OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.

Fortunately, you have no material effect on anything outside your own home.
:-)

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Mark Browne wrote:

So now you're in the electricity business eh? You know their overhead
costs?

And you? You *do* know this stuff?

I know how most businesses operate. This one is not much different.

Really?
================================================== ===================

OK, Dave. You don't eat fish. How about water. Do you like water? What about
your kids? Here are some bodies of water which supply cities in New York
(all except Tupper Lake, the last in the list below). Lake Ontario's another
one. It provides drinking water to a few million people in NY and Canada.

So what is your point? Do we have a pollution problem? Yes. So what are
you willing to give up to solve it?

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made, so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made, so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave



Translation: You are willing to play Russian roulette with the health of
your children and grandchildren so a handful of corporations don't have to
suffer a few years of economic hardship. Before patriotism, before faith to
a deity, before anything else, your responsibility as a father is the most
important thing on earth. By shirking that responsibility, you become the
lowest form of garbage imaginable.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made, so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave



Translation: You are willing to play Russian roulette with the health of
your children and grandchildren so a handful of corporations don't have to
suffer a few years of economic hardship. Before patriotism, before faith to
a deity, before anything else, your responsibility as a father is the most
important thing on earth. By shirking that responsibility, you become the
lowest form of garbage imaginable.


And you still haven't answered the basic question of just how much you
are willing to give up to achieve your utopian environment.

My concern for economic hardship has nothing to do with corporations
(although it would fit your agenda to believe that), but rather how the
increased costs will be passed on to the people, many of whom will not
be able to afford it.

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Dave Hall wrote:


My concern for economic hardship has nothing to do with corporations
(although it would fit your agenda to believe that), but rather how the
increased costs will be passed on to the people, many of whom will not
be able to afford it.

So, what you're saying is: our electricity supply system cannot be upgraded (not
because it would reduce corporate profit, although it certainly would, nudge
nudge wink wink) but because it would create economic hardship for poor people.
This is one step away from advocating socializing the power utilities. Careful
Dave, put down the computer and back away....

DSK

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

DSK wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:


My concern for economic hardship has nothing to do with corporations
(although it would fit your agenda to believe that), but rather how the
increased costs will be passed on to the people, many of whom will not
be able to afford it.

So, what you're saying is: our electricity supply system cannot be upgraded (not
because it would reduce corporate profit, although it certainly would, nudge
nudge wink wink) but because it would create economic hardship for poor people.
This is one step away from advocating socializing the power utilities. Careful
Dave, put down the computer and back away....

That's certainly one conclusion, but not the one I'd advocate. If it
were, I'd have said so. But I don't favor socialism in any form.

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water
like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made,
so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave



Translation: You are willing to play Russian roulette with the health of
your children and grandchildren so a handful of corporations don't have
to
suffer a few years of economic hardship. Before patriotism, before faith
to
a deity, before anything else, your responsibility as a father is the
most
important thing on earth. By shirking that responsibility, you become
the
lowest form of garbage imaginable.


And you still haven't answered the basic question of just how much you
are willing to give up to achieve your utopian environment.

My concern for economic hardship has nothing to do with corporations
(although it would fit your agenda to believe that), but rather how the
increased costs will be passed on to the people, many of whom will not
be able to afford it.

Dave

You would give up the health of your children because you are wedded to the
policies of your president, who just gave a free gift to electric utilities.
You are the lowest form of garbage imaginable. Family values require that
you put your children first, and a complete stranger much further down on
the list.


And you STILL refuse to answer my question, instead attempting to throw
ad-hominem comments at me. How much are YOU willing to give up to
achieve your ideal environment Doug?

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Harry Krause wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:
Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points made, so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave


No translation needed. Your views are so simple-minded, Dave, they
really need no rebuttal or even comment. I certainly hope you do not
have children.

Coming from the king of simplistic. You responses are so trite and
simple, that you can't even be original. I've run out of fingers
counting the number of times you have made that same, almost exact,
comment. Are you even capable of independent thought?

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


You would give up the health of your children because you are wedded to
the
policies of your president, who just gave a free gift to electric
utilities.
You are the lowest form of garbage imaginable. Family values require
that
you put your children first, and a complete stranger much further down
on
the list.


And you STILL refuse to answer my question, instead attempting to throw
ad-hominem comments at me. How much are YOU willing to give up to
achieve your ideal environment Doug?

