On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Michael Luscombe <[email protected]>wrote:

>
> --
>
> Yeah, you ask the plants. We'll wait for you to get back to us. Yes,
> plants process C02, but it's an equation. You can't cut down the
> Amazon and produce C02 willy-nilly without unbalancing that equation.
>
> You've combined several issues here into one. So if we like Johnny
> Carson and don't agree with the auto bailout, we have to discredit
> global warming?
>
>
> 1. The Automotive Bailout.
>
>        1a) We're talking about North American companies that have regularly
> closed plants in the US and Canada and moved those jobs to Mexico
> because of the prohibitive cost of labour, while Japanese companies
> have been opening plants in the US and Canada and making a decent
> profit. This is hardly an industry that had the public's best
> interest at heart.
>
>        1b) The writing was on the wall about consumer's desire for lower
> emission vehicles, and GM, Ford and Chrysler have been unwilling or
> unable to produce cars that people in this country actually want. I
> really don't have a basis for linking some kind of conspiracy between
> oil and car companies, so I'll put it down to old executives who
> aren't very nimble thinkers.
>
>        1c) Of course, now they've completely f*cked up, they have no
> profits to develop vehicles with the customers needs in mind. So do
> we employ tough love, let a giant north american industry fail and
> give all that business to Japanese carmakers? That's what I want to
> say, but that doesn't sit well with me.
>
>        You gave a ridiculous amount of money to a financial industry that
> produces nothing worthwhile, and largely pocketed the money that may
> have counted as "profit" in more sensible times, with almost no
> strings attached. I say you have an opportunity here to exert some
> real pressure on the auto industry to start hitting targets for low-
> emission/no-emission vehicles like the EV-1 GM scrapped in
> California. California was pressured to drop a law on emission caps
> and targets for low emission vehicles. This bailout is an opportunity
> to apply some real leverage to these companies. We'll help you out,
> but you have to start making cars we want. Now. If it means your
> profits are lower for the next few years, start getting used to mac
> and cheese.
>
>
> 2. The premise for the Iraq war.
>
>        This whole "premise" bit is a nice way to gloss over the fact that
> the "premise" for the Iraq war was a complete invention (lie) by the
> US government. I'm not sure it's that hard to understand that support
> for an unnecessary war dried up when it was revealed that there was
> indeed a conspiracy to fake the entire threat. That threat was then
> used to erode basic human rights by illegally wiretapping citizens,
> opening black-site prisons, and flat out torture. Liars on this scale
> usually get tossed in prison.
>
>        This isn't a cute anecdote, this should have been bigger than
> Watergate, Contra and 100 Clinton blow jobs put together. Thankfully,
> they were able to precipitate a worse disaster to draw attention away
> from them.
>
>
> 3. Global Warming.
>
>        3a) Thankfully, 95% of the scientists in the world don't have to
> convince every last crackpot that global warming is real. Having the
> support of the president and the party in power should be enough.
>
>        3b) If your premise is that the entire thing is a hoax, what's wrong
> with creating new jobs, and new markets for eco-friendly products?
> Oil is a finite resource, and one controlled primarily by foreign
> interests that gain far too much leverage on our economies. Swiftly
> moving away from these conflicts of interest towards a far more
> sustainable, responsible and independent future is a win-win-win
> situation for the economy, security and the environment.
>
>        3c) Seriously, what's the downside? You're not a scientist, you're
> just too set in your ways to side with hippies in any way, shape or
> form. You let your financial institutions deceive and steal from you
> (rich men in suits), you let your government invent a threat and
> steal money, goodwill and young men and women from you (again, more
> rich men in suits). Your willingness to listen to rich people tell
> you what's good for you isn't doing you any favors.
>
> If you can't learn from your mistakes, then you're a fool.
>

too bad there isn't a "best of ot-stratalist" to send this to...if anyone
was ever more eloquent with their perspectives and those ideas paralleled my
own, i haven't met them, thanks.
i do take one issue, if i heard right, this morning...GM does have capital
but refuses to use it to save itself.
and i do firmly believe it should be the big oil suits bailing them out, not
us...that way we won't be paying  thrice, etc....
i bet external oil profiteers are paying heavy prices to lobby against
alternative fuel use vehicles...;  ^)

>
>
At 11:23 AM -0600 11/29/08, Chris Bischoff said:
Just nod and smile, that's a smart pair you have there.

Mugsy replies:
why thanks, (blush).

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"StrataList-OT" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/StrataList-OT?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to