Fingolfin269
Lifer
- Feb 28, 2003
- 17,948
- 34
- 91
The correction is to come up with a solution other than ridiculous floor on gas prices. And *I* don't remember desigining my city at all. Did you design yours? Please think before posting idiocy.
The correction is to come up with a solution other than ridiculous floor on gas prices. And *I* don't remember desigining my city at all. Did you design yours? Please think before posting idiocy.
The idea is to use the money from the price floor to fund alternative energy, more nuke plants, etc. Plus, with the higher prices, the demand for alternatives will increase.
The free market religion will only have us use up all the gas and then be fvcked.
he has some valid points
The only long term solution is to develop better engine technologies - not just hybrids, but non-gas using car engines -
Anwar isn't an answer to anything.
The only long term solution is to develop better engine technologies - not just hybrids, but non-gas using car engines -
Anwar isn't an answer to anything.
You have no idea if more jobs will be lost than created. Here's what we do know . . . at some point in the future gasoline will be extremely expensive. What will the lower/middle class put in their cars . . . beer? It's long past time for all Americans (and certainly government/industry) to invest in a sustainable a future. A little pain today for everyone may allow us to avoid a terribly painful future.
Someone is going to produce more and better fuel efficiency technology. My guess is that it will not be the US DOE/DOT or US companies. That means it will be just another good that will be imported instead of made in America and exported.
If your issue is truly the protection of the lower/middle class, I can fix that. Fuel taxes just like most other consumption taxes are quite regressive. Why not make other elements of the tax code more progressive to make up the difference? Repeal all taxes on nonprocessed food. Exempt the first 20-30k of income from FICA. Reinstate/raise luxury tax/gas guzzler taxes and provide a credit to all Americans with income less than 40k. Provide a tax credit for the purchase of dramatically more fuel efficient vehicles. Fully subsidize bus and light rail for low income people.
Anyone that really cares could find a way (often even a simple way) to mitigate the effect of higher gasoline taxes on lower income Americans.
Nope you didn't design it , your dad and grandpaw did and their short term thinking has affected you. Like so many things humans can't see past their own life expectancy and damn the future to problems like this IE a correction in the way we do things.
The only idiocy is your short term thinking and unwillingless to accept the fact the status quo is going to have to change. .
Sometimes mankind doesn't have a technological answer, see the common cold.
Read a paper called The tradgedy of the Commons
Henry Ford designed the first model T to burn Ethanol and the big oil companies lobbied Washington saying we would all starve :shocked:
Too bad so sad
http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_3215721
The only idiocy is your short term thinking and unwillingless to accept the fact the status quo is going to have to change. .
Sometimes mankind doesn't have a technological answer, see the common cold.
Read a paper called The tradgedy of the Commons
Henry Ford designed the first model T to burn Ethanol and the big oil companies lobbied Washington saying we would all starve :shocked:
Too bad so sad
http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci_3215721
PingSpike
Lifer
- Feb 25, 2004
- 21,758
- 603
- 126
Yeah, Henry Ford was also a big proponent of biodiesel (biodiesel is actually the original diesel, diesel made from oil is called diesel 2 or something like that.) But oil companies had such a plentiful supply at that time, and ran a successful campaign against biodiesel and cemented themselves into a monopoly position.
While Ford was a raging bigot he did have his fair share of good ideas.
While Ford was a raging bigot he did have his fair share of good ideas.
Setting a price for the whole country wouldn't be right. In some parts of the U.S, a $14/hr job will buy you a 1500sq ft house and feed a family of 4 and in other parts you wouldn't be able to pay your rent, let alone eat. A national gas tax of even 20 cents/gallon would generate over $20 billion/yr linky if my math is correct. I deliver pizza and fill my tank once a week. It cost me $21.60 I think last night ($2.10 gal.). 10.5 gallons x 4 weeks x $.20 = $8.40/month. I think that even the poorest people can afford $8.40/month.
$8.40/month = $2.10/week = 30 cents/day.....
$8.40/month = $2.10/week = 30 cents/day.....
A lot of people were raging bigots back then..just so you know...it wasn't exactly a radical thing to be.
Maybe I missed some insane news release about someone actually finding out how much oil is in the ground and if it is a limited amount but I don?t think so. In fact I know so. Nobody knows how much oil is in the ground or if it replenishes itself. And for all of you that think it comes from all the dinosaurs and vegetation that died back in the day? get real! If that is the case we will NEVER run out of oil because everything that has ever lived on this planet has died and therefore would become oil? eventually.
The only argument people have against using oil for energy is the fact that it pollutes. This is certainly no reason to make me pay $3, $3.50, or $6 a gallon. The only time I drive is from work to home, home to the store, and sometimes home to my parents house. Other than that I hardly drive at all. Right now I pay about $35 a fill up and that is down $10 from a few weeks ago. So your suggesting to ?help? me limit my driving (which can?t really be done seeing as how little I drive as it is) will force me to pay up to $96 for a tank of gas?
Yea, GREAT SOLUTION. All that would end up happening is I wouldn?t be able to afford where I live, my various bills, and would be forced to alter everything in my life as I know it simply because you are scared.
