Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default OT Political

I was prompted to read the article on Global Warming in the Sept. issue of
Nat.Geo.
Very well done and informative. I believe that my point in mentioning it in the
first place was misconstrued a bit.
To clarify, I am not disputing that the globe is apparently warming. The point
I was making is that I don't see the productive side of getting personally
offended when someone doesn't share someone else's personal concern..meaning:
The globe is warming, causes are many, varied and open to discussion. Quoting
from the opening of the Nat. Geo. article..
"But even Kyoto would barely slow the rise of heat trapping gases. Controlling
the increase ' would take 40 successful Kyotos,' says Jerry Mahlman of the
National Center for Atmospheric research. But we've got to do it."..HOW????
I driver a fuel efficient car, I insulate my structures correctly, I recycle
and I've just signed up to buy my electricity from renewable sources. If we all
do all we can, it will still take immeasurably more to make a difference. I
don't see how blaming someone for not lamenting life because they can't stop
Global Warming is helpful.
I find that worrying about things I can't control usually keeps me from action
in an area that I can make a difference in.
Anyway....

John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
  #2   Report Post  
Roger W. Norman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ah, a topic I really can talk about. Yes, the studies have said that Kyoto
wouldn't change things all that much, and that's why I've said that it's not
worth changing economical structures in order to do 1% better. With the
implementation of Kyoto the outcome would be that no one would adversely be
affected but the major petrolium users, so that means us. Since most of the
technology in the world comes from us, it doesn't make sense to deny the
world the possibility of coming up with technology that would free the world
from the oil constraints.

It also doesn't do anything towards lessening global warming because
countries that are signatories of the accord could sell off their overages
to countries that had deficiences, thus allow countries like India and China
to continue to over produce CO2 while countries in Africa who don't burn
anything worth concern could profit from selling their own underages and the
world would still be the same.

Not much new here.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
I was prompted to read the article on Global Warming in the Sept. issue of
Nat.Geo.
Very well done and informative. I believe that my point in mentioning it

in the
first place was misconstrued a bit.
To clarify, I am not disputing that the globe is apparently warming. The

point
I was making is that I don't see the productive side of getting personally
offended when someone doesn't share someone else's personal

concern..meaning:
The globe is warming, causes are many, varied and open to discussion.

Quoting
from the opening of the Nat. Geo. article..
"But even Kyoto would barely slow the rise of heat trapping gases.

Controlling
the increase ' would take 40 successful Kyotos,' says Jerry Mahlman of the
National Center for Atmospheric research. But we've got to do

it."..HOW????
I driver a fuel efficient car, I insulate my structures correctly, I

recycle
and I've just signed up to buy my electricity from renewable sources. If

we all
do all we can, it will still take immeasurably more to make a difference.

I
don't see how blaming someone for not lamenting life because they can't

stop
Global Warming is helpful.
I find that worrying about things I can't control usually keeps me from

action
in an area that I can make a difference in.
Anyway....

John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637



  #3   Report Post  
Roger W. Norman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Ah, a topic I really can talk about. Yes, the studies have said that Kyoto
wouldn't change things all that much, and that's why I've said that it's not
worth changing economical structures in order to do 1% better. With the
implementation of Kyoto the outcome would be that no one would adversely be
affected but the major petrolium users, so that means us. Since most of the
technology in the world comes from us, it doesn't make sense to deny the
world the possibility of coming up with technology that would free the world
from the oil constraints.

It also doesn't do anything towards lessening global warming because
countries that are signatories of the accord could sell off their overages
to countries that had deficiences, thus allow countries like India and China
to continue to over produce CO2 while countries in Africa who don't burn
anything worth concern could profit from selling their own underages and the
world would still be the same.

Not much new here.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
I was prompted to read the article on Global Warming in the Sept. issue of
Nat.Geo.
Very well done and informative. I believe that my point in mentioning it

in the
first place was misconstrued a bit.
To clarify, I am not disputing that the globe is apparently warming. The

point
I was making is that I don't see the productive side of getting personally
offended when someone doesn't share someone else's personal

concern..meaning:
The globe is warming, causes are many, varied and open to discussion.

