Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
That is my point - we're fucked if people refuse to change for the sake of convenience, since the oil companies and the government will just continue to collude and rule the world to the detriment of us all unless oil does run out. The solution: end oil dependency and take the world back from the oil companies.
Your mileage has a minute effect, and so does everyone else's, and combined all together, it has a massive impact in many, many ways. Not just the emissions, but also the giant lump of resources/pollutants that the cars are made from, the roads and other infrastructure that destroys the land so you can drive all over it, the noise pollution gas cars create, not to mention the horrendous traffic jams that lower everyone's quality of life in cities, and, of course, the support given to the oil companies that basically control the world. I am not accusing you. I don't expect you or really anyone else to stop driving. I'm just stating some facts.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
That is my point - we're fucked if people refuse to change for the sake of convenience, since the oil companies and the government will just continue to collude and rule the world to the detriment of us all unless oil does run out. The solution: end oil dependency and take the world back from the oil companies.
Your mileage has a minute effect, and so does everyone else's, and combined all together, it has a massive impact in many, many ways. Not just the emissions, but also the giant lump of resources/pollutants that the cars are made from, the roads and other infrastructure that destroys the land so you can drive all over it, the noise pollution gas cars create, not to mention the horrendous traffic jams that lower everyone's quality of life in cities, and, of course, the support given to the oil companies that basically control the world. I am not accusing you. I don't expect you or really anyone else to stop driving. I'm just stating some facts.
Energy is good. Oil is good. I want more oil companies to find more oil and bring down energy costs for all. It is these energy costs that are built in to every single good and service sold. The oil free world you seek "might" be negligibly cleaner but it will certainly be more expensive and harsher on the poor. That is the consequence of your good intentions. A Trump administration will allow for continued exploration of energy in all forms and will bring to the costs to those hit hardest.
Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
That is my point - we're fucked if people refuse to change for the sake of convenience, since the oil companies and the government will just continue to collude and rule the world to the detriment of us all unless oil does run out. The solution: end oil dependency and take the world back from the oil companies.
Your mileage has a minute effect, and so does everyone else's, and combined all together, it has a massive impact in many, many ways. Not just the emissions, but also the giant lump of resources/pollutants that the cars are made from, the roads and other infrastructure that destroys the land so you can drive all over it, the noise pollution gas cars create, not to mention the horrendous traffic jams that lower everyone's quality of life in cities, and, of course, the support given to the oil companies that basically control the world. I am not accusing you. I don't expect you or really anyone else to stop driving. I'm just stating some facts.
Energy is good. Oil is good. I want more oil companies to find more oil and bring down energy costs for all. It is these energy costs that are built in to every single good and service sold. The oil free world you seek "might" be negligibly cleaner but it will certainly be more expensive and harsher on the poor. That is the consequence of your good intentions. A Trump administration will allow for continued exploration of energy in all forms and will bring to the costs to those hit hardest.
Why would you assume that new energy technologies would be more expensive or harsher on the poor? That is quite the assumption. Anyway, if you want to care more about that than you do about innocent people being slaughtered for the sake of oil, and if you enjoy having your government controlled by oil companies, well, nothing anyone can do about that. I can't fucking believe you still support Trump btw, lol. Christ.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
That is my point - we're fucked if people refuse to change for the sake of convenience, since the oil companies and the government will just continue to collude and rule the world to the detriment of us all unless oil does run out. The solution: end oil dependency and take the world back from the oil companies.
Your mileage has a minute effect, and so does everyone else's, and combined all together, it has a massive impact in many, many ways. Not just the emissions, but also the giant lump of resources/pollutants that the cars are made from, the roads and other infrastructure that destroys the land so you can drive all over it, the noise pollution gas cars create, not to mention the horrendous traffic jams that lower everyone's quality of life in cities, and, of course, the support given to the oil companies that basically control the world. I am not accusing you. I don't expect you or really anyone else to stop driving. I'm just stating some facts.
