TEA Parties
Dangit... I wanted to attend the TEA Party from noon to two in Ventura CA today, and I didn't make it. Drat.
That sucks UG. How come you didn't make it?
The Boston Tea Party was to protest taxation without representation.
Guess what? You have representation. You voted. You lost.
Now get out there and do something for the GOOD of the country. Or keep whining. Your choice.
That is all.
will they have Devonshire cream? *hopehope*
Dangit... I wanted to attend the TEA Party from noon to two in Ventura CA today, and I didn't make it. Drat.
Its a good thing you missed it.
Didn't you read or hear that ACORN planned to infiltrate the tea parties and take names in order to report back to Obama with a list of right wing subversives that need watching.
It had to be true....Michelle Malkin said so!
The Boston Tea Party was to protest taxation without representation.
Guess what? You have representation. You voted. You lost.
Now get out there and do something for the GOOD of the country. Or keep whining. Your choice.
That is all.
So people who disapprove of the current government aren't allowed to voice their discontent? This is no different than anti-war protests in 2002. The actions of the government do not sit well with these people, so they are taking advantage of their 1st Amendment rights to express their dissatisfaction. Yes the original Boston Tea Party was in direct response to the British taxes levied on the colonies. However its not about the tea then or now. Its about a group of people who see the government overstepping it's boundaries and voicing their concerns about it. Yeah its a little outlandish and some of what a few people at these "Tea Parties" have to say is a bit on the ridiculous side, but that doesn't matter in the big picture, and neither does the fact that the original Tea Party was about taxation sans representation.
Where did I say they have no right to voice their discontent? They can voice their discontent all they want. However, I would think more highly of their efforts (and by their I mean Fox News and the ilk) if they had fashioned it after something that didn't smack of ridiculous, and if their patriotism included wanting our country to succeed instead of hoping we fail miserably so that they can be "right."
Not impressed. Yawn. Oh, and still, blaming it on Obama....come on, how do they do that with a straight fucking face? Who the fuck got us into this mess? I'm glad there are those of us who aren't mooing cattle following the collective trough of lies.
We will go down in flames. Then they can cheer and be "right." How nice that will be for them, as they stand in bread lines all puffed up and proud with their I told you so eyes. For me, I didn't approve of Bush, AFTER he fucked it all up, but I would have hoped we would never see the mess we do now. I suppose my brand of patriotism isn't about being personally "right" but about fixing the fucking shit so that this American Dream doesn't become a paragraph in a cheesy history book.
Un. Be. Lievable.
It's what makes us great.
Constant whining just makes us look like the French.
;)
uh the french! Thats a really low blow.
uh the french! Thats a really low blow.
That's where I was aimin'
:)
so. No Devonshire cream, I suppose.
you wankers.
are you, classicman, kicking me in the nether region in a celebratory manner due to the absence of Devonshire cream? An absence you yourself most likely engineered? HUH?
is that what you're doing there?
Real matoor, classic, real matoor.
While Urbane is the resident right wing wacko on this board, he's also the recipe guy, and since I didn't know anything about these "Tea parties" I honestly thought he was posting about food. I didn't notice we were in the current events forum. I'm with you Brianna.
I might go make myself some green tea right now...
are you, classicman, kicking me in the nether region in a celebratory manner due to the absence of Devonshire cream? An absence you yourself most likely engineered? HUH?
is that what you're doing there?
Real matoor, classic, real matoor.
Although I do realize that the world revolves around you :p, no I was responding to S123 and her reference to the french - low blow = kick in the nads.
I would never deprive you of your sweet cream, nor your tea.
Although I do realize that the world revolves around you...
After that bit, there's really no need to go on with the post, is there?
:D
My mom goes to these tea parties, if that tells you anything..........LOL.
It's a place for suburbanites to talk about the new guns they have purchased and tell each other that Obama is the anti-christ blah blah blah. Obama did it, blame Obama..blah blah blah...Obama the secret spy that was sent from other secret factions to destroy the country la la laaa. (for those of you who haven't heard of these tea parties)
Yes there is a group in this country thinking that they are about to go to war and they get together and talk about it.
Apparently Obama has destroyed this country. Even before he was sworn in he did it somehow. Must be a tricky guy.
There are two types of people. Tea party people and not tea party people. Be advised. :)
Jebus H...the foil sales must have been through the ROOF. Foil sales as economic stimulus? I like. ;)
Oh lord, I am frightened for us all.
i get a lot of email forwards bashing Obama from this guy that sends me some funny stuff. I really dont give a shit about it enough to ask him to stop sending political stuff, but i find it mildly distasteful.
Yea, there were people with signs who STILL think Obama is not a US citizen.
What really slays me about the people who are protesting the whole tax issue, is that most of them will do better under Obama. How the right gets people to vote against their own best interests, or to go out and protest for something that is against their own best interests, is beyond me.
I saw a bumper sticker the other day: Obama Lied. The Economy Died.
I wanted to ram my car into the dumbass. Seriously. Dumb. Ass.
3 fucking months after 8 years? WTF can these people to be thinking? [SIZE="4"]MORONS? STFU! KTHXBAI![/SIZE]
Yah my mom manages to out-yell me on the phone about it. How Obama destroyed everything........Get more guns everybody! Obama is going to make white slave camps and put us all in them. LOL! There are people that look normal. But they are not normal. Another advisory.
shhh, shhh, Shawnee!
Darling, This is OHIO!
you'll do well to remember that.
What really slays me about the people who are protesting the whole tax issue, is that most of them will do better under Obama. How the right gets people to vote against their own best interests, or to go out and protest for something that is against their own best interests, is beyond me.
No one will do better tax wise under Obama. I don't think its his fault its just a reality. A LOT, an unimaginable amount of money has been spent and it has to come from the taxpayers - period. Do not listen to the, far right NOR left, wackos. The numbers are what they are - we, the taxpayers ARE the income for the gubmint. That hasn't changed and isn't likely to anytime soon.
I find it best to gauge my views on the extreme fringes of a group. It's much easier to ignore the issues that way.
What really slays me about the people who are protesting the whole tax issue, is that most of them will do better under Obama. How the right gets people to vote against their own best interests, or to go out and protest for something that is against their own best interests, is beyond me.
Really? Care to prove that?
I can see the silly Left has leapt out in unison if not force -- and altogether stumbled in their understanding.
Glatt, you don't have to be crazy to perceive the unwisdom of the Left. It doesn't even help. See below for why the unwisdom is so easy to perceive.
Green tea, however, is definitely not crazy -- though I'm more a black-tea guy. Unsubtle palate.
Presently, a left-leaning Administration is demonstrating the Democrats' economic illiteracy in a big, nay gigantic, way. The stimulus will debase the currency by inflation. Nobody here disputes that you can't fix a problem of excessive, ill-secured debt with more debt. But Congress is behaving like they'd never heard of that idea.
The Republicans are going to be able to campaign on the idea of "Had Enough?" again after a couple of years of this.
This inflation, and growth of the almighty nanny State, are what the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) bunch is annoyed with Congress and the President about. It's not at all about airing silly ideas about Obama's citizenship, or any of the notions floated in this thread, really. It's bipartisan. If there's anything really identifiable as the center of their bell curve, it's a tendency to center-right politics, and calling for better (cheaper) governance.
Nor is it all Federal-level. TEA in California is directing at least as much attention to Sacramento's spending as to Washington's. Sacramento isn't paying attention to the idea that outlay should be slashed until it is at least somewhat below income -- state-provided services must be reduced to stay within this state's means. Instead, they raise taxes all over the place. Serve 'em right if revenue consequently declines. They won't hear the idea that maybe Californians are man enough to take care of their personal needs without going to state officials. They heap burdens upon economic activity, driving up the cost of doing business. That's bloody silly. Even sillier is how they're ignoring how businesses look at California-imposed costs and move out of state in search of better bargains elsewhere. Sacramento needs a two-by-four.
Now get out there and do something for the GOOD of the country.
Exactly, Shawnee.
Debasing the dollar is not good for the Republic. Inflationary pressures act to debase the currency.
That Government is best which governs least. Or
has to govern least. As long, at any rate, as it governs a little, for anarchy isn't a fix for anything much either. Does what the present Administration is doing sound like "governs least?"
The private sector economy creates wealth. The public sector's expenditures do not. Taxation to bankroll government's outlays is to do those things a society agrees need to be done, but which are not of themselves profitable. They are more in the realm of overhead -- particularly in the general heading of security, such as police and armies.
At any rate, it is always likely that control and reduction of public-sector costs and expenditure controls inflation and frees capital to use in actual creation of wealth.
There's the good.
See: Acorn
I judge ACORN by what appears to be habitually accepted within the organization and my own experiences with them. I don't expand that out to pass judgement on democrats, liberals,
insert label here.
I can see the silly Left has leapt out in unison if not force -- and altogether stumbled in their understanding.
Given that you usually include me in your 'silly Left' category, I'd like to point out that my response shows we didn't leap out in unison either.
I think S123 was saying that Acorn was an example of a parties extreme.
I dont think
ACORN is extreme. I think its mission is quite noble.
I'm also a silly leftist. I didn't jump either.
I only came along because it sounded like you were doing the Timewarp in here.
@ Sundae: I lol'd heartily at that.
