[quote]wirewound wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Mah-lur wrote:
NateOrade wrote:
Mah-lur wrote:
The solution is to do something about our seeming inability to control ourselves.
Good luck with that.
Taxes on gas are absurdly low. Perhaps a change is in order.
How is growing the size of government with our taxes and impoverishing those who have to drive for a living(the poor) going to help anything?
Tax gas and grow mass transit.[/quote]
We already tax gas.
Mass transit is antithetical to freedom. By taxing gas (more) you are saying that you are against allowing individuals to move freely, unless it is in places that central organizers direct that you can go. Mass transit is great if you are trying to create a hivelike community. It is bad if you are trying to foster individualism.
When congress doesn’t even have the balls to vote on expanding our domestic drilling, then it goes beyond moral, and inspirational. Those who are whores to the enviro-fucktards are holding oil reserves hostage.
Every time you buy a tank of gas, there is a 70% chance it will wind up in the hands of those that want our nation destroyed, and we have a congress full of nutless assholes who are more than happy to support lixy and her gang of cowards.
The enviro-fucktards? Are you insane?
The USA is one of the world’s richest fossil fuel producers. We’ve been exploding in an orgy of consumption for a very long time. And despite two major crises in supply and an ever-increasing dependency on foreign oil, we haven’t learned.
Taxes on gas are absurdly low. Our strategic stockpiles are unimpressive.
And you think the solution is to drill more? The solution is to do something about our seeming inability to control ourselves.
And regardless, we’re going to be dependent on the imports of potential adversaries in the foreseeable future. In fact, almost all highly industrialized nation import A LOT of their energy.
What? We hve over 83 billion barrels of LSC sitting in Alaske, and right off shore. Who in fuck’s name is keeping us from even bringing drilling there to a vote?
CHina is about to start drilling about 90 miles off our Florida coast in oil fields we could already be exporting.
Yes enviro fucktards have whores like Pelosi by her political balls.
We could double our domestic oil production and cut our foreign dependence in half. That would be a very good thing. How can you not understand this?
Um, no, we have nowhere close to 83 billions of oil in Alaska.
More like 7.7; hardly anything.
China is going to drill because we have an embargo on Cuba, which opened leasing awhile ago, and invited the US to partake. This is our fault, not China’s.
We will never become interdependent. It is no longer posssible. [/quote]
You missed the “and offshore reserves” part. Nice job only paying attention to half of what is said.
[quote]Mah-lur wrote:
Everyone: I know politics can be a highly emotional issue. I know this is T-Nation.
But if we’re trying to have a debate, to find the truth of an issue, it seems as if we should avoid personal attacks and distortion of an issue to achieve an ego boosting internet victory.
I’m not in this thread to attack anyone, just to present my views the best way I know how.[/quote]
Then start looking for truth. What you say is half-truths at best.
Mass transit is antithetical to freedom. By taxing gas (more) you are saying that you are against allowing individuals to move freely, unless it is in places that central organizers direct that you can go. Mass transit is great if you are trying to create a hivelike community. It is bad if you are trying to foster individualism.
[/quote]
So true! But what about the implications?
You’re very right, the car is literally and figuratively symbolic of prosperity, individualism, and mobility, all of which are associated with liberal democratic societies.
But what about petroleum? And other nations?
If the Chinese were to drive as many per capita passenger miles as Americans currently do each year, it would only take five years to use all of earth’s known energy reserves.
So do we limit the freedom of other nations, like China and other developing nations? Wouldn’t that be hypocritical?
[quote]wirewound wrote:
PRCalDude wrote:
Mah-lur wrote:
NateOrade wrote:
Mah-lur wrote:
The solution is to do something about our seeming inability to control ourselves.
Good luck with that.
Taxes on gas are absurdly low. Perhaps a change is in order.
How is growing the size of government with our taxes and impoverishing those who have to drive for a living(the poor) going to help anything?
Tax gas and grow mass transit.[/quote]
Great. How do the welders, construction workers, plumbers, etc. get their tools to the job site? They’ll just load them onto the bus, huh?
