Jeff Owens wrote: > Greg wrote: > >OPEC knows this will damage (largely western) oil dependant > >economies and in the long term reduce demand, and their profits. They > >are simply following the curve of maximizing profits along the > >supply/demand curve. > > Yes, OPEC does seem to be making rational economic decisions > at this point. In the past various countries have made special > deals or pressured them. Also, other oil fields have popped > up to undermine their power (Alaska, Indonesia, etc.) The > big question is: What will happen between now and when the > oil supply begins to decrease? > > >Looks like I'll be throwing my vote away and voting for Nader. Oh well > >what can you do, > > I just got report about Ralph Nader and he is hinting things > like: don't vote for me if it helps elect a development > oriented candidate. Here are some other Nader comments: That's an interesting comment from Mr. Nader. Problem is ALL the candidates are "development oriented". I'd love for someone to point out a valid alternative. I have always been pretty pragmatic in my voting and usually choose to not purposely throwing my vote away as a "protest vote" type of thing. Sometimes its a perfectly valid exercise in democracy but simply choosing the lesser of two evils, or a better balance. I have long believed a Democratic president and a Republican majority congress will do the least damage - but that's another thread altogether ;-) However, in this case - with Gore and Bush - as the only two viable winners, I so thoroughly put off by both of them and their policies I seem to have no choice. So its either vote for Nader, a whiny Liberterian (yuck!) or don't vote at all. Very nice quote from Cicero. I like that one, thanks Jeff! Greg > > > Freedom is participation in power > -- Cicero >