Energy is good. Oil is good. I want more oil companies to find more oil and bring down energy costs for all. It is these energy costs that are built in to every single good and service sold. The oil free world you seek "might" be negligibly cleaner but it will certainly be more expensive and harsher on the poor. That is the consequence of your good intentions. A Trump administration will allow for continued exploration of energy in all forms and will bring to the costs to those hit hardest.
Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
That is my point - we're fucked if people refuse to change for the sake of convenience, since the oil companies and the government will just continue to collude and rule the world to the detriment of us all unless oil does run out. The solution: end oil dependency and take the world back from the oil companies.
Your mileage has a minute effect, and so does everyone else's, and combined all together, it has a massive impact in many, many ways. Not just the emissions, but also the giant lump of resources/pollutants that the cars are made from, the roads and other infrastructure that destroys the land so you can drive all over it, the noise pollution gas cars create, not to mention the horrendous traffic jams that lower everyone's quality of life in cities, and, of course, the support given to the oil companies that basically control the world. I am not accusing you. I don't expect you or really anyone else to stop driving. I'm just stating some facts.
Energy is good. Oil is good. I want more oil companies to find more oil and bring down energy costs for all. It is these energy costs that are built in to every single good and service sold. The oil free world you seek "might" be negligibly cleaner but it will certainly be more expensive and harsher on the poor. That is the consequence of your good intentions. A Trump administration will allow for continued exploration of energy in all forms and will bring to the costs to those hit hardest.
negligibly cleaner. tell that to the starving polar bears that are balancing on a 2x4 sheet of ice trying to hunt.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
That is my point - we're fucked if people refuse to change for the sake of convenience, since the oil companies and the government will just continue to collude and rule the world to the detriment of us all unless oil does run out. The solution: end oil dependency and take the world back from the oil companies.
Your mileage has a minute effect, and so does everyone else's, and combined all together, it has a massive impact in many, many ways. Not just the emissions, but also the giant lump of resources/pollutants that the cars are made from, the roads and other infrastructure that destroys the land so you can drive all over it, the noise pollution gas cars create, not to mention the horrendous traffic jams that lower everyone's quality of life in cities, and, of course, the support given to the oil companies that basically control the world. I am not accusing you. I don't expect you or really anyone else to stop driving. I'm just stating some facts.
Energy is good. Oil is good. I want more oil companies to find more oil and bring down energy costs for all. It is these energy costs that are built in to every single good and service sold. The oil free world you seek "might" be negligibly cleaner but it will certainly be more expensive and harsher on the poor. That is the consequence of your good intentions. A Trump administration will allow for continued exploration of energy in all forms and will bring to the costs to those hit hardest.
negligibly cleaner. tell that to the starving polar bears that are balancing on a 2x4 sheet of ice trying to hunt.
Trump probably said that oil is good for the environment at some point, lol.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
That is my point - we're fucked if people refuse to change for the sake of convenience, since the oil companies and the government will just continue to collude and rule the world to the detriment of us all unless oil does run out. The solution: end oil dependency and take the world back from the oil companies.
Your mileage has a minute effect, and so does everyone else's, and combined all together, it has a massive impact in many, many ways. Not just the emissions, but also the giant lump of resources/pollutants that the cars are made from, the roads and other infrastructure that destroys the land so you can drive all over it, the noise pollution gas cars create, not to mention the horrendous traffic jams that lower everyone's quality of life in cities, and, of course, the support given to the oil companies that basically control the world. I am not accusing you. I don't expect you or really anyone else to stop driving. I'm just stating some facts.
Energy is good. Oil is good. I want more oil companies to find more oil and bring down energy costs for all. It is these energy costs that are built in to every single good and service sold. The oil free world you seek "might" be negligibly cleaner but it will certainly be more expensive and harsher on the poor. That is the consequence of your good intentions. A Trump administration will allow for continued exploration of energy in all forms and will bring to the costs to those hit hardest.
negligibly cleaner. tell that to the starving polar bears that are balancing on a 2x4 sheet of ice trying to hunt.
