

          And as I said before by your way of thinking, marrying and having sex with a 13 year old is alright as long as you move to Kentucky to do it. Law means okay.

        • #2905571

          Jck made a good point, though I doubt he’ll like it.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i]Laws prohibit nothing[/i]

          You’re absolutely right. Laws only provide that the government can impose consequences for certain actions. [b]That means I can do anything that I want[/b], as long as I am able to, and understanding that there may be consequences imposed.

          Glad we cleared that up. Guess I will continue to visit mom weekly until those consequences are imposed. Maybe I’ll rent a Hummer and an 8,000 lb trailer for the trip…. just because I can 🙂

        • #2905553

          I wasn’t making a point

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          I was correcting your inaccuracy :p lol

          You go ahead and rent that hummer and 8,000lb trailer. And when you can’t stop fast enough and run over someone, they will sue you. 🙂

          BTW if you have one, never take your adolescent daughter to Kentucky. I bet someone up there might think she’s “real purdy” lol

        • #2905535

          You know what they say down there…

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i]BTW if you have one, never take your adolescent daughter to Kentucky. I bet someone up there might think she’s “real purdy” lol[/i]

          … “old enough to bleed, old enough to breed.”

          By the way, Kentucky is 16, New Hampshire is 13.

          http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-6230-0.html?forumID=102&threadID=266702&messageID=2527272

        • #2905017

          Re Okay one more

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          “You North Americans are all the same anyway what difference does a border make”

          I was joking
          The Aussies would have got it

          You are lucky
          How would you like it if your nearest neighbour was a member of the commonwealth and gave you a hard time all the time

          ?As for slamming New Zealand, why? What have you ever done??

          Yes I did know what you meant
          But where is the humour in that

          ?Did you do something wrong that we should all know about??
          I suppose you expect a confession
          Do your own research

          ?Are you just upset that I am missing a valuable flaw in your country??
          No your not here so its all fine
          Poor Canada
          Diamonds can have valuable flaws

          The real trouble is Oz
          Talking to you is just too much trouble for most
          I have talked to others about the topic but with you it is pointless
          Why?
          Because you have a reading comprehension problem
          Which is the cause of the argument at the start of this discussion

          Now why don?t you try to convince me that you are not doing it on purpose?
          It would fit with your rants to the Americans
          You know the anti ones

          I admitted nothing as far as my knowledge of fuel components goes
          You assumed
          That was your mistake

        • #2905013

          Re Re law books To Tony

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          ?If it’s not in the law book, it’s rightness or wrongness is a matter of non-enforcable opinion.?

          It is sad how many people base right and wrong on the law and what they can get away with

          One of the things I say is

          If you can not tell your family and friends what you have done
          You should not have done it in the first place

          So many young people are totally clueless when it comes to morals
          I guess its why so many get in trouble at home and with the law

          This is off topic
          But I wanted to let you know I agree

          Steve

        • #2904963

          Kentucky

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          Used to be 13 with the consent of one parent or in case of pregnancy, when I was in college and took my sociology work. Of course, that was the early 90s. Laws change.

          Maybe the laws will change for automobile mileage too before gas hits $10 a gallon.

          Added: Used to be in Texas it was 16 with one parent consenting, but it looks as though you can be married as early as 14 now.

          What a world.

        • #2904958

          For the record, Tech

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          I’ve never thought or said a bad thing about New Zealand. In fact, the few people I’ve met from there are quite pleasant, polite, and love a pint as much as myself.

          Maybe I should try to move there. I might get along with your people better than I do my own.

          Wouldn’t be the first time I’ve discovered that much.

        • #2904955

          If (TRat)

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          [i]It is sad how many people base right and wrong on the law and what they can get away with[/i]

          that’s what you think I’m doing, you’re incorrect. I’m just saying if it’s not the law, you cannot force your version of right and wrong down other people’s throats… Just because YOU think something is wrong doesn’t mean everybody else does. Even God doesn’t FORCE us to follow His law. He would like us to CHOOSE the right path, but He doesn’t force us.

          If it’s just a statement, I agree.

        • #2904929

          RE: Texas

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          Recent news illuminates a growing problem… government run amuck!

          This country has the greatest variety of culture (where a lot of one’s sense of right and wrong comes from) in the world. [b]That really is this country’s greatest resource[/b]. It allows people to compare what they believe with what their neighbor believes side-by-side and can see what really counts… the results. You see what your neighbor is doing right and he sees what you’re doing right and change will occur… naturally… no force required. We ALL have the opportunity to lead by example. Our results will determine how well we do that. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

          But our government has become a hindrance to that. Powerful people of a time have used the influence they had at that particular time to write down their version of right and wrong and gave the government the power to force it down everyone’s throat. They’re forcing vastly different peoples into ever narrowing categories for [i]their[/i] convenience and it is creating strife and dissension. They are inhibiting progress (ever notice it’s a lot easier to enact a law than to remove it?).

          We need to take our country back. I hope it can be done peacefully.

        • #2904891

          The worst thing I can do to my country…

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          is to leave it and take my tax monies away from them.

          I can get dual citizenship somewhere else that I believe holds more in line with my personal values, e.g.- Ireland or Scotland.

          I can still maintain my citizenship in the USA and then at 67 draw that Social Security that I’ve been paying into since I was 11.

          But, I can always go somewhere else and be a dual citizen and be resident there and pay their taxes. Hence, taking my money and taxes away from the USA is the best protest I can do.

          Not contributing to a government who won’t represent me properly is the best way I can think of to truly make a point.

          And, it’s something I am still considering to this very day.

        • #2906949

          You dont’t need dual citizenship

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          Make that MAY NOT need, I don’t know how accessible other nations are with a US passport; I was warned against getting it, when I considered becoming a US citizen some years back, due to my need for prolonged overseas travel. Right now I can go to just about anywhere in Europe, India etc. without need for Visas and constantr updates if my stay is prolonged. I just don’t really know how it would work in your case, as a US citizen.

          You can apply for permanent resident status. That way you are still an American citizen, an immigrant, but pay taxes and reap befeits of the country you move to not to America. Of ocurse you would still be entitled to collect our pension fund that you paid into the USA, but in the Britain (not sure about Scotland) you would get your OAP before your US social security kicked in, then you would collect both OAP from Scotland and Social Security from the USA.

          I don’t know if it works so easily for a US citizen, in my case I was British and relocating to a British Commonwealth country. Still had to go through a 6 months screening, wait, blood, urine samples and other doctors clearances etc. But its worth it. As much as I LOVE England, the convenience of Eruope (going to a show in Germany is just as easy as driving to Seattle from here, but cheaper)there is no place on Earth I would rather look at and spend time in than BC. Not the cities and teh Lower Mainland crap, I can do withotu that, but it only takes a half hour to get to a reasonably remote lake or mountain to really get away and soak in the scenery.

          Yesterday I went to a local beach, with perhaps 6 people spread out across the whole area, had a few beers with friends, gazed at the ocean, watched cruise ships passing through, a couple of seaplanes going to the Island and kite surfers out on the inlet.

          At the time we were less than 5 minutes from the downtown core, yet you would feel like you were hours away from it all.
          No people, no noise just beer, buddies and beach.

          gotta love BC.
          http://lh4.ggpht.com/_JjmJKibaWQ8/Rg8I-Lw0DLI/AAAAAAAAAvU/CYx6m4YV1wg/IMG_9346.JPG

        • #2904600

          Getting dual citizenship

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          It just would make it easier for me. If I were living in Scotland or Ireland, travelling around Europe with an EU ID would be much more easy than a US passport.

          As pensions go, I’d love to move across and work 15 years or so more and get a 2nd government pension. I don’t trust the private pensions here.

          I’ve worked enough years now (total 20 I think? and I am not even 40) paying into Social Security that I qualify for a nice monthly pension at age 62. Given the US dollar gets strength back against the British Pound, I could live quite nicely outside of Glasgow or Edinburgh in a little cottage and walk to the local for pints on 2 retirement pensions.

          I think if I wait and start drawing my SSI at 70, I get a few hundred a month more. But, I’d forego the extra money to draw earlier. I never know when I’ll keel over dead.

        • #2904428

          When did that happen?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          In know the US dolar has been a lot stronger than the Canadian for as long as I can remember but when was it strong against teh UK Pound? The pound has always been double and a bit on Canadian money, and US dollars up a fair bit but nothing close to that difference.

          My residuals and UK income go into a UK bank, when I am over there, I have money without taking a beating on canadian dollars that way, also a bit of a tax benefit, it costs a lot to get that money into my Canadian bank.

          But Us money going back to England, especially social security can’t be enough is it? It helps but I don’t think it’s much to look forward to, sorry, I’m not trying to downplay your plan (it sounds great, it really does) but I just thought the reality was different.

          In conytrast, my mother collects her pittance of a Canadian pension but also had worked a BIT in the UK but was manily a housewife and according to UK law is entitled to pension based on money my dad paid in while working. They recognize the role of a mother as being part of a family unit, when the father pays into OAP, it is credited to him and his wife. I don’t THINK the same goes here.

          So she collects on my dad’s pension from England, which is a pittane but converted ot Canadian and added to the Canadian OAP helps. I couldn’t live on it at all, I make great money now but still grind and scratch it out to get by (I like to live an expensive lifestyle sometimes).

          Then again, with your penchant for musicals, I am sure that Rogers and Hammerstein will take care of you well into your golden years. 😉

          Best of luck with that plan, I definitely support you all the way. In fact I’ll take the train up island to have a few pints of the black stuff with you and laugh about the latest gang of young punks on TR.

          Sorry I almost forgot, jerk, bastard, loser, retard, clown..

          Just giving Dan some crap to complain about and submit as spam to Tammy (sorry Tammy). He’s playing rent-a-moderator in his mom’s new heels. 😉

        • #2904414

          ……. :0 OOPS!

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          oops…posted in the wrong spot lol

        • #2904411

          Sue them and get lots of money

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          Then you can buy an stretch Escalade with 24″ spinners on it and look REALLY cool!

          Those guys just slay me, we get them here too, wannabe gansta’s. It’s so comical to see the money they pi$$ away on garbage and then they get offended when you point and laugh at them. Quit making such a spectacle of yourself if you don’t want poeople to laugh at you then.

          Anyway, ncie to see I am not the only one stuck in discussions with people that just don’t get it no matter how often you explain yourself.

        • #2904405

          currency and comedy

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          At one point…although quite some time ago, the US Dollar was stronger against the pound by far…I think $1.20-some…as compared to almost $2 now.

          If it was just $1.20-some, I’d be okay with the 2nd pension from the UK for sure. Like I said, I don’t need a car if I live in Scotland or Ireland or even England. The public transport is fine for me to use. I travelled that way for 18 days in 2006. Never had an issue one with getting around…other than the half eaten hotdog i almost sat on boarding the bus in Ireland.

          Too bad the USA doesn’t put as much emphasis on public transportation. We could probably cut our oil consumption by 30% if we’d all learn to ride together peacefully and respectfully with one another.

          As for the excesses and ludicrousy of it all:

          Yeah, I laugh at people who drop $3000 on a set of wheels for their car. Just amazing.

          Of course, it really burns me when it moves from being silly waste to being harmful and willfully irresponsible.

          Hence, why I would move to Ireland any day of the week…or even Holland for that matter. I like the idea of progress in society being more than just how much stuff you can accumulate and how fancy it is.

          I just guess there’s something charming about simplicity and modesty to me that most other Americans don’t get.

        • #2904380

          Hey , what have you done with JCK?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          I know what you mean, pride doesn’t have to be worn on your sleeve. YOu know hwo proud teh Irish, Scottish and British are, however you don’t hear abotu it much and most wealthy people, (usually ANCIENT money) doesn’t really APPEAR to be or have need to show you they are wealthy.

          Ireland is a fantasic country, eve being British I can really appreciate it there. I wish i had spent more time there but have only been in for a few days at a time, something I’ll have to change in future. Scotland is teh same to me, just SO interesting. Maybe that’s my attraction to Europe, so much history and cultural diversity just makes it all so interesting. People are all the same really though, you go to Germany, and everyone shares a similar mindset and disposition, same in most European countries, they just get on with it.

          Of course there is major class separation in England, but I find it’s just old money that doesn’t like to mix with new money. Those are usually the snobs we see portrayed on TV so often here, the pinky finger up, ‘spot of tea’ stereotype that nobody actually says in real life.

          Oh well, I hope your wiches come true (you can always make your dreams come true if you want it bad enough) and you live your life in happiness wherever you choose to plant yourself until you are planted. 🙂

          It would be fun actually talking to jck in Europe, a neat twist on things. Hell that’d be enough to get me to move home too.

        • #2904363

          I got back here…unfortunately (meaning work lol)

          by jck ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          I’m alright. I just expected to get sick…the shrimp in my fried rice tasted kinda undercooked. Guess those Chinese like their boiled/sauted shrimp that way sometimes lol

          I guess I was just raised different than a lot of Americans, Oz. It’s weird. Maybe it’s that I was taught to care about others more than myself, whereas lots of Americans grew up with the “you gotta look out for number one” influence.

          My parents were never like that, and never told me anything more to make sure i stayed healthy and be safe…not to have all that I could no matter what the cost to others.

          As for trying to get to Europe, I have done that. Even used friends over there as references.

          Seems that the EU has ruined my chances of getting across, since they have to (at least in Ireland with FAS) post a job for 4 weeks min for all qualified EU citizens to apply.

          Since there’s 360M Americans…and 460M EUers…I have a better chance at jobs in the USA.

          Guess I’ll go about keeping on applying. Never hurts. Maybe one day, I’ll get across and sit and write stories about my trips to pubs in Dublin to listen to bands, or going to the pubs in the countryside to listen to the traditional song be played.

          I’ve done both. I had the time of my life. Honestly didn’t want to leave Ireland either time.

        • #2906697

          Oops. Posted in wrong place.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          .

        • #2906687

          Best of luck!

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          Sorry abotu the typos, didn’t use FF for that post, FF has a spell checker, I haven’t installed the IE spell check though.

          Just watch out for the wiches! 😀

        • #2906480

          Re If (TRat) (ATN Tony)

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Ahh sit on your hands

          “It is sad how many people base right and wrong on the law and what they can get away with”
          No that was not about you
          Yes it was a statement

          There is an argument that can be made
          Its called promotion though murder

          It goes something like this
          Knock off your boss
          Make sure your competition gets blamed for the murder

          There are some things that most people think are wrong

          Everyone has had the noisy neighbours who like to party until the wee hours
          As long as the volume is below a certain level there is nothing that can be done
          But that does not help the poor buggers who have to work the next day

          Down south there was an old guy who had served in WWII
          He had the bad luck of living next door to a vineyard
          One day the vineyard decides to put in a bird scarer
          It was a gas-powered gun that made a lot of noise without shooting anything out of the barrel

          Anyway
          Every time it went off the poor old guy flashbacked to the war
          The gun was within the law so there was nothing anyone could do about it

          That is from memory so sorry if I got some of it wrong

        • #2908782

          One thing

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Responsibilty

          You forgot

          People have to be offered a choice for them to be able to make a decision
          Some will need to have the choices pointed out
          They usually complain when they are given no choice or an unfair choice

          So hows it going in Canada
          Everyone cutting back are they?

          Shame on you and your country selling oil to someone else
          That is exactly the problem

          You are enabling the yanks
          Bad Bad people

        • #2905976

          Cutting back

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to One thing

          Actually yes, there is a massive awareness and cutback on resource waste. It has become a way of life for most now, one which is rarely even considered now. As for driving and gasoline, the city is full of bicycle commuters that were once drivers, our sky train expansion has kept several hundred thousand cars off the streets every rush hour, it is actually getting much better now. Thank you for your considerate thoughts.

          We have a reliance on US money and resource sharing. We ship them grains, they pay us money. We ship them lumber, they pay us money. We ship them fish, they pay us money. about the only fair trade off is power, they can’t shut down nuclear generators in California, so we buy their power at night and shut down our own hydro dams. In they day, we sell our hydro to California to make up for eh slack in their nuclear plants. It only sicks when they use too much power in the day and WE get a water warning. BC has more lakes and rivers than pretty much anywhere, we have massive glacial run offs and an abundance of water, even when there’s a shortage warning, we still have full reservoirs. The problem is they are saving that water to run hydro to California in the daytime. Shucks.
          Actually our government has bent over enough that the US corporations just come and help themselves now, they don’t even pay the tariffs they imposed and they’ve put our own forestry and fishing industries out of business. niiiice.

          yup, bad, bad people. But I didn’t vote, I’m not Canadian, I’m just in it for the nice view.

        • #2905949

          Re Cutting back

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Cutting back

          Good to read the stuff about conservation
          We have a lot of the same things happening here

          But some of our city councils were very stupid in the past
          Public transport is a joke
          Auckland our largest city has no subway
          What makes it worse is our cities are very large in size but small in population

          One day they will go up instead of out
          Well I can hope

          We have no nuclear power plants
          Our main supply is hydro electric
          We use to have coal and geothermal power stations

          We are expected to have power cuts later this year
          The reason is low levels of water in the Dam lakes
          Funny thing is we have had rain every day for about the last week

          In the past we had cars that were converted to run on CNG (methane) and LPG (butane)
          My car at the time ran on CNG
          But most of the tanks have gone over seas now

          Its is a shame we have more than enough in this country
          But we still import so much

          Let me guess you come from the UK

        • #2905617

          NO fair, you said “one thing”

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Cutting back

          Now there’s another?
          I don’t mind reading your comments, I have just grown so tired of this topic as it is way off track now.

          There are people who admit to knowing nothing, that simply contest facts for the sake of argument, it happens here a lot and yoo just have to leave it behind after a while.

          Yes UK, originally.

        • #2905008

          UK I knew it all along

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Cutting back

          Now what is the favourite English past time?

          Nope not soccer something else
          Cricket? No there is something else

          Well its not important
          You know the answer anyway

          Ps don?t get smart and say sex the rest of the world knows you lot hardly ever get it

        • #2905881

          by your own account

          by jck ·

          In reply to Pretty much

          [i]As this pertains to the subject, that means suing or taxing or fining a business is stupid, as all of the punishment is borne by the consumers, who are doing nothing except buying perfectly legal products or services in order to live their perfectly normal lives, and eventually, at least some of those consumers are going to react, in some cases fiercely, to what they see as blatant unfairness. Just be prepared is all I’m saying, because this is going to get dangerously close to many (more than you even have an inkling of) people’s
          definition of enough! [/i]

          you don’t want to tax a business?

          how do you pay for police then? go down and write a check to them? and your firemen? or roads maintenance? or your kid’s school?

          taxing a business is sensible to maintain that “infrastructure” you mentioned.

          Fining business for anything illegal or improper is the only way to make them pay. What else do you do? Take away a gold star off the board of life for them?

          BTW, the premise of “each should be responsible for his own health(care)” is a predicate to making healthcare cost based on income. Otherwise, you’d be dooming everyone who couldn’t make an average living to certain death if they catch pneumonia, mononucleosis, etc.

          Are you saying the poor should just die off, Tony?

          That’s real human and intelligent.

          BTW…if I were to sit and drink around your kid(s), it would not harm them or you in any way.

          Can I do that? Swearing in front of them? Telling dirty jokes?

          My…I am starting to like this liberation thing. I think I’ll go get me some crack and a hooker tonight, since that doesn’t hurt anyone else. lol

        • #2905829

          You’re right.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to by your own account

          [i]you don’t want to tax a business?[/i]

          I don’t Every cent of corporate tax is paid by the consumers, the only possible reason for the continuation of this sham is the “taking advantage” of the ignorance of consumers.

          Taxing consumers directly will allow them to more accurately see what their government is costing them, perhaps allowing them to apply appropriate pressures to bring those costs down. Companies also have to pay someone to figure out all the tax codes and everything, and the cost of THAT is also included in the cost of the product or service.

          [i]Fining business for anything illegal or improper is the only way to make them pay. What else do you do? Take away a gold star off the board of life for them?[/i]

          Companies don’t do wrong things, PEOPLE do! Fining a company doesn’t put the punishment where it belongs. The fine, like taxes, was included in the cost of the product or service and passed along to the consumer. When you fine a company, or sue a company, or tax a company, you are fining, suing, or taxing the consumer!

          [i]BTW, the premise of “each should be responsible for his own health(care)” is a predicate to making healthcare cost based on income.[/i]

          No, the cost to fix a broken leg should not be different for a rich person than for a poor person.

          [i]Otherwise, you’d be dooming everyone who couldn’t make an average living to certain death if they catch pneumonia, mononucleosis, etc.[/i]

          We can bring the cost of health care down without making one person responsible for the costs of another (there may be an argument for SOME exceptions). For example, if you choose to smoke, you do NOT have the right to impose the costs of your cancer treatments on me.

          The REASON costs are so high is that we’ve lost all sense of personal responsibility. (“The insurance will pay for it.”) Bring back the responsibility, and costs will fall into line. I would also recommend banning companies from paying for employees’ health insurance. Better to give THAT money to the employees, and let them buy their own. This will increase competition in the insurance industry, bringing down prices.

          [i]Are you saying the poor should just die off, Tony?[/i]

          The poor die all the time. I have the right to CHOOSE to help do something about that, but I have no OBLIGATION to help anyone except for the ones I brought into the world.

          [i]BTW…if I were to sit and drink around your kid(s), it would not harm them or you in any way.

          Can I do that? Swearing in front of them? Telling dirty jokes?[/i]

          Depends on where you are. If you are on MY property, you will behave as I require, or you will leave or be ejected. If you’re on TV, I can turn the set off or change the channel. If you are in public, I can simply walk away from behavior or speech I do not approve of.

          [i]I think I’ll go get me some crack and a hooker tonight, since that doesn’t hurt anyone else.[/i] [edit: fix italics]

          Go for it. I think drugs and prostitution should be legal for adults. I’m not going to pay to have your crotch critters exterminated though 🙂

        • #2905813

          all I can really say is then…

          by jck ·

          In reply to You’re right.

          [i]The poor die all the time. I have the right to CHOOSE to help do something about that, but I have no OBLIGATION to help anyone except for the ones I brought into the world.[/i]

          I really hope and pray you never lose your job, lose your insurance, and have your child(ren) get sick.

          My parents (both working) had my brother get sick. Even with medical insurance, his brain cancer ate through the maximums.

          He died, even with insurance. And, my parents were $110k in the hole for over 20 years.

          I hope it doesn’t take something like that for you to see having a common good for everyone is not a bad thing.

          I wish you well. You need it with desires to run a country like that.

        • #2905659

          Do you really believe you have the right

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to all I can really say is then…

          to impose costs which “others” have no control over onto those “others”. By what theory is it OK for you to, for example, have children and impose their health care costs onto others?

          Why then, would not those “others” have a right to limit if and how many children you could have, in order to control their costs?

          What? you don’t think that’s reasonable? Well that’s the problem when you get rid of personal responsibility and replace it with mob rule. When you vote to take away liberties that you don’t like from some people, you give them the right to take away liberties they don’t like from you. Your ox just hasn’t been gored… yet!

        • #2904820

          what I can do

          by jck ·

          In reply to all I can really say is then…

          [i][Do you really believe] you have the right to impose costs which “others” have no control over onto those “others”. By what theory is it OK for you to, for example, have children and impose their health care costs onto others?[/i]

          Do I have the right? Of course not. That is the function of government to establish that system. Not me.

          By what theory is it okay? The Preamble to the Constitution of the United States.

          Let me remind you exactly what it says:

          [i]We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, [b]promote the general Welfare[/b], and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.[/i]

          Read it…that’s the principle that our country was [b]FOUNDED ON[/b]: promoting the general welfare of the country.

          If you don’t like it, I invite you to move to another country. But, don’t act like going against the constitution of my nation is okay for you to do because you decide it’s what interests you most.

          [i]Why then, would not those “others” have a right to limit if and how many children you could have, in order to control their costs?[/i]

          Because I have no kids. You can’t limit what’s not there.

          Plus, I can (and just might) move to another country at some point in the future. I’d be glad to take my 10’s of thousands per year I pay in all sorts of taxes to another country where I am better represented and accepted.

          [i]What? you don’t think that’s reasonable? Well that’s the problem when you get rid of personal responsibility and replace it with mob rule. When you vote to take away liberties that you don’t like from some people, you give them the right to take away liberties they don’t like from you. Your ox just hasn’t been gored… yet! [/i]

          You’ve never shown me an example yet of how allowing personal freedom to enter the stage of extreme materialism and wasteful excess is a personal responsibility. As I said before, it’s personal [b]indulgence[/b] and not freedom or liberty.

          And my ox won’t ever have to be gored, because i don’t fatten my ox up as a target for being butchered like some folks.

          You espouse that “personal freedom” and “liberty” means “do whatever I want and when I want as long as it is not illegal”.

          Well, I can tell you all day “I think you’re a m*****f***er.” and “I think you like to have sex with kids.” and that’s totally legal. Why? Cause, it’s my right to express my opinion of you. And, that’s constitutionally protected.

          However, I don’t think either thing. And, I have more [b]personal responsibility[/b] over myself than to act like a social retard and do obtuse, irresponsible, and mindlessly heinous actions.

          I’m an adult, and I do my best to act like one, and not like some spoiled kid who can do or say what they want just because they have some wealth or gift others don’t.

          Again, I wish you well. Allowing personal freedom to lead to anarchy and extremist activities is what has brought down many a great empire.

        • #2907015

          Ok.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to all I can really say is then…

          [i]As I said before, it’s personal indulgence and not freedom or liberty.[/i]

          Is it a “personal indulgence” to have a child? How about 9 children? Should the government then limit this?

          Does the definition of “personal indulgence” ever change? With the times, perhaps?

          [i]You’ve never shown me an example yet of how allowing personal freedom to enter the stage of extreme materialism and wasteful excess is a personal responsibility.[/i]

          Well, I do not presume to be qualified to force a definition of those things on anyone but myself, but here’s a real-world example of what I’m talking about…

          We get 10 sick-days a year. A few people abused their sick leave, and management wanted to do something about it, so a couple of years ago, they instituted a new policy where days after the 5th day are paid at 70%. The result, everyone is being treated like they’re sick leave abusers, even though the majority haven’t done anything wrong.

          I call it the “Little Johnny got caught chewing gum in class so EVERYONE has to stay in from recess” form of legislation. It’s abhorrent!

          [i]And my ox won’t ever have to be gored, because i don’t fatten my ox up as a target for being butchered like some folks.[/i]

          Ah, but someone may have a personal grudge against skinny oxen, and convince his friends to petition their legislators to outlaw them.

          “[i]You espouse that “personal freedom” and “liberty” means “do whatever I want and when I want as long as it is not illegal”. [/i]

          Not quite. Change “is not illegal” to “does not harm another person or violate another person’s rights, with determinations to be made through due process, as is guaranteed us via the fifth amendment (‘… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;…’)”, and you’d have it.

          [i]However, I don’t think either thing. And, I have more personal responsibility over myself than to act like a social retard and do obtuse, irresponsible, and mindlessly heinous actions.[/i]

          So you’re allowed to determine your “personal responsibility” for yourself, but others are not? Are you trying to take over as dictator or king?

          Maybe your first act should be telling Al Gore to stop using more fuel in a week than 10 average people do in an entire year! (or is that OK because he’s buying carbon credits?)

        • #2906987

          personal responsibility

          by jck ·

          In reply to all I can really say is then…

          [i]Is it a “personal indulgence” to have a child? How about 9 children? Should the government then limit this? [/i]

          only in the sense that if you can not provide for the welfare and health of the child, it is taken away.

          if a woman wants to blow her uterus out by havin 50 kids, let her. no one made her. just like no one makes you smoke.

          [i]Does the definition of “personal indulgence” ever change? With the times, perhaps? [/i]

          yes…as does personal responsibility evidently.

          [i]Well, I do not presume to be qualified to force a definition of those things on anyone but myself,[/i]

          but you’ll force everyone else in the world to have to accept that the minority of others pollute the world unnecessarily for everyone else…just because…they have the money to afford the “personal responsibility” of having something detrimental to the quality of life for others?

          [i]but here’s a real-world example of what I’m talking about…[/i]

          ok

          [i]We get 10 sick-days a year. A few people abused their sick leave, and management wanted to do something about it, so a couple of years ago, they instituted a new policy where days after the 5th day are paid at 70%. The result, everyone is being treated like they’re sick leave abusers, even though the majority haven’t done anything wrong.[/i]

          I’d say to contact the US Department of Labor. That sounds like unfair workplace practice, as well it violates your agreement as a (I assume you are) salaried/exempt computer professional by law. They can not dock your pay because you took sick leave by law. Go to http://www.dol.gov and check it out. I believe you all have a case for a federal suit, if they don’t change their policy.

          [i]I call it the “Little Johnny got caught chewing gum in class so EVERYONE has to stay in from recess” form of legislation. It’s abhorrent![/i]

          And, my first name is John and I find your stereotyping “John”s as miscreants offensive! :p lol

          [i]Ah, but someone may have a personal grudge against skinny oxen, and convince his friends to petition their legislators to outlaw them.[/i]

          Sounds like you have a self-esteem issue hating my skinny ox :p lol

          [i]Not quite. Change “is not illegal” to “does not harm another person or violate another person’s rights, with determinations to be made through due process, as is guaranteed us via the fifth amendment (‘… nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;…’)”, and you’d have it.[/i]

          So…driving that super inefficient or higher than most at spewing exhaust and atmosphere polluting contaminates oversized vehicle does not infringe on my right to have reasonably clean air? How do you figure?

          [i]So you’re allowed to determine your “personal responsibility” for yourself, but others are not? Are you trying to take over as dictator or king?[/i]

          No, I have common sense. And, I don’t think that personal responsibility means “just taking care of me”. I think it means “making sure I am doing right in every way I reasonably can”.

          Buying a Humvee when all you need is a Volkswagen Jetta isn’t a personal responsibility. That’s hubris and self-indulgence and vanity-fed egotism.

          And, allowing that kind of selfish materialism to be a staple of “The American Way of Life” actually contributes to inflicting increased duress on people with respiratory ailments as well as causing other detrimental environmental factors.

          But, I guess they should just suffer because they are genetically inferior.

          [i]Maybe your first act should be telling Al Gore to stop using more fuel in a week than 10 average people do in an entire year! (or is that OK because he’s buying carbon credits?) [/i]

          Actually if I met Al Gore I’d commend him on his work to bring environmental causes to the forefront for debate and study.

          But, I would definitely ask him why he and Tipper have not down-sized since all their children are now out of the house and they no longer need a huge home.

          As well, i’d ask him why he hasn’t put a large wind farm at his home since he is in an area that he could derive wind power from most of the year.

          I’d also ask him what kind of car he uses, and why he wasn’t on the list with people like Jamie Lee Curtis and Christoper Guest to get one of the new hydrogen fuel cell cars if he’s such a proponent of reducing eliminating fossil fuel use.

          Trust me…I don’t let anyone off easy just because they talk good talk.

        • #2906947

          Nope,

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to all I can really say is then…

          [i]That sounds like unfair workplace practice, as well it violates your agreement as a (I assume you are) salaried/exempt computer professional by law.[/i]

          I am not management. I am under the bargaining unit, and the union agreed to it (even though I refused to join the union, I am still bound by their agreements, and they get a portion of their dues from me as a “fair share payment”).

          [i]So…driving that super inefficient or higher than most at spewing exhaust and atmosphere polluting contaminates oversized vehicle does not infringe on my right to have reasonably clean air?[/i]

          … to be determined by due process!

          [i]Buying a Humvee when all you need is a Volkswagen Jetta isn’t a personal responsibility.[/i]

          Now you’re talking about socialism…. Equality through cutting off the legs of anyone who dares stand up. Should we outlaw everything that you decide is not “all you need”? What then, would be the point of existence? Are the earth’s resources really so used up that you have to start rationing them? This was the point I was making about the children. If you believe the resources are in that bad of shape, then you must agree that from now on, anyone having even one child violates the rights of everyone else. Are you prepared to do something about that? I don’t think you are.

        • #2904563

          we already hashed that

          by jck ·

          In reply to all I can really say is then…

          [i]I am not management. I am under the bargaining unit, and the union agreed to it (even though I refused to join the union, I am still bound by their agreements, and they get a portion of their dues from me as a “fair share payment”).[/i]

          That makes sense…contractual obligation. You agreed to give up that right, which means you’re not exempt.

          [i]… to be determined by due process![/i]

          Nah, because “The American Way of Life” nowadays is about selfishness and ego and materialism. We pursue the unnecessary out of vanity and desire to be better than the other guy for self-promotion and status, rather than to improve ourselves to make a
          better me and we.

          Hence, why I have looked for several years now at jobs in Europe. People there seem to have a real understanding of personal responsibility…that it’s not just to self and family…but to your neighbors, town, county, country, and world. And, they seem to be more grounded as a whole.

          At least, when they’re not at football matches. lol

          [i]Now you’re talking about socialism…. Equality through cutting off the legs of anyone who dares stand up. Should we outlaw everything that you decide is not “all you need”? What then, would be the point of existence? Are the earth’s resources really so used up that you have to start rationing them? This was the point I was making about the children. If you believe the resources are in that bad of shape, then you must agree that from now on, anyone having even one child violates the rights of everyone else. Are you prepared to do something about that? I don’t think you are. [/i]

          No. See, you’re wrong there. Socialism makes every live at the same social level. I would not restrict your income, ability to study, what food you could buy. I would just make life different.

          And, change is evidently something you and jdclyde fear worse than a case of herpes.

          And as I said before, I have no children. Moot point.

          How many do you have? If I become dictator, are you ready to let me take them away? Give them to Madonna to raise?

          Fact is, you make the assumption that the Earth’s resources are anyone’s to do with as they wish.

          And in essence, your ideology of being able to do with the world as you wish and just going out and using and taking whatever you need because it will give you what you want…is just as bad as me finding the bag of money and not turning it in.

          You, sir, are taking as much of something as you want when it does not really belong to you.

          That is so selfish. It’s as though you think that your paycheck entitles you to do anything with something that doesn’t wholly belong to you…including doing things that fulfill your enjoyment but unnecessarily and negatively impact people around you…both near and far.

          I don’t set what others can do. I am fully aware of that. I know I can not change it. I wish I could. Things would be a bit different if I ran the world. For one, I’d already live in the Irish countryside and walk or take the bus or train or hire a taxi everywhere. No need for a car at all.

          But, I think it is in the best interest of the [b]general welfare[/b] (there’s that darn phrase from the constitution again…jeez) of our country environmentally, economically, and socially, to be more prudent and [b]responsible[/b] with how we use our resources and those we acquire from other countries.

          While your view seems to be the “oh hell…it doesn’t matter…as long as I’m happy and having fun” point of view.

          The day they make a 35 mpg Humvee, I’ll have no problem with it. I doubt that will ever happen. Even when gas is $6.

          But the fact is, too many people have no idea of the word “need” really means, and too often confuse it with “desire” or “want”.

          It’s nice that you wanna drive your kid around in an Escalade, but the fact is it’s spewing out more pollutants than what a Kia Sorento would and does the same job, and that just screams selfishness and lack of respect and concern for how you affect your neighbors, fellow citizens, and the world in general.

          If I spray paint a wall or pee in the street, I get arrested for it.

          You drive a huge tank of a vehicle that pollutes more and contributes to damaging the world around you and decreasing enjoyment of that world for the people in your area, and that is okay because it’s what you want…you get to go on your merry way because bigger is better in America.

          So, can you please explain to me in definitive terms how again it is your right to unnecessarily contribute to diminishing the quality of life for me, your neighbors, your country, etc., all in the name of your desire to have a bigger, fancier car that you can brag about…when supposedly personal responsibility is an exercised quality, and is supposedly in practice and in place and used by Americans today?

          I think you’re very wrong. Personal responsibility here has gone to the wayside in most peoples’ lives in lieu of self-indulgence and vanity and lack of respect for anyone’s needs other than one’s self.

          That’s why I am an advocate of government finding qualified, intelligent, educated, sensible people to research and inform them of everything that our modernization and industrialization is doing and negatively impacting everything around us near and far.

          Then, government needs to set limits and guidelines and rules that will make us more [b]personally responsible[/b], since most Americans are too busy with thinking only of themself rather than to reflect and think and plan and do the best they can.

          But…you’re right. People like you and jd should pray I never become dictator. I’d make life different, and that would probably so hurt you to have to change.

          Skoda and Citroen and Tatu would become staple names in this country as passenger vehicles…rather than Humvee and Escalade and Navigator.

          Oh well, I’ve written long enough. I actually have to go do some research now.

