Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 29 of 29
  1. #21  
    I don't have a clue....which is why I brought it up. It is not something that many people have thought of much yet I think, so it may not have received much notice. But with that much money at stake, it would be hard to imagine there isn't any.
  2. #22  
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    One company might make 30 billion or more, but together they seem to spend 15 to 30 million toward political campaigns in both parties. What is the issue? They have contributed ba portion of their money to ensure their agenda is kept in the spot light.

    I see nothing wrong with it.


    Funny everyone wants to condemn lobbyists... until they need one. I was recently involved in some business decisions and one of the things discussed was hiring a lobbyist. They are like lawyers or police, you don't like them until you need them. When you need them, they are your best friend.
    Its the current system - those with the money get what they want in Washington. Even though its the GOP which is mainly propping up the oil industry here, Ben is at least right in that there are many instances where there are Democrats propping up other special interests. Nothing wrong with working the current system. Nothing wrong about wanting to change it either.

    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    And what do you know about short and long term profits? lol...
    Actually I do know a few things about business and one of the most important is that belittling the accomplishments of others to make yourself look good only makes you less effective in your dealings with associates, clients, as well as employees. (this is intended as helpful advice only).

    The short term profits of the oil companies I have no problem with. When I spoke of long term I was talking about the long term economic and environmental outlook for us all.

    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    I think we already had the "business" discussion that you turned into a history lesson...
    Can one treat a discussion comparing the current president to past presidents as purely a business exercise, without going into historical context? I think sometimes (not you but I say this in general to everyone, including me) that people like to ignore history in the same way they like to ignore science, that is, when it conflicts with their preconceived ideology.

    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    So you think hillary has a good idea?

    You missed the essence of the discussion anyway.

    Instead of searching the net for wonderful links, answer the question directly and let your argument speak for itself.
    If you find the links I come across in my regular reading, which are pertinent to the current discussion helpful, then you are welcome.

    Sorry to miss the essence of the discussion. I look at the gas holiday, like most here do, as a politically expedient and ineffective way to address a much more complicated problem. Its not going to help our addiction to oil, its not going to salvage our environment, its not going to stimulate research into alternative or renewable energy, its not going to prevent future wars for oil. Its not going to result in the production of more energy efficient vehicles, nor stimulate less energy comsuming habits. In short, I think all it does is distract from other more important ways to deal with this issue.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by slingbox View Post
    ...to bad so many depend on them to get to work and drop of the kids at school....
    In reality, isn't it a pseudo-dependence? There are other viable transportation options.
  4. #24  
    No, there is nothing wrong with wanting to change things. However, what some seem to remember is that there are limitations to what big business and big oil in particular is limited to when it comes to contributions.

    Ben
  5. #25  
    Carbon credit companies - does that mean companies like General Electric which owns NBC and the $100 million or so that Gore has made since leaving office and is that GE is the one that stands to make a killing with this?
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim View Post
    In reality, isn't it a pseudo-dependence? There are other viable transportation options.
    That really depends on your locale.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by electronique View Post
    Actually I do know a few things about business and one of the most important is that belittling the accomplishments of others to make yourself look good only makes you less effective in your dealings with associates, clients, as well as employees. (this is intended as helpful advice only).
    Was not too helpful... I only asked a question. If you felt like I was belittling you then so be it. You still did not answer the question, so oh, well. I withdraw the question since it seems to offend you. lol

    Ben posted thoughts on what I was alluding to anyway (not all but enough)... he did it in another thread... so this will get talked about.

    The short term profits of the oil companies I have no problem with. When I spoke of long term I was talking about the long term economic and environmental outlook for us all.
    That is not exactly how I took your posts... oh, well.


    Can one treat a discussion comparing the current president to past presidents as purely a business exercise, without going into historical context? I think sometimes (not you but I say this in general to everyone, including me) that people like to ignore history in the same way they like to ignore science, that is, when it conflicts with their preconceived ideology.
    I think it is great to talk history, but first you should attempt to answer the questions presented in the thread so people know where you stand on the issue. When someone asks you a question or there is a question to be answered and you go off into a history lesson.... well, you get the picture. But who am I to tell anyone how to post? You can post anyway you want.

    Sorry to miss the essence of the discussion. I look at the gas holiday, like most here do, as a politically expedient and ineffective way to address a much more complicated problem. Its not going to help our addiction to oil, its not going to salvage our environment, its not going to stimulate research into alternative or renewable energy, its not going to prevent future wars for oil. Its not going to result in the production of more energy efficient vehicles, nor stimulate less energy comsuming habits. In short, I think all it does is distract from other more important ways to deal with this issue.
    Interesting... considering your other posts. Nothing wrong with being interesting though....
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  8. #28  
    I'll say it again - if you get a car with double the fuel efficiency, would it not automatically mean it would be as if fuel was half the price.

    According to this article, average fuel efficiency in USA in 2007 was 25.7 mpg. There is obviously a lot of space for improvement.
    http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/004903.html

    Unfortunately the natural vehicle replacement rate in USA is pretty low at present (4.5%), and poor economic conditions will make it even lower, but when your fuel payments are equal to your car payments maybe a much smaller, much cheaper car may be the solution.

    Surur
  9. #29  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    I'll say it again - if you get a car with double the fuel efficiency, would it not automatically mean it would be as if fuel was half the price.
    Obviously your consumption would reduce... and so would the amount you pay each month. But you are right, the price of the gas at the pump would not decrease. If anything, once we get to more people using electric cars and such, I'd not be surprised to see oil increase drastically.



    Unfortunately the natural vehicle replacement rate in USA is pretty low at present (4.5%), and poor economic conditions will make it even lower, but when your fuel payments are equal to your car payments maybe a much smaller, much cheaper car may be the solution.

    Surur
    Some people bring it on themselves... I have a parter who has an suv. Yesterday he was complaining of how high fuel was for his truck and house.

    In my mind I'm thinking, he has a son and wife. They are all small people... no need wheel chairs or other reasons to have a truck. He does not farm or use the truck for much (well, I can't remember him ever using it 100%). He does not have a boat or anything.

    His house is close to 3000 sq ft. Ok, for three people. He has no business in the house nor other purpose for having a house that size. Now he can't keep up with payments due to heating costs... when I asked why he got that house, he said, "Because I wanted it. I wanted a house that size."

    I'm the first person to tell anyone they should spend their money how they want... but boy, I wonder how it all pans out when you do that but then complain when things go exactly how someone told you they would (she'tay).

    Keeping up with Mr. and Mrs. Jones does not make much sense.....

    But my point was now he can't get out of the truck or house. Of course it cost him an arm and leg to drive, but he owes too much on it. Same with the house. No one wants an suv right now anyway... he can't move down to a small car. Nor can he trade down to a smaller house. Well, I guess he could, but it won't be pretty in either case.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions