โMay-20-2008 09:25 PM
โJun-13-2008 06:56 AM
iwmuddy wrote:
Posts or public statements like yours may very soon be forbidden and considered to be a threat to National Security because it acts to incite readers to become rebellious. Also talk radio has been suggested as being problematic.
โJun-13-2008 06:31 AM
โJun-13-2008 05:01 AM
โJun-13-2008 02:15 AM
โJun-12-2008 10:35 PM
โJun-12-2008 09:21 PM
โJun-12-2008 08:04 PM
topflite51 wrote:
Getting to the market or work by car is not an essential function. Ever hear of walking, riding a bicycle, etc.Of course but to use that as a broad justification that vehicles arenโt essential is ridiculous. Ever hear of people with bad knees, bad backs, asthma, heart problems, hemorrhoids etc.? Donโt they get eat or do they have to depend on someone else to get their grub? I want to see you pedal to the grocery store when itโs minus 20, the windโs blowing at 20 MPH and the road shoulders are covered with snow or invisible. Youโd have to be an idiot to ride a bike on snow covered highways when the roads are narrow and shoulders icy. If you fell on the shoulder by the time someone found you, youโd be frozen like a rock. Of course, they wouldnโt have to dig a grave, they could pound you into the ground. Wouldn't a lot of Americans be in a lot better shape if they tried it?Maybe not. Ambulances wouldnโt be essential either. The medics could ride bikes and make little saddle bags to hold batteries for the siren, oxygen cylinders and medical equipment. Maybe some people would be healthier but it has no real bearing on your introductory statement and bicycle ambulances are out of the question. Or how about mass transit or ride sharing?I think, when possible, thatโs being done more than you may think. We havenโt developed mass transit because we relied on cheap gas and never saw a need for an extensive mass transit system until now. As to the utilities, their infrastructure is in horrendous shape, asking for price increases after the fact is not getting it done. It worked in the beginning, but it is slowly failing. "20 -30 years of using oil utilities, that may give enough time to make necessary transitions." What is that? Is that your idea of an energy policy for the nation? No. It was an alternative to windfall profits taxes. We need a workable, nonpartisan energy plan but we must also buy the time to implement it. That is a plan doomed to failure.It wasnโt an energy plan, it was a suggestion to contain greed. The reason I can that is simple, even you used the words "that may".You know the adage, โnever say neverโ. Do we risk our children's and their children's future on those words? I think not.I donโt know what youโre driving at here. We have to do something better than thatโฆ
โJun-12-2008 07:49 PM
โJun-12-2008 06:32 PM
onrecess wrote:
It is tiring to hear the so called "America loving" people saying the govt is stupid, crooked (admitting this ruling party is unabashedly so) even under a different party), incapable of effective action... On and on. Gee, what part of America do y'all love? The dirt?
โJun-12-2008 06:16 PM
โJun-12-2008 06:13 PM
topflite51 wrote:
Is gasoline and diesel "essential", maybe for commercial applications, but for private? There is no "commerce" without "private". Once the truck gets the food to market (commercial), "private" (people) must have the ability to travel to the stores, go to work, etc. Commerce wouldn't exist without "private's" participation. As to being a "public utility" best look at those, they are in serious need of capital for upgrading. The system for applying for a price increase is not working for those utilities.They seem to have worked for decades and if we can eek out 20-30 years using oil utilities, that may give us enough time to make the necessary transitions. ...Rationing fuel, may have worked where you were, but... In today's ME FIRST society, I sincerely doubt it would work...I don't think so either. I think in WWII the common ration was 4 gallons/week and 8 if you were working in an industry necessary for the war effort. Our population is much too diverse and spread out for similiar rationing.
For instance, a local company is considering four day work weeks because the average distance driven by their 500 employees is 43 miles to work (I may have my numbers wrong but you get the idea). The gas savings are substantial to say the least and any rationing program would have to be sophisticated.
โJun-12-2008 04:36 PM
โJun-12-2008 02:49 PM
eltejano1 wrote:Is gasoline and diesel "essential", maybe for commercial applications, but for private? As to being a "public utility" best look at those, they are in serious need of capital for upgrading. The system for applying for a price increase is not working for those utilities. How would it work for the oil industry? Rationing fuel, may have worked where you were, but as I recall my father and uncle's stories regarding rationing, it didn't work where they were. I guess it all depend's on ones perspective on whether it worked or not. In today's ME FIRST society, I sincerely doubt it would work.
I don't anticipate flat-out nationalization, but I do think we're going to see some serious regulation of the industry. There's plenty of precedent for it. Gasoline, after all, falls under the category of "essential" goods and services and, therefore, could be considered a "public utility". Price controls would be the first step, and the industry couldn't raise prices without first making their case to a regulatory commission. This would lead to shortages and long lines at the pump, which would be followed be some sort of allocation system, i.e., rationing. After that, without vigorous enforcement, as in WWII, blackmarkets would develop, etc etc.
But John Q. Public has to get work, to the grocery store and the doctor. They'll probably devise some workable system for rationing. I remember WWII rationing. Our family car had a windshield sticker with an "A" on it, which meant it was just a low-priority family vehicle. I can't remember the details, but it seemed to work pretty well. Everyone complained, but it worked - we had essential gas but no extra.
Jack
โJun-12-2008 02:14 PM
AO_hitech wrote:Yeah, I remember Enron, they were encouraged to do things by the well meaning deregulators in California as I recall.
Anyone remember Enron? Quite an example of a company manipulating energy prices. No conspiracy there, just facts.
โJun-12-2008 02:13 PM