Prev: Reg versus Premium Fuel experiament in 09 PT Cruiser
Next: A "SAVAGE SERVILITY" -- "The Holiday Season" !!!
From: John Larkin on 16 Nov 2009 11:58 On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 07:36:41 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill <BretCahill(a)aol.com> wrote: >> >> >>>>The price of fuel hadn't gone over $5/gallon back then. >> >> >> >>> Current US average at the pump is about $2.60. >> >> >> >>The price of fuel should include the true costs of getting the raw >> >> >>material >> >> >>(crude oil) >> >> >> > If I'm not paying for the cost of the crude oil when I buy gas, who >> >> > is? >> >> >> All people who pay taxes of any kind, and our future generations who will >> >> be paying the debt we are accumulating. >> >> Nobody will pay the debt. We'll just print money. > >That's why fuel will be $5/gallon again next year and $10/gallon in 2 >years. > >> >Not that it's an immediate concern but the real cost is the climate. >> >> >The NY Times recently ran an article claiming that now most economists >> >agree that it will be more expensive for society to ignore AGW than to >> >do something about it. > >> The "most economists agree" bit is hilarious. > >They were including the shills at Hoover and the Chicago School. > >> And even if they did >> agree, they'd usually be wrong. > >I'ld like to see the sample myself. > >> You guys need something productive to do. All this worrying about the >> future is making you neurotic. > >Lots of opportunities in technical fields especially materials science >and heat transfer. > >And in hauling coal. > > >Bret Cahill > Given that you like to post to an electronics group, you might consider learning a little about electronics. Unlike neurotic fretting about climate and energy issues that you can't control, electronics is accessible and fun. John
From: krw on 16 Nov 2009 19:00 On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 08:58:29 -0800, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 07:36:41 -0800 (PST), Bret Cahill ><BretCahill(a)aol.com> wrote: > >>> >> >>>>The price of fuel hadn't gone over $5/gallon back then. >>> >>> >> >>> Current US average at the pump is about $2.60. >>> >>> >> >>The price of fuel should include the true costs of getting the raw >>> >> >>material >>> >> >>(crude oil) >>> >>> >> > If I'm not paying for the cost of the crude oil when I buy gas, who >>> >> > is? >>> >>> >> All people who pay taxes of any kind, and our future generations who will >>> >> be paying the debt we are accumulating. >>> >>> Nobody will pay the debt. We'll just print money. >> >>That's why fuel will be $5/gallon again next year and $10/gallon in 2 >>years. >> >>> >Not that it's an immediate concern but the real cost is the climate. >>> >>> >The NY Times recently ran an article claiming that now most economists >>> >agree that it will be more expensive for society to ignore AGW than to >>> >do something about it. >> >>> The "most economists agree" bit is hilarious. >> >>They were including the shills at Hoover and the Chicago School. >> >>> And even if they did >>> agree, they'd usually be wrong. >> >>I'ld like to see the sample myself. >> >>> You guys need something productive to do. All this worrying about the >>> future is making you neurotic. >> >>Lots of opportunities in technical fields especially materials science >>and heat transfer. >> >>And in hauling coal. >> >> >>Bret Cahill >> > >Given that you like to post to an electronics group, you might >consider learning a little about electronics. Unlike neurotic fretting >about climate and energy issues that you can't control, electronics is >accessible and fun. But like Slowman he can't do, only whine.
From: Paul E. Schoen on 17 Nov 2009 01:47 "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message news:shv3g59tsdd4r36braf5m2jmi25evb4iie(a)4ax.com... > > What a downer! Design some electronics. You'll feel better. Yes, we should bury our heads in silicon crystals like Ostriches. And reality will take a big bite out of our butts. Maybe 2012 will be the end. 12/12/12 to be precise. Divide that by two and you get 6/6/6. Paul
From: John Larkin on 17 Nov 2009 11:55 On Tue, 17 Nov 2009 01:47:46 -0500, "Paul E. Schoen" <paul(a)peschoen.com> wrote: > >"John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message >news:shv3g59tsdd4r36braf5m2jmi25evb4iie(a)4ax.com... >> >> What a downer! Design some electronics. You'll feel better. > >Yes, we should bury our heads in silicon crystals like Ostriches. And >reality will take a big bite out of our butts. > >Maybe 2012 will be the end. 12/12/12 to be precise. Divide that by two and >you get 6/6/6. > >Paul > So eat, drink, and be merry. John
From: Bret Cahill on 17 Nov 2009 18:53
> >> >> >>>>The price of fuel hadn't gone over $5/gallon back then. > > >> >> >>> Current US average at the pump is about $2.60. > > >> >> >>The price of fuel should include the true costs of getting the raw > >> >> >>material > >> >> >>(crude oil) > > >> >> > If I'm not paying for the cost of the crude oil when I buy gas, who > >> >> > is? > > >> >> All people who pay taxes of any kind, and our future generations who will > >> >> be paying the debt we are accumulating. > > >> Nobody will pay the debt. We'll just print money. > > >That's why fuel will be $5/gallon again next year and $10/gallon in 2 > >years. > > >> >Not that it's an immediate concern but the real cost is the climate. > > >> >The NY Times recently ran an article claiming that now most economists > >> >agree that it will be more expensive for society to ignore AGW than to > >> >do something about it. > > >> The "most economists agree" bit is hilarious. > > >They were including the shills at Hoover and the Chicago School. > > >> And even if they did > >> agree, they'd usually be wrong. > > >I'ld like to see the sample myself. > > >> You guys need something productive to do. All this worrying about the > >> future is making you neurotic. > > >Lots of opportunities in technical fields especially materials science > >and heat transfer. > > >And in hauling coal. > > >Bret Cahill > > Given that you like to post to an electronics group, you might > consider learning a little about electronics. Unlike neurotic fretting > about climate and energy issues that you can't control, electronics is > accessible and fun. We need a motor - generator that is efficient over a broad rpm range and doesn't require rare earth elements. Bret Cahill |