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.
I was with you until the last sentence. Hundreds of years? Maybe you've confused total fossil fuel reserves with oil reserves, but in any case, at our current rate of fossil fuel usage, large portions of New York and Miami and other areas near sea level will have to be abandoned by 2100, and the world's food productions zones will be dramatically altered from the current ones. We must not allow this to occur.
First off, their is no man made global warming. Climate change happens all the time, it is called weather. Second the ice packs are stronger than they have been in years. The ocean covers 75% of the surface. If you were to take all the people and their stuff and place it in the same area of the Earth you would cover 1% of the planet maybe. People have not destroyed the planet. The planet is very healthy and doing just what it does best.
Thinking that its acceptable to bend others to your immutable will and perfect understanding is a bit too fascist for my tastes.
It's not my immutable will. It's basic physics.
I never supported a ban on high fuel consumption, just a disincentive. If that is sufficient to be fascist, then surely so are a number of others including taxes on alcohol and cigarettes?
Energy cost go up and down to supply and demand.. There is a bottom price where all cost of production stops when the product can't sell without a profit..The actual cost of the raw oil is a small part of it's overall cost at the pump..In short even if the raw oil cost went down 30% there wouldn't be anywhere near a 30% reduction of energy at the pump.
I have read discussions on here how much people hate gas prices but they hate public transportation even more. Even if public transportation is subsidized, I think it is a solution to high gas prices.
I agree, to an extent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric
Please do think
Transportation really means the bus, unless you happen to live in a major city. Buses are less energy efficient than personal automobiles per passenger mile.
Actually no they're not, when the residual effects of traffic congestion and parking space are included. Subways are the best bet for rapid transit, as they eclipse both quite significantly.
I don't drive to work. I discovered this invention called a bicycle. Anyone living within 5 miles of work should be riding a bike. For healthy adults, even 5-15 miles is a doable commute. Mine is 8 miles and takes roughly 30-35 minutes in traffic.
I never supported a ban on high fuel consumption, just a disincentive. If that is sufficient to be fascist, then surely so are a number of others including taxes on alcohol and cigarettes?
Perhaps such subjects are best left to the politics forum, where they belong.
Incentives and disincentives through tax programs are all very well. The attitude that all others should follow your opinion on correct behavior at all costs is not.
An economy based on subsidized oil is not a strong economy.
True enough. However I believe the same is true for an economy based on any effort to manipulate behavior based on subsidies or tax structures of any kind.
In some cases, doing so is a necessary weakness (like we were discussing with education and property taxes in the other thread).
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.
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.
Hundreds of years? Maybe you've confused total fossil fuel reserves with oil reserves, but in any case, at our current rate of fossil fuel usage, large portions of New York and Miami and other areas near sea level will have to be abandoned by 2100, and the world's food productions zones will be dramatically altered from the current ones. We must not allow this to occur.