I actually think the tea parties are a brilliant idea. I disagree fundamentally with the political views they support, but as an expression of popular political identities I think it's wonderful. It's drenched in history, laden with inherent and instantly recognised symbolism, and the people involved engage with it at a family and community level as well as a public and political level. It also looks fun. There needs to be more joy and celebration in our politics. The content of the conversations one might hear at such an event may well appear joyless or founded on fear to one of us lefties, but the actual even itself seems to me a fairly joyous expression of political agency.
Shame you missed it UG. I bet you'd have had a ball. :(
I agree Pico - The cause is an outstanding one. That is partly what upsets me so much about it.
I disagree fundamentally with the political views they support,
Interesting, and a little surprising to me that you feel that way. Which would be what? What political view do you think they were/are supporting that you disagree with?
Actually, I don't have any kind of clear view on that. I have leapt (rather ungracefully I admit) to a conclusion based on the fact that UG supports them...
And the few little bits I've heard about them lead me to think they object to the kind tax system that I personally am in favour of :P
But I am happy to stand corrected if I am wrong on that. My point still stands; but I'll pose it in more hypothetical terms: I may disagree fundamentally with the political views they support, but I would still consider it a wonderful expression of popular political identities.
I didn't mean to put you on the spot, I know only a little about what the tea parties were organized for, but it seems they attracted a whole host of other people touting other political issues at the events.
Aside/I find it rather amusing that you, a Brit, disagree with the American tea parties. :)
They're still a little sensitive about tea, don't push it.
Yah I can understand the sensitivity. I watch people ruin perfectly good cups of Earl Grey, and I wonder how I can train the masses to make it properly.
What, with cream and sugar? Yummmm!
These are from the Indianapolis rally
I didn't bring a sign. My mission was to take the time out of my busy schedule and take photos of normal type folks at the protest to show them to all those that did not attend.
I was so proud of these people. Many of them seemed out of place and didn't know exactly what to do or what to think about having their picture taken.
My message to all that participated; I'm proud of all of you. You were all polite, there were very few obscene signs and you took part instead of sitting on the sidelines.
shhh, shhh, Shawnee!
Darling, This is OHIO!
you'll do well to remember that.
Tin soldiers and Obama coming,
We're finally on our own.
This summer I hear the drumming,
Four dead in Ohio.
Looks like a Ron Paul supporter there with the
HR 450 sign.
And finally.....
The after event food. It's really all about the food. :)
This is the place that the only protest is against warm beer and cold ribs.
Savannah had some 1500 people in attendence and many of the smaller communities around it had groups of about 100 in the central parts of the towns.
http://savannahnow.com/node/707582I saw a bumper sticker the other day: Obama Lied. The Economy Died.
I wanted to ram my car into the dumbass. Seriously. Dumb. Ass.
3 fucking months after 8 years? WTF can these people to be thinking? [SIZE="4"]MORONS? STFU! KTHXBAI![/SIZE]
I KNOW!!! There was a guy at one of the protests on TV with that sign! I was like, what a fucking
dumbass. The economy was already tanking under Bush, and the TARP was done under Bush, as was the big AIG bailout. Yet Obama is being blamed for ALL of it! The right is trying to rewrite history. Too bad we have videotape. :D
I can see the silly Left has leapt out in unison if not force -- and altogether stumbled in their understanding.
Glatt, you don't have to be crazy to perceive the unwisdom of the Left. It doesn't even help. See below for why the unwisdom is so easy to perceive.
Green tea, however, is definitely not crazy -- though I'm more a black-tea guy. Unsubtle palate.
Presently, a left-leaning Administration is demonstrating the Democrats' economic illiteracy in a big, nay gigantic, way. The stimulus will debase the currency by inflation. Nobody here disputes that you can't fix a problem of excessive, ill-secured debt with more debt. But Congress is behaving like they'd never heard of that idea.
The Republicans are going to be able to campaign on the idea of "Had Enough?" again after a couple of years of this.
This inflation, and growth of the almighty nanny State, are what the TEA (Taxed Enough Already) bunch is annoyed with Congress and the President about. It's not at all about airing silly ideas about Obama's citizenship, or any of the notions floated in this thread, really. It's bipartisan. If there's anything really identifiable as the center of their bell curve, it's a tendency to center-right politics, and calling for better (cheaper) governance.
Nor is it all Federal-level. TEA in California is directing at least as much attention to Sacramento's spending as to Washington's. Sacramento isn't paying attention to the idea that outlay should be slashed until it is at least somewhat below income -- state-provided services must be reduced to stay within this state's means. Instead, they raise taxes all over the place. Serve 'em right if revenue consequently declines. They won't hear the idea that maybe Californians are man enough to take care of their personal needs without going to state officials. They heap burdens upon economic activity, driving up the cost of doing business. That's bloody silly. Even sillier is how they're ignoring how businesses look at California-imposed costs and move out of state in search of better bargains elsewhere. Sacramento needs a two-by-four.
Exactly, Shawnee.
Debasing the dollar is not good for the Republic. Inflationary pressures act to debase the currency.
That Government is best which governs least. Or has to govern least. As long, at any rate, as it governs a little, for anarchy isn't a fix for anything much either. Does what the present Administration is doing sound like "governs least?"
The private sector economy creates wealth. The public sector's expenditures do not. Taxation to bankroll government's outlays is to do those things a society agrees need to be done, but which are not of themselves profitable. They are more in the realm of overhead -- particularly in the general heading of security, such as police and armies.
At any rate, it is always likely that control and reduction of public-sector costs and expenditure controls inflation and frees capital to use in actual creation of wealth.
There's the good.
The private sector is not creating jobs right now. They are getting rid of jobs. And the Great Depression was made worse in the beginning and laster longer because Hoover refused to get involved, he wanted to let the market correct itselt. Guess what. It didn't work. All he did was cut taxes. Gee, that worked out brilliantly too, didn't it? :rolleyes:
The private sector is not creating jobs right now. They are getting rid of jobs.
Wait now, Obama promised us Millions of Jobs under his plans!
Oh, wait. Maybe not...
The stimulus money IS saving jobs. It is also starting to create some. Give it time. He has only been in office a short time. This stuff does not work overnight.
shhh, shhh, Shawnee!
Darling, This is OHIO!
you'll do well to remember that.
I know. I know. :(
Oh fuck, we were just there. You poor lambs.... :(
The Boston Tea Party was to protest taxation without representation.
Guess what? You have representation. You voted. You lost.
Now get out there and do something for the GOOD of the country. Or keep whining. Your choice.
That is all.
so wait just one doggone minute on this. Voting has nothing to do with representation. Apparently. Us immigrants, we have to pay taxes. But we are not allowed to vote. apparently, though, it's not "taxation without representation" because we have representation -elected officials are still supposed to listen to us and work n our behalf.... we just have no say in choosing who they are. I'm sure they still care about us, though.....
How much did all y'all pay in Federal Taxes this year? Put your money where your mouth is! And then list what federal resources you used.
and then bitch about it if you think you didn't get your money's worth.
we paid nothing to the Feds. we couldn't believe it, but after all our other credits, we weren't even able to clain the full credit for all our children. But we still drove on the Interstates (are they federally funded?), and we were protected by federal law (:lol:) and um.... well MIL from UK was thoroughly checked on entry and cleared, although apparently her flight surcharges paid for that....
So really, what's all the whingeing about? Or is it just "The Principle Of The Thing"?
The Interstates are funded by the tax on the gas you bought, so you paid for the use.
How much did all y'all pay in Federal Taxes this year? Put your money where your mouth is! And then list what federal resources you used.
and then bitch about it if you think you didn't get your money's worth.
we paid nothing to the Feds. we couldn't believe it, but after all our other credits, we weren't even able to clain the full credit for all our children. But we still drove on the Interstates (are they federally funded?), and we were protected by federal law (:lol:) and um.... well MIL from UK was thoroughly checked on entry and cleared, although apparently her flight surcharges paid for that....
So really, what's all the whingeing about? Or is it just "The Principle Of The Thing"?
It's the "I hate Obama" thing, and the "oppose Obama at every turn" thing, and the "party of NO" thing, and the "democrats and liberals are bad" thing...
I attended three tea parties, and did not see all the negatives you guys are bitching about. It is about left and right abuses, and destroying our currency by printing trillions that we will never be able to pay back. When the rest of the world gets fed up, and dumps dollars, all the stimulus pork bills won't amount to 35 cents. And Hoover didn't solve the depression, neither did Roosevelt. WWII ended the depression. Raising taxes on business when we are in recession makes no sense whatsoever. If business spent like government, they'd be out of business. Oh wait, General Motors, Fannie Mae et al did spend like government, and now they get us to pay for their excesses. People making $80 an hour to make cars for people who make $15 an hour doesn't work. Queen Pelosi needing a 757 to go back and forth to California 2 or three times a week while we're in a financial crisis doesn't work either. All the tea parties are saying is, WE CAN'T AFFORD YOUR EXTRAVAGANCE! CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND PORK!
It's the "I hate Obama" thing, and the "oppose Obama at every turn" thing, and the "party of NO" thing, and the "democrats and liberals are bad" thing...
Stop buying into that bullshit - that is total and complete bullshit.