Dave



Trash. You are comfortable with letting your children be guinea pigs for
increased pollution, because you have mistaken a monkey president for a
deity. Fathers like you should be dealt with in the most severe fashion. You
are not fit to be called a human or an American.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


You would give up the health of your children because you are wedded to
the
policies of your president, who just gave a free gift to electric
utilities.
You are the lowest form of garbage imaginable. Family values require
that
you put your children first, and a complete stranger much further down
on
the list.


And you STILL refuse to answer my question, instead attempting to throw
ad-hominem comments at me. How much are YOU willing to give up to
achieve your ideal environment Doug?

Dave



Trash. You are comfortable with letting your children be guinea pigs for
increased pollution, because you have mistaken a monkey president for a
deity. Fathers like you should be dealt with in the most severe fashion. You
are not fit to be called a human or an American.


And you are nothing more than a hypocrite. A typical liberal, who sees
nothing wrong with everyone else changing their lifestyles, and digging
deeper in their pockets for more tax money to support "liberal friendly"
social and environmental programs. But when it comes to your own
lifestyle, and assets, it's suddenly a different game. You champion the
poor when it suits your agenda, yet, when posed the question on how you
would deal with the poor if electric costs rise, you skate the issue and
claim that it won't happen. When will you learn the universal truth in
business; TINSTAAFL. Someone WILL have to pay for any changes that are
made to improve the environment. That conclusion is inescapable. So once
again, what are you willing to give up in the name of a clean
environment? A true environmentalist leads by example. I can respect
someone who walks the walk. Otherwise....... Your words are merely
sanctimonious.

Your inabilty to answer my direct question is proof enough that you live
a double standard. One for yourself, and another for everyone else. And
each time I ask the question, you slip further and further down that
Harry Krause road of abandoning issue debate, and just throwing out
ad-hominem barbs. A true sign of a intellectual lightweight.


Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

Trash. You are comfortable with letting your children be guinea pigs for
increased pollution, because you have mistaken a monkey president for a
deity. Fathers like you should be dealt with in the most severe fashion.
You
are not fit to be called a human or an American.


And you are nothing more than a hypocrite. A typical liberal, who sees
nothing wrong with everyone else changing their lifestyles, and digging
deeper in their pockets for more tax money to support "liberal friendly"
social and environmental programs. But when it comes to your own
lifestyle, and assets, it's suddenly a different game. You champion the
poor when it suits your agenda, yet, when posed the question on how you
would deal with the poor if electric costs rise, you skate the issue and
claim that it won't happen. When will you learn the universal truth in
business; TINSTAAFL. Someone WILL have to pay for any changes that are
made to improve the environment. That conclusion is inescapable. So once
again, what are you willing to give up in the name of a clean
environment? A true environmentalist leads by example. I can respect
someone who walks the walk. Otherwise....... Your words are merely
sanctimonious.

Your inabilty to answer my direct question is proof enough that you live
a double standard. One for yourself, and another for everyone else. And
each time I ask the question, you slip further and further down that
Harry Krause road of abandoning issue debate, and just throwing out
ad-hominem barbs. A true sign of a intellectual lightweight.


Dave

Scum. When your so-called god finally sweeps the sinners into your mythical
fire, you'll be in the first load. Before you go, don't forget to explain to
your children that money was more important to you than giving them a world
that was clean and safe.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Does anyone else see the irony in this post?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

You are a fool...and a usenet windbag. There's nothing you post that is
worth an "original" comment from me. Why would I waste the time and the
little bit of effort it would take to slice and dice you? To what end?




--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

NOYB wrote:

You mean that Harry could have posted a reasonable response in the same time
that it took him to post a derogatory one? But reasonable responses require
*thinking*...something Harry hasn't tried in a long, long time.



"Bill Cole" wrote in message
news:De77b.395105$Ho3.59593@sccrnsc03...
Does anyone else see the irony in this post?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

You are a fool...and a usenet windbag. There's nothing you post that is
worth an "original" comment from me. Why would I waste the time and the
little bit of effort it would take to slice and dice you? To what end?




--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.






What possible reason would I have for elevating Dave's lunatic-fringe,
right-wing dribblings here? He gets what he deserves.



--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Bill Cole wrote:

Does anyone else see the irony in this post?


Yea. It's called "look in the mirror". Harry that is....


Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Dave,
I am glad someone besides myself saw how ridiculous Harry's
statement was.


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Harry Krause wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:
Doug Kanter wrote:

Oh boy.

I think it's best to just let your last message sit in the water
like
chopped fish in a minnow trap, and see what it attracts.


Translation: "I cannot offer up any logic to counter the points
made, so
I'll just bow out gracefully".


