The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

All general, non-comics discussion goes here!

Moderators: Don Alexander, midgetshrimp

Post Reply
User avatar
Searcher
Skipper of the S.S.Shipper
Posts: 2721
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:29 am

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Searcher »

See, you need to come over to my side. At our last meeting of the "Great Right Wing Club", we had Maine lobsters and Longhorn Streaks, used redwood trees for toothpicks and had peel grapes served to us by co-eds. ;)

I will have more comments on Sunday, and yes, I am a rightwing Rebublican. I just try really hard to see the world as it is and not be blinded by my desire for how I wish the world be. Drives my Conservitve freinds and my liberal freinds ... 8-}
"Vegetarian: an old Iroquois word for Bad Hunter." Stolen from Azrael
“My books are like water, those of the great geniuses are wine. (Fortunately) everybody drinks water.” ~Samuel Langhorne Clemens
Robin Williams, a man who used his natural talents to make people smile, to laugh, to spread joy, to let everyone else feel alive; so no one else ever had to suffer as much as he has.

User avatar
Adamas
Posts: 8033
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:56 am
Location: N.E Alabama

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Adamas »

And that's why I have great respect for your view. You believe the way you do, but not doing it blindly and demonizing anyone who doesn't. :-bd :ymhug: :-bd :YMPEACE: \M/
Aquila89 wrote:It's really nice how a conversation about linguistics overlaps with a debate about strap-ons.
A good friend comforts you and talks you down when you are angry. A best friend skips along side you, carrying a baseball bat, and chanting, ‘Somebody’s gonna get it!"
Chelvo56 wrote:Sorry, but when the sentence "It is wrong to go into a foreign country, take out your weapon and enforce your will there", coming from an US-diplomat, was generallly laughed at, you might want to think why.
And to keep for future reference: Image

User avatar
Pneumonica
Posts: 1573
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 9:57 pm

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Pneumonica »

Your recognition of your own biases and rational reaction to them DISGUSTS ME! You are EVIL! EVIL! :p

Back to reality...

My favorite professor in law school is an Evangelical minister who is a single-issue voter - he doesn't vote for any candidate who is pro-choice. He hasn't overtly stated it, but I understand that he is against gay rights. He believes the universe is 6,000 years old, and he is for restarting prohibition. In class, half the time the arguments he presents are against his views - he's read them and studied them so well that he can argue the opposite view effectively. We discuss some of these issues (I'm one of the few he'll talk about them with, because I won't spend my time trying to convince him of my view, nor does he spend his time trying to convince me - we hash out views to get a better understanding of the other side), and I love these discussions.

Of course, the easily-offended should not enter into the legal profession in the first place...
Further affiant sayeth not.

User avatar
Adamas
Posts: 8033
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:56 am
Location: N.E Alabama

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Adamas »

Yeah, I had a friend who'd get into debates about pretty much anything, and in the middle, he'd quite cheerfully start arguing the opposite point of view. Drove our teachers NUTS! :p
Aquila89 wrote:It's really nice how a conversation about linguistics overlaps with a debate about strap-ons.
A good friend comforts you and talks you down when you are angry. A best friend skips along side you, carrying a baseball bat, and chanting, ‘Somebody’s gonna get it!"
Chelvo56 wrote:Sorry, but when the sentence "It is wrong to go into a foreign country, take out your weapon and enforce your will there", coming from an US-diplomat, was generallly laughed at, you might want to think why.
And to keep for future reference: Image

User avatar
Searcher
Skipper of the S.S.Shipper
Posts: 2721
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:29 am

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Searcher »

https://gasapp.rebelsites.com/index.php ... m&iframe=1

Just as a side note and kind of related to the whole Climate Change ...

in 2009 it took $22.20 to fill up my Chevrolt Aveo

today it takes $46.44








Yea ... how is that Hope and Change working for you?
"Vegetarian: an old Iroquois word for Bad Hunter." Stolen from Azrael
“My books are like water, those of the great geniuses are wine. (Fortunately) everybody drinks water.” ~Samuel Langhorne Clemens
Robin Williams, a man who used his natural talents to make people smile, to laugh, to spread joy, to let everyone else feel alive; so no one else ever had to suffer as much as he has.