People making $80 an hour to make cars
That's bullshit too.
It's the "I hate Obama" thing, and the "oppose Obama at every turn" thing, and the "party of NO" thing, and the "democrats and liberals are bad" thing...
The truth is painfull. The Democratic party needs to go to Rehab.
[offtopic]
btw, the original tea party is where you all went wrong. Not politically, but you shoved the tea into cold saltwater and your technique hasn't changed much since. WTF? You need to pour boiling water onto the leaves. and then leave it to brew for a few minutes. it is not ok to drop a teabag in a mug of cold water and shove in in the microwave for two minutes. it is not Ok to add half-and-half to Earl Grey. c'mon, people, no wonder your ecomony is fucked -look what you did to the very foundations of society!
[/offtopic]
The Interstates are funded by the tax on the gas you bought, so you paid for the use.
oh good, I'm not scrounging.
So c'mon. All y'all who hate the fed taxes -exactly how much is it you resent paying? because you sound to me like a bunch of kids whining about homework. Except that I actually have sympathy for them and your Fed taxes probably do you more good....
I'm also a silly leftist. I didn't jump either.
I only came along because it sounded like you were doing the Timewarp in here.
Now now now, SG, I'm positing a jump
from the left. So if you don't quite stick the landing, there's a step to the right.
Shame you missed it UG. I bet you'd have had a ball.
Yeah, I'm sure I would have. I'm keeping a ear open for the next one in-county. Heck, near it.
What I Missed April 15, when American income taxes are due.
A little more from the same blogger. Links too.
And one David Atkins, writing on the Ventura County Democratic Party webpage, demonstrates how little he wants a clue. Grammatical perhaps, but I wouldn't call it intelligent.
David AtkinsIt's the "I hate Obama" thing, and the "oppose Obama at every turn" thing, and the "party of NO" thing, and the "democrats and liberals are bad" thing...
Not as far as I can actually see and personally experience. By contrast, you're just reciting what somebody else told you to think. These people seem to figure inflation is quite bad enough without printing money to buy more.
Didn't anybody ever tell you not to pour Kool-Aid on your breakfast
Sugar Pops?I attended three tea parties, and did not see all the negatives you guys are bitching about. It is about left and right abuses, and destroying our currency by printing trillions that we will never be able to pay back. When the rest of the world gets fed up, and dumps dollars, all the stimulus pork bills won't amount to 35 cents. And Hoover didn't solve the depression, neither did Roosevelt. WWII ended the depression. Raising taxes on business when we are in recession makes no sense whatsoever. If business spent like government, they'd be out of business. Oh wait, General Motors, Fannie Mae et al did spend like government, and now they get us to pay for their excesses. People making $80 an hour to make cars for people who make $15 an hour doesn't work. Queen Pelosi needing a 757 to go back and forth to California 2 or three times a week while we're in a financial crisis doesn't work either. All the tea parties are saying is, WE CAN'T AFFORD YOUR EXTRAVAGANCE! CUT GOVERNMENT SPENDING AND PORK!
My god, here it is again, blame the workers for all the bad decisions made at the top by the fucking CEOs and executives. If you took all the union workers and added up their pay, it would be less than what the executives at the top made. And ftr,
they weren't making $80/hour. They were making only a few dollars more per hour than workers at Toyota. The difference is, Toyota doesn't have the health care costs and other costs that are added in when quoting the pay scale at American car companies.
http://blogs.payscale.com/ask_dr_salary/2008/12/are-ford-workers-really-paid-73-an-hour.html
Most economists believe the reason
why it took the war to really end the depression is the fact that Hoover
did nothing but cut taxes, and that is exactly what the republicans want to do now, cut taxes and let the market take care of itself. In the case of Hoover, it meant the depression just kept sliding downward. The things Roosevelt did
were making the economy better, but because they were done so late in the game, it took a long time for things to work. And, why do you think the war ended the depression? It's because there were JOBS.
The stimulus is
investing in things that need to be done anyway. The budget is
investing in things that need to be done anyway. Yes, it costs money now, but down the road, the money will pay for itself. The banks were
leant money, and hopefully it will all be paid back over time, at something like 8% interest. And let's set the record straight here, a LOT of that money went out under Bush, NOT Obama.
That does not mean I agree with everything Obama is doing, because I don't. Personally, I think he should told GM they had to make electric cars, and compressed air cars, and hybrids. No more low milage cars that run solely on gas. I would have liked to see more money going to create jobs by building/fixing more infrastructure. But I do believe he is doing what he believes is in the best interests of the country, and he is a pretty smart guy. I am willing to give him a chance.
And, why do you think the war ended the depression? It's because there were JOBS.
So you believe it was the war that finally ended the depression and not the policies of Roosevelt?
re: toyota, they don't have the retirees to pay yet either. and the $80hr figure is total bullshit - we rectified that right wing crap long ago.
Personally, I think he should told GM they had to make electric cars, and compressed air cars, and hybrids. No more low milage cars that run solely on gas. I would have liked to see more money going to create jobs by building/fixing more infrastructure. But I do believe he is doing what he believes is in the best interests of the country, and he is a pretty smart guy. I am willing to give him a chance.
What about the workers!?!?!
The unions would never have supported it.
Personally, I think he should told GM they had to make electric cars, and compressed air cars, and hybrids. No more low milage cars that run solely on gas.
yeh thats feasible :eyebrow: Are you serious? Do you have any concept of what it would take for them to stop making what they are making and start making a product that doesn't really exist in a production ready way yet?
That mandate would have been total disaster for GM. They were told to get competitive which is reasonable.
It looks like selective
bankruptcy is in store.
So you believe it was the war that finally ended the depression and not the policies of Roosevelt?
From an economic viewpoint, they are identical. Ask yourself this: what would have happened if we had just
pretended there was a war, spent all that money on building all those planes and munitions, but then just dumped it all into the ocean instead? Would it have had the same effect on the economy? How would that be different from spending all that money on anything else?
So you believe it was the war that finally ended the depression and not the policies of Roosevelt?
No. I think the policies Roosevelt enacted were working slowly, and the war helped put the economy into overdrive by creating many more jobs. I think it was a combination. You can't deny that those policies didn't bring the unemployment rate down significantly. But we were already in such a black hole, because of Hoover's nonaction, that it was going to take a very long time to come out of it.
What really kills me, is that we have allowed it to happen again, by deregulating everything in sight. It's really too bad we can't regulate greed. And ethics.
yeh thats feasible :eyebrow: Are you serious? Do you have any concept of what it would take for them to stop making what they are making and start making a product that doesn't really exist in a production ready way yet?
GM successfully made electric cars back in the 90s, so don't tell me they don't already have the technology. And they are already making compressed air cars in Europe.
Why is so hard to find innovative people here, in the US? We are supposed to be the almighty greatest country ever, right? :rolleyes:
What about the workers!?!?!
The unions would never have supported it.
Why?
They would have been put out of work while the companies completely retooled. The process of mass producing a new car, esp one as radical as the one you are talking about, would require a massive amount of work and change. The unions want status quo or more, not less. It is not like flipping a lightswitch.
And that is probably going to happen anyway. At the very least, they could have been making more fuel efficient cars and hybrids while they design the other ones. And as I said, they successfully made electric cars in the 90s. They could easily start making them again.
And that is probably going to happen anyway. At the very least, they could have been making more fuel efficient cars and hybrids while they design the other ones. And as I said, they successfully made electric cars in the 90s. They could easily start making them again.
I don't believe they successfully made electric cars. They made some. They were not successfull and they were not mass produced. We can debate why but the reality is that they are going to make what they can be profitable with. The bottom line is the dollar. It was so in the 90's and it is so now.
they successfully made electric cars in the 90s. They could easily start making them again.
A prototype is very different than mass production and meeting all the requirements that go with it.
re: toyota, they don't have the retirees to pay yet either.
More half truths. When the employee retires, GM stops paying. Why? The retirement fund is fully funded. No legacy costs exist when management is honest and responsible.
You conveniently forgot facts to post a myth. GM stopped funding those pension funds in the 1990s. Therefore GM still owes that 1990 money - with interest. Toyota does not have this problem because corporate management was honest. Toyota funded their pension funds when required.
Anyone who believes GM has legacy costs is forgetting facts to promote a myth. GM's legacy costs are directly traceable to people, including Rick Wagoner, who stopped funding the pension funds to avert the 1991 bankruptcy. GM was four hours away from bankruptcy in 1991 because their problems today have existed that long ago. They stopped funding pension funds so that management could reap bonuses for ill begotten corporate profits.
Damning fact - GM cars sold for less than what they cost. GM profits were estimated at about $100 to $200 per vehicle. That was not legacy costs. That was bean counters doing what is necessary when the purpose of a company is its profits.
A prototype is very different than mass production and meeting all the requirements that go with it.
I am pretty sure from design to production is at least 5 years.
I don't believe they successfully made electric cars. They made some. They were not successfull and they were not mass produced.
The US government paid for each company to design hybrids. Functioning electric cars existed in all three companies. Called the Prodigy, Precept, and ESX3. For 30 years, automakers would not innovate unless required by government regulation. So when George Jr came to power, all that innovation was quashed - no longer required. For 30 years, innovation appeared as an expense on the spread sheets.
Could these electric cars been marketed successfully? Yes. Toyota and Honda both proved that in spades. Success if government had not stopped forcing these automakers to innovate. But the new president was an MBA. Therefore hybrids - the auto industry's future - appeared in foreign products. American hybrids could not be successful because we elected an administration that routinely stifled innovation. Even had White House lawyers rewrite science papers.
Government should not have to force innovation. That is the underlying problem. Innovation was not possible in MBA dominated auto companies - which is why electric cars (innovation) were quashed.
Obviously, electric cars could easily be successful. But that meant management had to believe a company's purpose is its products. Therein lays the only threat to innovation in the American auto industry. Eliminate that problem and these vehicles easily could have been successful. It’s no longer even debatable.
The designs even existed in 2000. And the 70 horsepower per liter engine existed in 1975. It too was quashed for 30 years for the same reason. Not available in America until patriotic auto companies such as Toyota, Honda, Nissan, VW, etc brought it SUCCESSFULLY into America. Radial tire – 1948 and kept out of America until 1975. Different product. Exact same story.
I am pretty sure from design to production is at least 5 years.
The hybrids designs started in 1994(?) when Clinton gave them free money to design them. These were ready for moving into production in 1999 and demonstrated in 2000. But then I am only posting these facts for what - the ninth time?
At the very least, they could have been making more fuel efficient cars and hybrids while they design the other ones.
Which is what the 70 horsepower per liter engine addressed in 1975. Or the stratified charge engine that existed in the early 1960s.
When did the stratified charge engine finally appear? In 1980 in the Hondas - that immediately became the #1 and #2 selling models in America - despite American automaker claims that it could not work.
When did the 70 hp/liter engine appear? In 1992 in Japanese and most European products - despite American automaker claims that is could not work.
It takes decades to upgrade all models to better technology. Let's look at MPG mileage. GM claimed they had 19 models that exceed 30 MPG. Then we consult honest sources. Not one single GM model comes close to 30 MPG. Not one. Of 40 GM models, the average MPG is ... 18.5. Some examples: Buick 16.7. Cadillac 16.7. Chevy 19.2
Average for 109 models from 16 import manufacturers is just under 21 MPG. Only Mercedes (that has no small cars) has MPG numbers equivalent to the low performance obsolete technology engines in GM. GM numbers are equal because GM also has small cars – Mercedes does not.
But then if you think GM is bad, worse is Chrysler. MPG for their 21 models is 17. Lower MPG because innovation is not found in GM or Chrysler models except when required by CAFE standards and EPA requirements.
Why no innovation? Ignoring that many Americans told them to keep stifling technology by purchasing such crap? Engineers were not permitted to innovate unless government regulations required it. Which is why GM, et al campaigned so vigorously to have SUVs liberated from innovation requirements.
GM has lower MPG numbers because GM has not been doing engine engineering for 30 years - except when required by government regulation.
A prototype is very different than mass production and meeting all the requirements that go with it.
Well what do you think classic?
I dunno - from what I remember the Gov't gave them money years ago to innovate and investigate the alternate vehicle power systems. For some reason it didn't work. IIRC it was in the 80's when the got a bunch of money to try to build some hybrids. No one cared enough back then. Now, apparently people do and they should be ready to roll. They aren't because demand dictated what they built. Srsly, what good is a product that no one is going to buy? It took $4.00 gasoline to get people to give a shit.
But as is typical with the American mentality, they went for the money they could get and now they aren't prepared. I blame it all on the beancounter MBA mentality. you?
And look how short the memory banks are? Now that gas is generally less than $2 mid sized vehicles are still being bought and the Prius of the world are sitting on the lots unbought. No one cares about the electric cars. We sat in the Prius recently and Did not fit either in the drivers seat or passengers side. I would not buy one anyway. I did fit in the Mini Cooper so we bought one of those last week. :D Mommy is very happy.
Neighbor has a Prius - drove to CO with it to go skiing. They immediately put it up for sale upon returning. They said it was very uncomfortable, couldn't hold all their gear and was overall just not that nice a ride. I think its great that they get good gas mileage and I would drive one to/from work, but the cost to get one is still too prohibitive for my wallet.
I don't believe they successfully made electric cars. They made some. They were not successfull and they were not mass produced. We can debate why but the reality is that they are going to make what they can be profitable with. The bottom line is the dollar. It was so in the 90's and it is so now.
That is bullshit. I lived in LA back when they were making them, and I used to see them on the street all the time. I suggest you watch the movie "Who Killed the Electric Car?" You can watch it online at surfthechannel.com. they weren't the only car maker making them either.
Neighbor has a Prius - drove to CO with it to go skiing. They immediately put it up for sale upon returning. They said it was very uncomfortable, couldn't hold all their gear and was overall just not that nice a ride. I think its great that they get good gas mileage and I would drive one to/from work, but the cost to get one is still too prohibitive for my wallet.
I know several people who own Priuses, and they love them. One couple likes them so much they own two of them.
FTR, about the electric cars, California spent hundreds of millions of dollars putting in electric charge stations around the state back when GM and others were making electric cars. Do you honestly think the state would have spent all that money for a few prototypes?
That is bullshit. I lived in LA back when they were making them, and I used to see them on the street all the time. I suggest you watch the movie "Who Killed the Electric Car?" You can watch it online at surfthechannel.com. they weren't the only car maker making them either.
It is
bullshit.
Read the history here:
http://www.hybridcars.com/history/the-great-hybrid-car-cover-up-of-74.html
They never went to full production.
https://www.simplyhybrid.com/hybrid-vehicle-articles/hybrid-auto-history.php
http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/223/electric-car-timeline.htmlOnly one of the links you provided said anything about the electric cars that were built in the 90s Merc.
Do you honestly think the California would have spent all that money for a few prototypes?
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind and yes I firmly believe they would waste all that money and many many millions more.
I did fit in the Mini Cooper so we bought one of those last week. :D Mommy is very happy.
My car is mightier than yours. ;) /offtopicsnarkiness
In actuality, I don't like that commercial. It would have been better if I really had gotten a cape and the silly decals when I bought the car.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind and yes I firmly believe they would waste all that money and many many millions more.
They did it believing the car manufacturers would keep the agreements about the regulations California had put in place. but they didn't. They fought them, and when Bush was put in place, it all went to hell, because you know, he was an oilman, so he took their side.
Those CA hippies are trying to dictate to the rest of the nation what to drive. Silly hippies.
Don't forget there are still plenty of [SIZE="1"]gasp[/SIZE] one car families in this country. And lots of people that drive a long way work or shop.
Electrics haven't come far enough to be viable for these people.
It's only been a couple years that batteries have been good enough for suburban viability.
The best option is electric motor driven wheels with a small gas or diesel engine with a generator/alternator to make the juice.
From here
Exerpt:
The message seems to be that since we are in a crisis, and everyone agrees "something must be done," any spending, no matter the purpose, the amount, or how obscure or even unnecessary, is to be sheepishly accepted because we are told to.
Obama said it for all on his side: "Any spending is stimulus." I don't think so!
The humongous deficits that will be enshrined in the Obama/Democrat budgets (from nearly $2 trillion per year down to around $600 billion and then increasing back to nearly $1 trillion in 10 years, according to Congressional Budget Office) will dwarf anything that has come before. People of every political stripe, except for liberals, are outraged and angry. If you're not, you should be. [Emph mine -- UG]
If you feel magnanimous and think the government deserves additional largess, no one is stopping you, on this Monday after tax day, from writing a check for however many thousands of excess dollars you have to Uncle Sam's Treasury Department.
Since the only inarguable source of economic productivity is through the private, free enterprise market, why you would think your money is better spent by Washington or Sacramento is truly beyond me to comprehend.
And some here insist I'm mad. I ain't mad -- just literate.
Tea Parties: What's Next?
A View From Main Street
Garofalo Highlights Left's Hypocrisy... Its last sentence reads:
You get the sense the left may be coming to the realization that it doesn’t have what it takes to lead.
Those CA hippies are trying to dictate to the rest of the nation what to drive. Silly hippies.
Don't forget there are still plenty of [SIZE="1"]gasp[/SIZE] one car families in this country. And lots of people that drive a long way work or shop.
Electrics haven't come far enough to be viable for these people.
It's only been a couple years that batteries have been good enough for suburban viability.
The best option is electric motor driven wheels with a small gas or diesel engine with a generator/alternator to make the juice.
No they aren't. Because California had a serious air pollution problem back in the 70s, and still do sometimes, they have continued doing what they need to do in order to clean the air up so it is safe to breathe. That's why they always had strictere standards. I think Bush may have watered them down significantly though.
Electrics ARE viable for a large portion of the population. Most people probably don't drive anywhere near 100 miles per day.
From here
Exerpt:
And some here insist I'm mad. I ain't mad -- just literate.
Tea Parties: What's Next?
A View From Main Street
Garofalo Highlights Left's Hypocrisy... Its last sentence reads:
So if Obama had done nothing but cut taxes, like republicans wanted him to do, the economy would have barrelled downward at an alarming rate and we would be in serious depression right now, instead of showing some small signs of recovery. Hoover proved that already.
