U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-25-2008, 08:30 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,260,533 times
Reputation: 948

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCMommy2-4 View Post
So back to the topic... I drive a larger car that holds more and probably burns more gas per mile but again, I am keeping my kids safe in the car seats that require seat belts and I will not compromise my kids safety by purchasing a smaller car where they will not each have a seatbelt regardless of laws.. its MY law to keep them safe.
There are fuel efficient and safe cars that will hold what is needed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCMommy2-4 View Post
If you think that we have to change our lifestyles in order to make this gas issue go away, then you are conforming to another form of terrorism. Keeping us in our homes, limiting our American right to be free.
Choices have consequences. Blow your household budget any way you want.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCMommy2-4 View Post
Do they not have safety laws in Europe? Do they choose which child to leave home on the family trip if the car won't hold them? Unreal !!!
Oh yeah the Europeans are all baby killers

Quote:
Originally Posted by NCMommy2-4 View Post
And furthermore, just as sailboat runs on air I coast downhill a lot.
Both ways?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-25-2008, 08:34 AM
 
Location: Pinal County, Arizona
25,107 posts, read 35,218,716 times
Reputation: 4899
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
There are fuel efficient and safe cars that will hold what is needed.
We drive what I consider fuel efficient SUV's.

There - Happy now?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-25-2008, 08:38 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,260,533 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greatday View Post
We drive what I consider fuel efficient SUV's.

There - Happy now?
delighted
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2008, 09:58 AM
 
Location: Foothills of Colorado
290 posts, read 486,365 times
Reputation: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
My recreational boat uses a sail. 12 gallons a week. Whatever you want to use it for.
Avoiding the original question with your experience?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Now how does nuclear power affect the amount of gasoline people have?
The point is that your side is restricting the development of nuclear power. It affects the demand of gasoline.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
All the oil companies want to build.... They don't. Gasoline consumption in the US will be going down.
The point is that they don't because your side has restricted the development.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
You should look back over the last 30 years. The EPA's had all of about 2-3 applications for greenfield plants. The oil companies put their money into expanding capacity at existing refineries and they've done quite a bit of that. Surprise!
Didn't you just say that they don't because they expect the consumption to go down?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Well Jake If allocate meant restrict you might have a point, but it doesn't and you don't.
In this debate between JAKE and BUBBA, I have to go with Jake. Allocate does not have to mean restrict. It just has to mean ration.

From Websters

Ration - To allot in time of scarcity
Allot - Allocate

Yep that is what it means.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
Oh yeah the Europeans are all baby killers
Avoiding the issue again. The point was that we will never be able to consume gas at the per capita levels Europe does for a variety of reasons and continually bringing up Europe as a goal is preposterous.

If both the US and China get to European per capita levels, will everything be hunky dory then? Admit it, what you really want is every country to be at the level of the third world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2008, 10:17 AM
 
Location: Washington DC
5,915 posts, read 7,260,533 times
Reputation: 948
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagz View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch
Now how does nuclear power affect the amount of gasoline people have?

The point is that your side is restricting the development of nuclear power. It affects the demand of gasoline.
LOL the first licenses requested in 30 years are already being processed by the NRC. How can somebody block what nobody has asked for?

Absolute BS that nuclear produced electricity impacts the consumption of gasoline. Want to explain how you get electricity in your tank, Jake?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagz View Post


Originally Posted by rlchurch
All the oil companies want to build.... They don't. Gasoline consumption in the US will be going down.

The point is that they don't because your side has restricted the development.
Link to more than ONE refinery project that has been cancelled for environmental reasons in the last 30 year?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagz View Post

Originally Posted by rlchurch
You should look back over the last 30 years. The EPA's had all of about 2-3 applications for greenfield plants. The oil companies put their money into expanding capacity at existing refineries and they've done quite a bit of that. Surprise!

Didn't you just say that they don't because they expect the consumption to go down?
Those were spread out over the last 25+ years, while demand increased, and also coincided with oil companies closing down refineries not needed. And what I said is that it really doubtful that oil companies will be building any greenfield refineries in the US in the near future because demand will be (actually already is) going down.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagz View Post
In this debate between JAKE and BUBBA, I have to go with Jake. Allocate does not have to mean restrict. It just has to mean ration.
Ration means restrict Jake. Allocate does not.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagz View Post
The point was that we will never be able to consume gas at the per capita levels Europe does for a variety of reasons and continually bringing up Europe as a goal is preposterous.

If both the US and China get to European per capita levels, will everything be hunky dory then? Admit it, what you really want is every country to be at the level of the third world.
China isn't part of the discussion and it seems pretty clear that you've never been to Germany -- third world. LOL
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2008, 11:07 AM
 
Location: Floribama
15,046 posts, read 31,425,067 times
Reputation: 13844
Quote:
Originally Posted by NCMommy2-4 View Post
Do they not have safety laws in Europe? Do they choose which child to leave home on the family trip if the car won't hold them? Unreal !!!
If they even have children at all. Europes birthrate is dangerously low right now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2008, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Foothills of Colorado
290 posts, read 486,365 times
Reputation: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by rlchurch View Post
LOL the first licenses requested in 30 years are already being processed by the NRC. How can somebody block what nobody has asked for?
By making the requirements so high that it would be unreasonable to even ask.
Quote:
Absolute BS that nuclear produced electricity impacts the consumption of gasoline. Want to explain how you get electricity in your tank, Jake?
The final product is energy, not gasoline. Gasoline and electricity are both forms of energy. It is possible to travel from place to place using only stored electricity.
Quote:


Link to more than ONE refinery project that has been canceled for environmental reasons in the last 30 year?
I never said any were canceled.
Quote:
Those were spread out over the last 25+ years, while demand increased, and also coincided with oil companies closing down refineries not needed. And what I said is that it really doubtful that oil companies will be building any greenfield refineries in the US in the near future because demand will be (actually already is) going down.
Consumption in this country may be going down, but the oil price is clear indication that demand is not.
Quote:

Ration means restrict Jake. Allocate does not.
Any system that determines the allocation of limited rescources restricts the distributioin in one form or another. (economics)There are 2 ways to regulate the distribution of limited resources. Either by letting the market forces determine who buys it (market economy) or by the government determining who gets what (and at what price.) If you want to claim that there is another way, please do so. And also explain how you can ALLOCATE a limited resource without RESTRICTING someone from getting all they would like to have.

Allocate does mean ration, and both terms have a restriction component.
Quote:
China isn't part of the discussion and it seems pretty clear that you've never been to Germany -- third world. LOL
This thread is about the gas shortage. Are you that naive to think that China has nothing to do with it? Your solution was to ALLOCATE US citizens gas at European levels. (In effect lowering our consumption.) I merely pointed out that that wouldn't solve the problem because you would also have to lower the consumption of all other countries, and in the case of China, allocating gas at European levels would dramatically increase consumption.

I have been to Germany and prefer to be here. The one thing I find interesting about Germany is the amount of Germans who would live in the USA if they could. Visit any nightclub frequented by GI's and you will know exactly what I mean.

I never referenced Germany as the third world. I said your ultimate goal is get our consumption much lower than Germany's ....to third world levels. You either cleverly tried to change the subject or didn't read the post carefully.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2008, 11:42 AM
 
21,044 posts, read 19,570,031 times
Reputation: 5930



STILL arguing about consumption????? Refineries, no refineries, nuclear, no nuclear...blah blah blah.....


Doncha get it!


Doesn't matter....gas/oil prices will be whatever oil companies want it to be....





Even the so-called experts can't agree because they ignore that simple fact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2008, 11:55 AM
 
Location: Foothills of Colorado
290 posts, read 486,365 times
Reputation: 92
Quote:
Originally Posted by Who?Me?! View Post



STILL arguing about consumption????? Refineries, no refineries, nuclear, no nuclear...blah blah blah.....


Doncha get it!


Doesn't matter....gas/oil prices will be whatever oil companies want it to be....





Even the so-called experts can't agree because they ignore that simple fact.
Facts are objectively verifiable.... please prove your fact.

Try this for a fact.... As supply goes up, prices go down. The things we are debating are restrictions to supply. Looks to me like it is easier to ignore the facts and blame the big bad oil companies than it is to come up with good facts of your own.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-28-2008, 12:14 PM
 
21,044 posts, read 19,570,031 times
Reputation: 5930
The facts are ...there is plenty of oil.


Now, YOU tell me why oil companies CAN'T charge anything they want.



The Golden Rule:

Those with the most gold, rule.


PS: I drive a small car with great mileage, have stayed home on the last 4 weekends, didn't drive anywhere unnecessary, so why haven't the gas price come down?????
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:16 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top