How dare you.
The only argument people have against using oil for energy is the fact that it pollutes. This is certainly no reason to make me pay $3, $3.50, or $6 a gallon. The only time I drive is from work to home, home to the store, and sometimes home to my parents house. Other than that I hardly drive at all. Right now I pay about $35 a fill up and that is down $10 from a few weeks ago. So your suggesting to ?help? me limit my driving (which can?t really be done seeing as how little I drive as it is) will force me to pay up to $96 for a tank of gas?
Yea, GREAT SOLUTION. All that would end up happening is I wouldn?t be able to afford where I live, my various bills, and would be forced to alter everything in my life as I know it simply because you are scared.
How dare you.
hey dmcanally here is your tinfoil hat.
Its pretty much widely reported by everyone including the oil companies that the known world reserves are X trillion barrels I'll dig up the number later. So far we have consumed since the 1800's X trillion barrels, roughly about half.
So at current rate of consumption and they do take into account future potential but its bleak cause pretty much everywhere on planet has been gone over once all the easy stuff to get is pretty much in decline most oilfeilds are in decline and have been since the 50's we have a few decades left NOT centuries.
If your drink a case a beer a night and have a fridge full but the bartender only makes a bottle a night do you see a potential problem?
Its pretty much widely reported by everyone including the oil companies that the known world reserves are X trillion barrels I'll dig up the number later. So far we have consumed since the 1800's X trillion barrels, roughly about half.
So at current rate of consumption and they do take into account future potential but its bleak cause pretty much everywhere on planet has been gone over once all the easy stuff to get is pretty much in decline most oilfeilds are in decline and have been since the 50's we have a few decades left NOT centuries.
If your drink a case a beer a night and have a fridge full but the bartender only makes a bottle a night do you see a potential problem?
You guys want to increase the number of refineries? Who here is going to pony up tens or hundreds of billions to build one? If you did, you could make your money back pretty quickly, since apparently oil is 100% profit. :roll: I guess it's easy to spout out baseless BS like this guy when you're ignorant of the true workings of things.
I take from your sarcasm you are calling me either a drunk, redneck, or both. Sorry, but I am neither and shame on you for trying to insult me.
You have no argument that credits the theory of ?we are running out of oil?. Because an oil field doesn?t produce as many daily barrels as it used to, does not mean that it won?t pick back up. There are oil refineries off the cost of Texas that didn?t used to produce NEAR as much oil as they do today. You have evidence and conjecture but neither lead to fact. Only fear driven opinions.
Just so you know there is no technology that human kind knows of that can predict or tell how much total oil is in the earth. Just to make my point go out and get a 5 gallon jug of water. Cover it up and stick a straw in. After two hours of sucking try and guess how much you sucked out. Also you have no evidence that oil isn?t naturally replenished, hence the oil refineries off the Texas coast that are more productive now than when it first started.
I used to work a siesmic crew, you see by creating an explosion and examining the shock wave against what an oil feild shock wave looks like you can be pretty sure there is oil underground. You see its called science not a guess, Saudi Arabia who has most of the worlds easy to get oil is already having to resort to horizontal drilling and pumping water into the ground to keep producing at current levels.
One of my siesmic buddies spent a year in the desert on a crew.
"Simmons didn't. Instead, two years ago, he pulled about 200 technical papers from the files of the Society of Petroleum Engineers and performed his own assessment. His conclusion: The Saudis are increasingly straining to drag oil out of aging fields and could suffer a "production collapse" at any time."
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industrie...rgy/2005-10-16-oil-1a-cover-usat_x.htm
I had lunch with a comproller for BP when I was in Barbados on vacation, he was from
Europe, he was quit lamentfull of the prospect of the future of oil basically he said there isn't one that it is an industry in decline.
http://www.energy.gov/engine/content.do?BT_CODE=OIL
"One way to prevent an oil supply disruption is to ensure our domestic production of oil is maintained. Remaining U.S. oil fields are becoming increasingly costly to produce because much of the easy-to-find oil has already been recovered. Yet, for every barrel of oil that flows from U.S. fields, nearly two barrels remain in the ground. Better technology is needed to find and produce much of this ?left-behind? oil,"
OK now take note of this, and this is what I said, EASY to GET OIL, oil will always be around but the cost to get it out will be prohibitive if even possible.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html
"Proved reserves are estimated quantities that analysis of geologic and engineering data demonstrates with reasonable certainty are recoverable
under existing economic and operating conditions"
http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm...ature5/?fs=www7.nationalgeographic.com
"Yet as the Enterprise drillers know, slaking the world's oil thirst is harder than it used to be. The old sources can't be counted on anymore. On land the lower 48 states of the U.S. are tapped out, producing less than half the oil they did at their peak in 1970. Production from the North Slope of Alaska and the North Sea of Europe, burgeoning oil regions 20 years ago, is in decline. Unrest in Venezuela and Nigeria threatens the flow of oil. The Middle East remains the mother lode of crude, but war and instability underscore the perils of depending on that region. "
"Before 1998, I was on the side that said, 'Technology solves all problems,' " says Roger Anderson of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University. "The problem is, after $12 oil, oil companies responded by merging and firing large portions of their technical staff."
Now, the International Energy Agency in Paris estimates that $5 trillion in new spending is needed over the next 30 years to improve exploration and production"
I got stuff like this all day buddy. I never said oil was running out I said peak production and easy to get oil and we are looking at decades not centuries of an oil economy,when people beatch about prices at 3$ a gallon they are in for a rude awakening.
BTW I'm not in favor of 3$ price fix on gas I am in favour of gov't regulation of the auto industry and power industry tho. When the gov't gave Outboard boat engine manufacturers a deadline of 2005 to get rid of 2 stroke pollution engines they met and exceeded pollution standards by switching to either 4 stroke or direct fuel injection engines. All this before 2001 now the auto industry already creates clean burning fuel efficient engines but they can do better.
105 MPG and note the date, 2001
One of my siesmic buddies spent a year in the desert on a crew.
"Simmons didn't. Instead, two years ago, he pulled about 200 technical papers from the files of the Society of Petroleum Engineers and performed his own assessment. His conclusion: The Saudis are increasingly straining to drag oil out of aging fields and could suffer a "production collapse" at any time."
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industrie...rgy/2005-10-16-oil-1a-cover-usat_x.htm
I had lunch with a comproller for BP when I was in Barbados on vacation, he was from
Europe, he was quit lamentfull of the prospect of the future of oil basically he said there isn't one that it is an industry in decline.
http://www.energy.gov/engine/content.do?BT_CODE=OIL
"One way to prevent an oil supply disruption is to ensure our domestic production of oil is maintained. Remaining U.S. oil fields are becoming increasingly costly to produce because much of the easy-to-find oil has already been recovered. Yet, for every barrel of oil that flows from U.S. fields, nearly two barrels remain in the ground. Better technology is needed to find and produce much of this ?left-behind? oil,"
OK now take note of this, and this is what I said, EASY to GET OIL, oil will always be around but the cost to get it out will be prohibitive if even possible.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html
"Proved reserves are estimated quantities that analysis of geologic and engineering data demonstrates with reasonable certainty are recoverable
under existing economic and operating conditions"
http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm...ature5/?fs=www7.nationalgeographic.com
"Yet as the Enterprise drillers know, slaking the world's oil thirst is harder than it used to be. The old sources can't be counted on anymore. On land the lower 48 states of the U.S. are tapped out, producing less than half the oil they did at their peak in 1970. Production from the North Slope of Alaska and the North Sea of Europe, burgeoning oil regions 20 years ago, is in decline. Unrest in Venezuela and Nigeria threatens the flow of oil. The Middle East remains the mother lode of crude, but war and instability underscore the perils of depending on that region. "
"Before 1998, I was on the side that said, 'Technology solves all problems,' " says Roger Anderson of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University. "The problem is, after $12 oil, oil companies responded by merging and firing large portions of their technical staff."
Now, the International Energy Agency in Paris estimates that $5 trillion in new spending is needed over the next 30 years to improve exploration and production"
I got stuff like this all day buddy. I never said oil was running out I said peak production and easy to get oil and we are looking at decades not centuries of an oil economy,when people beatch about prices at 3$ a gallon they are in for a rude awakening.
BTW I'm not in favor of 3$ price fix on gas I am in favour of gov't regulation of the auto industry and power industry tho. When the gov't gave Outboard boat engine manufacturers a deadline of 2005 to get rid of 2 stroke pollution engines they met and exceeded pollution standards by switching to either 4 stroke or direct fuel injection engines. All this before 2001 now the auto industry already creates clean burning fuel efficient engines but they can do better.
105 MPG and note the date, 2001
Fingolfin269
Lifer
- Feb 28, 2003
- 17,948
- 34
- 91
Who ever said the status quo doesn't need to change? The solution is in taxation of the larger vehicles. Keep your gas taxes away from people like me who are wise enough to stay away from the guzzlers that only help perpetuate the problem. This is not a transportation issue as much as it is a 'I drive a two-ton truck that I only use to haul groceries... and I'm single' problem.
And, in terms of fathers and grandfathers in the South, if you condense our cities you destroy our farmland. If you destroy our farmland you'll be eating the SUV scrap metal for dinner because there won't be enough food to go around. Food is certainly a renewable resource but you would have to replace that food production somewhere and that would cost money. Trying to restructure the widespread sprawl of the South is something that will have to be paid for by the very taxes collected by this price floor since the sprawl is virtually a component of the industry. I suppose that in and of itself could be considered an investment in conservation.
Personally I would rather tax people based on the size of their vehicle than institute a tax floor if I had to make a choice between the two.
Funny Europe has agriculture that exceeds their food requirements and they have much more efficient cities and public transportation?
You said 'think before you post idiocy'
I've done some thinking
I never said a floor price on gas was a good idea
You said 'think before you post idiocy'
I've done some thinking
I never said a floor price on gas was a good idea
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter