Thread: Getting what's due
08-13-2005, 02:10 PM #1
Getting what's due
Every time I fill up the car i think......
The US people are getting EXACTLY what we deserve for electing this moron for pres.......taking it right up the butt from the big oil companies.......
08-13-2005, 02:15 PM #2Originally Posted by Badgerman
time for a revolution!!!!!!!!!!!!!
we have atleast half the US military and the rest of the world!!!!!!!
08-13-2005, 10:39 PM #3
How much will the average person take before bucking the system that does not represent the majority in this supposed republic? Can we start with voting at the polls? Less than 40% of registered voters actually voted... So we are represented by the minority.
VOTE THIRD PARTY
08-13-2005, 11:51 PM #4
Ya, well, maybe only 40% of the registered voters voted, but 100% of everyone who was interested and wanted to vote did their patriotic duty and voted. So, 100% of Americans got what they deserved -- politicians dedicated to lining their pal's pockets while most people stayed home and watched TV instead.
Probably won't change anytime soon, so brace yourselves for more of the same, because the average American voter is only average.
08-13-2005, 11:53 PM #5
So you're saying if that p##sy John Kerry were in office....Gas prices would be lower?...WRONG!
08-14-2005, 12:18 AM #6Originally Posted by Zapp
Americans are easily manipulated, and special interests know that, and know how to get their guys elected. On top of that, while Americans don't want to change their gas-guzzling ways, the Chinese and Indian's economies are slowly building, more and more of their people want to buy gas-guzzling cars too, and they need more oil to keep their economies going, so guess what? With everyone willing to pay more $$$ for oil, the price is gonna go up.
But as I sagely observed, most Americans don't understand this, and their choice of politicians reflect their lack of understanding, and hence, we get screwed-up governments and big problems.
08-14-2005, 01:08 AM #7
Alright Tock...you are president of the US. How would you go about changing the United States oil consumption problem? Force everyone to drive electric cars?
08-14-2005, 01:13 AM #8
Just goes to show a slight majority of Americans are idiots. Don't blame me, I voted for the other guy that don't give a shit about me that is actually wealthier then Bush.
08-14-2005, 01:16 AM #9
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- In The Kitchen :)
- Blog Entries
the problem that both are bad, so whoever u voted for, u still gettin' fvcked.
08-14-2005, 01:18 AM #10
08-15-2005, 01:36 AM #11Originally Posted by Zapp
If the national dependancy on oil didn't decline, I'd raise taxes on everything made out of petroleum and give that $$$ to pay for the expenses incurred by the military to keep the idiots in the Middle East quiet.
Sooner or later people are gonna have to go to renewable energy, and I'd spend billions on research on stuff to make that technology practical.
And sooner or later, people on this planet are gonna have to stop multiplying like rabbits -- the population simply can't continue to double and then double and then double again until we've got hundreds of billions of moody idiots instead of only a few billion. I'd instigate programs to reduce population growth, and figure out some way to get to population reduction (without resorting to war, pestilence, or famine).
It would be a "responsibility oriented" effort, making those who create the problem pay the associated costs of fixing them.
But since such a common-sense solution isn't likely to ever happen, what else would you like to know?
08-15-2005, 03:28 PM #12Originally Posted by Zapp
Do nothing. That's right, nothing.
The increasing cost of fuel will motivate technology savy individuals and companies to work in the direction of an alternative form of energy or cells that are far more fuel-efficient than the 19th century technology that we use now.
IMO, the higher the cost of gas, the better. Better for the earth. Better for the economy. Better for our future.
08-15-2005, 03:39 PM #13
All while the oil companies are posting higher and higher yearly profits...
makes you wonder if all these increases in gas prices is substantiated??
08-15-2005, 03:49 PM #14Originally Posted by elcapitan
It's their oil. They can charge as much as they want for it. It is completely in their right to make a profit, as big a profit as the market will allow them to make.
08-15-2005, 04:09 PM #15Member
Originally Posted by inheritmylife
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
maybe in a perfect world .
08-15-2005, 04:21 PM #16Originally Posted by O.fO.shO
Where do you think hybrid engines came from? Mars?
08-15-2005, 04:40 PM #17
Jesus, more than 100 years ago we already had electric engines, they were stopped by the government and the car makers. Weird these same car makers are the one who hold shares of oil companies. Now, here the plot thicken.
We have a super increase in price since Bush came in power, then we were attacked, we boosted price, we went to Afghanistan we boosted price, we went to iraq we boosted price, we menace Syria and Iran another reasons to boost price.
We have Bozo Chavez in Venezuela, telling how he hates imperialist, he manage to boost price(thank you imperialist oil bastard)
Now, all companies promoted and built more powerfull engines, and car and truck to "please" the babyboomers exactely when the price were soaring.
Seriously, we are getting ****ed royally and what do we say?
Nothing, we are sheep!!!
08-15-2005, 04:52 PM #18
My step dad bought a heating unit for his farm house, it was a very expensive prototype. It ran off oxygen, well a mixture... very similar to the air we breath. They had to go to natural gas a few years later as the government stopped production on all parts to repair. Can you imagine free heat in the winter? It is possible, I have seen it.
Cars running on alternative fuels are around, hemp oil or vegatable oil let alone electric.
08-15-2005, 04:57 PM #19Originally Posted by Mesomorphyl
That's awsome! I'm soo looking into one of those.
08-15-2005, 05:37 PM #20
We should be pusuing fusion and solar power along with mandatory birth control for the people who can't afford to support their children........which I would guess is over 90 percent of the world
08-16-2005, 01:02 AM #21Originally Posted by Badgerman
Kinda makes ya wonder if Scrooge was right after all . . . ``If they would rather die,'' said Scrooge, ``they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
Back when I was a city dogcatcher, I spent about 6 months putting the surplus population of dogs and cats "to sleep." Worst job I ever had, but that's besides the point I'm trying to make here . . .
Had I not killed all those unwanted dogs and cats and instead just let them go to fend for themselves on the streets of Dallas, they would have led miserable lives, spreading disease, and reproducing and creating more unwanted, hungry, miserable, and diseased dogs and cats. The problem would have gotten worse.
Not that the homeless, starving billions of people around the planet should be killed, but giving them only enough charity so that all they can do is reproduce and make more poverty-stricken babies who in turn increase the number of needy people is neither intelligent nor wise, IMHO. It would be better, as Scrooge would say, to let them die "and decrease the surplus population."
But then again, who knows, maybe I'll be visited by three spirits tonight . . .
08-17-2005, 08:55 AM #22Senior Member
- Join Date
- May 2005
The Ghost of Christmas Present says something about "the insect on the leaf" complaining about the "too-much life" among his fellow insects in the dust, and that there are those who would consider Scrooge's life to be worthless.
Stalin said; "The undesirable classes do not liquidate themselves"; dangerous thinking. That everything would be fine in the garden if the human race could just somehow be "edited" is a perenial thought that must be guarded against in every place and in every generation.
As one gay boy to another, remember there are those who would regard both our lives as superfulous, and happily consign us to the workhouse and prison, if not worse.
08-17-2005, 10:10 AM #23
My statement had nothing to do with genetics.......it had to do with economics......if you can not support a child with basic necessities.....then you have no right to have them....period.
08-18-2005, 01:15 AM #24Originally Posted by BigLittleTim
I understand and wholeheartedly support efforts to help needy folks who are alive now, but question the wisdom of supporting people who will only reproduce and further increase the number of people living in desperate poverty. It would take an awful lot more than simply sending food and supplies to the starving millions in Mexico or Sudan or where ever. They'd need to acquire the means to sustain themselves so they would not become perpetually dependant on others. And that would involve $$$ for education, possibly cultural and political changes, and more $$$ for infrastructure.
I doubt there is much sentiment in the US and other wealthy countries to give what it would take to effect all the necessary changes to help improve the lot of the world's needy people. And politicians in many 3rd world countries are corrupt, and much of the charity would be funneled off into their Swiss bank accounts, and progress held at bay by political and cultural obstacles.
One major obstacle would be the Catholic Church's official teaching on birth control
http://www.population-security.org/swom-98-02.htm which has had the unhappy result of bringing millions of babies into families that could not provide for their basic needs. There's not much sense in giving poor folks just enough food to procreate and further increase the number of human beings in poverty. Of course, there's not much sense in just letting them starve, either. Clearly, there's got to be a reasonable middle ground somewhere, something that enables poor societies to become self-sustaining, but that's the sort of charity that's costs a lot more than just a few shiploads of surplus American rice to starving countries, and I don't see much support for that.
08-18-2005, 07:27 AM #25
the usa should take norways example and begin investing serious cash in alterante energy sources.
norway has stockpiled huge ammunts of oil money that is going into stuff like that. To bad only small countries seems to have any inteligence.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)