Trump probably said that oil is good for the environment at some point, lol.
"oil is great, really really great. tremendous stuff. can't imagine my life, or melania's, without it. love it, absolutely love it".
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
So actions don't have consequences now? This living in trumpworld sure is going to be fun.
All actions have consequences. There is a risk/benefit scenario to every action...that includes government action.
Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
So actions don't have consequences now? This living in trumpworld sure is going to be fun.
All actions have consequences. There is a risk/benefit scenario to every action...that includes government action.
Unless you're bombing around in your Wrangler. Then there's no consequences.
Talk about class Obama has to advice the Bafoon even more than he thought he'd have to , Bafoon trashed Obama for 8 yrs but Obama still acts with class ! Bafoon transition team is a total circus
Trump is the president-elect and it is irrelevant whether I support him the man or not. I look at issues and on the issue of energy I absolutely support Trump. In terms of innocent people being slaughtered in the name of oil that is about to be a thing of the past as the greatest untold story of the last 8 years is the amazing discovery of shale oil deposits in peaceful parts of the world. This was just published yesterday:
Oil is plentiful and here to stay for good reason. Now in terms of alternatives they should absolutely be explored but the ones developed to date have been more expensive and less plentiful. This is just a fact and regulating out oil as per your want hurts poor people for marginal societal benefit. Even the polar bears know this.
Talk about class Obama has to advice the Bafoon even more than he thought he'd have to , Bafoon trashed Obama for 8 yrs but Obama still acts with class ! Bafoon transition team is a total circus
Obama bashed Bush for 8 years and then Bush still acted with class. Pretty standard fare.
Oil prices are complete bullshit - they mean nothing about anybody besides the fuckers running the oil and gas companies (of course Trump invests in them). Gas prices are a complete scam at all times, whether they're high or low.
The oil and gas industry has been hurting for a long time now due to low crude and NG prices.
I'm not sad about it.
I say the higher gas prices are the better. I actually support artificially high gas prices (well, no, because of where the money goes... but i would if the money went somewhere useful), or a bunch of taxes tacked onto the price. Anything that encourages people to drive less is a-okay in my book. If people could be priced out of the gasoline market and forced to find alternatives, that would be good in the long run IMO. I know most disagree with me, so sorry about my opinion, lol. I realize almost everyone has what they consider great and logical reasons for needing to drive everywhere ... I just think people and their lives have become way too dependent on gasoline. I say tax the living shit out of gasoline and parking and put that money straight into public transit development.
I'm not in support of artificially inflating the price of anything. It's not going to speed up production of an electric car. Public transit only works for people that live AND work in a city. For most of us that live outside large cities, we need cheap gas prices to, you know, go to work and stuff.
The ONLY time I do support artificially inflating prices is when it will improve people's behaviour that harms the environment. Anyway, I'm talking about developing public transit that is NOT just in the city (as my next post explained). And I disagree that necessity/unaffordability doesn't motivate change and innovation. However, I wasn't really suggesting that everyone go out and buy an electric car, not that I would discourage it. Since they already exist, I don't see why higher gas prices would affect their production. The only thing that slows the production of electric cars now is the lack of demand and the lack of charging stations.
So why not artificially raise the prices of hamburger meat so that more people will eat chicken and less red meat?
I'm not in favor of artificially raising the price of any essential goods. So I guess we can agree to disagree on that point.
I mean in a common sense way of course. Obviously food prices should never be artificially increased, as food is a necessity of life. Driving a car isn't. Of course I am open to all common sense. I.e. say increase the gas prices in urban centres but not in rural areas until public transit infrastructure in and between rural areas is built, just as an example (and people can waste their time driving to rural gas stations if they like - some people love spending to save, lol). I'm thinking loooong term here. In decades, not years. High gas prices to dissuade driving is not an uncommon idea. Western Europe already does it. Of course, their infrastructure allows for it better. North America needs to catch up (and allow for the differences in population dispersement). Anyway, yeah, I know that nobody who drives will ever agree with my attitude about this. I don't care, haha, I'm a hardliner on this subject. I think government needs to be more involved in forcing change when it comes to this because people at large never will as long as convenience for themselves is involved. Of course, I don't expect any North American government to give a flying fuck anytime soon... maybe when we're old.
It's not really up to the government to tell me I have to use alternate forms of transportation because some don't like the oil consumption. For many people, driving a car is a necessity. I am fortunate enough to live about 8 Liles from my work. But when I lived 50 miles from my job, a car is necessary.
Owning a car and driving makes you a slave.
I'm going to have to disagree with that one lol
I just don't see why anyone would insist upon using a gas guzzler if there are alternatives offered to them ... I guess that's why the government has such an important role in keeping up with environmental standards, since individuals won't do what needs to be done for the benefit of the whole if left on their own. People are slave to their cars, but really only because they do at least tend to be slaves to convenience, no matter the consequences (I don't exclude myself from that judgment - I am not slave to the convenience of cars, but I'm sure I use plenty of other conveniences that would allow people to accuse me of being guilty right along with everyone else). I just hope the government(s) start taking it more seriously soon... I don't actually expect them to until oil actually starts running out (which will happen soon enough).
Oil is never running out so I shall gas up my Wrangler and drive it where ever the hell I want comforted in the fact that my mileage is having no consequential effect on this planet of ours.
So actions don't have consequences now? This living in trumpworld sure is going to be fun.
All actions have consequences. There is a risk/benefit scenario to every action...that includes government action.
Unless you're bombing around in your Wrangler. Then there's no consequences.
Talk about class Obama has to advice the Bafoon even more than he thought he'd have to , Bafoon trashed Obama for 8 yrs but Obama still acts with class ! Bafoon transition team is a total circus
Obama bashed Bush for 8 years and then Bush still acted with class. Pretty standard fare.
well, I don't think he kept shouting that Bush was the worst president in history. All he stated was facts, that the economics during his tenure were disastrous. I think Obama still respected Bush. hard to respect trump.
"every society honours its live conformists and its dead troublemakers"
Talk about class Obama has to advice the Bafoon even more than he thought he'd have to , Bafoon trashed Obama for 8 yrs but Obama still acts with class ! Bafoon transition team is a total circus
Obama bashed Bush for 8 years and then Bush still acted with class. Pretty standard fare.
well, I don't think he kept shouting that Bush was the worst president in history. All he stated was facts, that the economics during his tenure were disastrous. I think Obama still respected Bush. hard to respect trump.
Has anyone else noticed that since his win in general the news headlines, coverage and articles about President-elect Trump have been very coarse? It seems like the press does not want to write about him at all but are bound to. The press is not giving a very celebratory feeling of the next POTUS. I truly believe this is 100% opposite coverage from Obamas win and if Hillary would've won.
Has anyone else noticed that since his win in general the news headlines, coverage and articles about President-elect Trump have been very coarse? It seems like the press does not want to write about him at all but are bound to. The press is not giving a very celebratory feeling of the next POTUS. I truly believe this is 100% opposite coverage from Obamas win and if Hillary would've won.
Yes, it all makes perfect sense... Everyone is aware of how totally fucked up this is, including journalists. Anyone who expects Trump to get the same treatment as past presidents is living in a fantasy world.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Has anyone else noticed that since his win in general the news headlines, coverage and articles about President-elect Trump have been very coarse? It seems like the press does not want to write about him at all but are bound to. The press is not giving a very celebratory feeling of the next POTUS. I truly believe this is 100% opposite coverage from Obamas win and if Hillary would've won.
Yes, it all makes perfect sense... Everyone is aware of how totally fucked up this is, including journalists. Anyone who expects Trump to get the same treatment as past presidents is living in a fantasy world.
Is there not a scripted chain of events that happen when a POTUS is elected? (Americans help out here) Like parades or news interviews or just plain celebrations all covered by the press like past presidents. It perhaps indicates that President-elect Trump was right about some media. They can be led.
