Hundreds Of Truckers Protest High Gas Prices

On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Hardpan wrote:

> Sure, but you have industrialised China and the rest of the world
> competing for the same gallon of petroleum, which by most estimates is
> reaching its peak production and is or will be in decline.

And just think: China needs all that oil because *we* buy all the garbage
Wal-Mart sources there and ships here. We have the power to stop the
Chinese guzzling all that oil. All we have to do is stop buying from them.

> All great ideas, but we had 30 years to do something about it, and we
> did not do much of anything, except go ballistic over Chernobyl and
> Three Mile Island and shut down our nuclear plants, which pollute much
> less then coal-fired plants.

....not to mention discouraging the mindless production of ever more and
more babies.

It's thoroughly unpalatable to those folks who've grown up with the
postwar/baby-boomer vision of the American Dream (3 kids, 2 SUVs, a house
in the suburbs and multiple trips weekly to Safeway, Wal-Mart and Best
Buy...consume, consume, consume...). Why, it's downright unAmerican, given
that the red Chinese forcibly control their population growth. But the
unpleasant fact remains, we cannot invent our way out of simple, basic
biological laws. Our technology can't and won't exempt ourselves from
habitat carrying capacity, it can only buy us additional artificial
carrying capacity. The difficulty is, when the underpinning of this
constructed extra carrying capacity -- oil -- goes away, the rest of it
will crumble very soon after.

And we've made it very difficult for ourselves to back up and go a
different route. Much of North America's prime farmland has been paved
over for suburbs and shopping malls.

So, yeah, it's pretty basic: Too many people competing for too few
resources = problems.

(Given that, one wonders how long it'll take for society to begin to smile
on those who, for whatever reason, do not contribute to the population
boom.)

DS

"Daniel J. Stern" wrote:

> And just think: China needs all that oil because *we* buy all the garbage
> Wal-Mart sources there and ships here. We have the power to stop the
> Chinese guzzling all that oil. All we have to do is stop buying from them.

Sort of. China is an emerging economic power. Aside from the economic growth
associated with all the new industrial facilities, the workers are faring
better and are now becoming consumers, buying electrical appliances and
gasoline powered vehicles. I heard somewhere not to long ago that two years
ago the per capita oil consumption in China was half a barrel per year, and
that has risen to 1 barrel and a half per person. There are more than a
billion Chinese, so you know that is going to have a hell of an impact on the
demand for oil.

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005 12:27:13 -0400, "Daniel J. Stern"
> wrote:

>On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Hardpan wrote:
>
>> Sure, but you have industrialised China and the rest of the world
>> competing for the same gallon of petroleum, which by most estimates is
>> reaching its peak production and is or will be in decline.
>
>And just think: China needs all that oil because *we* buy all the garbage
>Wal-Mart sources there and ships here. We have the power to stop the
>Chinese guzzling all that oil. All we have to do is stop buying from them.

Isn't that amazing? We also have the power to reduce gas prices by
reducing our consumption (walking, biking, taking transit, carpooling)
- but we won't do that either.

I guess convenience takes precedence over cheap gasoline...

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Dave Smith wrote:

> > And just think: China needs all that oil because *we* buy all the
> > garbage Wal-Mart sources there and ships here. We have the power to
> > stop the Chinese guzzling all that oil. All we have to do is stop
> > buying from them.

> Sort of. China is an emerging economic power. Aside from the economic
> growth associated with all the new industrial facilities, the workers
> are faring better and are now becoming consumers, buying electrical
> appliances and gasoline powered vehicles.

....which they can't do if we quit buying from their employers.

"Daniel J. Stern" wrote:

> > Sort of. China is an emerging economic power. Aside from the economic
> > growth associated with all the new industrial facilities, the workers
> > are faring better and are now becoming consumers, buying electrical
> > appliances and gasoline powered vehicles.
>
> ...which they can't do if we quit buying from their employers.

I try not to. I usually try to find domestic goods, but they are getting
harder and harder to find. I needed a new white shirt a few months ago. I
went to at least a dozen men's stores before I found a Canadian made shirt.
I would have taken an American made shirt, but all shirts were made in
China. In each store I made it very clear that I would not by a shirt made
in China.

Sadly, many of the employers are North Americans who made their money here
and then invested overseas. They can make more profit if they pay slave
wages.

> Sadly, many of the employers are North Americans who made their money here
> and then invested overseas. They can make more profit if they pay slave
> wages.

Look at it the other way. Why are wages in North Amercia so high?
Why are North Amercians consuming far more than they need?
Why are North Americans unwilling to share with other people?
The world's natural resources can't supply the level of consumption in
North America for everyone, so why are North Amercians reluctant to live
with less so other people don't have to?


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William R Watt National Capital FreeNet Ottawa's free community network
homepage: www.ncf.ca/~ag384/top.htm
warning: non-FreeNet email must have "notspam" in subject or it's returned

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, Dave Smith wrote:

> > > Sort of. China is an emerging economic power. Aside from the
> > > economic growth associated with all the new industrial facilities,
> > > the workers are faring better and are now becoming consumers, buying
> > > electrical appliances and gasoline powered vehicles.
> >
> > ...which they can't do if we quit buying from their employers.
>
> I try not to.

Same here.

> I usually try to find domestic goods, but they are getting
> harder and harder to find.

....because North American MBAssholes have a permanent hardon for Chinese
"goods", yes.

"Daniel J. Stern" wrote:

> And we've made it very difficult for ourselves to back up and go a
> different route. Much of North America's prime farmland has been paved
> over for suburbs and shopping malls.
>
> So, yeah, it's pretty basic: Too many people competing for too few
> resources = problems.

I might venture to guess that the proliferation of third-worlders is more
damaging to the environment than the more moderate proliferation of
first-worlders.

> (Given that, one wonders how long it'll take for society to begin to smile
> on those who, for whatever reason, do not contribute to the population
> boom.)

Perhaps when they stop shrieking about how THEY are not contributing to the
problem like "the breeders" are. They seem to forget that the breeders are
raising the doctors who will care for the Virtuous Childfree in their old age
when they have no children to give a ****.

And who's going to fix their (ob)cars?

--
Cheers,
Bev
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Once you've provoked a few people into publicly swearing they are going
to hunt you down and kill you, the thrill wears off." -Elric of Imrryr

"Scott en Aztlán" wrote:
>
> > wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 12 Aug 2005, Hardpan wrote:
> >
> >> Sure, but you have industrialised China and the rest of the world
> >> competing for the same gallon of petroleum, which by most estimates is
> >> reaching its peak production and is or will be in decline.
> >
> >And just think: China needs all that oil because *we* buy all the garbage
> >Wal-Mart sources there and ships here. We have the power to stop the
> >Chinese guzzling all that oil. All we have to do is stop buying from them.
>
> Isn't that amazing? We also have the power to reduce gas prices by
> reducing our consumption (walking, biking, taking transit, carpooling)
> - but we won't do that either.
>
> I guess convenience takes precedence over cheap gasoline...

Of course it does. Time is irreplaceable.

--
Cheers,
Bev
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Once you've provoked a few people into publicly swearing they are going
to hunt you down and kill you, the thrill wears off." -Elric of Imrryr

On Sat, 13 Aug 2005, The Real Bev wrote:

> > So, yeah, it's pretty basic: Too many people competing for too few
> > resources = problems.
>
> I might venture to guess that the proliferation of third-worlders is
> more damaging to the environment than the more moderate proliferation of
> first-worlders.

Um...no. Look at the per-capita energy consumption in any first-world
nation. Now compare it to the per-capita energy consumption in any
third-world nation. QED.