So if Obama had done nothing but cut taxes, like republicans wanted him to do, the economy would have barrelled downward at an alarming rate and we would be in serious depression right now, instead of showing some small signs of recovery. Hoover proved that already.
How do you figure? To this point all he has done is spend money, that doesn't really exist except on paper. So if he cut taxes and spent money that doesn't exist how would that change things for you?
No they aren't. Because California had a serious air pollution problem back in the 70s, and still do sometimes,
I think Bush may have watered them down significantly though.
Aside from "It's Bush's fault. Have you considered any other anything? The kneejerk reaction to just blame the prior administration is getting very old.
Electrics ARE viable for a large portion of the population.
Whats the cost of an electric car right now?
Whats the cost of an electric car right now?
Try this:
http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=20125Aside from "It's Bush's fault. Have you considered any other anything? The kneejerk reaction to just blame the prior administration is getting very old.
Whats the cost of an electric car right now?
It is a fact that Bush made the regulations weaker in California. I'm sorry, but that is the truth. You cannot deny the truth.
I have no idea what the cost of an electric car is right now. I haven't priced them because a) I can't afford a new car right now, and b) there are no plug in electric charge stations where I live. I know the Tesla is expensive, but that is a sports car, and the price is comparable to other high end sports cars.
Califorina sucks. That is all.
I love California. Have you ever lived there Merc?
If I ever go back, I would like to live in or near San Francisco next time. Or maybe Big Sur.
Big Sur is a fantasy hippie area. It is not what it seems. The wife and I have visited many times, she lived there for three years. Calif sucks ass. I would rather live in Texas where there is unity than in Calif where there is chaos.
My ex lived near Big Sur. I went up there a few times to visit him. And anyway, you know what a hippie I am. I would be perfectly happy living on a commune somewhere. Growing food. Drumming and dancing in drum circles. Having orgies. :D
My ex lived near Big Sur. I went up there a few times to visit him. And anyway, you know what a hippie I am. I would be perfectly happy living on a commune somewhere. Growing food. Drumming and dancing in drum circles. Having orgies. :D
True dat! :D and I still love you.
Big Sur is definitely still a place populated by weirdos. That's where our big wildfire was last July and let me tell you my crew and I ran into some pretty strange folks over our two week stint in Big Sur. The Buddhist monks/volunteer firefighters haha, and the good old Esalen Institute (if you're interested in "non-violent wood turning", I can point you in the right direction), and another engine crew we befriended found a half-acre pot field. Very nice people for the most part, though that may have had something do with the fact that we were protecting their homes.., and beautiful part of the coastline.
Did you all go and stand downwind? lol
(yes I realize this wouldn't be a good idea in theory, but I suppose that's where firefighters usually have to be anyway right?)
I have no idea what the cost of an electric car is right now. I haven't priced them because
Then how can you say they are a viable option for many? How viable is an option most people cannot afford?
Big Sur is definitely still a place populated by weirdos. That's where our big wildfire was last July and let me tell you my crew and I ran into some pretty strange folks over our two week stint in Big Sur. The Buddhist monks/volunteer firefighters haha, and the good old Esalen Institute (if you're interested in "non-violent wood turning", I can point you in the right direction), and another engine crew we befriended found a half-acre pot field. Very nice people for the most part, though that may have had something do with the fact that we were protecting their homes.., and beautiful part of the coastline.
My ex's dad taught massage at Esalen. He's been working there for years. We visited him once. I LOVED it up there. I would love to work somewhere like that. Such amazing beauty. And the energy was delicious. :D
My ex grew up on a commune. Lucky bastard.
Did you all go and stand downwind? lol
(yes I realize this wouldn't be a good idea in theory, but I suppose that's where firefighters usually have to be anyway right?)
Nah we weren't with them when they found it. Just as well though because they had to sit there for hours as the police department, which was already stretched thin due to that pesky over 100,000 acre wildfire going on, went through the proper procedures to deal with such a large amount of growing plants.
Actually we go by the "one foot in the black"rule. You want to stay mostly in or near the already burned area attacking the flanks of the blaze never the actual head of the fire, be upwind of the fire (if you are facing the fire, the wind would preferably be at your back), no fuel between you and the fire if possible, and never ever ever ever uphill from the fire, no matter what direction it is heading or how far down the canyon/drainage/whatever it appears to be. Unless of course you have the task of securing a dozerline/firebreak, part of which entails spending all day or night chasing after embers falling on the unburned side of the line (not as fun as it might sound).
*~*~*~*~*~
The More You Know!~*~*~*~*~*
My ex's dad taught massage at Esalen. He's been working there for years. We visited him once. I LOVED it up there. I would love to work somewhere like that. Such amazing beauty. And the energy was delicious. :D
My ex grew up on a commune. Lucky bastard.
We actually got an invitation from whoever was running/care-taking Esalen during those weeks to come use their hot springs baths and get some stress relief/meditation pointers for free. Sounded like an awesome deal until we picked up a catalogue of their courses at a gas station while stopping to pick up some chew and jerky. They offer some crazy ass sounding courses there. Some seemed perfectly legit, and I guess some universities have psychology class credit deals worked out with Esalen for particular courses. That said, there were others that left us speechless like a course on tapping into the combined knowledge from all time that everything in the universe shares with one another, etc., and the "non-violent wood turning" class. Kind of weirded us out. Very nice but interesting folks up there.
You really should have gone Bullitt. The spring baths are totally awesome! :D Just be expecting lots of nudity...
Electrics ARE viable for a large portion of the population. Most people probably don't drive anywhere near 100 miles per day.
You're probably right for normal commuting. Now what do you do when you want to go to the mountains skiing or down to the shore for the weekend or just to the casinos for the evening? You need another car and it's got to be a good one for traveling, but what if you can't afford another car?
Does that ski lodge, shore motel or casino have a charging station? Not in the future, not even in the fall, RFN? No they don't. Electrics are
not viable for most people as the family sedan without a lot of bullshit.
A hybrid with a small engine is viable for most people RFN. Go anywhere anytime and still get 40, 50, 60, miles per gallon. The biggest drawback of hybrids is they have been designed and built for maximum bragging rights on mileage, rather than vehicles that are comfortable and with enough space to be useful for a family of four.
If you tend to travel a lot I can understand needing something else. If you can afford two cars, why not have an electric one for home use and another one for travel?
I am really looking forward to the high speed rail systems Obama wants to create. It would be extremely useful for the US to have the same kind of rail system that other countries enjoy.
There is this one commericial that was on TV not too long ago, and as much as I hate commercials, I loved this one. It was for a car company (I don't remember which one), and in the commercial it showed one person driving somewhere and then giving the keys to someone else, and they drove somewhere and then gave the keys to someone else, etc. I thought that was brilliant. I wish we could do something like that in society, where no one really had to own cars, they were just available for anyone to drive whenever they needed to go somewhere. :D
Bruce, you can get 50+ mpg out of a regular Toyota now if you practice certain driving techniques. My 91 Geo can get more than 40. I coast a lot. :D The reason I would like to get a newer car though is because the emmission standards are better now in newer cars. I can't afford a new car right now though.
oh, and as far as elecric cars go, you don't necessarily need plug in stations, some electrics can by plugged into a regular outlet with an adapter, I believe. I remember seeing something about that a while back.
So if we significantly increase the demand for electricity by plugging into our houses where do you think that electricity is going to come from? Oh, that would be the coal fired or nuclear plant down the road.
It is a matter of choosing the things that do the least amount of harm. Electric cars, from what I learned on that show last night, are a lot more efficient, so they are actually a much better choice. Not to mention the fact that we get most of our oil from countries that are hostile to us. No technology is going to be perfect, at least not anytime soon. We can only continue trying to move in the right direction with regard to ALL our energy resources, and to me, that means creating a lot more solar and wind and geothermal, etc. If we could get the government to sponsor a program where people could solarize their homes (where there is a lot of sun), or have individual wind mills (where there is high wind) at a reasonable cost, and sell the excess back to the grid, that is one way to help solve the problem. Less people getting energy FROM the grid, more people supplying energy TO the grid. Less need for big electric companies. More sustainable power for individuals, more empoerment for people. Less costly power. See what I mean? It would feed on itself, and in a good way. Honestly, I don't know why they haven't peoposed that yet. Over time, we might end up with practically free power for everyone.
Look up the contribution of coal fired plants to global warming and get back to me. It is a major source of pollution. China is build about 2 - 4 a month.
Did you even bother reading the rest of what I wrote? I do not like coal. look, just go here and read the transcripts or watch the show, OK?
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/car/But the fact is, even if you don't like them, they are the primary souce of electric power in this country and around the world. So if you want to take a technology and apply it to the cars I am sure that the power companies of the world would be really happy to to have us do that. Because the alternatives are not being practially considered. Although there is evidence that the public outcry against coal is having an effect. The fact remains that there is not a huge incentive at this time to stop building them. And as long as countries like China and India do not have to apply the same standards of technology to newly built or existing coal fired plants it will not make a difference to global warming how many electric cars we build. It may make us feel better and make the coal companies and power companies rich, but it is not going to improve the environment.
Whatever. There is more than one reason to get off of oil. Electric cars are only one way to go. I would prefer we have choices. Electric, biofuel, compressed air, hybrids...