User avatar
Adamas
Posts: 8033
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2008 2:56 am
Location: N.E Alabama

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Adamas »

Considering how rapidly the price has jumped in the past 6 months, just in time for campaign season. I'm not a big believer in coincidences.
Aquila89 wrote:It's really nice how a conversation about linguistics overlaps with a debate about strap-ons.
A good friend comforts you and talks you down when you are angry. A best friend skips along side you, carrying a baseball bat, and chanting, ‘Somebody’s gonna get it!"
Chelvo56 wrote:Sorry, but when the sentence "It is wrong to go into a foreign country, take out your weapon and enforce your will there", coming from an US-diplomat, was generallly laughed at, you might want to think why.
And to keep for future reference: Image

User avatar
Don Alexander
Dr. Ebil SithMod
Posts: 28238
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:26 am
Location: Under the arms of the ancient oak, where daylight hangs by a lunar noose...

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Don Alexander »

Erm, I think it's been established often enough that the president of the United States has no influence on GAS PRICES!!! #-o

Not to mention if anything will make gas prices skyrocket, it will be an attack on Iran, and I daresay a president from the party which is not the one of the incumbent president would have, to say it sarcastically, been, ahem, more supportive of Israel... /:)
ImageImage
Sithlord of the Sithling and best customer of McLovecraft's Image, in the business of keeping the little Platypus in business
Moderations in GREEN and signed by the DAMNed. I am not anonymous! Also, MODSMACK!! Image
Winner of the... 2010 Kilopost FRANKIE; 2010 Mad March Nom Off; 2010 Joker Cleavage Contest; 2010 Fan-Thing Contest; 2010 Mimic Contest (tied); 2011 Joker Cleavage Contest; 2011 Contest-for-the-next-Contest (tied)

User avatar
Artemisia
Mistress of Oddities
Posts: 12513
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:46 pm
Location: Deep in the mountains where the elves roam.

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Artemisia »

1) the President has no actual influence on gas prices.

2) the President's attempts to limit speculators in the oil and gas industry was shut down by the Republicans.

3) speculators have more influence on gas prices than anyone else

4) the Keystone Pipeline will do nothing for gas prices in the country

5) the attempts to push up gas prices are a way to try and sabotage President Obama's reelection

I do this for a living, and while one of our other writers is the woman who covers this particular stuff, we do so from a Moderate position. When it actually comes down to the issues, President Obama is actually a Conservatives compared to me, who is a Moderate.
Avatar thanks to Saikoh
"I'm going to do what I do best...lecture her."- Twilight Sparkle (My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic)
"Hello, I'm a lizard woman from the dawn of time, and this is my wife." - Madam Vastra (Doctor Who "The Snowmen")
"There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes." The 4th Doctor Doctor Who "Robot"

User avatar
Searcher
Skipper of the S.S.Shipper
Posts: 2721
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:29 am

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Searcher »

In the short term (say less then a year) NO, the president has no control ... unless he or she is able to convince Congress to pass a 100% surcharge tax on crude oil imports ... but no one is that stupid. However, long term he or she can influence it by closing off the off shore deep well drilling, imposing new restrictions on leases or not renewing or issuing new leases, killing a pipeline that would assist in getting more crude oil to the international market.

Iran ... Iran ... gads! We and Israel have been on the verge of attacking them since the 80's. I don't see that changing no matter what the 'experts' say unless Iran actually attacks (which they won't). The recent increase could be a result of lots of thing, one of them could be the Syria problem, our really screwed up Libya response last year (President's influence) or even that billion dollar settlement from the BP oil spill.
"Vegetarian: an old Iroquois word for Bad Hunter." Stolen from Azrael
“My books are like water, those of the great geniuses are wine. (Fortunately) everybody drinks water.” ~Samuel Langhorne Clemens
Robin Williams, a man who used his natural talents to make people smile, to laugh, to spread joy, to let everyone else feel alive; so no one else ever had to suffer as much as he has.

User avatar
Artemisia
Mistress of Oddities
Posts: 12513
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:46 pm
Location: Deep in the mountains where the elves roam.

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Artemisia »

The off shore drilling argument would have substance if it weren't for the large number of capped wells already in place. The oil industry routinely sends out rigs to drill and seal off wells for later use- usually decades in advance. The moratorium on drilling in the Gulf had no affect on the oil supply since none of those wells would be used at any time in the near future. It may cause a blip in the oil supply about five or ten years down the road.

Additionally, the oil supply that we have currently in production is more than enough to meet the needs of the market. In fact, some oil producers wanted to cut the supply down because oil was getting to be too cheep.

