Bent
I got nothin'
Ok I see what you are saying. I thought you were talking about increasing tax rates.
Another ship stuck trying to prove lies...
- Thread starter PIPSTER
- Start date
- Status
Ok I see what you are saying. I thought you were talking about increasing tax rates.
HippieSmell
Occupy Reef Central
I'd support a tax increase for research. The government should fund more fundamental science. It's one of those things that is difficult for a private company to get approval, but is widely applicable and beneficial across society.
Bent
I got nothin'
I agree. That's what I meant by the government wasting money. They get plenty of income to invest and help, they just are all too busy blasting it on expensive suits, hookers and blow to bother with it.
alton
Well-known member
In 1978 my 1/2 ton truck got 12 miles to the gallon, In 1982 my Corvette got 16 miles to the gallon, both on the highway. Today my 2001 3/4 ton truck gets 19, and my 2014 Corvette gets 31 on the highway. In many ways we have done an excellent job increasing fuel economy. Come visit Texas if you want to see a bunch of wind farms and solar energy being used.
HippieSmell
Occupy Reef Central
That's what regulations and incentives can accomplish.
For a little perspective... and alternate theory.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783
Climate changes in the past 17,000 years from the GISP2 Greenland ice core. Red = warming, blue = cooling. (Modified from Cuffy and Clow, 1997)
http://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783
Climate changes in the past 17,000 years from the GISP2 Greenland ice core. Red = warming, blue = cooling. (Modified from Cuffy and Clow, 1997)
Attachments
alton
Well-known member
Actually I was thinking it was Toyota and Datsun/Nissan/ BMW/Volkswagon/Mercedes? Although Regulation killed the Hummer and the Ford Excursion. At 7 mpg both where not going to last. Although for some reason now they no longer give fuel economy for large trucks? And that same regulation let Toyota build Tundras like no end because of all the Camry's and Corrolla's getting 30+ miles to the gallon, it helps with there average to meet the standards. But at 13 mpg I still would never own one, but that's my choice not the government. We as a nation have become to dependent on the government to fix everything, and take care of everyone. Sorry I got off of the subject
HippieSmell
Occupy Reef Central
If it weren't for setting standards, we'd have much lower average mpg. It's not that it might not have ever happened on its own, but the market forces needed to encourage those changes would take longer to develop and could be forces we don't want to see develop, such as fuel shortages or a totally fubar environment. It's not government dependence, it's government foresight. Market forces are almost completely reactionary.
gone fishin
New member
The company I work for has been the recipient of government grants for making drop in fuels for jets from basically sugar water.
alton
Well-known member
You do realize how we get sugar?
http://earthjustice.org/blog/2015-december/sugar-cane-burning-not-so-sweet-for-florida-s-residents
Here in South Texas the smoke from Mexico darkens the skies in late spring, people with asthma have a very hard time
HippieSmell
Occupy Reef Central
It's not as if all sugar comes from there. His company might use sugar beets.
Also, do we need to point out where oil comes from and compare which is worse?
alton
Well-known member
Living in South Texas we have more than enough oil and gas to supply most of the US, what we don't have is water. My water bill for 6,000 gallons is about $45, I went on vacation last year and a toilet malfunctioned for two days my usage that month was 12,000 gallons and the bill was over $100. FYI I do not water my grass.
sde1500
Active member
From what I hear, other parts of your state certainly DO NOT have that problem.
gone fishin
New member
We have used beet sugar, corn stover, pine chips and a few other items.
alton
Well-known member
The city of San Antonio is getting ready to spend 3.4 billion to get water from a source 142 miles away. Houston has plenty but that is 200+ miles away
ThRoewer
New member
Be glad you don't live in Riverside County. When the Santa Ana winds blow you can see the black wall of air from there coming through the passes into LA.
I think here in California it's worse - despite el Niño the reservoirs are still not full. Here is in many places watering the lawn already banned or at least strictly limited.
Texas gets at least once in a while a tropical storm from the gulf.
If things go on like this the next wars are not about oil but about drinkable water...
power boat jim
Well-known member
It may have started that way, but it is now do business as the EPA says or you are legislated out of existence. Our government has decided we dont need large sedans anymore, we get appliances that only last a few years instead of 30 and a whole list of other products that have been legislated into a "green" corner that are now worthless under the guise of energy consumption or emissions (try buying a gas can you can actually use).
Lost in the equation are the resources it takes to continually replace the energy efficient appliances. we have now replaced cars with way more expensive large SUVs. The EPA has become a clearing house for what products get to market and now controls most industry in the U.S. There is no longer a consumer supply and demand for what we get. They have decided what we get, whats good for us and who gets to make it.
That isnt setting standards its government over reach.
HippieSmell
Occupy Reef Central
I think you're greatly exaggerating. The government doesn't manufacturer appliances, or anything else for that matter. Isn't it up to the manufacturer to produce a quality product? My appliances don't break after a few years, and I have no shortage of options when it comes to vehicles.
The bottom line is that the government has a responsibility to ensure the environment my family lives in isn't needlessly polluted by those wanting to save a dollar. Companies have repeatedly shown they are unwilling to self regulate, and any company that does is likely to be at a disadvantage due to the increase in costs. A government regulation is actually the most fair option because is creates a level playing field. Until you start factoring in international trade agreements, but that's another issue.
power boat jim
Well-known member
Unfortunately I am not exaggerating, The EPA controls more of whats made, how its made and who makes it then most people know. They do not allow a level playing field at all. it is quiet the opposite. They have for all intensive purposes removed the free market from alot of things. I do agree we need some sort of guard rails and enforcement on industry to insure the environment we live in isnt turned into a junk heap. They have just been allowed too far and are now too power full. The dont regulate the environment anymore they regulate industry.
a family member worked there for 17 years and left due to some of the inconsistencies and favoritism some were shown. Believe it or dont, it doesnt change what goes on.
- Status
