Posted on 07/16/2008 5:43:59 AM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
To an extent, yes.
"Wake up. Drilling won’t do anything."
Bullshit. I'm from South Louisiana, and I'm VERY familiar with the oil business. I know just what a TINY fraction of the Gulf of Mexico in which drilling is allowed (about half of the available coastline). And ALL of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts are off limits as well. There are HUGE amounts of oil off the California coast-so much that it oozes out of the seabed naturally--all off limits. There's plenty of oil---but the eco-nutcases like you have prevented drilling for it and refining it. This situation is TOTALLY artificial and caused DIRECTLY by government INTERFERENCE with the "free market".
Nice try, but no they are not.
The statistics are comparing 2 *major* cities, that have clearly marked city boundaries, such as Minneapolis and Los Angeles have.
The statistics are clear regarding these two major cities, and Minneapolis has considerably more crime per capita than does Los Angeles.
I’m not an eco-nutcase. I haven’t said a word on this thread to suggest that, either. I don’t think it’s economically feasible in the long-term to reamin dependent on a fossil fuel. There’s a finite supply and an ever-growing demand. Maybe it will be fine for the rest of our lifetime, but I’m trying to think further ahead than that.
Fine, whatever. All that says is that Los Angeles is a low-crime city. I still don’t get the point you’re trying to make.
Also, Minneapolis and St. Paul (which is where I live, BTW) pretty much just have the city proper and then suburbs. I grew up in Edina, right over the border from Minneapolis, and it becomes very suburban very fast. This is unlike Los Angleles where there are very urbanized towns and cities right next to or in some cases surrounded by the city proper. A lot of what people think of when they think of “Los Angeles” is not actually IN the City of Los Angeles. That was the only point I was trying to make. It doesn’t mean that there is more crime within the city limits.
[I always wonder what people out in the middle of nowhere do when their car breaks down? I just take the bus.]
I live out in the middle of nowhere (and like it very much). If my car breaks down, I fix it! You are quite the city slicker aren’t ya?
What if it breaks down for good? What if you need to go shopping for parts? It’s not always that simple.
I wouldn’t call myself a city slicker. People from the country think I am, but I spent a few years working in NYC and people there I thought I was a country bumpkin. I just can’t win.
Cars are always fixable. However, if it was going to cost more to repair the car that what it was worth, I’d sell it for scrap and buy a new car. If I needed to go shopping for parts, I’d can order them over the internet or take one of our other two vehicles to town. I could also call a friend or family member to give me a lift (us little folk out here in the boondocks like to help each other out like that, probably a foreign concept to most city liberals).
I’m a little insulted, frankly. First of all, I’m not a liberal. Secondly, I’ve never seen a motorist stranded on the side of the road without somebody pulling over to help him or her. I’m skeptical you’ve ever even been to Minnesota, so don’t make judgements. I wouldn’t do the same about Kansas.
I would take the bus because I don’t want to bother people. I don’t want to interrupt somebody else’s day when I have a better option. Also, if I want to make it to work on time, I don’t necessarily have time to wait. I could fix my own car, but the money I spend having somebody else fix it isn’t worth as much as the time I’d lose doing it myself.
There are places on this world where they are burning it up. In this country, we HAVE destroyed things, we have polluted and made toxic areas of our environment, we have caused unnecessary destruction.
We have become markedly better in the past 40 years. However, don’t let the fact that the left and the environmental whackos have stolen the movement for their own purposes make you think you must therefore be opposed to the concept of “greening up the planet”.
There are things we can do that make sense, that will be better for us and our children, that will provide a virtually eternally sustainable environment for humankind.
If we simply dismiss environmentalism and conservationism because the movements have been overrun by liberals, we will be on the wrong side, just as they are.
I’ve been to every U.S. state except, CA, OR, WA, AK, FL and the very northeastern states.
You position here is liberal. You oppose free market solutions and support Gov’t interference and regulation. That is leftist. Why not just let the free market find the solution?