As for the Keystone XL Pipeline. . .that's another not worth it project as the cost of building it is likely to actually drive up the cost of oil. The only reason why they are trying to take it through the US is because the Pacific Canadian provinces refused to allow the pipeline to go through. When you get right down to it, that pipeline is going to have to have oil stay at an inflated cost just to be able to turn a profit for the company building it. It is kind of like drilling in the ANWR. The amount of oil that is there would require that oil prices remain at or above $150 a barrel in order for it to be profitable to drill there, and would only flatline our oil prices for about five years.

It's basic cost/benefit analysis. The problem is that most businesses do not behave on a market-driven cost/benefit structure. What they do is operate on a system whereby they want to accumulate as much wealth for the people at the center while doing their best to rob or swindle as much from everyone else as possible. It isn't about actually running a good company or making a profit, and it certainly isn't about doing what is best for the nation/world/society.

Searcher. . .just to give you the rundown on my political positioning- I believe that government is there to protect people from business. When it comes to personal liberties, the government should be as inobtrusive as possible- that means as few regulations on personal liberty as possible, and most of those have to do with things like driving and unsafe living areas. Also, I believe that the government has to impose standards regarding things like housing and employment discrimination.

Conversely, because a business cannot be punished the way a person can, the government must regulate business; however, regulations must be done in such a way as to not burden business, but to curb the worst excesses of their nature since they are not people, but entities comprised of many people who will, if they can, take advantage of whatever they can in order to increase profits while hurting others at a distance.

I just wanted to let you know where I stand regarding my political philosophy. Since I argue these kinds of things every day, though, I am probably going to drop out of this discussion now.
Avatar thanks to Saikoh
"I'm going to do what I do best...lecture her."- Twilight Sparkle (My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic)
"Hello, I'm a lizard woman from the dawn of time, and this is my wife." - Madam Vastra (Doctor Who "The Snowmen")
"There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes." The 4th Doctor Doctor Who "Robot"

User avatar
Searcher
Skipper of the S.S.Shipper
Posts: 2721
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:29 am

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Searcher »

It isn't about actually running a good company or making a profit, and it certainly isn't about doing what is best for the nation/world/society.
It is never about doing what is "best for the nation/world/society", that is not what companies are there to do. They are there to provide a service that people are willing to pay a certain price to obtian. If they are providing a service for the so-called 'betterment' of society; it is a by-product, a bonus but never a objective. Those who do usually end up bankrupt and out of business or require goverment assistance to stay open.

One of the cost on the pipeline or deep water drilling is the eviromental impact studies, lawyer cost to make sure all the "T" are crossed and "I" are doted and dealing with multipule goverment agencies on local, state and federal level. The leases for deepwater drilling are they exploration and production or just exploration? Is there extra cost that need to be paid out for every barrel removed?
"Vegetarian: an old Iroquois word for Bad Hunter." Stolen from Azrael
“My books are like water, those of the great geniuses are wine. (Fortunately) everybody drinks water.” ~Samuel Langhorne Clemens
Robin Williams, a man who used his natural talents to make people smile, to laugh, to spread joy, to let everyone else feel alive; so no one else ever had to suffer as much as he has.

User avatar
Artemisia
Mistress of Oddities
Posts: 12513
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2011 6:46 pm
Location: Deep in the mountains where the elves roam.

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Artemisia »

Those bureaucratic costs are meant to prevent the wholesale destruction or destabilization of the economy. The crippling or obliteration of businesses along the Gulf Coast cost far more to the overall economy than the pennies on the barrel will cost from those added expenses. It ripples outward, and destabilizes the entire economic structure because every business and every person spends money and generates both tax income and business revenue. Without those jobs, people and businesses are not buying things like gas, and that means demand goes down, which hurts profits.

Those regulations are suppose to force businesses to think about what is going to happen down the line. They are suppose to think about what will happen five years from now with regards to their business rather than scooping up money. People without jobs don't buy gas. People without jobs don't buy clothing. The thing is, these regulations are there to prevent corporations from acting like sociopaths.

Some of the nations with the heaviest regulation loads have the most stable economies, and that also goes for US states. Vermont is likely to have more problems due to the mild winter than they are due to the overall economic downturn. Our unemployment remained fairly low, and it's one of the lowest in the nation. Our economic outlook is not bad, over all. Our legislature is looking at ways to streamline the regulation process because it has become burdensome in some places, but they aren't going to dump them.