I would also prefer no more coal plants be built, and people who own those plants have to pay big taxes. There is no such thing a "clean" coal.
It may make us feel better and make the coal companies and power companies rich, but it is not going to improve the environment.
I really think that we will have to go nuclear soon. The safety standards have been raised and it is cleaner and more practical than any other option. Although, a lot of research is going into other clean alternative energy sources (wind, solar) and in a few decades, those will start to become more viable options as well.
They are viable now. I'm sick of people saying they aren't viable. They are.
sure, they are viable when the sun is shining and the wind is blowing. Neither of those things are happening at the moment here.
The sun shines here almost all of the time. And in California and the southwestern states.
The biggest drawback of hybrids is they have been designed and built for maximum bragging rights on mileage, rather than vehicles that are comfortable and with enough space to be useful for a family of four.
Biggest problem are the many labeled as hybrids that, instead, pervert the technology only to increase horsepower during acceleration. And other hybrids that provide none of those needed benefits.
Routine for all driving is for a hybrid to get over 50 MPH. So we put hybrids in larger car and get something around 40 MPG. Meanwhile, even GM's smallest cars average (at best) 26 MPG.
But again, how many horsepower is required to maintain 50 MPH? My worst case calculations on an Olds 88 and Taurus were 8 and 10 hp. GM engineers told me it was more like 4 and 2. That means most every car needs maybe a 1 liter engine. If using hybrid technology, it accelerates same, but does not waste a 200+ horsepower engine putting only 10 hp to the wheels. Damning numbers that say why hybrids should have been routine ten years earlier - when even President Clinton was a better innovator than auto executives.
Hybrid technology is the 'at minimum' requirement for all cars of the future. So what will GM introduce in 2010? A 500 hp obsolete technology Camaro. Could they be any dumber?
Electric cars are only one way to go. I would prefer we have choices. Electric, biofuel, compressed air, hybrids...
There is no viable replacement for fossil fuels (petroleum). The electric car is the hybrid. Hydrogen was never a viable fuel - could not even work in theory. Compressed air - do the thermodynamics. Also not viable. Biofuels - myths. Yes, there are exceptions just like some farmers still use the old wind mill for backup electricity. But face reality. We have no viable alternative to current petroleum transportation systems for the next 30 years. And then, only in limited applications.
Time to start getting smart about it. The only solution is doing more with less. Smart as in letting scientists – not White House lawyers – write the science papers.
That is complete bullshit. The Tesla is an all electric vehicle and is already being sold. Granted the original car is a sports car that many people can't afford, but they also have a family car coming out. It is about the price of a Lexus or Mercedes. The cars can go up to 300 miles on a single charge.
http://www.teslamotors.com/
Biofuels are not a myth. I know several people who changed their diesel engines over to biofuels. Willie Nelson's tour bus runs on biofuels. We have trolly car in Savannah that is a hybrid; it is an electric trolly that uses biofuels. So please stop spreading lies about alternatives.
lol - sugar - as much of an asshole wacko partisan dickhead as tw is, he is right on this one.
Biofuels are not a myth.
I never said they are a myth. After all, golf carts have been operating for generations. Ethanol has been in Brazil for decades. But I said replacements for petroleum based transportation fuels are not viable. We have and are stuck with petroleum energy sources for generations to come. Even in theory, there is no viable alternative. There is just no other energy source that packs so many joules in that same weight.
Current solutions are the same ones we needed to implement even in the 1970s. In ten gallons of gasoline, how much energy actually does any productive work? Between one and two gallons. The rest gets wasted - does nothing productive. Therein lays the problem. Even upping that number to three out of ten gallons is a major accomplishment. Not only are we stuck with petroleum. Look at the numbers. Solutions are possible. But only if we stop listening to wacko extremists and start demanding more innovation.
Where could other energy sources come from? Even nuclear is not a viable solution if we do not solve the waste problem? But quantum physics - a potential source of future solutions - has been seriously impeded in America. Especially when White House lawyers rewrote research papers for the greater glory of their political agenda. Part of the contempt for "doing more with less" that has been particularly promoted by extremists of the past decade. Even quantum physic research must now leave America for nations that more wanted to advance mankind.
Yes, there are other energy sources that can supplement our petroleum demands. But we are stuck with and have no *viable* alternatives to petroleum.
lol - sugar - as much of an asshole wacko partisan dickhead as tw is,
You cannot post logically. Everything is typical of extremists complete with the Rush Limbaugh insults.
So where does classicman provide any facts on this topic? Rush forgot to tell him what to say. So he posts insults. Now let see how he lies about it.
I cannot post logically. Everything is typical of extremists complete with the Rush Limbaugh insults.
So where do I provide any facts on this topic? I don't need no stinkin citations.
Rush forgot to tell him what to say.
I did not forget to tell him what to say. He's going off the reservation on his own.
Biofuels are not a myth.
Hello SP
I must say in all honesty that most everything that you post makes my trigger finger twitch and the word "bullshit" slip out of my mouth quite loudly.
We do however agree on the biofuels issue. Food for fuel? That does not have to be the case. How many people eat marine algae as a food stapel? Not many. I believe that ethanol is viable through algae.
Ethanol alone is not the answer and wont replace gas as a motor fuel. It seems possible to me that 50/50 gas ethanol would make a huge difference in energy imports
and allow more job/business opportunities here in the US. Not bullshit census jobs, real jobs that pay and that are
sustainable.
With some luck and good planning I should be able to study and experiment more on the subject in the coming months on my next great adventure back to the Philippine islands.
The coastal waters are warm enough year round to allow continuous harvesting of algae and the islands combined have about 25k miles of coastline to accomplish this. The US, on the other hand has about half of that length of coastline and much of that is out of the temperature range of many types of algae.
This is something that I'm quite serious about investigating. It seems possible that with all the conditions present today that the PI could provide a good portion of alcohol to it's fuel market as well as possibly China's.
Lots of "ifs" in there but it's technically possible IMO.
Biofuels - myths.
I never said they are a myth.
Tw, if you were fully competent, you'd copyedit -- it might help with your memory problems. But oh, no, that might make you less the wacko extremist we all know you are. (You make adhominem attacks on you mandatory, you know. Or you
don't know, and demonstrate that exquisite incompetence yet again.)
You continue your bad behavior here:
You cannot post logically. Everything is typical of extremists complete with the Rush Limbaugh insults.
-- an instant adhominem bellow of your own, and with what need? And you'll
never ever improve, you damned fool. You never wanted to. Your emotional development came to a halt at about age four, five tops. It is grotesque. Vulcan, schmulcan; your personality prevents adult thinking ever being manifest, owing to the stupid emotional needs of your ruling lizard brain. Look at how well the anti-Limbaugh Left is served: it has you! Mister Thoughtless.
Now in the hope that you might demonstrate some rare flash of competence, let's hear this "quantum physics" idea explained more fully, and how it might have anything to do with powering transportation.
Or are we to suppose you believed every word of
The Republican War On Science?
I dunno guys, did you ever consider
this?
Lots of "ifs" in there but it's technically possible IMO.
It's being done. Boeing is pushing it bigtime, convincing several jet engine makers and the US Air Force to test it successfully. Teeming up with a couple of Aussie outfits to work on reliable mass production techniques from algae. It's not ready for prime time but they've made impressive progress and see it as a viable solution for aircraft.
Teeming up with a couple of Aussie outfits to work on reliable mass production techniques from algae.
Which coastline are they proposing to set up production?
Southern Cali would be nearly perfect. That means it will not be done there the way things work.
I've not seen the published data on the emissions but heard in an interview that it's "nearly as clean as hydrogen while being much more economical."
Hello SP
I must say in all honesty that most everything that you post makes my trigger finger twitch and the word "bullshit" slip out of my mouth quite loudly.
We do however agree on the biofuels issue. Food for fuel? That does not have to be the case. How many people eat marine algae as a food stapel? Not many. I believe that ethanol is viable through algae.
Ethanol alone is not the answer and wont replace gas as a motor fuel. It seems possible to me that 50/50 gas ethanol would make a huge difference in energy imports and allow more job/business opportunities here in the US. Not bullshit census jobs, real jobs that pay and that are sustainable.
With some luck and good planning I should be able to study and experiment more on the subject in the coming months on my next great adventure back to the Philippine islands.
The coastal waters are warm enough year round to allow continuous harvesting of algae and the islands combined have about 25k miles of coastline to accomplish this. The US, on the other hand has about half of that length of coastline and much of that is out of the temperature range of many types of algae.
This is something that I'm quite serious about investigating. It seems possible that with all the conditions present today that the PI could provide a good portion of alcohol to it's fuel market as well as possibly China's.
Lots of "ifs" in there but it's technically possible IMO.
I have brought up the whole biofuel from algae thing before and posted a link. Brazil makes fuel from sugarcane, so we know it can work.
What else did I say that makes you want to kill me? :D Electric cars?
Here is a link to Tesla Motors, fully electirc cars...
http://www.teslamotors.com/I have brought up the whole biofuel from algae thing before and posted a link. Brazil makes fuel from sugarcane, so we know it can work.
It works for Brazilian biomass because they grow in temperatures above 70 degrees F. The process to obtain energy from biomaterial grown at lower temperatures (ie corn) is so inefficient as to probably consume more energy than it creates.