>I’m criticizing people who think they’re entitled to cheap gas.<
I know Congress is not totally responsible for the price of oil/gas, but in as much as their action has raised our costs in the recent future, we voters are doggone sure entitled to cheaper gas by voting these liberal whackadoos out of Washington.
That, and we can drill our resources in a manner that does as little harm as possible to the environment, if these Dems weren’t so glued to their environmentalist base.
I beg to differ. Your "solutions" are right out of eco-nutcases "case book" of eliminating the automobile and forcing everyone into megalopolises.
"I don’t think it’s economically feasible in the long-term to remain dependent on a fossil fuel. There’s a finite supply and an ever-growing demand. Maybe it will be fine for the rest of our lifetime, but I’m trying to think further ahead than that."
And I agree. But we don't NEED a "long-term" fix TODAY. There are technologies coming on that will take care of the LONG-term (Nanosolar CIGS printed solar cells, Bussard IEC fusion, "cold fusion" (is looking more real every day), burner and breeder fission reactors) and more. There is no shortage of solutions to the LONG term problem if we can just shove the eco-fanatics back into their cages and quit following the meme that the only good technology is a banned technology. And may James Earl Carter rot in hell.
“I’ve got a news flash for you; the road system is government subsidized transportation.”
Here’s a news flash for you, Mr. “Liberaltarian.”
The roads in states are subsidized by taxpayers, not government. The slimey politicians don’t contribute a dime to roads. They steal money from working taxpayers at the point of a gun. Liberals in states tax the hell out of productive communities and redistribute that money as “grants” and subsidies back to those communities liberals choose.
It’s called socialism.
Did you know that states issue notices inviting communities to apply for “grants” to fix bridges, lay roads, build sewers, steal privately owned railroad tracks for bike paths, grab property for snowmobile trails from private property owners and hand out money to set up regional planning commissions to overrule decisions by local communities?
I’d bet you never knew that.
How about I send a bum and a heavily armed squad of fascist cops to your house and demand you give him 30% of everything you earned last week. That okay with you?
Because it's a beautiful state that doesn't have the liberal lunacy of Michigan or Ohio. Yes Doyle is a Rat but he's Reagan compared to Granholm.
Unfortunately, I'm all out of pixie dust. Drilling for oil will automatically bring gas prices down. It happened under Reagan, and it happened when Bush overturned his father's EO ban on offshore oil drilling.
This a problem of global supply and demand, and it’s only going to get worse.
Harry Reid, is that you?
We need to ween ourselves off oil, not kick the can down the road.
Oil is a commodity, not an addiction. We need oil, not just for fuel, but it's used in thousands of other products as well.
The high prices are good because they’ll allow the market to figure out something more efficient much faster than any government program will.
You mean like ethanol, bio-fuels, and farts? Those efficient alternatives?
It's the new gov't speak. $75k per year income is "rich", a 1/6 acre lot is "large", and a 2,000 sqft house is a "mansion".
You're simply wrong and myopic on this topic.
Yeah, all thanks to the socialists in Congress.
It’s a global problem.
It's not. It's a problem fabricated by the socialists in Congress.
For many people, that may leave them unable to live their current lifestyle.
That includes your buddies living in the city. Guess where the bulk of low-income energy assistance programs go to? People in the big cities!
If you think people can magically adjust their lifestyles because of energy, you are crazy. High energy prices affects EVERYONE - even Bill Gates. All the food that's trucked into your grocery store, the products trucked into Wal-Mart. Hello? What do you think these trucks run on?
Rather than accepting it adjusting, many are whining and complaining and expecting somebody else to fix the mess they’ve gotten themselves into. Typical liberal behavior
It's not "typical liberal" behavior. Energy is the lifeblood of freedom. It has made America, for the 20th century anyway, a powerful and envied nation. It has built our military, our factories, and maintained our relatively high standard of living. You are truly out to lunch on this issue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.