[lotuseclat79]

Hi JB,

Checkout my latest post in the other oil thread where the news is a bit lighter on the wallet.
Post #63 link here.

-- Tom

[pyritechips]

...along with ww2, this may be the greatest test of our society's ability to respond to a threatening situation....made more so, perhaps, by the fact there is no "bad guy" we can simply mobilize against...

Actually there is a bad guy. Us. We are the gluttons, voraciously gobbling up all the available food and fuel and denying we have a problem. And the less there is the less we will allow others to have so that we can maintain our level of gluttony. If the word "gluttony" troubles you then substitute "life style".

[iltos]

Originally Posted by pyritechips

Actually there is a bad guy. Us. We are the gluttons, voraciously gobbling up all the available food and fuel and denying we have a problem. And the less there is the less we will allow others to have so that we can maintain our level of gluttony. If the word "gluttony" troubles you then substitute "life style".

true, but we aren't ones to look in the mirror too closely....

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by Rep

Quoting myself from above: "...Marginalizing anybody that has questioned our need to adapt new strategies is well embedded in our public discussions. And they now hamper us in moving forward to adopt new ways."

Humor is one method of marginalizing. If a joke can be made of anybody supporting an issue, you then control that issue. You control it by showing others that the person in support of an issue does not have serious ideas. They are a, "joke" and should be discarded as such.

How wins in that scene? Nobody. Issues no longer get serious debate.

Look what happened to Al Gore and his message on climate change. What happens if he is right? The public thinks its a joke, even as they see their environment hanging and know that something must be done.

Itos...sorry, this popped up and I wanted to use it as an example. I have no intention to poke your eye with it.

Rep, if you don't think humor in politics is effective, then you should watch more of the Daily Show and read some Mark Twain and Will Rogers!

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by pyritechips

Actually there is a bad guy. Us. We are the gluttons, voraciously gobbling up all the available food and fuel and denying we have a problem. And the less there is the less we will allow others to have so that we can maintain our level of gluttony. If the word "gluttony" troubles you then substitute "life style".

I've always thought you Canadians should share more

It's really a practical situation, those that lead in technological development are going to be using those resources the most.
I look forward to tech developments that circumvent these shortages.
Who then are the 'bad guys' ?
Those that resist and play out the status quo for profit and those that manipulate politics for the power of rule. Both right and left wing political adversaries playing off each other's positions rather than projecting solutions.

[Knotbored]

I understand the biggest obstacle to alternate fuels of all types in USA (and most other developed areas) is our infrastructure. Our distribution networks and manufacturing plants are too valuable and modern to just replace with new "stuff."
Well those undeveloped countries that are competing for our prefered fuels (oil and coal) don't have that burdon!
Why don't we help those undeveloped countries with technology and investment to use all the new "gee-whizz" fuels instead of oil and coal. Reducing the need for oil worldwide will have exactly the same effect on price as reducing it nationwide only.
Maybe we need a new perspective about who we withold fuel technology from and who we don't.

[Rep]

Originally Posted by Stoner

I've always thought you Canadians should share more

It's really a practical situation, those that lead in technological development are going to be using those resources the most.
I look forward to tech developments that circumvent these shortages.
Who then are the 'bad guys' ?
Those that resist and play out the status quo for profit and those that manipulate politics for the power of rule. Both right and left wing political adversaries playing off each other's positions rather than projecting solutions.

Technology has bailed us out often in the past. And it will again unless the technology cannot be developed and implemented soon enough.

That is my concern. The economic/political divide appears to be so great and the people so complacent that decisions are unable to be made in a timely and rational basis.

I am afraid that the choices we will need to make in the future will be very drastic when if we made some fairly minor ones today it would relieve that pressure.

[iltos]

Originally Posted by Stoner

It's really a practical situation, those that lead in technological development are going to be using those resources the most.
I look forward to tech developments that circumvent these shortages.
Who then are the 'bad guys' ?
Those that resist and play out the status quo for profit and those that manipulate politics for the power of rule. Both right and left wing political adversaries playing off each other's positions rather than projecting solutions.

good answer, Stoner
at some level, it seems to point to a failure of vision...maybe that's due in part to an entrenched social atmosphere -that entrophy thing that happens to an "aging" political system, where change becomes too risky, and maintaining the status quo becomes the front lines.

kennedy, when he set that goal of landing a man on the moon in a decade, was maybe the last time i felt any focused political inspiration to mobilize the american spirit towards an accomplishment.....i suppose you could argue the civil rights movement, but that strikes me more as an "attitude adjustment"....tho there are parallels within it that may prove important to the particular vision i see as necessary in the years to come.

we seem obsessed now with "holding on" to things the way they have always been....or to our assumptions of the way they have always been, and it's led to an atmosphere of micromanagement, based on those assumptions, in an era of change.

i'm good (if not always accurate) at generalizing -if i had to do it now, and define our political aspirations based on generalities, my feeling is that both parties have got it wrong....neither one sees the potential for leadership and freedom within our society -within us- anymore....the GOP still insists that its embedded in manipulations of our economic system -and they're right, except for one big blindspot- it ain't "ours" anymore....we showed it to the world, and the world said "cool" and has made it their own....the "progressives" still believe that it can be drawn out of our social fabric, like some elixir of freedom and leadership, and infused into a paste of social programs that can be spread over our wounded, and so heal us all....and they're right, too, except that they've got it backwards....freedom is about healing ourselves, not having somebody do it for us.

regardless, tho, all of us have come to rely on these mantras as a substitute for at least one truth....america remains capable of changing itself, and so changing the world.

but that vision must capture the american spirit....it must motivate our disparate notions that are the cause of our universal frustration -so it must unify- and that, imo, is at the heart of a freedom that can only come from each of us.....not from a government that offers only the promise of economic well-being , whether it be in the form of insuring national security or by providing universal health care.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by Rep

....................

I am afraid that the choices we will need to make in the future will be very drastic when if we made some fairly minor ones today it would relieve that pressure.

This is an issue.....not meaning of your doing, Rep.
Too many 'solutions' only facilitate immediate concerns without thought of consequences.
For instance......why was it obvious to me that bio fuels from food products was a poor plan?
Why was Congress on board for promoting the concept with all the experts at their fingertips?
That is a perfect example of alleviating a 'present' problem with out regard of future impact.

IMO, there are no minor solutions that solve. The issue will most likely keep coming back to the ability to generate energy from sources that are not based on natural resources (oil, food) .
Wind, water,solar and nuclear are the obvious choices with nuclear being the best in regards to consistency. The choices are basically fission and fusion. Fusion needs a lot of development and fission has it's own drawbacks.

There is no simple solution, just choices that politician argue making.

[Rep]

Originally Posted by Stoner

This is an issue.....not meaning of your doing, Rep.
Too many 'solutions' only facilitate immediate concerns without thought of consequences.
For instance......why was it obvious to me that bio fuels from food products was a poor plan?
Why was Congress on board for promoting the concept with all the experts at their fingertips?
That is a perfect example of alleviating a 'present' problem with out regard of future impact.

IMO, there are no minor solutions that solve. The issue will most likely keep coming back to the ability to generate energy from sources that are not based on natural resources (oil, food) .
Wind, water,solar and nuclear are the obvious choices with nuclear being the best in regards to consistency. The choices are basically fission and fusion. Fusion needs a lot of development and fission has it's own drawbacks.

There is no simple solution, just choices that politician argue making.

It was not just congress. Ethanol was well lobbied in the state legislatures as well. This often had a local appeal as local investors in a local plant became active in the lobby effort as well.

We needed regular people to step forward and some did. But they were not as well organized and the ethanol people had money. That resulted in local tv ads running to promote ethanol and that convinced most people to believe food to energy was a good thing.

We have for too long been only looking at short term solutions. But also know that much effort has been put in place to knee cap any long term solutions. If highways suck more and more money, less available for mass transportation. Therefore, build up the lobby for roads and again, run local ads to convince people that roads are the way to go, guess what happens? More money to roads, less to alternatives.

That's how public policy is made today. He how can divide best, wins.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by Rep

........................

That's how public policy is made today. He how can divide best, wins.

With all the waste going on in government, the one that wins is the proponent with the most appealing scheme and the best ability to hide the spoils.
That's reality.

[bill.aam]

Pelosi: ‘With Skyrocketing Gas Prices, Americans Can No Longer Afford a GOP Rubber Stamp Congress'
California Political Desk
April 24, 2006

Washington, D.C. – House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi released the following statement today on President Bush’s, Speaker Hastert’s, and the Republican Congress’ empty rhetoric on gas prices. Key facts on the Republicans’ failure to address gas prices follows Pelosi’s statement.

With skyrocketing gas prices, it is clear that the American people can no longer afford the Republican Rubber Stamp Congress and its failure to stand up to Republican big oil and gas company cronies. Americans this week are paying $2.91 a gallon on average for regular gasoline – 33 cents higher than last month, and double the price than when President Bush first came to office.

California Political Desk

Quote from Nancy Pelosi "Democrats have a commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices by cracking down on price gouging, rolling back the billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies, tax breaks and royalty relief given to big oil and gas companies, and increasing production of alternative fuels.”

Did I miss this commonsense plan??? Did I over sleep?

Americans this week are paying $3.57 a gallon on average for regular gasoline – 31 cents higher than last month($3.26), and $1.22 more since the Democrats took control of Congress. (Price of regular gas in Jan '07 was about $2.35)

I sure hope their plan kicks in soon..... Americans Can No Longer Afford a Democrate "commonsense plan to help bring down skyrocketing gas prices" Congress!!!

[Rep]

Originally Posted by Stoner

With all the waste going on in government, the one that wins is the proponent with the most appealing scheme and the best ability to hide the spoils.
That's reality.

Yes, it is. And there is a lot of blame to go around. Some of it falls directly on the American people for allowing themselves to be bamboozled and not paying attention to stuff until it is a crisis.

Thus, we pay higher bread and beer prices because in part our food is diverted to our gas tanks. Duh.

[gurutech]

If it wasn't for the Greenies blocking legislation to start drilling in Alaska, oil would still be around $50 a barrel, gas prices around $1.25/gallon....

[bassetman]

Originally Posted by gurutech

If it wasn't for the Greenies blocking legislation to start drilling in Alaska, oil would still be around $50 a barrel, gas prices around $1.25/gallon....

Guess you haven't really read up on it have you?