Re: But of course none of this will have any impact on boating
- From: "P. Fritz" <paulfritzREMOVEME@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 21:43:25 -0400
"NOYB" <noyb@xxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:REO1g.6378$Es3.501@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> " JimH" <jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS> wrote in message
> news:dPOdnXSsfbvbLtrZnZ2dnUVZ_sednZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> <chuckgould.chuck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:1145541532.200130.268290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> Harry Krause wrote:
>>>> Ignatius Thistlewhite wrote:
>>>> > You wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> HoustonChronicle.com
>>>> >>
>>>> >> April 19, 2006, 10:21PM
>>>> >>
>>>> >> ENERGY
>>>> >> Rising crude oil prices splash over $72 a barrel
>>>> >> - - -
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Time for regime change...here.
>>>> >
>>>> > Your posts seem to suggest strong support for Democrats. Since
that
>>>> > party
>>>> > has been a proponent of prohibitive tax increases on energy, your
>>>> > argument
>>>> > seems to be purely partisan rather than the product of principle.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I support the idea of a tax increase on gasoline if it will be used
to
>>>> directly support significant R&D aimed at weaning us off oil. I also
>>>> believe the $70+ a barrel we're now facing is a number reached
because
>>>> the oil cartels know the Bush administration won't even *try* to do
>>>> anything about it.
>>>
>>> You're looking for a technological answer to an issue that is
primarily
>>> about lifestyle choices. The vast majority of us insist on traveling
>>> everywhere by private automobile, and it isn't unusual these days for
a
>>> family unit with a common address to have 2 or 3 cars on the road at
>>> the same time. The majority of Americans prefer to live in Disneyesque
>>> suburbs, (places that exist only to serve as bedroom communities for
>>> commuters), than in actual cities with employment and commercial
>>> opportunities. They all need to get from their couple thousand square
>>> feet of lawn (and their privacy fences that foster the illusion they
>>> aren't really living in a horizontal hive) into town so they can
>>> convert their labor into the mortgage payments that prevent the true
>>> owner from kicking them out of their little look alike cell. Some of
>>> these horizontal hive dwellers spend no more than 2-3 waking hours in
>>> their patch of paradise on an average weekday, given 9 hour work days
>>> and 2-hours in a traffic jam every morning and evening.
>>>
>>> Why adapt technology simply to allow the continuation of a broken
model
>>> for a few more generations? Why do we need technology to move people
>>> from bedrooms 40-50 miles out of town into their daily workplace? The
>>> basic premise makes no sense.
>>>
>>> Then there are boaters. I operate a boat that gets about 4 nmpg and
>>> that's ridiclously efficient among powerboats. Am I going to give up
my
>>> boat to save "society" 300 gallons of diesel per year? Frankly,
"Nope."
>>> Are the suburbanities going to rediscover the joys of urban living and
>>> return to the city? Probably not. If we are going to wean ourselves
off
>>> of oil, any time soon, it will have to be a result of changing the way
>>> we live not the technology that
>>> allows us to live that way. I think that's something most people
>>> probably realize but are reluctant to admit. I'm sure we'd all like to
>>> see the "other guy" reduce his use of oil, merely to ensure a
continued
>>> supply for our personal consumption.
>>>
>>> Much as I hate to see the high prices for refined producs and resent
>>> the fact that BIG OIL is pocketing nearly all of the increase in the
>>> form of robber-baron profits, it's the current high price and the
>>> future higher prices for gas, diesel, home heating oil, etc that will
>>> bring about the needed lifestyle changes much more quickly than any
>>> government program would ever modify technology. As my friends who
>>> often hold differing opinions on things are often heard to say, "Keep
>>> government out of it, and let the free market dictate how society
>>> operates."
>>> We're watching the free market argument (minus any meaningful
>>> competition and with the major suppliers in tacit collusion) play out
>>> right before our eyes. I think the conservatives are right on this
one:
>>> The free market profiteering will do more to change our lifestyles
than
>>> any government regulation ever could. Sadly enough, it's the very
>>> lifestyle enjoyed by so many of the free market proponents that will
be
>>> most badly damaged by the change.
>>>
>>
>> This should make your blood boil:
>>
>> from http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=1847117&business=true
>> DALLAS Apr 15, 2006 (AP)- A $69.7 million compensation package and $98
>> million pension payout to Exxon Mobil Corp.'s former chief executive
and
>> chairman Lee R. Raymond has some shareholders and economists asking,
"how
>> much is enough?"
>>
>> "Some folks will ask the question, 'Is this more evidence of big oil
>> taking an enormous windfall and retaining all the riches?'" said Mel
>> Fugate, assistant professor for Southern Methodist University's Cox
School
>> of Business.
>>
>> Exxon benefited from high oil and natural gas prices and solid demand
for
>> refined products en route to earning $36 billion last year. The company
>> has defended its profits, saying that other industries have larger
profit
>> margins but oil companies' bottom lines stand out because they operate
on
>> a much larger scale.
>>
>
> The reason it angers me is because of the money and lives we're spending
as
> a nation to protect the key ingredient to keep our economy rolling: oil.
>
> Don't get me wrong...we need to protect our access to oil at reasonable
> prices. But since Exxon/Mobil is reaping the rewards bestowed upon it
by
> the US military, US taxpayers and a sound foreign policy by our
> administration, they ought to "give back" to this country by providing
us
> with cheaper gas.
Which would create shortages.
I would settle for the guvmint (at least here in Mich) from capping the
sales tax on gas, since they are reaping far greater profits from the
increased price :-)
>
>
>
.
- References:
- Re: But of course none of this will have any impact on boating
- From: chuckgould.chuck@xxxxxxxxx
- Re: But of course none of this will have any impact on boating
- From: JimH
- Re: But of course none of this will have any impact on boating
- From: NOYB
- Re: But of course none of this will have any impact on boating
- Prev by Date: Re: But of course none of this will have any impact on boating
- Next by Date: Re: OT: Where is the plane?
- Previous by thread: Re: But of course none of this will have any impact on boating
- Next by thread: Re: But of course none of this will have any impact on boating
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