Quoting
from the opening of the Nat. Geo. article..
"But even Kyoto would barely slow the rise of heat trapping gases.

Controlling
the increase ' would take 40 successful Kyotos,' says Jerry Mahlman of the
National Center for Atmospheric research. But we've got to do

it."..HOW????
I driver a fuel efficient car, I insulate my structures correctly, I

recycle
and I've just signed up to buy my electricity from renewable sources. If

we all
do all we can, it will still take immeasurably more to make a difference.

I
don't see how blaming someone for not lamenting life because they can't

stop
Global Warming is helpful.
I find that worrying about things I can't control usually keeps me from

action
in an area that I can make a difference in.
Anyway....

John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637



  #4   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Roger W. Norman wrote:

It also doesn't do anything towards lessening global warming because
countries that are signatories of the accord could sell off their overages
to countries that had deficiences, thus allow countries like India and China
to continue to over produce CO2 while countries in Africa who don't burn
anything worth concern could profit from selling their own underages and the
world would still be the same.


Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is. Pick up the new issue of Newsweek. Much of it is devoted to
environmental and energy issues. A very good read.

You can also see it online:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4264305/site/newsweek/

  #5   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Roger W. Norman wrote:

It also doesn't do anything towards lessening global warming because
countries that are signatories of the accord could sell off their overages
to countries that had deficiences, thus allow countries like India and China
to continue to over produce CO2 while countries in Africa who don't burn
anything worth concern could profit from selling their own underages and the
world would still be the same.


Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is. Pick up the new issue of Newsweek. Much of it is devoted to
environmental and energy issues. A very good read.

You can also see it online:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4264305/site/newsweek/



  #6   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is.


I would think this would be the case as they are starting form a much "dirtier"
place so any attempt will yield a bigger result percentage wise.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
  #7   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is.


I would think this would be the case as they are starting form a much "dirtier"
place so any attempt will yield a bigger result percentage wise.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
  #8   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Blind Joni wrote:
Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is.



I would think this would be the case as they are starting form a much "dirtier"
place so any attempt will yield a bigger result percentage wise.


Well, the lopsidedness of what the U.S. has been consuming in energy
resources for many years now is disgraceful, not to mention down right
embarrasing. Your trivialization of the Chinese trying to do something
about *their* responsibility is very telling. If I wasn't American, I
would be tempted to call us ignorant pigs, too. And it is justifiable
with statements such as yours.

I agree this is NOT a party line issue. But there DOES seem to be a
difference on which way the parties lean. And their degree of concern
about the health of our (one and only) planet.

  #9   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Blind Joni wrote:
Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is.



I would think this would be the case as they are starting form a much "dirtier"
place so any attempt will yield a bigger result percentage wise.


Well, the lopsidedness of what the U.S. has been consuming in energy
resources for many years now is disgraceful, not to mention down right
embarrasing. Your trivialization of the Chinese trying to do something
about *their* responsibility is very telling. If I wasn't American, I
would be tempted to call us ignorant pigs, too. And it is justifiable
with statements such as yours.

I agree this is NOT a party line issue. But there DOES seem to be a
difference on which way the parties lean. And their degree of concern
about the health of our (one and only) planet.

  #10   Report Post  
Kurt Albershardt
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Blind Joni wrote:

the lopsidedness of what the U.S. has been consuming in energy
resources for many years now is disgraceful


What are you ****ed at me for? I wasn't trivializing anything jsut stating a
perspective based on the state of affairs. In my limited understanding the US
uses about as much energy percentage wise as it produces relative to the world
as a whole.


Change 'produces' to 'controls' and you're getting close.




I also thought we were one of the "cleanest" countries around..or
I would hope we are after all this time of environmental awareness.
Is this not the case?


Not even close.

Discirminate between 'produce' and 'extract' and it gets really scary...






  #11   Report Post  
Kurt Albershardt
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Blind Joni wrote:

the lopsidedness of what the U.S. has been consuming in energy
resources for many years now is disgraceful


What are you ****ed at me for? I wasn't trivializing anything jsut stating a
perspective based on the state of affairs. In my limited understanding the US
uses about as much energy percentage wise as it produces relative to the world
as a whole.