Most businesses these days run like our government, actually. The megacorps typically run on borrowed money and on the assumption of profits five years into the future. They engage in a shell game that often sees them hiding the fact that they are teetering on the edge of collapse. Businesses need to consider how they are going to impact the people around them. What happens is that when they do not, they end up hurting the overall economic structure of the country. The last time that corporations were allowed to get away with that kind of sociopathic behavior was in the 1920's, and that lead to the Great Depression.

Believe it or not, it is actually in the self interest of those at the top to make sure that the economy works properly and that they do as little impact as possible to those around them because that not only increases profits in the long run, but makes sure that their businesses last longer. That is, of course, if they were worried about their businesses actually surviving. How many CEO's have driven their companies into the ground and yet still managed to make a huge amount of money as they headed out?

But, shall we agree to disagree? You have a different philosophy than I do and I would really like to avoid a full on argument with a fellow forumite.
Avatar thanks to Saikoh
"I'm going to do what I do best...lecture her."- Twilight Sparkle (My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic)
"Hello, I'm a lizard woman from the dawn of time, and this is my wife." - Madam Vastra (Doctor Who "The Snowmen")
"There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish sometimes." The 4th Doctor Doctor Who "Robot"

User avatar
Gil Hamilton
Posts: 1965
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 4:37 pm
Location: TX Camelopardalis
Contact:

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Gil Hamilton »

Searcher wrote:
It isn't about actually running a good company or making a profit, and it certainly isn't about doing what is best for the nation/world/society.
It is never about doing what is "best for the nation/world/society", that is not what companies are there to do. They are there to provide a service that people are willing to pay a certain price to obtian. If they are providing a service for the so-called 'betterment' of society; it is a by-product, a bonus but never a objective. Those who do usually end up bankrupt and out of business or require goverment assistance to stay open.

One of the cost on the pipeline or deep water drilling is the eviromental impact studies, lawyer cost to make sure all the "T" are crossed and "I" are doted and dealing with multipule goverment agencies on local, state and federal level. The leases for deepwater drilling are they exploration and production or just exploration? Is there extra cost that need to be paid out for every barrel removed?
First of all, I want to know where you live that you are paying 33 cents per gallon above the national average for gas now (the Aveo has an 11 gallon gas tank, yeah? So if you paid $46.44 and were running on fumes, you paid $4.20 a gallon, compared to $3.87/gal which is the current average), but in 2009 were paying 43 cents below the national average ($2.43/gal was the national average in 2009, and you recall paying ~$2/gal). It sounds like where ever you lived raised taxes on gas, because places either tend to be above the national average consistently or below, but don't wildly fluctuate between well above and well below. Or did you move to another state? If it wasn't one of those two things, I call shenanigans on your math.

If there was a change in taxes in your locality, that isn't Obama's fault.
If you moved to a place with higher gas prices, like, say to California, that also isn't Obama's fault.
If you live in the twilight zone where your locality swings wildly above and below the national average.... you guess it, Obama probably wasn't involved.
If the math you are quoting is bull in order to try and make a cheap jab at Obama over gas prices, when (by sheer coincidence, I'm sure) one of the current GOP talking points to be repeated over and over is try to stick it to Obama is gas prices as though Obama has much power over that, that certainly isn't Obama's doing.

Which of those is it?

Secondly, you need to recall history a little bit. National gas prices are actually currently LOWER than their historic peak, adjusted for inflation. The current kind of high gas prices for a year was 2008, when it hit $4.12... which I believe was when your guy President Bush Jr was in office. How could that even BE?! President George Walker Bush was a conservative.

Nextly, all that regulation on deepwater drilling is necessary. It's not an industry that can support lax safety or engineering standards. We know what happens when you try to "oh, free market, regulation costs money" oil companies. Obama's current stance on deep water drilling came directly from a BP oil rig exploding due to an engineering failure that was ultimately the result of lax standards and cost cutting. This, as you'll recall, covered the Gulf of Mexico in oil and wrecked the Gulf economy, in addition to killing 11 people aboard the rig.

