THe GW Scan Is Still Alive, Amazingly
in [Drive]
|
Prev: Besides the Revolution, what influence do the French hve in USculture?
Next: Ridiculous Speed Limits
From: Larry G on 22 Jul 2010 07:22 On Jul 21, 10:13 pm, russo...(a)grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) wrote: > In article <951f0b5f-1d8e-44c9-a57f-142f4053a...(a)g35g2000yqa.googlegroups..com>, > Larry G <gross.la...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >On Jul 20, 8:26=A0pm, russo...(a)grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) > >wrote: > > >All of the industrialized countries use less than what we do and have > >comparable standards of living - > > They have comparable standards of living, but they come up on the > short end of the comparison. Reducing energy usage has costs, and > reducing it drastically has high costs. The big one is less living > space; smaller and fewer cars (with all that implies) probably comes > next, though the mere availability of HVAC is likely in there. > -- it's not that drastic of a difference in many respects. They live a life not that different than we did 30 or 40 years ago when we lived in smaller houses closer to work - and were not near as obese ....though we did smoke more. we live a much more extravagant life these days - precisely because we have kept energy costs low but this does not come without a cost ... we pay for low energy costs in many ways that affect us - that does not have the same effect on those who use less. The most apparent is how much oil we have to import and because we use so much - we cannot afford for the middle east to be taken away as a source.
From: Larry G on 22 Jul 2010 07:26 On Jul 21, 10:17 pm, russo...(a)grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) wrote: > In article <22879a1c-b4c1-4d4e-816b-eaad9492e...(a)j8g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>, > Larry G <gross.la...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > >On Jul 20, 9:07=A0pm, Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVET...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >> On 2010-07-20, Larry G <gross.la...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > I'd say that you need an agency like the EPA to make the tradeoffs > >> > between what is necessary for society and for business and what is > >> > safe enough.. or pollutable enough for society. > > >> No single person or small group can possibly have enough information to > >> do that properly even if they were pure of heart and absolutely perfect > >> in their thinking. That means even if you can elminate all the problems > >> of politics and corruption, have qualified people with no self interest, > >> it still wouldn't work, because no small group can manage a society of > >> 300 million people without causing all sorts of problems. > > >and your alternative? > > Decentralize decisionmaking. > > -- > The problem with socialism is there's always > someone with less ability and more need. that's the opposite of how Nukes get built in other countries though.
From: Matthew Russotto on 22 Jul 2010 18:53 In article <a11eb019-24f5-4c33-a770-dc327499d318(a)q22g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, Larry G <gross.larry(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >Most folks who live in most modern industrialized countries - live >well .. maybe not as "well" as the US but how could is "well" when the >US is dead last in life expectancy of industrialized countries? We're not, we beat Taiwan. >It sure can't be because we suffer in the heat and cold, eh? It's most likely largely because we eat like pigs. -- The problem with socialism is there's always someone with less ability and more need.
From: Matthew Russotto on 22 Jul 2010 18:55 In article <042dde65-48d4-40d3-a86c-5a32964e6d9e(a)c10g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, Larry G <gross.larry(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >On Jul 21, 10:13pm, russo...(a)grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) >wrote: >> In article <951f0b5f-1d8e-44c9-a57f-142f4053a...(a)g35g2000yqa.googlegroups= >.com>, >> Larry G <gross.la...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >On Jul 20, 8:26=3DA0pm, russo...(a)grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew Russotto) >> >wrote: >> >> >All of the industrialized countries use less than what we do and have >> >comparable standards of living - >> >> They have comparable standards of living, but they come up on the >> short end of the comparison. Reducing energy usage has costs, and >> reducing it drastically has high costs. The big one is less living >> space; smaller and fewer cars (with all that implies) probably comes >> next, though the mere availability of HVAC is likely in there. >> -- > >it's not that drastic of a difference in many respects. They live a >life not that different than we did 30 or 40 years ago when we lived >in smaller houses closer to work - and were not near as >obese ....though we did smoke more. Excuse me if I don't want to go back 30 or 40 years in terms of standard of living. >The most apparent is how much oil we have to import and because we use >so much - we cannot afford for the middle east to be taken away as a >source. The sainted Europeans (and Japan) import a greater percentage of their energy from the Middle East than we do. -- The problem with socialism is there's always someone with less ability and more need.
From: Dave Head on 22 Jul 2010 21:48
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 04:13:07 -0700 (PDT), Larry G <gross.larry(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> We don't have the same infrastructure, we don't have the same size >> country, etc. etc. �Just because they can do it with X BTUs overall >> doesn't mean WE can do it with the same BTUs. > >doesn't mean we can't either. Does. Our fuel goes up a truck's diesel smokestack, when they roll 100's of miles on 1 gallon of fuel per 1000 lbs of cargo, on rails. >the bottom line is that we are 30th in the world on life expectancy so >the idea that their energy use contributes to a "subsistence" >lifestyle is ... well.. it's foolish. Sedentary lifestyes, lack of walking to places 'cuz of our suburban layouts, smoking, fatty food preference, etc. etc. Its the lifestyle people choose, that's all. >Most folks who live in most modern industrialized countries - live >well .. maybe not as "well" as the US but how could is "well" when the >US is dead last in life expectancy of industrialized countries? People are relatively poor compared to us. Once again, French doctors - that's doctors who have to study about a decade to do that job just like American doctors - net about $55K/yr on average. Read it: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_28/b4042070.htm _I_ net just about that much with 4 yrs of computer college work. Geeezzz... I mean, a DOCTOR makes $55K clear. C'mon... overall, they're poor. >It sure can't be because we suffer in the heat and cold, eh? Nope, but they might. Or maybe they all run around the house in heavy sweaters and long johns, and dial the heat down to 55, and just "get used to it." Dunno. But... we make a lot more $$$$ than they do, so far, and that's 'cuz of capitalism, and 'cuz their socialism is bleeding them dry. |