        • #2904453

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to all I can really say is then…

          [i]Nah, because “The American Way of Life” nowadays is about selfishness and ego and materialism.[/i]

          Who says? Someone on TV or the newspaper?

          [i]We pursue the unnecessary out of vanity and desire to be better than the other guy for self-promotion and status, rather than to improve ourselves to make a better me and we.[/i]

          I think you speak for the minority (plus your hubris in thinking you have the right to determine what’s “necessary” or “better” for someone else; unless, of course, you’re paying for it).

          [i]Hence, why I have looked for several years now at jobs in Europe.[/i]

          Good luck with that…. truly!

          [i]No. See, you’re wrong there. Socialism makes every live at the same social level. I would not restrict your income, ability to study, what food you could buy. I would just make life different.[/i]

          Oh? You said elsewhere that we should be “living by the minimum” or something to that effect. and implied that “personal indulgences” were bad. So if you’re not going to limit income, what is the excess for? Taxes? Paying for other people’s “living by the minimum” (you know… the people whose job was making other people’s “personal indulgences” who are now unemployed because you made their work product illegal). If you can’t buy anything with it, what’s the incentive to earn it? Why do harder jobs if you’re not going to derive any additional benefit from it? (OMG I just realized… [b]jck wants to unionize the whole damned country!!!![/b])

          [i]And as I said before, I have no children. Moot point.[/i]

          By saying it is moot, you prove that it isn’t. You display your own self-centeredness and assume that everyone is like you.

          [i]How many do you have?[/i]

          One of blood, dozens by advice.

          [i]If I become dictator, are you ready to let me take them away?[/i]

          You can try…

          [i]Fact is, you make the assumption that the Earth’s resources are anyone’s to do with as they wish.[/i]

          As long as you do not harm another or violate their rights…

          [i]And in essence, your ideology of being able to do with the world as you wish and just going out and using and taking whatever you need because it will give you what you want…is just as bad as me finding the bag of money and not turning it in.[/i]

          I cannot do with “the world” as I wish, but I can damned sure do with “my property” as I wish (as long as I do not harm…). The bag of money is not your property, so it’s not the same at all.

          [More after lunch]

          [i]But, I think it is in the best interest of the general welfare (there’s that darn phrase from the constitution again…jeez) of our country environmentally, economically, and socially, to be more prudent and responsible with how we use our resources and those we acquire from other countries. [/i]

          Regardless of what YOU think, the constitution also says the government cannot deprive anyone of life liberty or property without [b]due process [/b] “(there’s that darn phrase from the constitution again…jeez)”.

          That means that you nor anyone else can arbitrarily decide what is “necessary” or “unnecessary” or “detrimental to the general welfare” unless you prove it and prove that the public interest is more important than the individual right. You’re going to have a pretty tough time eliminating “indulgences” that way, since the courts have already ruled, for example, that states can take property from people and give it to developers to sell more of these indulgences to the public (and just think of all the pollution they’ll make driving to these new malls… HARMING people who have to BREATHE…) By your way of thinking, all highways should be torn down, because they encourage people to (gasp!) DRIVE!

          [i]While your view seems to be the “oh hell…it doesn’t matter…as long as I’m happy and having fun” point of view.[/i]

          I don’t have the right to do ANYTHING that harms another person (defense against them harming me excepted) or violates their rights. I have NEVER stated different.

          [i]But the fact is, too many people have no idea of the word “need” really means, and too often confuse it with “desire” or “want”.[/i]

          The fact is, you think that one person should have the right to determine what someone else “needs”, and that what he needs is all he should have. You think the government should control people, not the other way around.

          [i]I think you’re very wrong. Personal responsibility here has gone to the wayside in most peoples’ lives in lieu of self-indulgence and vanity and lack of respect for anyone’s needs other than one’s self.[/i]

          And I think you’re very wrong. I think that you have a distorted view of what “most people” do, and even what they think, based on ?????

          [i]make us more personally responsible[/i]

          Is that anything like FORCED charity? 🙂 🙂

          Is the government going to “make us” love each other too? (kumbaya)

          You’re funny…

          [I]People like you and jd should pray I never become dictator. I’d make life different, and that would probably so hurt you to have to change.[/i]

          I think with you as dictator many people would change …. but probably not the way you think.

          [one more edit]

          I suspect your “perfect society” would bear some resemblance to a cross between the Borg, 1984, and Soylent Green. No thanks.

        • #2904409

          …..

          by jck ·

          In reply to all I can really say is then…

          [i]Who says? Someone on TV or the newspaper?[/i]

          No, common sense.

          If I have a wife and myself, and I get an 8 passenger vehicle…what is the sense of having that as a passenger vehicle? Is there a need to be able to drive around in an 8 passenger vehicle when you only have 2 people that you transport in the normal day?

          I’d like to know if you have any rational explanation for it, and an excuse other than “because I can”.

          [i]I think you speak for the minority (plus your hubris in thinking you have the right to determine what’s “necessary” or “better” for someone else; unless, of course, you’re paying for it).[/i]

          I never said…and even in the last post said…i don’t have that right…although I’d like to have it. I said it’s government’s right to make an informed decision of what is best for everyone…remember…basic founding principle…a government one of whose duty is to “…promote the general welfare…”?

          [i]Good luck with that…. truly![/i]

          Thank you.

          [i]Oh? You said elsewhere that we should be “living by the minimum” or something to that effect. and implied that “personal indulgences” were bad. [/i]

          I said that we should be living by the minimum that we can. That’s personal responsibility in regards to being respectful to everyone else, while at the same time you do right for you and those you support.

          I also said personal indulgence was bad in the regards to extreme excess and the irresponsibilities that often lead to negative impacts of them.

          [i]So if you’re not going to limit income, what is the excess for? Taxes? Paying for other people’s “living by the minimum” (you know… the people whose job was making other people’s “personal indulgences” who are now unemployed because you made their work product illegal). If you can’t buy anything with it, what’s the incentive to earn it? Why do harder jobs if you’re not going to derive any additional benefit from it? (OMG I just realized… jck wants to unionize the whole damned country!!!!)[/i]

          Gosh…I guess GM and Ford are just going to go bankrupt if they quit making trucks and SUVs, aren’t they?

          Oh wait…they were doing that [b]before[/b] now. Go figure.

          I’m sure GM…and Ford…and any other company would adapt. In fact, they have done it before. They will do it again.

          As for not being able to buy anything with it…who said you couldn’t buy anything? There you go to an extreme again.

          I guess you’ve never bought a fishing pole or canoe or tent or a gazebo or had a barn raised, have you?

          Of course, you could always invest in some solar panels or a wind turbines or something like that…or wouldn’t you get any satisfaction out of knowing you’d done something positive to help the environment and help improve the quality of life for everyone?

          And yes, I have some solar-powered electronics in my 24 year old house. So I do practice what I preach.

          [i]By saying it is moot, you prove that it isn’t. You display your own self-centeredness and assume that everyone is like you.[/i]

          How is it not moot want you want me to decide on a child that doesn’t exist?

          And I didn’t assume that everyone is like me…in fact, you were the one who assumed i am out to make everyone like me.

          [i]One of blood, dozens by advice.[/i]

          Grats on your kid.

          [i]If I become dictator, are you ready to let me take them away?

          [b]You can try…[/b][/i]

          Watch CNN and see how the mean dictators act. I would never be cruel enough to assume to take your kids away, unless you abused them…although you hypothesized I would out of an extremist view of what you think I believe.

          About the only thing I’d do if I ran things, in regards to children and their cost…is eliminate the benefit of a person on public assistance having another child before they become self-sufficient.

          [i]As long as you do not harm another or violate their rights…[/i]

          So…you have the right to use something you do not own to any extent you care to? That’s what you’re saying?

          [i]I cannot do with “the world” as I wish, but I can damned sure do with “my property” as I wish (as long as I do not harm…). The bag of money is not your property, so it’s not the same at all.[/i]

          By using a car that is more than you need, less efficient than you could be using and uses more than resources than necessary, and polluting more than another that you could have taken …you are using a tool (your property) to abuse the resources of the planet (not your property).

          Abuse is abuse…whether or not you use your possessions to do it.

          As for the bag of money…under various laws in various jurisdictions…if I found it and turned it in…in a period of time if no one claimed it…it would be mine. So, you’re circumstantially right as I am as well.

          Talk it up if you want after lunch. I may or may not be here. I’m hoping the Chinese food I got makes me sick so I can sue them and have lots of money.

          I need a vacation.

        • #2908786

          Gosh

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Who are these people?

          You don?t believe in political correctness do you?

          I agree you are Anti American
          So that means America stops at the border

          Are all Canadians like you?

          The ones I have met seemed to be very nice

          Let me guess
          You were born somewhere else

        • #2905974

          did you have a point?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Gosh

          ? little too warm in here?

          Yes most Canadians I have met on both coasts and in between share a very similar view of America. People in Germany and the Uk seemed to as well, come to think of it they do in France also, I’m sure it’s somewhat common.

          Perhaps some are too fed up to bother talking about it anymore, perhaps others are too reserved, but all in all, I have yet to meet anyone outside of America that actually LIKES America these days.

          Pardon me, it’s not America, it’s not American people, but the government and foreign policy that people seem to oppose.

          Do they not have news in New Zealand yet?
          Oh well not to worry, just wait ’til you see pong?

        • #2905944

          Re did you have a point

          by tearat ·

          In reply to did you have a point?

          ?? little too warm in here??

          DO NOT start the global warming debate

          I would not listen to the French
          But we have had a few problems with the French here

          Kiwis don?t normally blame people for their government
          We know better than that
          We know that most if not all politicians are self centred morons
          We know that politicians lie about almost everything

          Yep we have the NEWS
          Nope you can’t believe everything it says

          Pong I do remember playing that game
          Is that all you have for entertainment
          I would have thought you had more powerful computers than that by now
          Try Pac-man you guys should be getting close to running that by now

        • #2905631

          I wouldnt’ listen to the French either

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Re did you have a point

          I actually hate working or having anything to do with Montreal based companies, they don’t hav a clue how business works outside of Quebec.

          Canadian does nto mean French, that is a small part of our population and most Canadians don’t remember more than four or five French words from high school.
          dey have der little uuuuuh , hoo you say, ditch, and dey can ‘ave it to demselves all dey like ya know?

          Blame people for our government? nooo canadians blame teh Canadfian govermment, I blame the US government for thei ractions, and pobvisouly those who support such actions as if clueless that the government conmsists of backstabbing, liars with an alternate agenda. People that supporty such idiocy are just as bad as the idiots themselves. If I ever said teh canadian or UK governments wer great and doing the right thing, I would expect he exact same in return. It’s called accepting reality, we KNOW our governments are a joke but they aren’t out there tryign to change the world and tehy aren’t putting us directly into harms way whiel escalatign that harm.

          News? Complete crap, take it with very cautious mind.

          Pong, well we just got it here. But I don’t have too much time with all teh seal clubbing and igloo building i have to catch up on.
          Plus I am behind in my sinew shewing classes, Mrs.Akkalaktach is going to be really PO’d with me if I play more pong.

          We usually just line up polar bears and throw ice at them for kicks.

        • #2905003

          Well its getting to be a long day

          by tearat ·

          In reply to I wouldnt’ listen to the French either

          ?Blame people for our government? nooo canadians blame teh Canadfian govermment, I blame the US government for thei ractions, and pobvisouly those who support such actions as if clueless that the government conmsists of backstabbing, liars with an alternate agenda. People that supporty such idiocy are just as bad as the idiots themselves. If I ever said teh canadian or UK governments wer great and doing the right thing, I would expect he exact same in return. It’s called accepting reality, we KNOW our governments are a joke but they aren’t out there tryign to change the world and tehy aren’t putting us directly into harms way whiel escalatign that harm.?

          Would you mind retyping that
          It is too hard to decrypt
          I am not being rude it is just to hard and I don?t want to get the wrong meaning

          Seal clubbing
          You are totally evil
          Real men would take on the adult males

          How much do the Eskimos charge to teach the rest to you foreigners?

          Damn
          Polar bears are you crazy
          Who is stooped enough to try and line them up
          Its not the kicks but the biting and chewing you should watch

          What about bowling penguins that would be safer

          No what am I saying
          You need to try boxing with the polar bears
          Go for it be a man
          Life is for pussys

        • #2904757

          Yes it was late

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to I wouldnt’ listen to the French either

          As indicated my lack of attention to my spelling.