Further, I disagree with you. While "betterment of society" should be a by-product of a business, "at the expense of society" cannot be tolerated. Companies have an obligation to not actively increase their largesse at the expense of the people they effect and in fact, many professions have this built into their professional ethics. An engineering firm that cuts corners to increase their own profits not only is a bad company, but one that will lose its engineering license (no one goes, but look at the profit they made using substandard materials!). Scientists are obligated, morally and professionally, to the truth, and scientists who do bad science because a company is paying them to produce results that happen to support the company's party line should quickly find their professional licenses removed (and, in my opinion, shot out of a cannon). A manufacturing company has a responsibility to dispose of their waste safely and not dump cadmium into the river adjacent to their plant. You can claim that the "invisible hand of the market" will punish companies that act non-ethically, but it really doesn't do it, as numerous and on-going litigation against such companies show.

That's why we have a government that regulates business. A governments primary goal should be the well being of all members of its citizen body. That is the whole point of the government; voluntary transference of power to a centralized body which then acts on the behalf of the people who gave it that power. It must work for EVERYONE, not just companies. That means a government is obligated by its very nature to ensure that even if a company doesn't make society better, it certainly doesn't make society worse.

User avatar
Searcher
Skipper of the S.S.Shipper
Posts: 2721
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 5:29 am

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Searcher »

The math is not mine, which is why I provided the link so anyone could go back to the site and use the same page I did, however in Jan 2008 I drove from Orlando, Fl to Canton, Ohio which is very roughly 1000 miles (give or take a hundred) the fuel bill was around $100.00. In May of 2009, I reverse my trip and found my gas price tag had increased roughly $25.00. While I don't remember the exact prices I paid, I do remember being a bit worried that I was getting close to the upper limits of the amount of money I set aside just for gas. When I bought my car in 2006 (it is a 2007 model and yea it is almost paid off #:-s ) I barely put in $20.00 to fill, yesterday I paid $3.90/gal. Had I filled it up it would have been $42.90. And yea I run it till fumes, got to make the paycheck streatch. As far as that 'adjusted for inflation' number ... yea doesn't mean much when I will spend roughtly $180.00 this year driving one way ( $360.00 round trip) goin to Ohio. Talk to me about using actual prices, because I feel and remember what I actually paid not what was adjusted for inflation.


:-T :-T Completely bias pages ahead :-T :-T http://energyanswered.org/questions/why ... e-to-state the main page is here : http://gaspricesexplained.org/?utm_sour ... line-taxes

and the main gist of it is this :
Image

Besides the obviuos question, like what the heck to they do with all that money that they collect every year with the millions of gallons sold ... are those taxes helping or hurting the economy? Are those extra reglations making thing worst?

When are regulations hurting instead of helping? Are we there yet? I believe we are there. Absolute free market is the same as Utopia ... impossible, fake, non-achievable, never ever gonna happen, anyone telling you that it is possible is lying and most likely would give it to you at a price of your soul and ritual killing of your children.
Is regulation ascaryy evil, YES!
Is over regulation as bad as under regulations ... yes.
Was it overkill to shut down all operations because of one faulty drilling platform,I believe the answer is yes.
Side note: the system work, BP is going to pay throught the nose and should for allowing lax safty standards. That is what the courts are there for, to redress grives actions or inaction of persons and corperations.
Does it really take three plus years to study a pipline?
Did killing the pipeline help the situtaion?
If we hadn't done those two actions would we be paying (for me anyways) $3.90/gal or would it had helped lower the market demands and prices?
"Vegetarian: an old Iroquois word for Bad Hunter." Stolen from Azrael
“My books are like water, those of the great geniuses are wine. (Fortunately) everybody drinks water.” ~Samuel Langhorne Clemens
Robin Williams, a man who used his natural talents to make people smile, to laugh, to spread joy, to let everyone else feel alive; so no one else ever had to suffer as much as he has.

User avatar
Don Alexander
Dr. Ebil SithMod
Posts: 28238
Joined: Sat Aug 30, 2008 11:26 am
Location: Under the arms of the ancient oak, where daylight hangs by a lunar noose...

Re: The Great Debate Thread - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK!

Post by Don Alexander »

ImageImage
Sithlord of the Sithling and best customer of McLovecraft's Image, in the business of keeping the little Platypus in business
Moderations in GREEN and signed by the DAMNed. I am not anonymous! Also, MODSMACK!! Image
Winner of the... 2010 Kilopost FRANKIE; 2010 Mad March Nom Off; 2010 Joker Cleavage Contest; 2010 Fan-Thing Contest; 2010 Mimic Contest (tied); 2011 Joker Cleavage Contest; 2011 Contest-for-the-next-Contest (tied)

Post Reply