Great. How do the welders, construction workers, plumbers, etc. get their tools to the job site? They’ll just load them onto the bus, huh? [/quote]
Those are folks of myth. Urban liberals know there are only software engineers, cinematographers, and diversity officers at internet publishing firms.
Kidding aside - though I really wasn’t kidding - I don’t hate the idea of public transit, and it works reasonably well in highly populated urban areas. But, adding public transit infrastructure where there is none in growing cities is an investment and logistical nightmare, fantasies of the urban liberals aside.
And the idea ignores the vast area of America that aren’t coastal cities that aren’t compatible with any form of concentrated public transportation. Urbanites haven’t quite made it to the flyover states where their idealized “common man” lives to see that highly prized theories of “public transit” aren’t going to work.
You’ve just described the demographic of Prius drivers in LA.
I’ve often wondered what would become of monied, propertied liberals in Los Angeles if the working class Mexicans began to experience much economic want due to socialistic economic practices and excessive taxes that affect the poor. I should stop wondering these things though because nothing like that could possibly ever happen.
Mass transit is antithetical to freedom. By taxing gas (more) you are saying that you are against allowing individuals to move freely, unless it is in places that central organizers direct that you can go. Mass transit is great if you are trying to create a hivelike community. It is bad if you are trying to foster individualism.
So true! But what about the implications?
You’re very right, the car is literally and figuratively symbolic of prosperity, individualism, and mobility, all of which are associated with liberal democratic societies.
But what about petroleum? And other nations?
If the Chinese were to drive as many per capita passenger miles as Americans currently do each year, it would only take five years to use all of earth’s known energy reserves.
So do we limit the freedom of other nations, like China and other developing nations? Wouldn’t that be hypocritical?[/quote]
So the solution is to limit liberty for Americans? It’s all in fairness right? Or we could let the free market rule. Everyone drives what they can afford. Eventually gas supplies run low and the price goes up. Then someone sees the opportunity to profit from another energy source and someone invents the tech. It’s already happening, but we want our toys NOW.
On second read: What is your solution to this problem? I will never give up my Dodge, even if that means 100 Chinese are forced to ride their bicycles. If you cannot convince me to conserve (because I know that the “elite” will never conserve and therefore continue to grow in power over me) then how do you fix our supposed crisis? Should we all be given a fuel allowance by big brother?
As for me, I’ll put my trust in the market. Gas prices will go up and everyone will cry. So far as I see it, there isn’t a whole lot to worry about except for the draconian rules that the U.S.S.A. will place upon me in a pathetic attempt to solve a nonexistent problem will increasing the power of my “leaders”.
[quote]Mah-lur wrote:
rainjack wrote:
You missed the “and offshore reserves” part. Nice job only paying attention to half of what is said.
You’re right, I did miss that.
Can you show me the source of your information?[/quote]
CNBC, or MSNBC. Can’t remember which. I think the show was “Fast Money”, or something like that. It’s the financial show that comes on right before “Cramer’s Mad Money”.
I hate people who can’t cite sources, so I feel like a damn hypocrite saying I saw it on TV.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Mah-lur wrote:
rainjack wrote:
You missed the “and offshore reserves” part. Nice job only paying attention to half of what is said.
You’re right, I did miss that.
Can you show me the source of your information?
CNBC, or MSNBC. Can’t remember which. I think the show was “Fast Money”, or something like that. It’s the financial show that comes on right before “Cramer’s Mad Money”.
I hate people who can’t cite sources, so I feel like a damn hypocrite saying I saw it on TV.
[/quote]
I searched for 83 billion barrels and nothing came up.
The number is completely wrong. 83 billion barrels in alaska in Alaska and offshore? I don’t know if you mean offshore from alaska, or of all of our coasts, but either way it is way high.
There are 21 billion barrels of proven oil reserves onshore and offshore in the US, including Alaska.
But hey, If I were you I’d love to believe we had 83 Billion barrels at our disposal. But the reality is that we are fucked and there is very little we can do about it.