          In short, most people know that EVERY government is a completely screwed up joke taht should be locked away and allowed to meet once a month to go over their disasterous plans to change the world.

          However, in the USA, people actually buy into the crap they are fed, even AFTER the guy has been proven to decieve them and be feeding misinformation. They actually think they have a good leader in the White House and protect his comments and actions. Now that is what I call beign blind to reality or just simply fooled by the BS.

          Were republicans really THAT happy to win office that they will support the moron no matter what he does? It sure seems that way!

          The scary part is thinking that, if they support Bush, what the hell are we in for in teh future? Perhaps americans shouldn’t be alowed to vote for their own president, they sure aren’t very good at choosing responsible leaders these days.

        • #2906497

          Re Yes it was late

          by tearat ·

          In reply to I wouldnt’ listen to the French either

          ?In short, most people know that EVERY government is a completely screwed up joke taht should be locked away and allowed to meet once a month to go over their disasterous plans to change the world.?

          To say governments are screwed up is a nice way of putting it
          A collection of evil bastards is closer to the truth

          ?However, in the USA, people actually buy into the crap they are fed, even AFTER the guy has been proven to decieve them and be feeding misinformation. They actually think they have a good leader in the White House and protect his comments and actions. Now that is what I call beign blind to reality or just simply fooled by the BS.?

          Something similar happened before WWII

          ?The scary part is thinking that, if they support Bush, what the hell are we in for in teh future? Perhaps americans shouldn’t be alowed to vote for their own president, they sure aren’t very good at choosing responsible leaders these days.?

          Just so long as you don?t start blaming the victims for the crimes
          That is how the con artists think
          There is a sucker born every day

          It has never been a crime to be stupid
          Fraud is a crime
          But I don?t need to tell you that do I?

        • #2905836

          Let’s Think About This for a Second

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to did you have a point?

          Nobody likes the current US foreign policy of being proactive and facing tomorrow’s threats today before they grow out of control.

          As opposed to Europe’s appeasement policies of the past. Foreign policy to most European countries is wait to be attacked first than counter.

          Well, let me tell you something. That won’t work in the future. And if you think it will, after your first city goes up in a radioactive cloud of smoke, you’ll get the point.

        • #2905614

          Uh

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Let’s Think About This for a Second

          The first time my country is terrorized you mean?

          I am from England. Ever heard of eth IRA? how about Hitler?

          Did the UK not recently catch suspected terrorists before they were able to attack?

          nah, must have been Americans.

        • #2905505

          before they attacked the underground?

          by locrian_lyric ·

          In reply to Uh

          Riiiiight.

        • #2907370

          The UK and Terrorism

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to Uh

          Actually, I think the UK is being very proactive in the war on terrorism.

          And there are numerous Eastern European countries doing likewise.

          It’s the weenies in France and Germany (mostly) that just don’t get it.

          Ironically, you’d think France would have a clue after being attacked and occupied twice in both world wars.

          I applaud the UK’s assistance in the war on terror. I don’t think the US could have a stronger ally.

        • #2906495

          Rick

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Let’s Think About This for a Second

          That could be seen as guilty until proven innocent

          But governments should watch their allies as well
          I am thinking about WWII

        • #2907365

          Allies are Extremely Important

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to Rick

          I really had hoped that the US had more support going into Afganistan and Iraq, however, sometimes you have to do what you got to do.

          And I realize that it is hard for some of the allies of the US to deploy the kinds of resources that we have.

          The US is a country of 300 million people. Some European countries are not a lot bigger than some of our individual states. We have more people, money, etc.

          And I also realize that sometimes other countries don’t agree with us politically. But, it’s almost embarrassing the number of troops that some other countries have offered up in support.

          Look at Italy. My god, we have police departments in some cities here that are bigger than the number of troops some countries have offered up to fight the war on terrorism.

        • #2907298

          Re Allies are Extremely Important

          by tech rat ·

          In reply to Rick

          The lack of support is the politicians covering their ass
          They did not want to take money away from other things
          Which the population of their country think of as important

          If only the population knew the truth
          The politicians and their cohorts are usually the cause of the lack of money
          They bleed every cent they can out of every part of the system
          The hardest work they do is in covering their tracks

          The only reason the US got the support they did was because of 9/11
          The politicians thought they could use it to make themselves look better
          And they may be able squeeze a few more cents out of the system
          It also gave them an excuse for the increase in the lack of money
          They could blame it all on the huge cost of supporting the war
          It?s a bugger that inflation

        • #2907273

          Rick

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Rick

          About a year ago, we had a long discussion about who was doing what.

          Seque-You don’t see much support in Iraq, because a lot of those allies had wanted proof rather than specualtion before invading Iraq. Bush then said you are either with us or against us and invaded anyway. Why should they join in now just because you are in over your head?

          Those same countries did start an international fight against terrorism though. While the coalition was in Afghanistan, Russia and other allied nations created a joint task force for tracking down AlQaeda with the intent of infiltrating the organization enough to diruot future operations. Thye did stop quite a few ‘plans’ from comng to fruition but most importanly are able to provide and share important information about movement with other allies, the USA and UK also.

          So while they are not IN Iraq per se, it doesn’t mean eberyone is just sitting on their hands.

        • #2907268

          TR

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Rick

          Really? Please post sources to such insight, I have yet to see that angle proven in all these years.

          I do agree that the only reason people supported Afghanistan was because the USA, neing an allied coutry, was attacked and retaliation was in the world’s best interests and goes without saying when an ally is attacked.

          As for just to make politicians look good; it was no more for the benefit of other politicians looking good as it was for GWB to look good.

          The only validity is that if nobody DID come to help, it would most definitely look bad. Allies support allies when attacked, turning down assitance in Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or the USA being attacked, allies are not obligated to join in, end of story.

          In your eyes, unless they help all the time, no questions asked, they are doing it for political appearances?

          Or in other words, unless they listen to the USA and follow the US lead, they are not really allies.

        • #2907140

          Re TR

          by tech rat ·

          In reply to Rick

          ?Really? Please post sources to such insight, I have yet to see that angle proven in all these years.?

          Like I said about politicians
          ?The hardest work they do is in covering their tracks?

          Which does not mean they do it personally

          No I don?t feel like discussing GWB or the war in Iraq
          Especially with you
          It?s pointless

          The war in Iraq would have never existed if the right thing had happened at the end of the gulf war
          The right thing would have been the death of Saddam Hussein

          ?In your eyes, unless they help all the time, no questions asked, they are doing it for political appearances?

          Or in other words, unless they listen to the USA and follow the US lead, they are not really allies..?

          No you misunderstood
          No surprise there

          I have already said discussing anything with you is a waste of time
          Your reading comprehension skills suck

          Get better skills or get lost

          Yes I am techno rat
          Did you even notice

        • #2907093

          Oz, “In Over Our Heads”

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to Rick

          Guess again.

          The US is not in over our heads. We are probably the only country on the planet that can send 200,000+ troops over seas for over 6+ years, fight two wars, and still win.

          And when did I say other countries are sitting on their hands?

          I know a lot of countries are helping in ways that they can. I simply said that I wished those countries that could do more would do more.

        • #2907090

          Techno Rat: First Gulf War

          by rkuhn040172 ·

          In reply to Rick

          First off, I couldn’t agree anymore with your comment about the first Gulf War. We should of finished the job then and we wouldn’t be where we are today.

          The world joined hand in hand to stop Saddam.

          But, I personally believe that’s why we are in the position we are today. Bush senior decided to play by the rules and follow the UN mandates and stop short of Baghdad.

          Bush junior, realizing the mistakes of his father decided it was time to finish the job or else we’d be doing this for the next 20 years.

          You remember the drill. No fly zones, occasional bombings, sanction after sanction. Nothing was working.

        • #2906344

          Ratbag

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Rick

          Yes I did notice that you were a bottom feeding rodent, if that was your point.

          As for your brilliant support of your assertion, “gee the government covers that up so you will never see the truth.”
          What a crock! Yes, I’ll agree that teh government tries to cover up most of what they do. I just didn’t realize that you were workgin in such close relation to the government that you are actually advised of the real intent that most of America is not allowed to hear, my goodness you must be impotent.

          You do realize that now you have given up the Caramilk secret that they will have to kill you, right? For someone with such inside information, you certainly are a security risk to the nation, perhaps they shouldn’t have trusted a kiwi.

          That’s not a defense it is an opinion, one with so much bias that it isn’t worthy of further consideration. I wish you were around when teh Iraq war was being discussed, we had some pretty clever and knowledgeable Americans here that would have quickly corrected your clueless views of reality. Originating from me, you wouldn’t believe it if it was broadcast on every global news station in teh world anyway, that’s teh way your narrow minded bias seems to work for you.

          if you don’t believe it, no matter what proof ispresented, you’ll dent it, flame teh messenger and then come up with some absolute nonsense like, I could tell you but I’d have to kill you or of course they won’t tell yuo that, it’s top secret info (which only you seem to have access to and are free to share publicly). What a fool.

        • #2906336

          Oh Sure, Rick, its been a great success hasn’t it?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Rick

          ” 6+ years, fight two wars, and still win.”

          Uh, which wars have you won so far? Afghanistan? Nope, more voiolence now than ever before. Taliban? Nope, still in full force in their safe haven in Kandahar (a neighbouring city). AlQaeda? Nope,they have grown in ridiculous porportions and are said to be stronger and larger than before, with members in over 60 countries, including the USA. Yuo can’t even rid the USA of AlQaeda, good luck doing that in the Middle East, Bosnia and other nations where they actively facelift cities (by adding elaborate mosques, and parks) and recruit anyone with a bone to pick on America.

          As for Iraq, yeah what a screamign success that one is, UK troops often refuse to fight alongside Americans due to thier “cowboy mentality”, where are all the others? When they interview Americans in Iraq, American soldiers don’t think they are “winning” anythign at all, in fact they are frustrated that theres’nothing they CAN do. Recent field documentaries have had reporters embedded with US troops in lookout camps, they watch insurgnts walk freely around outside their own walls, and there’s nothing they can do. They meet with locals, only to find otu that the insurgenmts have threatened them against talking with US troops and also PAY them to offer false info to US troops.

          The US can hardly say they have a grip on this one yet.

          I am not saying that you don’t have mroe resources to fight a 200 year war in teh Middle East, but if you think “you’ve won” you need to give your head a shake.

          Why two wars have you WON? WW!? nope. WWII? Nope. Korea, Vietnam,? What?

          Having a few hundred thousand troops and spending billions of dollars of taxpayers money whil eputting your nation into an economic crunch does not equate to winning a war in any way shape or form.

        • #2906334

          You are both right

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Rick

          Re the Gulf War: “We should of finished the job”

          I agree fully. You took the focus and force away when it was needed, leaving the cancer to spread once again.

          But Saddam himself is/was never your biggest threat, in fact he was pretty good at keeping the radical fundamentalists in check and keeping HIS people under HIS rule.

          But of course, leaving Afghanistan before THAT job was finished is completely logical, based on past experiences that was clearly the best soliution. Even though it has reverted to what it was before you saved the poor Afghans, it was a job well done, just don’t look back and everything is AOK!

        • #2906306

          Question for Oz

          by bhymen ·

          In reply to Rick

          I’m curious about something. Has the US ever WON a war?

          You know, everytime someone says the US lost the Vietnam war I’m reminded of something that happened back in the early 1980’s. I was working at a place that had hired a Vietnam refugee. He was a whiny, cry-baby type and we got into a spat about something one day. He babbled something about the US having lost the Vietnam war. And a thought ocurred to me. I live about 50 miles from where I was born and raised and I am free to go back there any time I wish to. In fact, I was free to do anything I wanted to do so long as it wasn’t illegal. On the other hand, he had fled his birth place and homeland under gun fire and could never go back. To me it didn’t sound like the US lost the war, it sounded more like South Vietnam lost the war.

          Just a thought.

        • #2906104

          Re Ratbag

          by tearat ·

          In reply to Rick

          ?Yes I did notice that you were a bottom feeding rodent, if that was your point.?

          Ratbag that is one of the nicest names I have seen you use
          No that was NOT my point
          You misunderstood AGAIN

          ?As for your brilliant support of your assertion, “gee the government covers that up so you will never see the truth.”
          What a crock! Yes, I’ll agree that teh government tries to cover up most of what they do. I just didn’t realize that you were workgin in such close relation to the government that you are actually advised of the real intent that most of America is not allowed to hear, my goodness you must be impotent.?

          LOL impotent (another hidden insult)
          Good one that
          Thanks for the laugh

          You are not very good at this are you?
          Poor comprehension skills
          Bad spelling
          Arrogant
          Do you ever wonder why you get so little respect?

          ?You do realize that now you have given up the Caramilk secret that they will have to kill you, right? For someone with such inside information, you certainly are a security risk to the nation, perhaps they shouldn’t have trusted a kiwi.?

          Well my government trusts kiwis all the time
          Could be fun to see if the Canadian government would accept my job application
          I would have to try for citizenship first
          No forget it
          Not interested in living in the same country as you

          ?That’s not a defense it is an opinion, one with so much bias that it isn’t worthy of further consideration. I wish you were around when teh Iraq war was being discussed, we had some pretty clever and knowledgeable Americans here that would have quickly corrected your clueless views of reality. Originating from me, you wouldn’t believe it if it was broadcast on every global news station in teh world anyway, that’s teh way your narrow minded bias seems to work for you.?

          If you don?t like what I write don?t read it

          Bias? Were did you get that from
          Sure I don?t like politicians
          I thought you felt the same
          Does that make you biased?

          The Iraq war
          I have already said the Iraq war should have never happened
          What would be the point in discussing it?
          Yes there was some very clever north Americans discussing it
          None of them were you
          You just looked stupid

          The rest of what you wrote is just a meaningless rant
          And an attempt to start one of those stupid off topic flame wars

          Get a clue dummy

          Re You are both right

          ?But Saddam himself is/was never your biggest threat, in fact he was pretty good at keeping the radical fundamentalists in check and keeping HIS people under HIS rule.?

          Isn?t it good how politics and justice have very little in common

          Saddam started the war the
          The JUST thing would have been his death
          Then maybe the people of Kuwait may have had some justice
          Not to mention the families of the Iraq solders who died

          Do you understand that?
          Or is it more important for you
          To argue about facts and politics
          In an off topic argument about history

        • #2905884

          OMG Oz

          by jck ·

          In reply to Who are these people?

          [i]Go sit by the crick and blow into your jug some more, Zeek. Billy Bob and Dusty’s Boys will be along with the washboard, spoons and banjo shortly. [/i]

          I almost fell out of my chair laughing lol 😀

        • #2905610

          Did ya hear it?

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to OMG Oz

          The banjo plucking away? LOL

        • #2905598

          you just have to understand, Oz

          by jck ·

          In reply to Did ya hear it?

          I grew in rural, southern, redneck, porch-sittin, banjo pickin, grass chewin, Redman tobacco spittin, you’re queer if ya ain’t drivin a pickup truck, stetson hat wearin, wrangler jean buyin, bible-belt Oklahoma.

          It reminded me of about 60 percent of the people I grew up around 😀 lol

          (And yes, I knew two brothers named Joe Don and Bubba…lol)

        • #2905532

          at least your man enough to admit it

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to you just have to understand, Oz

          I guess THEY don’t like show tunes IN Oklahahoma either huh?

          I was in the musical Oklahahoma in high school, dancing around like a knob with a Stetson on and straw hangin’ outta my mouth. We weren’t allowed any ‘baccy then though.

          Yeee haw, “OOOOOOOOOOOKLaaaaaaaa-homa where the wind comes sweepin’ down the plain”

          All the while you’re thinking , alright Curtain drops next, then I can get out of this stupid cowboy crap and go drink that cold beer in my locker.

        • #2905525

          At least

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          not too many people have died from “second-hand spit” 🙂

        • #2904948

          eh…doesn’t take a man

          by jck ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          I never fit in there really.
          Others wore Wrangler, I wore Levis.
          Others wore Stetson hats, I wore baseball caps.
          Others wore Nocona or Tony Lama boots, I wore running shoes.
          Others were into partying, I was…well, I partied my senior year. lol

          I was in a play too, but I played Santa Claus. Damn elementary schools lol 😀

        • #2904947

          second hand spit

          by jck ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          True.

          Of course, they can’t tie cancer to second-hand smoke either. A pommegrant has more nicotine in it than a pack of cigarettes. Plus, they can show you people who were around smokers all their lives who never got cancer.

          Second-hand smoke doesn’t kill. It’s your genetics. Blame your parents. lol

          (But, it sure makes things smell bad. lol :D)

        • #2904919

          Indeed.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          [i]they can’t tie cancer to second-hand smoke either[/i]

          and the evidence they have is growing weaker. Radon exposure causes more cancer, and guess where it accumulates? In the same places second-hand smoke accumulates. But you can’t SEE radon gas, so you don’t BLAME radon gas.

          Just like some people think diesel exhaust is dirtier than gasoline exhaust… it’s not!

        • #2904889

          actually

          by jck ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          from what I understand, the soils in NC, SC and VA (where the majority of cig tobacco is grown) are rich in radon.

          I bet that tobacco absorbs radon real nice, along with all the other chemicals and pesticides they use growing it.

          Cancer cocktail, anyone? lol

        • #2904832

          And…

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          Many of the chemicals in processed tobacco come from the drying process, where they hang the tobacco on racks, but them in sheds and dry them out by using propane/Natural gas heaters. The sheds I’ve seen get sealed up tight meaning there is no place for the particulate created by the heaters to go, and the tobacco absorbs it.

          James

        • #2904745

          JD that’s good

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          I can juet ssee pomegranates with nicotine warnings on them like Canadaian cigarettes.

          Surgeon generals Warning: Eating pomegranates can cause cancer, and ugly teeth!

          I think what you are referring to are polyphenols which offer the same simulus as nicotine and are sometimes used as a replacement for dealing with withdrawl symptoms. I don’t believe they actually have nicotine in them though, however I may be wrong on that entirely.

          http://www.smoke-free.ca/warnings/Canada-warnings.htm

        • #2906848

          Hey, don’t blame ME for that one OZ……

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          😀

        • #2904649

          What is it with you two that I can’t get sorted???

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          I don’t know why I keep mixing you guys mixed up!

          Sorry but it happens all the time, especially when you are both sharing in the same part of a thread and I am replying to both of your posts.

          I say you’re just screwing with my head.

          But in all fairness, I just had to wade through another senseless rant from DanLM, you thought MY typing was bad, that stuff is like trying to read latin on acid with a glass eye.

        • #2904590

          I understand

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          after all, they both start with a “J”. Very confusing…. :p

          And except for when the typos are funny, you will NEVER hear ME b1tch’en about it! B-)

        • #2904408

          Just ablack hole

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to at least your man enough to admit it

          Somehow it just doesn’t shine out of the void I consider my mind.

          It’s that same void that’s gets me hung up in 300 posts discussions with people who have no idea what they are on about and just want to play, ‘I know I am but what are you’ for a week or so, uh oh, here’s he comes again.

      • #2905959

        its not good

        by half9 ·

        In reply to This could be a portent to a lot of things.

        Have a look at ‘The energy non crisis’on you tube and remember it was posted jan 07

        Ethanol is good but if you look at the power output it is 25% less than petrol. So it should be at least that much cheaper.
        Our govt is pushing it and selling it the same price as 91. So why bother buying it. But Joe Public does not do the homework and thinks its the green wonder, and our local tree huggers think its the answer too. And they are in govt

        • #2905628

          But it’s not, because

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to its not good

          [i]Ethanol is good but if you look at the power output it is 25% less than petrol. So it should be at least that much cheaper.[/i]

          It costs MORE to produce, and you burn more of it to get the same amount of work done. Not to mention that it also increases the cost of our food.

          Embrace the second amendment, friend 🙂

      • #2905888

        Well, Tony…I’m sure that…

        by jck ·

        In reply to This could be a portent to a lot of things.

        our friends at the ATF and FBI will be glad to know that 😉 lol

        • #2905635

          They already know

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Well, Tony…I’m sure that…

          now you know the real reason for those spy programs… It’s not to protect us from foreign terrorists, it’s to protect the government from the people who are getting increasingly pissed off 🙂

        • #2905626

          i assure you

          by jck ·

          In reply to They already know

          that government…has a lot more, and a lot bigger sized, rounds than 30,000 😉

          Plus, they got more people to fire back at with too.

          BTW, I only have about 200 rounds. I guess that means I’m a better shot lol 😀

          I don’t have to worry tho. They know I’m a member of HAP…Heavily Armed Pacifists…our motto…peace through superior firepower ]:) lol

        • #2905554

          either that, or …

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to i assure you

          [i]I guess that means I’m a better shot[/i]

          … you’re not anticipating as many targets.

          [i]that government…has a lot more, and a lot bigger sized, rounds than 30,000[/i]

          They also know that I am not the only one… there are dozens that I know of, and many many more that I don’t. There’s also a great likelihood that many agents would be more loyal to the “government of the people” than to “the bureaucracy”, especially if that bureaucracy was to take to the blatant wholesale violation of peoples’ constitutional rights.

          [i]They know I’m a member of HAP…Heavily Armed Pacifists…our motto…peace through superior firepower [/i]

          I like that (except the pacifist part. I do not believe in “peace at all costs”)… I have never attacked another human being in my life, and never would… But I can and will defend. How well will have to be determined.

        • #2905549

          I’ve attacked another human

          by jck ·

          In reply to either that, or …

          But, only when they attacked first or were attacking/had attacked someone else.

          None of them faired well either. And, I didn’t even use a gun 😀

        • #2905527

          part of that

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to I’ve attacked another human

          [i]were attacking[/i]

          is how I would define “defending”.

          [i]when they attacked first[/i]

          I would call this retaliation.

          [i]/had attacked someone else[/i]

          this too, unless I had good reason to believe they were preparing to attack me or someone I wanted to protect, in which case I’d call it a “preemptive strike” 🙂

          [edit fix italics]

        • #2904962

          I just call it…

          by jck ·

          In reply to I’ve attacked another human

          doing what is right. 🙂

    • #2909534

      Fair but I’m missing the relation

      by oz_media ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      “After reading the following two articles, I have come to the conclusion that the granola eating, hairy armpit, tree hugging crowd along with the professors, ’60’s flower power, and theoretical BS crowd just don’t get it.”

      What don’t your steroptypical granola eating, hairy armpit, tree hugging crowd along with the professors, ’60’s flower power, and theoretical BS crowd don’t get?

      It looks like they share the same view as you, a reduction in resources will benefit everyone. Creation of new energy sources etc.

      First of all your sterotype is too broad to apply here;

      What does eating granola and living healthy have to do with your sterotype?

      What do women with unshaved armpits have to do with it?

      “Tree hugging” is the nickname for a practice of preserving trees fro mclearcutting by forestry companies, how do THEY play part in your analogy?

      To further lump professors, you didn’t go to University I assume, have to do with your little rant?

      60’s flower power? Okay so you are proposing that pot smoking hippies from the 60’s have something to do with it now? (possibly overlooking the fact that many of them own todays corporations.)

      Theoretical BS crowd…..sorry the article you posted was 100% theoretical, simply conclusions someone reached based on culminating facts.

      Who is it you are trying to attack?

      health nuts? preservationists? scholars? community leaders?

      You’ve included teh gamut in your rant but without any realistic or relevance to any of it.

      In short, the article says very little other than specualation based on forecasting.

      Well that and the fact that your system in teh US doesn’t offer accurate milage comparissons.
      In Canada we already base our mileage on how many litres are burned for every 100 kms.

      Gas prices are still higher here than yours and we PROVIDE yours, mostly through a former crown corporation, sure there may be SOME ‘towel heads’ working for Petro Canada/BP but they are often even more Canadian than I am.

      Just don’t see the basis for your rant.

      • #2909508

        RE: What do have to do with it?

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to Fair but I’m missing the relation

        [i]”Oh that’ll be handy, been watching Deliverance? “git awf ma layand!”

        Go sit by the crick and blow into your jug some more, Zeek. Billy Bob and Dusty’s Boys will be along with the washboard, spoons and banjo shortly.”[/i]

        Yeah, stereotypes are bad….

        • #2909500

          ironic, isn’t it?

          by locrian_lyric ·

          In reply to RE: What do have to do with it?

          Loc’s law #37: To know what someone will do, watch what he accuses others of doing.

        • #2909478

          If you two can’t figure it out

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to ironic, isn’t it?

