Please, everyone get a clue

First of all, yes there is some extent to global warming, and yes it may becoming more of a problem. But those "environmentalists" and goverment officials that are trying to get programs going saying its going to help a lot please! You seriously can't believe that. The thing all of you need to learn is that, the government have their own agenda. They dont give a shit about you and I, its all bout them. These "programs" that they say will help, is just another way to get money for THEMSELVES! If you people dont believe that, stop watching CNN(Communist News Network). It is brain washing you. YOU HAVE GOT TO LEARN, yes i am restating this because of the importance and impact of it, THEY ARE DOING THIS FOR THEMSELVES, those greedy sons of a bitches. You know what this all ties into? FREEDOM! They are slowly but surely chipping away the people's freedom. Even with small things such as Global Warming and what not. In California for instance, they have made it so that companies, im not to sure which ones, had to regulate the amount of power that they use. Hmm, I am pretty sure that that is their choice on how much power they consume. Yeah it is greedy, but you know what, IT IS THEIR FREEDOM! It all comes down to this, government wants your freedom, they want to control you. Our constituion is just fancy fishpaper to them.

That is my rant, feel free to post your opinions.

 

I've yet to see any right to "consume as much power as you want" enshrined in any constitution.

 

I saw Dennis Miller the other day
he made this one joke about how we won't get alternative fuels until we are nearly out of gasoline, and a company decides they can make tons of money off it (he compared this to Thomas Edison getting the patents to the light bulb not actually inventing it)
and how him driving an SUV is contributing to advancing the use of alternative fuels
'when I see someone driving one of these wimpy hybrids I always think "why are you prolonging the situation, don't you care about the environment?"'

 

Nor is there anything about how much you CAN'T consume. (Keeping in mind energy back then did not exist the same way it does today.)

I personally don't consume a lot of energy as I live a very minimalistic lifestyle... probably much more so than some of these global warming bandwagoners, who want to force their ways down everyone's throat while rarely practicing what they preach. While I believe moderation is always a good thing, I am not going to go around and tell people what they can and cannot consume, nor do I think that's the government's duty.

As I have said before, the reason global warming is being hyped the way it is is because there is an agenda behind it, that elitist bureaucrats like Al Gore will not tell you about. You see, when you can't create fear in enough of the public using Muslim boogeymen and the threat of suitcase nukes, you have to resort to another fear tactic where the people will be eagerly willing to hand over all their rights to the government so it can "protect" them. This is what we have with the global warming ruse. It's just another way of the government saying "you're in danger. Give us all of your rights and liberties and we will save you." It works the same with any government in any age.

 

Yeah, liberals or power-mongers invent phony or hyped-up "crises" so that they can cheat and claim in effect, "My issue is bigger than your issue." As if they don't get the limelight or media spotlight enough as it is? I am trying to remember what it was I heard or read about, about some such "crisis" to which is used as an excuse to steal away people's freedom. To which I thought, "Oh yeah, isn't that about the way that the 'overpopulation' issue has also been hyped?" They invent a phony, bogus "crisis," and then people start talking about whether we anymore, have a "right" to have our children, without conclusive evidence or proof, as if, like Adolf Hitler said, if you tell a lie often enough people will believe it. "Truth" in the view of such liars, seems to be more about "building consensus" and making it all up as they go along, pretending like they are smart or "educated."

Consume as much power as you want? What about the "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," in the Declaration of Indepence? Surely that somehow relates to consuming power? When there are so many ways to produce electricity, why exactly can't we run our (power-consuming) central air conditioners, provided we pay the reasonable cost of the electricity generation? Especially since practically every notable "environmentalist" and government decision maker, has air conditioning in their homes and SUVs. Lying hypocrites!

Wasn't nuclear power supposedly to bring us electricity "too cheap to meter?" Well we are still waiting for that promise. But nuclear power can power huge cities, fairly cleanly. I notice they don't appear to have notable "power meters" on the various residential quarters on the spaceship in Star Trek, and probably not for homes on the ground either. The spaceship engines produce apparently enough power to run a great city, of course they run a bit short on energy in a battle, just to make it seem more "realistic" to the audience. Along with people lurking, hopefully all in the same direction, to simulate a "hit" to their spacecraft. On a movie with a big enough budget, they might actually have things to shake the movie set.

Americans wouldn't know how to "conserve" energy if their lives depended upon it. But then if we don't have Enron-like corporteering being allowed, why should we have to? Sometimes I get disgusted seeing cars go down my street, even into late dark hours of the night. No way are all those people doing anything essential, like going to work. "What's wrong with you people? Don't you know you are supposed to be boycotting the greedy oil corporations? Or at least do sensible things, like sleep at night. Why do you continually waste gasoline and consume, consume, consume?," I wish I can scream in their faces. But then maybe that's what the lying eco-freaks like Al Gore want. To jack up the price of gasoline so high, that only rich hypocrites like him, can afford to drive and not use public transit, or whatever inferior option is touted for the public, so that the rich elites can pretend like they are more priviledged or important that everybody else.

 

Meant to be funny, but isn't there some logic to such ideas, perhaps?

Why hasn't people went to Mars yet? Because the world population isn't big enough yet, to do such things. Largely because technology growth, is largely driven by human population growth. Want to see people someday, if ever, which I doubt, living on or exploring Mars? Have lots of children then, to further things along. Humans are often "lazy" in some respects, and may prefer not to expand to other worlds, if ever, which I doubt there will ever be the need, until they have to. So it would be "helpful" in that respect, to in the meantime, work on, if and as we can, "outgrowing" this world.

When there is too much natural "pressure" (population or otherwise) but when wisely directed, such "pressure" can press for constructive changes or release. An example could be hydro-electric dams. Water under so much pressure, can be used to do very constructive work to benefit people. They even have basement sump pumps, that are powered by city water pressure, so that they don't lose power during a storm. For every 2 gallons of water pumped, an additional gallon is used, to provide the energy. The flow of the water through a restricted jet, produces a vaccuum, which can draw the unwanted water out of the sump.

One thing I like about other people having supposedly gasoline-hog SUVs, is that the cost for building roads and maintaining them, is supposed to come from the gasoline tax. So when people drive vehicles that supposed use "too much" fuel, in effect, those people are offering to pay "more than their fair share" of the road costs, so that perhaps I can pay "less than my fair share." (That is, if I choose to drive a more "efficient" vehicle than the average or median vehicle.) Although I don't see how people can reasonably be driving around recreational campers and towing boat trailers, considering the current price-gouged cost of gasoline, I have to admit that some of those RVs really do look nice. Yeah, sometimes I would like to have a nice "house on wheels," for the rare instances when I might have to travel somewhere. But I would rather have a spaceship for a Christmas present. After all, who says that Christmas wish lists, have to be 100% realistic? Can't some wishes be a bit "wild?"

 

^mmhm

 

That's a bitch.

 

Under deregulation in California PG&E closed many of their hydroelectric pit stations and sold the equipment or let it rust. Because we were told companies like Enron could supply it cheaper. Now we are being told energy is at a premium because no new power plants have been built...who's fault is that? Up until then PG&E supplied affordable power, and researched and developed their industry. I can't fault PG&E they did what they were told to do, and watched their stock fall as Enron's rose.

 

That's a huge example of corporate greed, that often when there are too few corporations competing in the market, corporations sometimes think it easier to cheat than to compete, and conspire to manipulate the market rather than to serve the public. That's also a reason why I suggest maybe it should be made easier for responsible government officials to revoke corporate charters for failing to serve the public good, and why some change in corporate law may be in order, to distribute the highly centralized and undemocratic power in corporations that are highly top-heavy managed by unaccountable CEOs and stockholder bigwig "good ol' boys" networks of rich elites who don't even live in the real world of the working poor.