Change 'produces' to 'controls' and you're getting close.




I also thought we were one of the "cleanest" countries around..or
I would hope we are after all this time of environmental awareness.
Is this not the case?


Not even close.

Discirminate between 'produce' and 'extract' and it gets really scary...




  #12   Report Post  
George
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Kurt Albershardt wrote:

Blind Joni wrote:

the lopsidedness of what the U.S. has been consuming in energy
resources for many years now is disgraceful


What are you ****ed at me for? I wasn't trivializing anything jsut stating
a
perspective based on the state of affairs. In my limited understanding the
US
uses about as much energy percentage wise as it produces relative to the
world
as a whole.


Change 'produces' to 'controls' and you're getting close.




I also thought we were one of the "cleanest" countries around..or
I would hope we are after all this time of environmental awareness.
Is this not the case?


Not even close.


I got a lesson in coporate ways this weekend
I did a county harvest festival and the Parks and rec guys were all
driving these electric egg shaped buggies(as opposed to the golf carts
of past years)
The director told me that they were DONATED(beacuse at 7000$ each none
were selling)
but the car company(I think it was GM) was trying to get enough of them
in circulation to raise their coporate fuel mileage average
it seems you can make lots of piggish SUV as long as your overallfleet
mileage average fits the governments mandates
George
  #13   Report Post  
George
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Kurt Albershardt wrote:

Blind Joni wrote:

the lopsidedness of what the U.S. has been consuming in energy
resources for many years now is disgraceful


What are you ****ed at me for? I wasn't trivializing anything jsut stating
a
perspective based on the state of affairs. In my limited understanding the
US
uses about as much energy percentage wise as it produces relative to the
world
as a whole.


Change 'produces' to 'controls' and you're getting close.




I also thought we were one of the "cleanest" countries around..or
I would hope we are after all this time of environmental awareness.
Is this not the case?


Not even close.


I got a lesson in coporate ways this weekend
I did a county harvest festival and the Parks and rec guys were all
driving these electric egg shaped buggies(as opposed to the golf carts
of past years)
The director told me that they were DONATED(beacuse at 7000$ each none
were selling)
but the car company(I think it was GM) was trying to get enough of them
in circulation to raise their coporate fuel mileage average
it seems you can make lots of piggish SUV as long as your overallfleet
mileage average fits the governments mandates
George
  #14   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Do a little research into what happened to GM's EV-1 all electric car.

George wrote:
In article ,
Kurt Albershardt wrote:


Blind Joni wrote:

the lopsidedness of what the U.S. has been consuming in energy
resources for many years now is disgraceful

What are you ****ed at me for? I wasn't trivializing anything jsut stating
a
perspective based on the state of affairs. In my limited understanding the
US
uses about as much energy percentage wise as it produces relative to the
world
as a whole.


Change 'produces' to 'controls' and you're getting close.





I also thought we were one of the "cleanest" countries around..or
I would hope we are after all this time of environmental awareness.
Is this not the case?


Not even close.



I got a lesson in coporate ways this weekend
I did a county harvest festival and the Parks and rec guys were all
driving these electric egg shaped buggies(as opposed to the golf carts
of past years)
The director told me that they were DONATED(beacuse at 7000$ each none
were selling)
but the car company(I think it was GM) was trying to get enough of them
in circulation to raise their coporate fuel mileage average
it seems you can make lots of piggish SUV as long as your overallfleet
mileage average fits the governments mandates
George


  #15   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Do a little research into what happened to GM's EV-1 all electric car.

George wrote:
In article ,
Kurt Albershardt wrote:


Blind Joni wrote:

the lopsidedness of what the U.S. has been consuming in energy
resources for many years now is disgraceful

What are you ****ed at me for? I wasn't trivializing anything jsut stating
a
perspective based on the state of affairs. In my limited understanding the
US
uses about as much energy percentage wise as it produces relative to the
world
as a whole.


Change 'produces' to 'controls' and you're getting close.





I also thought we were one of the "cleanest" countries around..or
I would hope we are after all this time of environmental awareness.
Is this not the case?


Not even close.



I got a lesson in coporate ways this weekend
I did a county harvest festival and the Parks and rec guys were all
driving these electric egg shaped buggies(as opposed to the golf carts
of past years)
The director told me that they were DONATED(beacuse at 7000$ each none
were selling)
but the car company(I think it was GM) was trying to get enough of them
in circulation to raise their coporate fuel mileage average
it seems you can make lots of piggish SUV as long as your overallfleet
mileage average fits the governments mandates
George




  #16   Report Post  
Roger W. Norman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks Pete. I'll check that out.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"Pete Dimsman" wrote in message
...


Roger W. Norman wrote:

It also doesn't do anything towards lessening global warming because
countries that are signatories of the accord could sell off their

overages
to countries that had deficiences, thus allow countries like India and

China
to continue to over produce CO2 while countries in Africa who don't burn
anything worth concern could profit from selling their own underages and

the
world would still be the same.


Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is. Pick up the new issue of Newsweek. Much of it is devoted to
environmental and energy issues. A very good read.

You can also see it online:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4264305/site/newsweek/



  #17   Report Post  
Roger W. Norman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Thanks Pete. I'll check that out.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"Pete Dimsman" wrote in message
...


Roger W. Norman wrote:

It also doesn't do anything towards lessening global warming because
countries that are signatories of the accord could sell off their

overages
to countries that had deficiences, thus allow countries like India and

China
to continue to over produce CO2 while countries in Africa who don't burn
anything worth concern could profit from selling their own underages and

the
world would still be the same.


Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is. Pick up the new issue of Newsweek. Much of it is devoted to
environmental and energy issues. A very good read.

You can also see it online:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4264305/site/newsweek/



  #18   Report Post  
Roger W. Norman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hard to say since we're talking about a population into the billions alone.
China and India have some major problems on being mechanized nations with
their populations because it's almost impossible to provide inexpensive and
pollution free electrical generation. Which is why the Three Gorges dam is
so important to China even though thousands of years of history are no under
water. They made a choice, and it's a non-polluting method of generating
gigawatts of power, so I can't blame them. Their population puts the onus
on them to make big decisions.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is.


I would think this would be the case as they are starting form a much

"dirtier"
place so any attempt will yield a bigger result percentage wise.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637



  #19   Report Post  
Roger W. Norman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hard to say since we're talking about a population into the billions alone.
China and India have some major problems on being mechanized nations with
their populations because it's almost impossible to provide inexpensive and
pollution free electrical generation. Which is why the Three Gorges dam is
so important to China even though thousands of years of history are no under
water. They made a choice, and it's a non-polluting method of generating
gigawatts of power, so I can't blame them. Their population puts the onus
on them to make big decisions.

--


Roger W. Norman
SirMusic Studio

"Blind Joni" wrote in message
...
Actually China is attempting to do more to solve the problem than the US
is.


I would think this would be the case as they are starting form a much

"dirtier"
place so any attempt will yield a bigger result percentage wise.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637



  #20   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I did a county harvest festival and the Parks and rec guys were all
driving these electric egg shaped buggies(as opposed to the golf carts
of past years)
The director told me that they were DONATED(beacuse at 7000$ each none
were selling)
but the car company(I think it was GM) was trying to get enough of them
in circulation to raise their coporate fuel mileage average


Same here in Albany...all the city stuff is those little electric eggs.




  #21   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I did a county harvest festival and the Parks and rec guys were all
driving these electric egg shaped buggies(as opposed to the golf carts
of past years)
The director told me that they were DONATED(beacuse at 7000$ each none
were selling)
but the car company(I think it was GM) was trying to get enough of them
in circulation to raise their coporate fuel mileage average


Same here in Albany...all the city stuff is those little electric eggs.


  #22   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Do a little research into what happened to GM's EV-1 all electric car.


Actually one of my best friends was an engineer on that project..he was
actually the guy driving around the country doing the demos.

John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
  #23   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Do a little research into what happened to GM's EV-1 all electric car.


Actually one of my best friends was an engineer on that project..he was
actually the guy driving around the country doing the demos.

John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
  #24   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Your understanding is indeed very limited in that case. The US uses
by far more energy than it produces, and more resources, which in a
way is the same thing.


I meant that the US uses say ..25% of the energy and produces 25% of the Worlds
GNP.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
  #25   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Your understanding is indeed very limited in that case. The US uses
by far more energy than it produces, and more resources, which in a
way is the same thing.


I meant that the US uses say ..25% of the energy and produces 25% of the Worlds
GNP.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637


  #26   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Blind Joni wrote:
Do a little research into what happened to GM's EV-1 all electric car.



Actually one of my best friends was an engineer on that project..he was
actually the guy driving around the country doing the demos.


Ask him what happened to electric cars.

  #27   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Blind Joni wrote:
Do a little research into what happened to GM's EV-1 all electric car.



Actually one of my best friends was an engineer on that project..he was
actually the guy driving around the country doing the demos.


Ask him what happened to electric cars.

  #30   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The problem is that the US 7% of the population consumes far, far more
than it's share of the worlds resources. And most of the those
resources belonged to other countries... it's a stacked deck, which is
why so much of the world resents America.


I understand this but aren't we BUYING those resources..we're not stealing
them.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637


  #31   Report Post  
Blind Joni
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The problem is that the US 7% of the population consumes far, far more
than it's share of the worlds resources. And most of the those
resources belonged to other countries... it's a stacked deck, which is
why so much of the world resents America.


I understand this but aren't we BUYING those resources..we're not stealing
them.


John A. Chiara
SOS Recording Studio
Live Sound Inc.
Albany, NY
www.sosrecording.net
518-449-1637
  #32   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Blind Joni wrote:
The problem is that the US 7% of the population consumes far, far more
than it's share of the worlds resources. And most of the those
resources belonged to other countries... it's a stacked deck, which is
why so much of the world resents America.



I understand this but aren't we BUYING those resources..we're not stealing
them.


You CAN'T put a dollar value on everything. There is a finite amount of
fossil fuel available, and we took a good portion of that while it was
still cheap. Because we have (or had) the money to pay for them, doesn't
change the fact that we have and continue to use an imporportionate
amount of those resources. Maybe "stealing" isn't the right word, you
can call it "taking".

And, in direct corralation to your premise, it still remains fact that
the conservation efforts starting now could, and should have been
started many decades ago. They weren't. Because, as you point out, we
had the "money" to abuse the situation, and it was in "big oils" best
interest to WASTE those resources. Just because we had the money, that
doesn't mean it was right. Or smart. Very SHORT TERM thinking. And the
present administration is continuing in that tradition.

I do honestly think the situation would be a little less critical right
now had Gore (been appointed) president instead of Bush. Of course we
will never know.

  #33   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Blind Joni wrote:
The problem is that the US 7% of the population consumes far, far more
than it's share of the worlds resources. And most of the those
resources belonged to other countries... it's a stacked deck, which is
why so much of the world resents America.



I understand this but aren't we BUYING those resources..we're not stealing
them.


You CAN'T put a dollar value on everything. There is a finite amount of
fossil fuel available, and we took a good portion of that while it was
still cheap. Because we have (or had) the money to pay for them, doesn't
change the fact that we have and continue to use an imporportionate
amount of those resources. Maybe "stealing" isn't the right word, you
can call it "taking".

And, in direct corralation to your premise, it still remains fact that
the conservation efforts starting now could, and should have been
started many decades ago. They weren't. Because, as you point out, we
had the "money" to abuse the situation, and it was in "big oils" best
interest to WASTE those resources. Just because we had the money, that
doesn't mean it was right. Or smart. Very SHORT TERM thinking. And the
present administration is continuing in that tradition.

I do honestly think the situation would be a little less critical right
now had Gore (been appointed) president instead of Bush. Of course we
will never know.

  #34   Report Post  
Glenn Dowdy
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Pete Dimsman" wrote in message
...


Blind Joni wrote:
The problem is that the US 7% of the population consumes far, far more
than it's share of the worlds resources. And most of the those
resources belonged to other countries... it's a stacked deck, which is
why so much of the world resents America.



I understand this but aren't we BUYING those resources..we're not

stealing
them.


You CAN'T put a dollar value on everything. There is a finite amount of
fossil fuel available, and we took a good portion of that while it was
still cheap. Because we have (or had) the money to pay for them, doesn't
change the fact that we have and continue to use an imporportionate
amount of those resources. Maybe "stealing" isn't the right word, you
can call it "taking".


So what you're saying is that the US is offering the best price for scarce
resources, and is paying the same price as anyone else for non-scarce goods?
The countries that sell us resources don't have to, do they?

Glenn D.


  #35   Report Post  
Glenn Dowdy
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Pete Dimsman" wrote in message
...


Blind Joni wrote:
The problem is that the US 7% of the population consumes far, far more
than it's share of the worlds resources. And most of the those
resources belonged to other countries... it's a stacked deck, which is
why so much of the world resents America.



I understand this but aren't we BUYING those resources..we're not

stealing
them.


You CAN'T put a dollar value on everything. There is a finite amount of
fossil fuel available, and we took a good portion of that while it was
still cheap. Because we have (or had) the money to pay for them, doesn't
change the fact that we have and continue to use an imporportionate
amount of those resources. Maybe "stealing" isn't the right word, you
can call it "taking".


So what you're saying is that the US is offering the best price for scarce
resources, and is paying the same price as anyone else for non-scarce goods?
The countries that sell us resources don't have to, do they?

Glenn D.




  #36   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Glenn Dowdy wrote:



So what you're saying is that the US is offering the best price for scarce
resources, and is paying the same price as anyone else for non-scarce goods?
The countries that sell us resources don't have to, do they?


I'm not sure that is what I am saying, but you still missed my point. We
could have and can still choose to conserve resources instead of
exploiting them.

It is about doing the right thing, not what is in the best interest of
huge corporations.

b.t.w. Exxon still hasn't paid everything they owe for the Valdez
disaster. Still litigating. In the meantime, still one of the most
profitable entities on the planet.

  #37   Report Post  
Pete Dimsman
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Glenn Dowdy wrote:



So what you're saying is that the US is offering the best price for scarce
resources, and is paying the same price as anyone else for non-scarce goods?
The countries that sell us resources don't have to, do they?


I'm not sure that is what I am saying, but you still missed my point. We
could have and can still choose to conserve resources instead of
exploiting them.

It is about doing the right thing, not what is in the best interest of
huge corporations.

b.t.w. Exxon still hasn't paid everything they owe for the Valdez
disaster. Still litigating. In the meantime, still one of the most
profitable entities on the planet.

  #38   Report Post  
agent86
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Blind Joni wrote:

The problem is that the US 7% of the population consumes far, far more
than it's share of the worlds resources. And most of the those
resources belonged to other countries... it's a stacked deck, which is
why so much of the world resents America.


I understand this but aren't we BUYING those resources..we're not stealing
them.


Usually, yes. But recently, they've decided it's easier to just make up
lies about WMDs so they can just invade oil rich countries & take the oil.

  #39   Report Post  
agent86
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Blind Joni wrote:

The problem is that the US 7% of the population consumes far, far more
than it's share of the worlds resources. And most of the those
resources belonged to other countries... it's a stacked deck, which is
why so much of the world resents America.


I understand this but aren't we BUYING those resources..we're not stealing
them.


Usually, yes. But recently, they've decided it's easier to just make up
lies about WMDs so they can just invade oil rich countries & take the oil.

  #40   Report Post  
George
 
Posts: n/a
Default



So what you're saying is that the US is offering the best price for scarce
resources, and is paying the same price as anyone else for non-scarce goods?
The countries that sell us resources don't have to, do they?

Glenn D.



when they don't we will liberate them
George
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What are they Teaching Michael McKelvy Audio Opinions 199 October 15th 04 07:56 PM
The Bankruptcy Of The "Intellectual" Left pyjamarama Audio Opinions 0 April 9th 04 02:27 PM
Musical & Political Facts Bruce J. Richman Audio Opinions 0 March 25th 04 06:28 PM
Political sleaze at its worst Sandman Audio Opinions 4 January 9th 04 09:19 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:15 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"