          If you don’t see the joke in that, it at least explains why you don’t catch onto much around here and have so many problems with reading too deep into what has been said instead of getting a feel for the intent of the post itself.

        • #2909113

          That’s a good one.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to ironic, isn’t it?

          Is there a whole list you can link to? 🙂

        • #2908930

          I’ll post the list tomorrow

          by locrian_lyric ·

          In reply to That’s a good one.

          I have about 55.

        • #2908892

          Withdrawn

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to I’ll post the list tomorrow

          It had posted a heads up on libel but I think I see where you are going with it now so I’ve renegged my comments.

        • #2909480

          So you missed that

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to RE: What do have to do with it?

          You seem to have missed the fun in that, oh well, what else is new.

      • #2905897

        Geez!

        by rkuhn040172 ·

        In reply to Fair but I’m missing the relation

        Relax, I thought it was apparently obvious that parts of it were a joke and parts of it were real.

        You seem to take some of my comments just a tad too seriously man.

    • #2905971

      Maybe I have been wrong.

      by Anonymous ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      In a new article at ABCNews.com: http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=5235731
      it is reported that the high fuel costs are having the benefit of bring jobs back home from overseas. The reason given is that it costs less to manufacture locally than it does offshore and ship back in.

      • #2905940

        That is the upside

        by tearat ·

        In reply to Maybe I have been wrong.

        The downside is more people will be employed but they may have trouble getting to work
        Oh well at least they will have a job

        I wonder what will happen in China?

        I have to wonder
        All that fuel used to move things that could have been made down the road

        So there you have it
        Out sourcing was created by low transport costs
        So the price of fuel was to low for too long

        • #2905899

          Good from the bad

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to That is the upside

          the falling US dollar is also a contributor of jobs coming back home.

          Funny how something suckingass can be a good thing for some, huh?

          Either way, jobs, welcome home! B-)

        • #2905871

          Equilibrium

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Good from the bad

          Rising dollar in Canada means layoffs in some sectors, people who work making products mostly bought by Americans. Many Canadians used to make a living because our labour costs were lower but no longer.

          Regarding outsourcing, the latest is to move call centers to rural centers – lower cost of living, lower wages, but at least in the same country.

          I was calling my internet provider yesterday and spoke with a customer service rep in India. I really had to lead them through the nose to get what I needed from them. It was frustrating.

          James

        • #2905845

          Is that a cultural saying or mistype?

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Equilibrium

          [i]lead them through the nose[/i]

          I have always heard it [b]”lead them BY the nose”[/b] as in the nose ring on a bull.

          As for call centers, with VoIP and telephony what it is today, it amazes me that people were not doing that a few years ago.

          Get the most out of tech while keeping costs down AND providing a better quality of life at the same time.

          I was surprised yesterday when the Cisco tech I had to work with had a fairly think Indi accent. combined with still having my ear/sinus infection and that, I had to ask him to repeat himself several times. 🙁 That is with NO background noise in my office AND using a headset.

    • #2905880

      The only benefit…

      by wow > work ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      The only benefit I see is a sign I saw about 2 days ago just outside a bar:

      “Finally, beer is cheaper than gas. Drink, Don’t Drive.”

      • #2904990

        Kevin Bloody Wilson

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to The only benefit…

        I’m a born again pisstank
        and I’ve seen the light
        its a big neon sign that spelled PUB.

    • #2905853

      my take on how to get gas prices down…if anyone cares

      by jck ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      Basically, there 3 means to get gas prices down:

      Immediate means- personal conservation:

      carpool, plan trips and do things all in one circuit rather than back and forth for each task, take your lunch to work instead of driving to McDonalds or Subway, turn out lights when you’re not using them, walk to the convenience store instead of driving 2-3 blocks.

      Near-term (6 months to 5 years) – corporate development:

      develop more fuel efficient cars, downtrend large pricey gas-guzzling vehicles and (due to supply being low?) price them outrageously ($100k and up), work toward migrating to green technologies rather than sitting on 150 year old ones, move toward instancing a workplace environment that utilizes natural means of operations rather than man-made, implement existing alternative, green(er) technology.

      long-term (5 years and out) – resource exploration and optimization:

      finding what new resources can be tapped, developing technologies that will best utilize them and waste the least possible, and developing new technologies that minimize or don’t at all have dependence on fossil fuels.

      But no matter what anyone says…the only way to get [b]*immediate*[/b] relief at the pump…is for all of us to do our part.

      If demand doesn’t go down, the market and corporates will continue to drive it up through speculation and processing control.

      Otherwise, we’re all in for 1-5 years of high gas prices.

      • #2904916

        re: immediate relief at the pump

        by tonythetiger ·

        In reply to my take on how to get gas prices down…if anyone cares

        • #2904887

          God man!

          by jck ·

          In reply to re: immediate relief at the pump

          I’d be there with the 250 gallon water tank in the back of a truck!

          Then I’d sell to my neighbors at $2.50 a gallon lol ]:)

        • #2907000

          hmmm….

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to God man!

          Does profiting from another’s accidental error really fit in with your definition of “personal responsibility”? :8}

          [added: or is it more like http://tinyurl.com/5hjhyy%5D

        • #2906982

          well…according to your model of America

          by jck ·

          In reply to hmmm….

          I should be able to.

          You think it’s okay for Bank of America to charge fees for accidental overdraws, right?

          If business can do it, then why can’t I?

          Besides, he must have been a dummy. Almost all gas stations are required to have a breaker box to the power to all pumps in case of emergency fuel fires.

          He could have just hit the switch, locked the doors, and called the cops.

        • #2906837

          Sorry,

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to well…according to your model of America

          [i]I should be able to.[/i]

          My model of America does not condone theft.

          [i]He could have just hit the switch, locked the doors, and called the cops.[/i]

          The clerk tried to call management but was unable to get hold of anyone. He was probably not trained for that particular situation. The sign said $4.10 in great big numbers. The people would have a hard time claiming they didn’t know, so I’d bet that what they did could certainly be prosecuted.

          If I were the owner, I would first check to see if insurance covered the loss. If not, I’d charge the credit/debit cards of those who paid that way, and if there were any attempts to avoid payment, I’d pursue criminal charges.

          Would you also take money that fell out of a bank truck?

        • #2904607

          sure why not?

          by jck ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          If there were no name or contact info on the bags? Yes, I would.

          In fact, i’ve had the situation where I found a large sum of money laying on the ground and took it to the local police and gave it to them with the time and date i found it and location. They kept the money.

          I found out some years later from an attorney that after 90 days in Oklahoma if no one claimed the money, it was supposed to become mine.

          So, I’m not gonna trust law enforcement with it. And if I can’t find the rightful owner, I damn well next time will keep $8,000 to myself instead.

          BTW, if the price on the pump is $1.40: In most states, it doesn’t matter what the board says. The price on the pump is the true value of the product and is to be clearly visible to consumers at the time of transaction.

          Therefore if it was wrong, it is the liability of the business owner and his/her responsibility alone to ensure his product is priced accurately. Not the consumer’s.

          Just like if you went into Wal-Mart and they had tires for $5.38 instead of $53.80 a piece in their computer and for some reason the clerk didn’t catch it. That is Wal-Mart’s loss. They can not hold you responsible for their error.

          Now if you were in collusion with the clerk to commit fraud, that would be a different story.

        • #2904603

          How sad…

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          [i]sure why not?[/i]

          🙁

        • #2904554

          why so sad?

          by jck ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          You should be happy for me. I’m taking what I want of something that doesn’t belong to me, but is not secured and is open for anyone to grab and indulge in.

          I’m pursuing your American way of life. Be happy!

          Funny how…with money it’s one thing…but, a natural resource you’d treat totally different.

          They can print more money anytime.

          You have to wait 30M years for more oil.

          You do the math.

        • #2904545

          You are just making this up as you go long

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          [i]”Wal-Mart and they had tires for $5.38 instead of $53.80 “[/i]

          wrong. If it is clearly a mistake, either in the sign or the printing of an ad, they do NOT have to honor the mistake.

          Maybe instead of taking “how to be a liberal weenie 101”, you should have taken some consumer law classes, like I did.

        • #2904526

          example

          by jck ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          Maybe the discrepancy was outrageous in prices i hypothesized, but the Wal-Mart example is no different than of a circumstance than the gas station situation.

          But if you want a real life situation, here’s one:

          I was a kid and I went into a TG&Y store to buy a tennis racquet. When I was looking through them, I found a Wilson one that was marked $12.99 rather than $21.99 like the others. I took it to the counter and they had to sell me that product at that price.

          As for what the sign said…or whatever…that’s not what I was talking about.

          It was the price on the pump that mattered. That is just like a price tag on an item.

          If a product has a price on it, such as gasoline, and you buy it from that retailer at that price. It is [b]none[/b] of your responsibility how or what it was priced at when you purchased it. That is the responsibility of the business owner, and no one else.

          If a business had a car marked at $15,000 and you went to write the check for it and they told you it was $18,000, that is illegal.

          Same thing goes for any other purchase you make, even if it’s gas.

          As for consumer training, I’ve had consumer classes. That was part of my junior high education. I’ve also had a couple of pre-law/government classes when I started college. As for consumer law, I’ve never been to law school so I can’t say I’ve had specific training. I know enough about it…at least from the perspective of Oklahoma and Florida.

          If a retail outlet persistently and continuously displays or distributes an advertisement with an inaccurate pricing, it then becomes an offense. That is “bait and switch” and is illegal in most states.

          However, reasonable time must be allowed for the retailer to make adjustment of their product price to match the advertisement, and vice versa.

          And again, if a retailer prices a product (even if by mistake) lower than intended and makes a sale at that price level, it is not the responsibility of the consumer to pay more than what the retailer has priced his or her product at the time of purchase. And, the consumer has no culpability unless they were in league to defraud that business in some fashion.

          If you take the item to the register…and it rings up at that price…and it’s lower than what it should be…the most a retailer can do is pull the rest of the stock off the shelf to stop from losing any more money.

          Therefore, the ignorant clerk should have been shown how to power off the pumps off by his boss/the owner. No if, no and, no but.

          And again maybe in Michigan has laws that are just different than Oklahoma or Florida. If so, I feel sorry for you. You don’t get much consumer protection.

          But it’s not made up. I’ve learned it and lived it.

        • #2906614

          Funny thing, JD

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          That happened to me just this evening on my way home from work.

          I needed to pick up some baby carrots for potatosoup. I stopped at Walmart, and saw the sign said 48 cents! I thought wow, what a deal, ad picked up 6 bags. When I got to the register they rang up $1.48… I told them about the sign, they went and looked, ad discovered that someone had apparently slid the “1” behind the “4”.

          I put 4 of them back.

        • #2906612

          And what do you suppose

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          [i]And, the consumer has no culpability unless they were in league to defraud that business in some fashion.[/i]

          those consumers were waiting in line for? They damned sure couldn’t see the pump price from three blocks away!

        • #2907091

          the same way

          by jck ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          that you hear about a good deal on something…it’s called…communication

          my mother calls me and tells me about deals on things all the time.

        • #2907088

          So,

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          [i]my mother calls me and tells me about deals on things all the time.[/i]

          if your mother saw the big sign saying 4.10 and the pump saying 1.40, would she call you up and tell you about the deal?

        • #2907081

          If the cashier gives you back to much change

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          do you take it and run or do you return the extra money?

          Knowingly taking something like that is very unethical.

        • #2906372

          gas deals and change

          by jck ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          Tony:

          If I were in the same city? Yes. She probably would be thinking it was some promotion.

          And as I said, the clerk should be trained well enough how to shutdown gas pumps in case of a gasoline fire. That would have been enough to stop the pumping until the pricing issue was resolved, and therefore was negligence on part of management/ownership not having trained their staff adequately.

          jdclyde:

          Of course I would. I’m scummy like that. Money is money! lol :^0

          Seriously, it depends. If it was like $20, no I wouldn’t take it. If it’s $.02, i wouldn’t waste time over 2 cents. They make that up out of the penny dish.

          Big difference though between an employee making an earnest mistake, and management not properly and fully training their staff of what they need to know in order to handle situations that may arise.

          BTW…who priced that gas wrong on the pumps again? Was that the employee? If so, what’s an employee doing setting gas prices on pumps?

          Anyways…i’ll take a bank truck anyday over cheap gas lol :^0

        • #2906359

          As an ex-assistant manager of a gas station

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          I can tell you it isn’t as easy a job as you think.

          having to change prices or even change over the till while busy is a chore to keep it all straight.

          If someone KNOWS a price is wrong and takes advantage of it, is intentionally taking advantage of someone else, and knowingly taking screwing them over.

          Guess who gets in trouble over that? Bingo, the cashier that is making just over minimum wage. If the till is off by more than $5 (at most places) then it is big trouble. Much more than that, and your cheap gas cost them their job.

          When changing prices, if the price is going up, the sign gets changed first to avoid customers complaining about getting charged the higher price.

          When the price is going down, you do it in the other order, again, not for legal matters, but to keep the customers less mad. (caught myself from saying “happy”).

          As the change on the pump is just entered into a computer now, when is the last time you saw a user type in the wrong number? Happens all the time.

        • #2906354

          That must really be painful

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          [i]She probably would be thinking it was some promotion.[/i]

          All the twisting and contorting you’re doing to justify dishonesty….

          An [u]unadvertised[/u] promotion?????

          [i]Big difference though between an employee making an earnest mistake, and management not properly and fully training their staff of what they need to know in order to handle situations that may arise.[/i]

          Yes, big difference. One justifies dishonesty, and the other one doesn’t…

        • #2906343

          JD

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          [i]Guess who gets in trouble over that? Bingo, the cashier that is making just over minimum wage. If the till is off by more than $5 (at most places) then it is big trouble. Much more than that, and your cheap gas cost them their job.[/i]

          It doesn’t matter, as long as they think they’re ‘sticking it to the man’. They don’t realize that every dollar they take away from the man is a dollar he can’t use to provide someone else with a job. (and they accuse us of being self-centered???)

        • #2906248

          at this point in life, tony

          by jck ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          I really could care less.

          If some manager isn’t responsible enough to check his work and screws up setting prices, so be it. I get cheaper gas. He gets fired.

          If I mess up coding a system and it screws up the tracking for a public agency, I’d be fired. Is he any better that I have to be the good samaritan?

          Welcome to the real world of employment, my friend. You botch up your job bad, you get fired.

          Or are you telling me that manager shouldn’t be expected to do his/her job right and check their work quality since they’re maybe a $35k a year convenience store manager, but that software company should be held to a different standard??

          My product costs money. If my company charges less for work than they should and no one catches it here…does that mean our clients are required to come to us and do our job and correct our billing because we’re white collar professionals and make more than $15 an hour??

          The answer: no. They are only required to pay what we bill them for. No if, no and, no but.

          I say tough luck, convenience store. Lesson learned for them, IMHO. Be more thorough next time in performing the job you’re paid to do.

        • #2906229

          blah blah blah

          by jck ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          [i]It doesn’t matter, as long as they think they’re ‘sticking it to the man’. They don’t realize that every dollar they take away from the man is a dollar he can’t use to provide someone else with a job. (and they accuse us of being self-centered???) [/i]

          Maybe “the man” should have pulled his head out of his a$$ and did his job right?

          What happened to that personal responsibility thing, Tony?

          Q.E.D.

        • #2906122

          One’s failure to hold to his…

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          [i]What happened to that personal responsibility thing, Tony? [/i]

          … does not relieve others of theirs.

          For example, someone leaving their keys in their car does not mean it’s OK for someone else to steal it.

        • #2923066

          yeah…

          by jck ·

          In reply to Sorry,

          and i trust most people to do right by me if i make a critical mistake about as far as i can throw a humvee.

          Sorry. I am not “my brother’s keeper” anymore. If people can screw up my air with their idiot spending on overpolluting vehicles/equipment/appliances, can screw my fiscal well being with market manipulation of oil and food, etc…i have all rights to screw the world back…and harder…

          just as long as it doesn’t break a law…right? As long as they can’t sue me for my money, then I’m a-ok.

          So welcome to my new world.

        • #2906321

          You’re honest

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to God man!

          I like that. At least you will admit what most others would do, but not admit to doing.

          most people woud LIEK TO THINK they would always do teh righteous thing, most people would LIKE TO THINK they wouldn’t do somethign selfish but in reality, people USUALLY do what they would ideally oppose.

          Just like that old, psychology question. If you saw somwonw drop $20 in a busy place, where NOBODY would be any wiser if you took it, would you follow them and return it or would you keep it.

          Again, NOBODY would see you or be the wiser if you kept it.
          Morally, everyone wants to think they’d do the right thing and give it back, but in reality people just pocket it.

          there’s all kinds of psychological reason as to WHY someone would break their moral intentions.

          It was only $20, no big deal, if it was hundreds some would return it.

          I am really hard up right now, so I have to put morals aside and feed my family.

          The person looked pretty wealthy, chances are it would go unnoticed anyway.

          Excuses on and on.

          The long and short of it is, people KNOW it is morally wrong, but having a chance to get away with it and nobody looking at you negatively for it, all morals get thrown aside.

          I have to agree with you, I’d take advantage of it and sell it off too, in fact I’d find eth most expensive place for gas in town so I could make the most off of it.

          Where are all the Americans that believe in free enterprise, survival of the fittests etc?
          They seem to scurry under the furniture when it comes to taking the moral high ground, in theory anyway.

        • #2906290

          Being honest about being dishonest

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to You’re honest

          Takes a lot of character to admit that you don’t have character?

        • #2906258

          having learned a lesson in life

          by jck ·

          In reply to You’re honest

          After trying for almost 40 years now to live a decent, considerate, well-mannered life. I have decided I need to be as big of a prick about things as those around me.

          I get tired of being told I’m sweet, or so nice, or a real upstanding person…then get run over or abused or backstabbed by those same people.

          I have trusted law enforcement…they let me down.

          I have trusted others to have common sense above radical or overly-strict interpretation…they let me down.

          I trusted the investment community to protect my investments…they let me down.

          I trusted my government to protect me from being financially and professionally raped by business…they let me down.

          So, I guess I need to be as big an ass as the next guy in the world.

          Maybe if I kick enough people in the teeth and step on enough people, I’ll actually get somewhere in life.

          So if you see me coming and you’re not a relative or friend I give a $hit about, stay out of my way from now on.

        • #2923061

          You will get further ahead in life

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to having learned a lesson in life

          if you start thinking instead of feeling.

        • #2923020

          oh trust me

          by jck ·

          In reply to You will get further ahead in life

          I think plenty.

          And, I think that having been someone who always tried to give people the benefit of the doubt has led me to one conclusion: I should never have trusted people to be thinking, conscientious, respectable, or dependable.

          There are a few good seeds, but it seems to me that the majority of my fellow citizens in America tend to think “me me me”. So if it’s gonna allow me to step on them, get ahead of them, and give me the road to where I want to be in 10 years…then…so be it…I’m gonna play hardball.

          Someone screws up and I can benefit from it, I’m gonna benefit (as long as it doesn’t involve breaking the law).

          Someone doesn’t work as hard as me, I’m gonna point it out and work harder and step on them to get what I want.

          I’ll get further ahead in life by playing the game better than anyone else, rather than having to think or feel anything.

          So game on.

        • #2923015

          and another thing…

          by jck ·

          In reply to You will get further ahead in life

          The current job made me a lot of promises that they haven’t kept (including to make sure that my project timeline allowed for a week vacation which is supposed to be next week…and isn’t going to happen).

          So since I’m in my probationary period, they are in theirs too. And, I have recruiters call me 2-3 times a week asking me to look at their open positions.

          Right now, I’m looking at 3. 2 are very promising.

          If I find a better situation with better/same money, their probation period here is over and I will move on to better pastures.

          Now the only question is: Do I give 2 weeks notice or not? I don’t think they’ll give it to me, so I might not.

          Game is on.

        • #2906218

          Nobody’s perfect….

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to You’re honest

          but most of us learn from our (and sometimes other people’s) mistakes… usually through karma 🙂

        • #2906324

          Pump price dominates here

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to re: immediate relief at the pump

          If there is any discrepancy between teh sign and pimp price, the pump price dominates here. If the piumps were also incorrect, the station would simply close.

          The signs here are computerized but not in the sense that you ener a number, they simply roll over (digit by digit, row by row)like an old pinball game, which sometimes takes several minutes. AFTER the sign is changed, the pumps all wait until the existing cars are finished, then when all pumps are hung up, the pump price changes.

        • #2906171

          Musta been Freudian… ‘pimp’ price. Good One. :)

          by captbilly1eye ·

          In reply to Pump price dominates here

          nuff said.

      • #2906327

        Local news today, nes gas tax

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to my take on how to get gas prices down…if anyone cares

        We just got slapped with a new Carbon tax on Gas, 2.4 cents/litre (about a dime a gallon) to bring our total fuel taxes in around 40 cents/litre.

        JUST before imposing this tax, the government sent everyone a check for $100.00 as a acarbon tax credit, I suppose people will feel it offsets tax hikes. In a way it does, a smalelr car, taking 70L would be spending an extra $1.70 per tank, if you filled up once a week (shhhhh, it could happen!Even though I need to fill up at least twice a week) you’d actually make money over the year.

        For the rest of us, it’s a spit in the bucket just to make us feel like we get it back.

    • #2905581

      What an amazing topic.

      by stever ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      Rick,
      What a fantastic topic full of excitement, drama, intrigue. Dealing with social issues, bigotry, political turmoil, and lots of humor.
      Dude, this should get an emmy.
      And the Cast, Terrific. But, forgive me. by the time I got to the end I forgot where it started.
      Sorry a little sarcasm but, this is cool. I’ll bet if you all keep going we will see a solution or world war 3.
      (I for one feel privilaged to be able to even get to read views of someone in another country. Course I’ve been accused of being a hopeless romantic) Plus I just know we all get to share the issues of the world despite our individual beliefs because the issue of oil dependance costs everybody on the planet except maybe the people controlling the oil and they are laughing all the way to the bank.
      Meanwhile someone’s elderly parents freeze to death cause they couldn’t afford to pay their utility bill. Or better yet maybe a neighbors baby has to settle for a bottle of water cause milk is up to $4.00 a gallon.
      Dang all that from the Gas Prices.

    • #2904994

      this will save you more than a hundred dollars

      by file ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      ok. heres how it works, first get a male baby gorilla, then tie weights to his hands and feet. make sure to give him plenty of steroids and meth as he grows. be sure to keep him blindfolded too, that way when you slap him randomly he wont know where you are. keep up this activity for the next six years. Then just before the “experiment”, give him rabies. allow the rabies to stew for about four days.after the fourth day give your gorilla no less than twenty hits of LSD and four grams of X , then release him onto an elevator. Tell me that wouldnt work. Its perfect, think about it, it tottally runs on gorillas

    • #2907072

      WTF?

      by slvrknght ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      Ok, is it just me, or was the guy in the second article merely attempting to confuse people?

      The simple fact of the matter is fuel efficiency, listed either way, requires more miles on less fuel. Unless there’s a major price difference in the vehicles involved, it’s usually better to go with the higher MPG vehicle. That article made no sense whatsoever. Either that, or the author of the article was smoking something when he wrote it since I have never seen a more muddled article in my life.

      • #2906313

        That’s exactly what he said

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to WTF?

        You said: “Unless there’s a major price difference in the vehicles involved, [b]it’s usually better to go with the higher MPG vehicle. That article made no sense whatsoever.[/b] ”

        The article stated:
        [b][i]Cars with the highest miles per gallon are always the most fuel efficient,[/b] he said.[/i]

        So there’s no confusion, you just didn’t get the article’s context I think. You’re right though, they do twist and turn so that a simple comparisson becomes a tricky one. And he also stated that if you are upgrading an existing car, gallons per X miles is a better measurement.

        In Canada and most of Europe/Australia etc., they have measured in litres per 100 km’s for many years now and it does equate to a more accurate measure, if you read the second article again you might see the difference. Try a couple of examples on paper if need be.

    • #2920870

      Gas prices, and all prices…

      by catpro-54 ·

      In reply to Gas Prices

      are way up. I am a single parent making $20,000 a year, two children in college. I live in the most depressed state in America and am up to my armpits in debt, trying to make ends meet. I agree with everything you say. It is impossible to live without 2 salaries, and our MOST precious resource, our children, are suffering for it. I have no idea where help should come from but know that politicians are not the answer.
      Anybody heard of Boone Pickens’ wind farm?

Viewing 13 reply threads