The concept works in theory. In practice, it has been a grand and expensive disappointment.
So how did we solve the problem? A technically ignorant admistration solved it by putting a $0.50 per gallon tax on Brazilian and other imported ethanol. Biofuels were really only welfare to midwest farmers.
For your proposals to work, first they must work in science. None have yet shown anywhere near the promise or success that must exist today for them to work in years future.
A glaring fact makes the most viable solution obvious. In ten gallons of gas maybe one and never more than two gallons do productive work. That other eight plus gallons gets wasted completely as heat or pollution. That is where solutions can be implemented, already exist in some examples, and are still being routinely stified by the companies who could best implement them and be profitable for doing so.
Everybody likes Sara Lee - even though she routinely stifled battery innovation? General Motors remains unscathed by your contempt?
Which coastline are they proposing to set up production?
Southern Cali would be nearly perfect. That means it will not be done there the way things work.
I've not seen the published data on the emissions but heard in an interview that it's "nearly as clean as hydrogen while being much more economical."
Here's another one.
BILLINGS, Mont. (AP) - A new study says jet fuel made with the oilseed
crop camelina could cut greenhouse gas emissions by up to 84 percent
compared with jet fuel from petroleum.
The finding is expected to be used by the aviation industry as it weighs a
number of alternative fuels with the potential to reduce costs and curb
emissions.
Camelina is considered well-suited to Montana and other arid Northern
Plains states because it needs little water. Terrance Scott with the
aircraft manufacturer Boeing says camelina is one of a handful of crops
with the potential to provide sufficient "feedstock" to make large
quantities of jet fuel.
However, the industry has struggled to attract growers willing to switch
to the crop. Also, falling oil prices have dampened its economic appeal.
The greenhouse gas emissions study was done by the Sustainable Futures
Institute at Michigan Technological University. It was funded by the
camelina industry and conducted with jet fuel from camelina seeds
developed by a Bozeman company, Sustainable Oils.
For the study, lead author David Shonnard said he conducted a "life cycle"
comparison of camelina with petroleum, meaning he factored in the
greenhouse gas emissions from fertilizing, growing, harvesting and using
the crop.
Conventional camelina, Shonnard said, can cut greenhouse gas emissions by
60 to 70 percent with no loss of performance for the fuel.
The 84 percent reduction in greenhouse gases was based on a strain of
camelina expected to need less fertilizer and yield more pounds per acre
than types of the crop currently in production.
"These next generation biofuels are true hydrocarbons and on a molecular
level indistinguishable from fossil fuels," said Shonnard, a chemical
engineering professor at Michigan Tech.
Sustainable Oils General Manager Scott Johnson said Shonnard's study could
help sell dubious farmers on camelina by showing them its market
advantages.
"It's been a little slow start for camelina," Johnson said. "They don't
want to grow something that doesn't have a fit."
Shonnard said he expected that within a few years a market will develop
for camelina and other biofuels such as jatropha, switchgrass and algae.
With the worldwide population growing -- and worries over global warming
intensifying -- he said the "trends are in place" for the biofuels market
to expand as at least a partial replacement for petroleum.
They are viable now. I'm sick of people saying they aren't viable. They are.
They aren't nearly as efficient as they could be. Here in Minnesota they identified a very strong wind draft that occurs about 500ft (or meters) above the surface that happens every night. If that can be exploited, it can create a lot of energy. More research as that will push the technology significant steps further.
Either way, these technologies need to prove themselves to the public before mainstream use. That is in the process. The technology will grow.
What else did I say that makes you want to kill me?
Not you, your socialist/collectivist ideas/non-stop slobbering on the Messiah.
Which ones? Yeah I know, please cite. I'm working 7 days now and don't have time to properly add to many of these irritating posts.
Here's another one.
Very interesting.
The time available for researching and reading has been reduced lately due to deadlines at work.
Anything that can make the US fuel independant or move us in that direction has my attention. That attention is limited for now but that's going to change in a few months.
Everybody likes Sara Lee - even though she routinely stifled battery innovation? General Motors remains unscathed by your contempt?
Not something you can prove, so it must be one of your moronic lies: you cannot show improved battery technology to exist, and insist some industry conspiracy is suppressing its expression. Well, conspiracy theory is the realm of flakes and kooks.
Note that I never subscribe to conspiracy theory in any of my so-called "crazy" posts.
Not like you could make a 500-mile/80mph battery pack, either. You can't even theorize how, let alone engineer it. Broke-dick.
They aren't nearly as efficient as they could be. Here in Minnesota they identified a very strong wind draft that occurs about 500ft (or meters) above the surface that happens every night. If that can be exploited, it can create a lot of energy. More research as that will push the technology significant steps further.
Either way, these technologies need to prove themselves to the public before mainstream use. That is in the process. The technology will grow.
They have proven themselves. But to be clear, are you arguing we shouldn't do it because they aren't as efficient as they
could be, even though they are already
more efficient than what we're using now? yea, that makes a whole lotta sense. :headshake
Not you, your socialist/collectivist ideas/non-stop slobbering on the Messiah.
Which ones? Yeah I know, please cite. I'm working 7 days now and don't have time to properly add to many of these irritating posts.
non-stop slobbering on
the messiah? Clearly you have me confused with someone else...
Not something you can prove, so it must be one of your moronic lies: you cannot show improved battery technology to exist, and insist some industry conspiracy is suppressing its expression. Well, conspiracy theory is the realm of flakes and kooks.
Note that I never subscribe to conspiracy theory in any of my so-called "crazy" posts.
Not like you could make a 500-mile/80mph battery pack, either. You can't even theorize how, let alone engineer it. Broke-dick.
There IS a 300 mile battery though,
already in use, and I have posted SEVERAL TIMES links to the website. yes, the cars are still kind of expensive for some people, but as more people buy them, they will become less expensive, AND, they are comparable to other cars in the same price range.
I have posted SEVERAL TIMES links to the website.
Exept tesla is apparently full of crap - err - exaggerating their claims.
Hey guys 'n' gals,
Dont forget that all energy originates from the sun
either as thermal energy or by
causing things to grow into "biofuels" to serve as
food aka fuel for living things or decay into fossil fuels.
You have your choice of eating or getting biofuels!
You cannot get anything for nothing (First Law
of Thermodynamics)
Even the Tesla needs an external source of energy
to recharge its batteries.
Just hope and pray (to whatever "god" you may
believe in, even if only yourself) that the sun keeps shining!
Al
Exept tesla is apparently full of crap - err - exaggerating their claims.
cite please.
They have proven themselves. But to be clear, are you arguing we shouldn't do it because they aren't as efficient as they could be, even though they are already more efficient than what we're using now? yea, that makes a whole lotta sense. :headshake
Are they realistic to use? Whats the price?
Of course they are realistic to use. The price of some things may be high now, but it will come down as the demand for those technologies rises. And the cost of those technologies really is much less expensive than building coal or nuclear plants or using oil.
And ftr, there is no such thing as "clean coal." We have one, count it, ONE, coal plant in this country that captures the co2. Even the plants that are in the process of being built do not capture the co2. So they are ALL "dirty coal" plants. But of course people wouldn't know that by the commercials being aired every 5 minutes on TV touting the promise of "clean coal."
cite please.
Read the thread Sugar - you have brought the Tesla up a dozen times and their claims rebuked by a number of posters.
Read the thread Sugar - you have brought the Tesla up a dozen times and their claims rebuked by a number of posters.
Claims rebuked? Hardly. However some of what Telsa claims is not always accurately grasped by a public that also so easily *knew* Saddam had WMDs.
Numerous concepts are limiting - starting with three thermodynamic laws.
One fact so often forgotten - there is no replacement for our basic energy sources. Even Telsa is only about doing more with less. Just another attempt to solve a fundamental problem that will remain if we don't address it: ten gallons of gasoline; but less than two gallons does any productive work.
The electric car is not about new energy sources. It is about increasing thermodynamic efficiencies. Even every alternative energy source is about efficiencies that must increase to become viable. Telsa is simply another attempt to improve a part of an 'energy consumption' chain.
Even VCRs could not be sold for less than $20,000. Then the technology was sold to a company that wanted to innovate rather than reap fast profits.
There is no magic bullet in Telsa. But Telsa is part of a multidimensional solution that was all but completely subverted in America for most of the last ten years.
non-stop slobbering on the messiah? Clearly you have me confused with someone else...
Frankly, m'dear, no he doesn't. You sound like this textbook example of someone with leftist opinions only -- a stereotype Secular-Progressive, completely politically correct, and completely unversed in the merits of competing views. Thus you believe you are both right and moral. There are those of us who aren't so sure of either.
Thus you believe you are both right and moral. There are those of us who aren't so sure of either.
About Sugar, or about yourself?
Read the thread Sugar - you have brought the Tesla up a dozen times and their claims rebuked by a number of posters.
People keep
saying electric cars aren't viable, but NO ONE has offered any
proof that they aren't. the Tesla is a perfect example of how wrong these people are. Show me any kind of proof that the Tesla isn't everything they claim it to be. I have seen NONE.
Frankly, m'dear, no he doesn't. You sound like this textbook example of someone with leftist opinions only -- a stereotype Secular-Progressive, completely politically correct, and completely unversed in the merits of competing views. Thus you believe you are both right and moral. There are those of us who aren't so sure of either.
