Posted on 07/16/2008 5:43:59 AM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin
“I’m criticizing people who feel a sense of entitlement about living in the suburbs.”
Nobody here has demanded “a sense of entitlement” to live in the suburbs. You’ve projected your liberal vomit onto the good citizens here at FR. People at FR talk about allowing the free market to work. You write like a 19 year old college freshmen sponge who just exited a lecture from a drooling Marxist professor.
Allow me to recommend to you “The Federalist Papers.” Get back to us after you’ve read it.
In terms of fuel, your statement becomes a non-sequitur. That's because, like I've pointed out to you in the previous posts, that so much of what we do requires oil. Our economy, our way of life, our military, the products we buy, the clothes we wear....all requires oil, and right now oil is the only feasible commodity out there.
This entire energy crisis is completely fabricated by socialists in government.
This entire energy crisis is completely fabricated by socialists in government.
Uh, no.
Notice that they use the term “acre” to conjure up some idea of a huge lot, rather than lot dimensions, which anyone with the slightest concept of land and real estate, would try to think in terms of.
I guess 1/6 acre is a lot in a third world country, which the Left feels that everyone should reference to. Perhaps Europe. The Soviet Apartments are what they really want everyone else to live like, while government officials have all the huge lots and domiciles.
It’s very simple — people are free to live wherever they want as long as they can afford it.
However, the gubmint is under no obligation to support any particular lifestyle, nor is anyone entitled to a specific lifestyle just because it suits them.
I’m not really against drilling, I just think it’s not really going to help. We’re going to have to figure out an alternative; better to do it now while we still have plenty of wiggle room rather than when we truly have no other option.
I don’t want to force anybody to do anything. I just want people to stop whining when gas prices go up and accept they’re only entitled to the lifestyle they can afford.
All government money is taxpayer money. The government only has the money they manage to steal from us. Whether it’s paying for roads or something else, the government takes money from us to spends it. I’m not sure the point you’re trying to make.
How dare you suggest that people should live within their means!
I guess we’ll find out. I’m pretty sure I’m not, though.
What have I said that’s remotely Marxist? The very thing I’m promoting is allowing the free market to determine what the best solution is.
If it’s fabricated, I guess we got nothing to worry about. It’s not like our whole economy depends on it...
I saw your posts and I was gonna warn you to get your flame suit on. I said what I originally said for the very reason that I get reactions like I’ve gotten. It’s amazing the levels of emotion that are set off by high gas prices. People panic like lunatics, start pointing their fingers, and never take responsibility for putting themselves in a situation where fluctuation of energy prices can become an economic hardship.
Global oil consumption is rising at about 1% annually, according to almost every energy source who studies the issue.
That rate of growth could be reduced or kept even without much angst, such as conversion to natural gas (auto conversion is relatively simple. We just need a powerful energy company to commit to having natural gas filling stations around the US, and in urban areas globally)
Also, nuclear electricity plants are not the evil monsters many thought some 40 years ago.
Clean coal is another abundant energy source, if only the wackadoodle environmentalists can be vanquished. Coal can be converted to truck diesel relatively easily, I've read.
Crude oil is necessary for jet fuel, and other transportation requirements. But with some adjustments in our energy use, the rate of crude oil consumption should even out, and perhaps even start to drop.
When that happens, the crazy mid-East countries will be falling all over themselves to sell crude oil more cheaply, just to keep up their extravagant way of life.
The tide could be turned, if we only have the willpower... and America will not have to lessen its good lifestyle one bit.
I'm a big fan of T. Boone Pickens, and am currently trying to convince my conservative Republican candidate for Congress to join up with Pickens, and invite him to our district next month for marketing his plan.
The entire GOP caucus, every 2008 candidate, should invite Pickens to their district to lend support to his plan.
To a great extent, you are correct. Though IMHO, it is not an energy crisis so much as a price crisis. I haven't seen a station run out of gas yet, like in the Carter days. I haven't seen lines of people waiting to get gas like in the Carter days. There's enough oil, despite the liberals telling us otherwise. There is no immediate crisis - yet.
The problem is that there's barely enough, and we're one incident away from a true energy crisis. Supply is tight but adequate. But it would be more than adequate had the socialist/democRATS and a few RINO's not voted repeatedly to prevent off-shore drilling as well as drilling in that useless frozen tundra known as ANWR.
Think about this for a second. We haven't been able to build much in the way of coal-fired power plants due to democrats. Nuclear is "too dangerous". Dams "harm the fish". Windmills "kill the birds" (and are pretty unreliable anyway, but that's another story). Instead, we start burning natural gas, which forces the price of natural gas through the roof. That $100 heating bill of 10 years ago is 3+ times that much now. Thanks to the democRATS, a few RINOs, and mostly the environazis.
Likewise, with oil - our nation's demand has increased over the last 3 decades, but the liberals have been die-hard against drilling. So naturally, while our nation's production has stayed relatively constant, it's proportion of our increasing demand has decreased as we make up for the domestic shortage by buying on the world market. this puts more leverage in the hands of foreign entities that supply us - entities like Hugo Chavez (whom I suspect the liberals like). That puts the US in a weaker position than it needs to be in.
Of course, the 'rats are claiming to save the planet, but I don't buy that BS any more. I've been listening to the enviromental extremists since the 1960's when they actually had a case. Today, they're inventing demons (global warming, anyone?) to legitamize their existence.
There's another great factor in the gas price issue - that is that the dollar's value on the world market is horribly low. In fact, I'd venture to say that the devaluated dollar is having more influence on the price of oil than any supply-demand issues.
And finally, there's a psychological angle as well. Like a hot stock, speculative investors have put their money into oil with the hopes of gaining an increase, but at some point, the price is no longer supportable as the value is much lower than the price (like housing in 2005). So what happens? The house of cards eventually crumbles as it always does. I think that we're close to that point - Bush merely reversed the executive order banning off-shore drilling and oil prices have dropped $10 per barrel in 2 days. That shows a bit of volatility.
Nuclear and coal are both good alternatives. Coal will eventually run into the same problem (finite supply) but it’s a lot further off. Besides, throwing everything we can on the table is a good idea. By the way, T. Boone Pickens thinks that the current high oil prices are a reality and here to stay. That’s mostly what I’ve said on this thread, but got some pretty hostile reactions.
T. Boone Pickens has made a substantial investment in wind power and wishes to recoup his investment along with some earnings. Nothing wrong with that, but it should be understood that there is personal gain involved.
Wind power has some definate disadvantages - it can't be regulated to match customer load, and it tends to be least available when it is most needed. On those super-hot summer days. It also is very land-intensive, requiring many many times more land for a 1000 MW installation than, say, a coal or nuclear plant of equal size.
That's not to say that there's no place for wind in the portfolio of power production. It's just to say that by it's nature, it cannot become a major source.
Now, connecting wind turbines to a pumping scheme for pumped water storage generation would be a nice idea, but that's pretty doggone expensive up front. Still, at least the generation could be controlled and put on the grid as needed rather than when mother nature decides that it should be windy.
I only brought him up because the original poster did.
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.