But hey, If I were you I’d love to believe we had 83 Billion barrels at our disposal. But the reality is that we are fucked and there is very little we can do about it.[/quote]
Don’t you think “fucked” might be a wee bit of hyperbole?
But hey, If I were you I’d love to believe we had 83 Billion barrels at our disposal. But the reality is that we are fucked and there is very little we can do about it.
Don’t you think “fucked” might be a wee bit of hyperbole?
But hey, If I were you I’d love to believe we had 83 Billion barrels at our disposal. But the reality is that we are fucked and there is very little we can do about it.
Don’t you think “fucked” might be a wee bit of hyperbole?
mike[/quote]
I agree. We have become fat and lazy in the development of new technologies - especially given the fact that the peak oil myth has been completely dispelled - hyperbole is an understatement.
But hey, If I were you I’d love to believe we had 83 Billion barrels at our disposal. But the reality is that we are fucked and there is very little we can do about it.
Don’t you think “fucked” might be a wee bit of hyperbole?
mike
Not at all.[/quote]
Really? Really? Can you actually elaborate on that? I want to know how precisely we are fucked.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
Gael wrote:
But hey, If I were you I’d love to believe we had 83 Billion barrels at our disposal. But the reality is that we are fucked and there is very little we can do about it.
Don’t you think “fucked” might be a wee bit of hyperbole?
mike
I agree. We have become fat and lazy in the development of new technologies - especially given the fact that the peak oil myth has been completely dispelled - hyperbole is an understatement. [/quote]
How can you say that peak oil is dispelled when the following countries have already peaked (many of which were predicted by peak oil theories) ?
[quote]Gael wrote:
collapse of industry
breakdown of civil society
food shortages
rise in violent crime
disease proliferation
worldwide wars
massive population die off
[/quote]
So you’re saying that these things are inevitable now?
[quote]Gael wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
Gael wrote:
But hey, If I were you I’d love to believe we had 83 Billion barrels at our disposal. But the reality is that we are fucked and there is very little we can do about it.
Don’t you think “fucked” might be a wee bit of hyperbole?
mike
I agree. We have become fat and lazy in the development of new technologies - especially given the fact that the peak oil myth has been completely dispelled - hyperbole is an understatement.
How can you say that peak oil is dispelled when the following countries have already peaked (many of which were predicted by peak oil theories) ?
Among anyone who knows anything about the issue, isn’t a question of whether reserves actually peak. It’s a question of when.[/quote]
Shut up! The theory that oil is a new-renewable resource has been debunked. We know now that we can pump oil indefinitely. It’s true. RJ heard it on TV…
Yes, oil is running out but what are you going to do about it? People are still buying it and going to places they don’t need to be. And I’m talking about the middle class. It shows that, in absolute terms, oil is still cheap. I don’t know at which point people shall restrict their movements to the bare minimum, but I’m guessing it’s somewhere in the next couple of decades. Personally, I’m more worried about the quality of air in cities around the world than I am about oil running out. If anything, it’s a good thing as it is forcing those morons driving SUVs to the grocery store to rethink their lifestyle. The other side of the coin is that middle-eastern monarchs and oil corporations are going to get a whole new level above filthy rich.
[quote]Gael wrote:
rainjack wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
Gael wrote:
But hey, If I were you I’d love to believe we had 83 Billion barrels at our disposal. But the reality is that we are fucked and there is very little we can do about it.
Don’t you think “fucked” might be a wee bit of hyperbole?
mike
I agree. We have become fat and lazy in the development of new technologies - especially given the fact that the peak oil myth has been completely dispelled - hyperbole is an understatement.
How can you say that peak oil is dispelled when the following countries have already peaked (many of which were predicted by peak oil theories) ?
Among anyone who knows anything about the issue, isn’t a question of whether reserves actually peak. It’s a question of when.[/quote]
When oil was produced by process - the myth was dispelled. USA oil has not peaked. How can you say that when the Dakota fields have the reserves they do?
If you want to start a Peak Oil thread - knock yourself out. But I don’t think this thread should be hijacked so far off track as to start arguing about that crap here.