You sir, are the one who believes without a doubt that you are always right and on the side of good, as defined by your religious beliefs. Your attitude against anyone with leftist ideals is that you are the smarter one and they the lowly idiot. But... you are sadly misguided.
I am not always politically correct. I think we have gone way overboard with the political correctness. It's downright silly sometimes. That doesn't mean I think we should go back to the way we were before, because I don't. Some sensitivity is necessary when trying look at all sides of a situation. Empathy is important. Understanding is important. That doesn't mean it should rule out common sense. You on the right seem to think common courtesy is stupid, and manners are a bad thing, but they are not.
I have had my mind changed before numerous times, on issues I believed in deeply, because I had an open mind and I was willing to listen to another point of view. I cannot imagine you ever changing your mind about anything, especially when confronted by someone on the left.
And ftr, I have voted for republicans, democrats, and independents, even though I fall far on the left side of the political spectrum, so please don't try to figure out my political tendencies, because your brain would explode; it doesn't have the complexity to look objectively at two opposing views, and see where both are right, and both are wrong.
Re: CO2 Emissions:
All who believe that CO2 emmisions are dangerous and should be
eliminated, are you suggesting that we should eliminate the human
race? After all humans do emit a lot of CO2.
With respect to thermal pollutions Al Gore will not attack the worse
source of thermal pollution - air conditioning (and his Tennessee mansion
is assumed to be ACed. Just check the atmospheric heat budget changes
of any major city in the lower 48 and HI over the last 70 years.
Cheers, Al
are you suggesting that we should eliminate the human race? After all humans do emit a lot of CO2.
If we kill you off, then global warming will be solved. After all, your numbers prove it.
Re: CO2 Emissions:
All who believe that CO2 emmisions are dangerous and should be
eliminated, are you suggesting that we should eliminate the human
race? After all humans do emit a lot of CO2.
With respect to thermal pollutions Al Gore will not attack the worse
source of thermal pollution - air conditioning (and his Tennessee mansion
is assumed to be ACed. Just check the atmospheric heat budget changes
of any major city in the lower 48 and HI over the last 70 years.
Cheers, Al
There are two different types of carbon cycles, a micro and a macro. The Micro carbon cycle involves all living organisms. Animals breathe in oxygen and breathe out carbon dioxide. Plants take in carbon dioxide and then release it when they die. This cycle fluctuates every year.
The macro carbon cycle is the cycle where carbon dioxide get trapped in the bottom of the ocean and gets pushed underground where it is either converted into coal or oil or gets shot back up by a volcano. This cycle takes hundreds of thousands or even millions of years to fluctuate.
The reason burning coal and oil is dangerous is because we are taking the carbon cycle out of equilibrium and by doing that, consequences regarding the climate will follow. Climate change does happen naturally but by changing the carbon cycle, we are causing throwing other variables in there that are not usually counted for.
You sir, are the one who believes without a doubt that you are always right and on the side of good, as defined by your religious beliefs. Your attitude against anyone with leftist ideals is that you are the smarter one and they the lowly idiot. But... you are sadly misguided.
Looking at the kind of thing presented by those loudest in opposition to me, I'd say I'm not misguided one bit. Nor can you actually show misguidedness, sad or happy, on my part. Just saying is not proving.
I am not always politically correct. I think we have gone way overboard with the political correctness. It's downright silly sometimes. That doesn't mean I think we should go back to the way we were before, because I don't.
Worthy. And PC is even worse than "silly sometimes." It's a tyranny of non-think, a tyranny over the minds of men. Like all tyrannies, it should be abolished.
You on the right seem to think common courtesy is stupid, and manners are a bad thing, but they are not.
This attitude is to be found only among the Wrong Right, not the conservatives, who hang onto their manners pretty well, even in the face of routine provocation from the immature sorts that make up the Left.
I have had my mind changed before numerous times, on issues I believed in deeply, because I had an open mind and I was willing to listen to another point of view. I cannot imagine you ever changing your mind about anything, especially when confronted by someone on the left.
Then you're not doing all that well at it, are you? I once was antigun, particularly anti-handgun. I'm not, now.
I do have a good understanding of those permanent things that are good. You are trying, as several here have to nil result, to find evil where it is not -- in the heart of Urbane Guerrilla.
. . . so please don't try to figure out my political tendencies, because your brain would explode; it doesn't have the complexity to look objectively at two opposing views, and see where both are right, and both are wrong.
M'dear, you are sadly misguided here: you cannot explode my brain, however hard you may try. I am probably more objective than you are: I've seen more of it. I can figure you out and I routinely do. When I catch you doing something good, I'll mention it; same goes for doing something bad. I can tell genuine sophistication from the specious, and grounding in the good from grounding in the bad.
Having looked over the Left for a couple of decades, and compared them with the Right -- yeah, the Left is mostly full of shit.
So it is spoken, so it must be true.
Only if he says it Three Times.
I think he's said it rather more than three times already.
Hey, it's a permanent thing -- or at least it's permanent so long as I am what I am, and Sugarpop is what she is. To certain people, my lifeway is a reproach to their lifeway -- and they know it is one they cannot satisfactorily rebut.
To stay Left, you have to stay childish; you have to believe a childish dependency is the road of virtue.
I don't. Thus, I am not of the Left.
It is better that way.
So it is spoken, so it must be true.
For instance, DanaC, you cannot mount a defense of the Left that will stand against my attacks upon it. You've given up even trying. You can't even demonstrate why you think your way is better than my way.
Kind of sorry, isn't it, being all intellectually bankrupt like that?
Come to the side of the light. It's not overcrowded and the quality of life is better.
Yey! Urbane, I was wondering when you'd come back and call me morally bankrupt again :P Missed you babes *smiles*
Not morally bankrupt. <Kiss kiss.>
Yay -- on-topic, next TEA parties are coming up July 4 (Major US holiday, ten days before Bastille Day and celebrated in much the same vein). Google for one near you.
And the July 4 TEA party was plenty fine. The corner of the county government center's grounds that is the northeastern quadrant of the intersection of Victoria Road and Telephone Road in Ventura, CA. It's rather the traditional location for large demonstrations in this county. This one was one of the bigger ones; the news reported around 3500 people attended, with some turnover as the hours passed. There were always around 500 present at any one moment. The sign-wavers stretched from the corner northwards the length of a city block to the entranceway to the courthouse/gov't center parking lot. There were often a dozen and more across the street, also waving signs.
I didn't have a sign. I brought the lone teapot, and got lots of smiles and chuckles. It was a great conversation piece. The brisk wind kept tangling the teabag tags I had hanging out of the pot, or blowing them around behind my hand and out of view of the passing motorists. Another demonstrator had a teacup and other tea things hotglued to her straw hat, and yet another demonstrator was urging her to connect with me. As it happens, we walked up on each other. There were "Don't Tread On Me" yellow rattlesnake flags (historical reference to the Revolutionary period, 1775-1783) and rattlesnake jacks too (same idea, with red and white stripes; presently in use as jacks for the US Navy, in place of the fifty-star blue Union, to which we will probably in due course return). Lots of American flags and the bright yellow TEA bumper stickers, several "United We Stand" placards. One nice old gal asked me and my teapot to pose for a photo that she said she'd post on Facebook. I'm smiling and wearing a broadbrimmed sage-green hat for the sun.
Man, did we get honks and thumbs-up. The streets blared. In opposition, I saw but one middle finger and two thumbs-down, total, and I was there practically the whole time and helped pack up afterward. The positive support was overwhelming.
There was what I expect is the usual TEA blend, if you like: we had a fiscal-responsibility type Ventura city councilman get up and give a measured, thoughtful speech on what poor fiscal choices Ventura, and Sacramento, had made and how much trouble they were going to have to go through to repair the resulting budget holes. I hope this actually means these governmental levels will actually pull in their horns and become smaller parts of the economy. Other sorts abounded: Proposition 8 supporters, Prop. 8 opponents (me for one); one Ron Paul pamphleteer who looked like he lives alone, if not down in a basement -- rather pale and uptight; a couple of conservative activists speechifying on the platform, hardcore anti-Obama people who are keeping race conspicuously out of their utterances, though the "OBAMA: One Big Ass Mistake America" trope was on at least one sign; one "Teabagger and Proud Of It" sign, much opposition to socialism and even specifically Marxism. More no-extra-taxes signs than could easily be counted. Many signs demanding that both California and the Fed live within their means. There's a clear mood in this country that there's little a state does that's worth going deep in debt to manage -- a sign the people are getting a clue from the libertarians.
The sensible fraction of the population isn't behaving like the Gadarene swine presently running over cliffs in Washington and Sacramento.
Not morally bankrupt. <Kiss kiss.>
I should amplify: intellectually bankrupt perhaps, but AFAIK you're not an immoral individual. No torturing cats, no bestiality committed with Galapagos tortoises or dolphins... you get the idea, I'm sure.
Intellectual bankruptcy could make one morally bankrupt, but this does not necessarily follow. I think one can be morally bankrupt without being so intellectually: the bright but sociopathic.
I am a little amoral in some respects :P
![this]("http://thesportboys.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/pickle.jpg"){kind=link}