Has anyone else noticed that since his win in general the news headlines, coverage and articles about President-elect Trump have been very coarse? It seems like the press does not want to write about him at all but are bound to. The press is not giving a very celebratory feeling of the next POTUS. I truly believe this is 100% opposite coverage from Obamas win and if Hillary would've won.
Yes, it all makes perfect sense... Everyone is aware of how totally fucked up this is, including journalists. Anyone who expects Trump to get the same treatment as past presidents is living in a fantasy world.
Is there not a scripted chain of events that happen when a POTUS is elected? (Americans help out here) Like parades or news interviews or just plain celebrations all covered by the press like past presidents. It perhaps indicates that President-elect Trump was right about some media. They can be led.
Parades and celebrations?? No. Not until inauguration day. When did you ever see that done in the past when a US election was over? News interviews yes, and those are happening, although now it appears that Trump is literally running from the media. He is apparently getting all tricksie in order to avoid being caught on camera, lol. So he's acting like a celebrity instead of like a president elect, which also makes sense, since I think he can only conceive of any of this in that kind of celebrity context. The weight of his responsibilities are not at all sinking in. It's pathetic.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
^^^ Ok maybe not parades and celebrations full out but I remember being inundated with the pre-inauguration days of Obama. It was non-stop celebration time in the media. I don't think he is running from the media rather than I think the media is chasing him.
Trump dodging the press was him making a statement. Unfortunately it reflects what he thinks about an important check and balance in the system and that he doesn't want those checks and balances. The president lets the press know where they are at all times. This is essential to being in a democracy. Please no one buy into his ongoing attempts to demonize the press. It's step one for an authoritarian. The CNN people last night were visibly irritated with this when they reported on it.
Please no one buy into his ongoing attempts to demonize the press. It's step one for an authoritarian. The CNN people last night were visibly irritated with this when they reported on it.
They were visibly irritated all night long during the election and they knew where he was the whole time.
Comments
Your mileage has a minute effect, and so does everyone else's, and combined all together, it has a massive impact in many, many ways. Not just the emissions, but also the giant lump of resources/pollutants that the cars are made from, the roads and other infrastructure that destroys the land so you can drive all over it, the noise pollution gas cars create, not to mention the horrendous traffic jams that lower everyone's quality of life in cities, and, of course, the support given to the oil companies that basically control the world. I am not accusing you. I don't expect you or really anyone else to stop driving. I'm just stating some facts.
I can't fucking believe you still support Trump btw, lol. Christ.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-15/permian-s-wolfcamp-holds-20-billion-barrels-of-oil-u-s-says
Oil is plentiful and here to stay for good reason. Now in terms of alternatives they should absolutely be explored but the ones developed to date have been more expensive and less plentiful. This is just a fact and regulating out oil as per your want hurts poor people for marginal societal benefit. Even the polar bears know this.
It seems like the press does not want to write about him at all but are bound to.
The press is not giving a very celebratory feeling of the next POTUS.
I truly believe this is 100% opposite coverage from Obamas win and if Hillary would've won.
Like parades or news interviews or just plain celebrations all covered by the press like past presidents.
It perhaps indicates that President-elect Trump was right about some media. They can be led.
News interviews yes, and those are happening, although now it appears that Trump is literally running from the media. He is apparently getting all tricksie in order to avoid being caught on camera, lol. So he's acting like a celebrity instead of like a president elect, which also makes sense, since I think he can only conceive of any of this in that kind of celebrity context. The weight of his responsibilities are not at all sinking in. It's pathetic.
Ok maybe not parades and celebrations full out but I remember being inundated with the pre-inauguration days of Obama. It was non-stop celebration time in the media.
I don't think he is running from the media rather than I think the media is chasing him.
Why does The president lets the press know where they are at all times. This is essential to being in a democracy?
Why is this a rule?
This monster deserves the worst Saw movie esque torture death.
This is what drugs do to your brain. (the guy in the article)