----- Original Message -----
From: "Jed Rothwell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 8:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Vo]: Outrage !!
But not enough to cover the cost of pollution or the war -- which is
mainly a war for oil. That is why the nation runs a deficit, and why the
pollution problem has
not been fixed.
I seriously doubt that the "hidden costs" of your use of electricity is
completely covered by what you pay. Want to pay more? Say, $500-600 per
month more? Much electricity is derived from oil, and almost all of it is
from fossil fuels. You get no free ride either, buddy. But again, of course
it is different when it is YOU.
Either YOU pay it, or I pay it. Since you are the one who is moving you
should pay it.
If I have to pay for something, then you have no say over what I do. If you
or anyone else attempts to have a say, it better not be within striking
range of myself, or there will be a serious problem.
I pay for my car, my fuel, upkeep and repairs on my own, you don't.
No you do not. That's the problem. Your fuel costs you $2 per gallon and
it costs the rest of us $3 extra in hidden costs. You are forcing the rest
of us to bail you out.
Buses and trains use fossil fuels as well. As I said above, so does most
electricity in this nation, and the world in fact...particularly the hell
than is China...with their coal plants they must be accruing a SERIOUS
"hidden cost"... maybe we should destroy that nation entirely for the good
of the planet? Logic such as yours can be dragged out to ridiculous
extremes.
Again, you want to pay a few hundred extra per month for electricity? No?
Then screw off attempting to control our lives.
As far
as global warming, I don't want to hear it. It is still being debated, and
should be.
No it should not. It is a sure thing. You might as well debate whether
cold fusion is real.
Tell that to Freeman Dyson, Richard Lindzen, Fred Singer, etc. They question
what is going on. I suppose you think they are all idiots. People like Park
feel the same way about cold fusion researchers. There is no black and white
here, we need far more studies and less talk, and to not try and destroy our
civilization in the process...which is what your plan will do.
You really don't get it do you? If you put that kind of tax on travel, you
will DESTROY the US economy overnight. People will starve, riot, the cities
will burn. People are already getting tired of the crap they have to put up
with from the lazy on the one hand, and the high-minded on the other hand.
They will not keep putting up with more forever. Your tax will also affect
heavy trucking across state lines, so the price of food for you to eat will
skyrocket as well. Do you really understand that you can't just play around
with values and settings in the real world economy like that? It is not
self-correcting forever. Prod it too much and it will crash....
<sadistic sarcasm>...much like the climate will crash if I crank my Buick up
later today....heh heh heh. </sadistic sarcasm>
I am helping people do cold fusion experiments, in many ways.
Do tell.
Exactly. Resources are scarcer. The Chinese and Indians now want oil and
they can afford to buy it. Technology is ever changing.
And of course, they can burn it without having to pay the "hidden costs" the
rest of us have to pay for....Kyoto exemption being but one weasel-out they
get.
Anyone with half a brain can see that carbon-credit trading is political and
profit driven. It has little or nothing to do with actually changing things.
You and the media have this story backwards. She wants to ride commercial
jets. The government asked her to take a small government jet instead for
security >reseans. She said 'either provide a larger jet or I will take a
commercial flight.' I think the security should butt out an let her fly
commercial. There is no significant >danger.
Now I did not know that. I would have expected the media to have defended
her, as one of their own. Probably the truth didn't make a very interesting
story, however. Shame on me for listening to the mass media.
Why do you not see that YOU too want something for nothing?
So do you, we are all interconnected.
You want us to put you on permanent welfare and support your oil addiction,
and let you live in a part of the country where there is not enough work. I
do not see >any difference between your demands and the demands of people
who do not want to work at all. Both of you cost me. At least the people
who do not work are >not polluting or forcing us into war in the Middle
East. Frankly, I would rather pay you to sit on your butt than to burn up
lots of gasoline.
You see no difference between people who provide a service to the people
around them, by working and making a product for the consumer to "consume"
(sometimes literally) and people who say "screw it, I'm gonna sit on my ass
and do nothing"? You are seriously out of your mind.
I would also imagine that people who don't work, and depend on handouts are
the same kind of people who will vote for the kind of people you want in
office, to be guaranteed their handouts. Further, if you pay more people to
sit and do nothing that consumes energy or fuel, you by necessity force
those who *do* work to pay more for them to sit around, and maybe get a
second job to pay the higher taxes. That probably entails driving more....uh
oh, we are back to burning more stuff up, and yet we have less production
put into the US economy.
I think it would be more practical to use the solar power directly, for
electricity and heat. To make synthetic fuel nuclear energy might be a
better choice.
Who pays the hidden costs of extracting that nuclear fuel, and cleaning up
the radioactive crap belched out by these facilities? None of them are
clean, they leak radioactive water into the environment all the time.
Only the top people at U.S. corporations. Toyota is selling hundreds of
thousands of Prius automobiles. If everyone drove one, the U.S. would be
exporting oil. > GM is selling SUVs. Our corporations and consumers are at
fault. Some leaders in the U.S., such as the U.S. Toyota managers, and
some U.S. consumers --
such as me -- have done a lot to fix these problems.
You bought a Prius...you've done so much. I should really kiss your ass for
all you have done for us. Most people cannot afford those damned things, and
people with a few kids and groceries to get need something else, say a
minivan. I've worked on these things a few times, they are a nightmare to
repair, and a double nightmare to the customer. But if it floats your boat,
go ahead and pay for it. Unlike you, I am not going to tell you what to
drive.
Actually "Cold fusion"
ain't the damned answer either, and it looks like it never will be in the
forseeable future.
I disagree. If it has been developed properly starting in 1989, I am
pretty sure that by now it would supply most of energy, or all of our
energy.
Then why isn't it being demonstrated absolutely, conclusively?
Dog eat dog, eh? Ok. How about a federal ban on any environmental impact
studies when we start paving the desert with solar collectors.
There is no need to pave the desert when installing solar collectors! This
would be a very bad idea, in fact. You have to leave the open dirt under
the collectors to absorb rainwater. In Europe they grow grass under
collectors, and graze sheep.
I wasn't being literal.
Ditto for
windmill generators.
You mean wind turbine generators. They take up practically no space on the
ground. A megawatt generator takes up about as much space as a couple of
phone booths. Wind energy has the smallest land-use "footprint" of any
energy source, including nuclear when you account for the space taken up
by uranium mining and
-processing.
I have absolutely NO objection to wind generators. As a matter of fact, I
think they look rather impressive. I was referring to the envirowhackos here
in NY that demand no wind generators be built (the area they were going to
be put was in East Aurora, I think) because they would chop up a bird here
and there. These people made a huge deal about the "environmental impact" of
putting wind generators in. The point is, there are too many people standing
in the way to try to satisfy in order to get anything accomplished. There
comes a time when we must tell these people to screw off, and build the
thing, impact or not.
In any case, you and I will never agree, and probably can never coexist
peacefully. I am glad you are not in office or in a position to implement
your insane schemes. Should you (or anyone with these similar ideas) try to
actively do this, I will fight you to no end. Many will support me, even
from "your side" once they begin to feel the pain.
--Kyle
