"Don White" wrote:

If every American trashed their gas guzzling SUV's and purchased a Honda
Civic or smaller,
that would make up for China's demand.

There's no shortage of big 4x4s or SUV's in Canaduh, Don.
What's in your.. oops, your mom's driveway?

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high powered
though, only a 4.6L.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

Stick with letting Harry go first!
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White
wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works better
that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

Stick with letting Harry go first!

The child, Don, is exerting his independence and he can't handle it yet!

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
m...

"Doug Kanter" wrote:

In case Fruitz pretends not to notice the question I just asked him,
I'll
ask you: Please indicate specifics as to WHERE you believe this
increased
demand is coming from. If you choose to repeat "China...", as others
have,
please provide data.


Where have you been hiding, Kanter? Been in a cave the last few years?

Here's just one of *dozens* of articles with the knowledge you seem to
lack.
Please educate yourself.

http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update45.htm

Here's a quote: "With oil, the United States is still solidly in the
lead
with consumption triple that of China's-20.4 million barrels per day to
6.5
million barrels in 2004. But while oil use in the United States expanded
by
only 15 percent from 1994 to 2004, use in the new industrial giant more
than
doubled. Having recently eclipsed Japan as an oil consumer, China is now
second only to the United States."

China is waking up, they are hungry, and they are rapidly building their
industrial machine. Their escalating economy is allowing China's "Joe
Average" to own a car for the first time.

How in the hell do you think they manage to make *everything* that
Wal-Mart
sells? By rubbing two sticks together? Sheeesh...

Liebrals are blind to anything they cannot blame Bush for.




Jack

"HarryKrause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...

"Tim" wrote in message
ups.com...
Jun 24, 7:57 am show options

Newsgroups: rec.boats
From: - Find messages by this author
Date: 24 Jun 2005 04:57:44 -0700
Local: Fri,Jun 24 2005 7:57 am
Subject: Oil reaches record $60 a barrel
Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
original | Report Abuse



*JimH* wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
That's:

Bad for Bush
Bad for the US
Bad for boating. :-(


I agree.


And what exactly did Bush have to do with this?



Here you go Jim:
Don't Blame OPEC; Higher Gas Prices Are Almost Entirely Bush's Fault
Dave Lindorff, ILCA Associate Member

What is making oil so expensive is not energy policy or even SUV's,
dangerous as those are for the environment. It's Bush's massive
deficits and his willful destruction of the US dollar that has gas
selling at $2.30 a gallon and rising.


There's been a lot of hand-wringing going on among economists and
politicians, and a lot of fuming at the gas pump by consumers over the
soaring price of oil over the last two years.


Increasingly, concern is being expressed by treasury officials and
economists about the negative impact soaring oil prices and related
gas

prices could have on the overall economy. Politicians--especially
Republicans--are also fretting, since the thousands of extra dollars
consumers are now spending on electricity, home heating and gasoline
have, for all but the wealthiest taxpayers, more than cancelled out
any

minimal benefits they saw from the president's tax cuts.


What's wrong with this picture?


The focus of all this anger and angst is oil prices. As a result,
everyone is looking at culprits in the wrong place, blaming wasteful
energy use, OPEC production quotas, monopolistic oil companies and/or
conniving oil traders.


In fact the real culprit behind these higher oil prices is the Bush
Administration, which, thanks to its massive deficits and tax
give-aways to the rich and corporations, to its war spending, and to
its failure to combat unprecedented and ever-larger trade deficits,
has

been causing the dollar to plunge in value.


Oil is a commodity and it is priced in dollars. If dollars decline in
value, then the price of oil will rise in inverse proportion.




Man, this gets old.

did you ever consider supply and demand? or would that get in your
way.

Like T. Boone Pickens (oil tycoon) said: : When you need 36 mil.
Barrel of crude to run a country, and can only get 34 Mil barrel, what
does that do to pricing?

I know, I know. That doesn't fit any kind of political logic. because
it is one of a few circumstances of reasoning. I know, know...it's so
much easier (and to some its much more fun) to bash Bush........ that
little meanie.....LOL

And if it is the declining value of the dollar.....why have gas prices
risen when the dollar has gained in the last view weeks.........damn
facts always get in the way of the liebrals.



Sheesh. I haven't been following this thread, but is someone stupid
enough to suggest that a weak dollar is responsible for high oil
prices...rather than increased demand (from countries like China), and
instability in the oil producing countries?

In the Middle East and in South America, a lot of that "unrest" can be
traced directly to President Idiot, er, Bush.

There was no unrest in the Middle East or South America prior to Bush taking
office, right? It's the combination of increased demand *and* the
instability. We can't do anything about China using more oil...but we can
do something to reshape the Middle East.

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 20:46:06 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

Fuel Injected? I didn't know you could push the Ford standard 4.6 L
to 300 hp without altering something major. Supposedly this is Ford's
standard engine package across the product line.

Interesting.

"John H" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005 00:03:50 GMT, Shortwave Sportfishing
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 19:58:39 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 25 Jun 2005 22:23:32 GMT, Don White
wrote:

John H wrote:



Better let Harry do the talking, and you do the follow up. Works
better that
way.


Ok...let's substitute 'high powered yellow Mustang' for SUV....
make more sense?

I'm getting over 21mpg in the Mustang. Not bad. It's not really high
powered
though, only a 4.6L.

I thought your Mustang was a GT?

It is. The GT has a 4.6L V-8, with an advertised 300hp. I don't do a lot
of drag
racing though. (Although, I *know* it'll do 110mph in 3rd gear - without
redlining.) I've only done that once. That was enough.

My baby blue '72 Stang with a 2 bbl 302 V8 with a C4 running bias-ply tires
with a few lines going down the middle wiould easily do 110. I really miss
her!