How irresponsible that people would rather play games and gamble with electricity, than merely supply the demand and expand infrastructure, and hopefully make a reasonable profit in the process of serving, pretty much the idea in smaller business and "Mom & Pops." That even intrudes into public safety, as unreliable electricity impacts quite a lot of things, from trucking to hospitals, to old people who need their at-home medical equipment to work. Even refrigerators, food spoilage, air conditioning, public security, etc. There should be personal accountable and personal charges against the principles of such corporate mismanagement, and not so much of this "limited liability" for corporations. If corporations break the law, then some real person must have made the decision, to disregard the law. Sure, the stockholders may not be liable beyond the value of their stock, but why not the person who decided to break the law?

Isn't some of this some ploy, to give deregulation a bad name? Electricity is well known to be what they call "a natural monopoly," as presumably, it would be cost-prohibitive, to run dozens of competing companies power wires down every street. Since they can't so much compete in an open level marketplace, due to the necessary neighborhood infrastructure installations, don't such markets require some level of "regulation" to keep prices in line? I am generally for "deregulation," but I mean to get rid of endless "laws" that make little sense or disrespect the sovereignity of supposedly free people. People should not have to get permits and inspections to improve their own property. Surely "property rights" still has some meaning? Things can be done property and to code, without requiring needless permits and inspections. Probably it's different for businesses, since the public who enters stores, can't reasonably know if the wiring or fire sprinkler jobs were done properly. Next thing you know, the government will want to violate the 4th Amendment, to do "health and safety" inspections of our own home kitchens, something like what they do at restaurants, but surely even Church kitchens should be exempt, under that distorted nonsense of "separation of church and state," or because they are more privately or not-for-profit used.

It takes long enough to do home-improvements as it is, and people needing to bring home sick relatives, don't have time for government stalling and delays. And costs and having to bribe? inspectors to pass what should at least be "passable" anyway? Home-owners already have incentive to do things right, and should be able to easily check code, on the internet.

 

"I has a car...NOOOO, they b takin mah car!"

 

It may also be a mans choice to go out with a hacksaw and brutally murder another person. It may be a persons choice to forcably inject others with drugs, or mow down the entire amazon rainforest, or kill off the very last tigers on this planet. Does that mean that man should be allowed to go ahead and do those things? (because its his precious freedom?) These companies decisions affect us all, affect the entire planet, not just themselves. The effects may be devastating. So why stand back and just let it happen, when all it is is, as you quite rightly say, greed anyway?

We DO need to watch for our freedom being taken away...we also need to protect what is vital, and prevent other living things from being needlessly hurt because of greed, selfishness and corporate craziness

 

That short sentence just killed my faith in humanity.

 

Im beginning to wonder if it was actually a joke or something...

 

I read once in a Robert Heinlein novel that freedom actually boils down to having the responsibility to act correctly. I think that's not a bad definition.

 

that's an interesting thought, and though it's not one i would aggree with as being the whole story, it is clearly something governments and the corporate economic interests that own them, have NOT been doing. nor are we very likely to be able to count on them doing in the future.

because the're kind of an automatic mechanism that serves one purpose that really serves no purpose and no one's best intrests, and is really kind of totally indifferent to anything else, but in that indifference, will stop at nothing to further it, even at what it simply has no capacity to see, that it is heading for consuming even its own potential.

=^^=
.../\...

 

I think Bush fuzzed the lines between Church and State.

 

Public utilities before deregulation were deemed necessary for life. If there came a time when they were limited all people were regulated in their consumption of said utilities so that everyone could continue to live. I don't find that unreasonable.

 

juust a note---my electric was turned off 3 days ago--not due to non payment, but a mistake of their own. The man wouldn't hear me out regardless of the fact i was home with 4 children. 3, 1 1/2, and 3 month old twins. They realized they were wrong, but didn't return to restore my electric untill 6pm the next evening. also i live in fl where our heat index is 100+ degrees. this is legal!

 

That's to bad Nam, hope you and your family made out ok.