Dave


No translation needed. Your views are so simple-minded, Dave, they
really need no rebuttal or even comment. I certainly hope you do not
have children.

Coming from the king of simplistic. You responses are so trite and
simple, that you can't even be original. I've run out of fingers
counting the number of times you have made that same, almost exact,
comment. Are you even capable of independent thought?

Dave

Dave, there is virtually nothing you post that is worth the effort of a
reasoned response from me. You are among the most "programmed" rigid,
closed-minded posters I have ever encountered. Your simple-mindedness is
exceeded only by your verbosity.


Harry, there is virtually nothing you post that is worth the effort of
a
reasoned response from me. You are among the most "programmed" rigid,
closed-minded posters I have ever encountered. Your simple-mindedness
is
exceeded only by your verbosity.

Pot, meet kettle. Just change the names, and the statement is just as
valid, or not......


Why, for example, would I want to "engage" you in a discussion about
your simple-minded, fundamentalist Christianity? Your entire
ultra-conservative religious belief system, to me, is based on nothing
more than a crock of crap, and is so absurd, the only worthwhile
response is to occasionally poke fun at it and you.

That's because you're so closed minded, you cannot consider alternative
thoughts. You are unable to provide any information which could convince
anyone why they should listen to what you say over what I, or anyone
else, says. In other words, you are full of opinions, but are unable to
back them up with anything reasonable, beyond the additional opinions of
equally short sighted people.


Note that I am NOT putting *all* Christians in the same pot with you.
Just the fools who "believe" as you do.

Better put that little disclaimer in there lest you risk the wrath of
alienating other God loving Christians, who just *might* vote
democratic.

I believe in God. So I guess that makes you an athiest then?


And the rest of your beliefs are just as dogmatic and simple-finded.

You have thusfar been unable to provide one single piece of reasoned,
rational content which could prove that my thinking is flawed in any
way. You've done nothing but throw in sophomoric, adolescent barbs.
Hardly something to be respected for. It's your opinion versus mine. I
can cite historical, logical, and psychological reasons to bolster my
rationale. I'm still waiting to see yours.


You are a fool...and a usenet windbag.

Takes one to know one.

There's nothing you post that is
worth an "original" comment from me. Why would I waste the time and the
little bit of effort it would take to slice and dice you? To what end?

To be soundly proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that you know little
beyond whatever feeble bits of information that the lackeys at the DNC
feed you.

Your claim that "you can't be bothered" with a reasoned rational debate,
is laughable. It's obvious to just about anybody, that your failure to
engage in a rational debate, without ad-hominem name calling, is not
from choice, but from inability.

You're simply another mindless democrat.

You can feel free to prove me wrong at any time.

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


I believe in God. So I guess that makes you an athiest then?


Area Man Sacrifices Kids for Cheap Electricity
Satan Saving Him a Hot Pepsi
Story: Page 3

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


News Flash:

Area man vows to crusade for a cleaner environment, but refuses to
sacrifice any of his own personal habits in the name of said cleaner
envinonment.

Really??? What do you know of my habits with regard to resources?


Man is said to be meeting with other limousine liberals in a campaign to
blast owners of SUV's, while being driven around in equally fuel
inefficient vehicles, and to point fingers at the electric power
industry's poor record of emissions, while offering no reliable or less
costly alternatives.

Really? What do I drive, Dave?

And, please explain EXACTLY how you came up with the fantasy that there are
no "reliable alternatives" for electric utilities (when, in fact, there are,
and they've off-the-shelf items). And, "less costly".....less than what? On
the scale of expenditures with "free" on one end and "this'll put us out of
business" on the other, where do these off-the-shelf alternatives fall,
Dave.

Hint: "I don't know" is not a permissible answer, since you've already made
statements which suggest that you DO know.


In a drunken rage it is alleged, that when asked about the impact of the
costs of a cleaner environment on the lower wage earners of the country,
he retorted "Screw the poor. We only care about the poor when they bring
us votes".

Please explain how much of a rate increase will occur due to the
installation of the aforementioned off-the-shelf items, and tell us where
you got this rate increase information.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Dave Hall wrote:

Bill Cole wrote:

Does anyone else see the irony in this post?


Yea. It's called "look in the mirror". Harry that is....


Dave



You can high-five with all the other right-wing trash all you like. It
still doesn't change the fact that most of your posts are right-wing
lunatic fringe, simple-minded and programmed.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Other than the RW, describes your posts completely!

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Dave Hall wrote:

Bill Cole wrote:

Does anyone else see the irony in this post?


Yea. It's called "look in the mirror". Harry that is....


Dave



You can high-five with all the other right-wing trash all you like. It
still doesn't change the fact that most of your posts are right-wing
lunatic fringe, simple-minded and programmed.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...


News Flash:

Area man vows to crusade for a cleaner environment, but refuses to
sacrifice any of his own personal habits in the name of said cleaner
envinonment.

Really??? What do you know of my habits with regard to resources?

Man is said to be meeting with other limousine liberals in a campaign to
blast owners of SUV's, while being driven around in equally fuel
inefficient vehicles, and to point fingers at the electric power
industry's poor record of emissions, while offering no reliable or less
costly alternatives.

Really? What do I drive, Dave?

And, please explain EXACTLY how you came up with the fantasy that there are
no "reliable alternatives" for electric utilities (when, in fact, there are,
and they've off-the-shelf items). And, "less costly".....less than what? On
the scale of expenditures with "free" on one end and "this'll put us out of
business" on the other, where do these off-the-shelf alternatives fall,
Dave.

Hint: "I don't know" is not a permissible answer, since you've already made
statements which suggest that you DO know.

In a drunken rage it is alleged, that when asked about the impact of the
costs of a cleaner environment on the lower wage earners of the country,
he retorted "Screw the poor. We only care about the poor when they bring
us votes".

Please explain how much of a rate increase will occur due to the
installation of the aforementioned off-the-shelf items, and tell us where
you got this rate increase information.


I'm not answering any of this until you answer my questiuon of just how
much you are willing to give up in order to achieve your level of a
"clean" environment.

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Harry Krause wrote:

Dave Hall wrote:

Bill Cole wrote:

Does anyone else see the irony in this post?


Yea. It's called "look in the mirror". Harry that is....


Dave



You can high-five with all the other right-wing trash all you like. It
still doesn't change the fact that most of your posts are right-wing
lunatic fringe, simple-minded and programmed.

And until you can respond with substantive points, reasoned debate, and
rational thoughts instead of ad-hominem tripe, then "It still doesn't
change the fact that most of your posts are left-wing lunatic fringe,
simple-minded and programmed".

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Calif Bill wrote:

Other than the RW, describes your posts completely!

And that't the humorous irony of it all. Harry is exactly the same as
those he accuses. He's simply the flip side of the same coin.

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:


I now pay $35-$50 per month for electricity. I'd pay $100-$150 before I'd
write my senators and ask for an explanation. Keep in mind, however, that
ANY number you choose, and any comment about whether the poor can afford
clean power are 100% irrelevant, since you have NO clue as to how much a
typical electric generating plant in Ohio would pay for cleaner equipment,
and for how many years it would affect their balance sheet in a major way.

But suffice to say that it WILL cost more than nothing at all. What that
exact figure is, is not important. The fact that everyone's electric
bill WILL go up as a result, is.

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"-rick-" wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote ...
"Dave Hall" wrote

I'm not answering any of this until you answer my questiuon of just
how
much you are willing to give up in order to achieve your level of a
"clean" environment.

I now pay $35-$50 per month for electricity. I'd pay $100-$150 before
I'd
write my senators and ask for an explanation. Keep in mind, however,
that
ANY number you choose, and any comment about whether the poor can afford
clean power are 100% irrelevant, since you have NO clue as to how much a
typical electric generating plant in Ohio would pay for cleaner
equipment,
and for how many years it would affect their balance sheet in a major
way.


In front of me is a brochure from PGE detailing options for electrical
sources.

For 99% pollution free renewable sources (wind and geothermal), the cost
is an extra $0.29/day for the average household consumption level.

For "Clean Wind" the rate is $3.50 / 100kWh unit.

http://www.portlandgeneral.com/home/...er/default.asp

-rick-

Anything in the brochure about the cost of retrofitting a coal burning plant
with the latest in smokestack filtering equipment? That's the real problem
in places like Ohio, where plants are belching out the worst crap, which
blows East.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:


I now pay $35-$50 per month for electricity. I'd pay $100-$150 before
I'd
write my senators and ask for an explanation. Keep in mind, however,
that
ANY number you choose, and any comment about whether the poor can afford
clean power are 100% irrelevant, since you have NO clue as to how much a
typical electric generating plant in Ohio would pay for cleaner
equipment,
and for how many years it would affect their balance sheet in a major
way.

But suffice to say that it WILL cost more than nothing at all. What that
exact figure is, is not important. The fact that everyone's electric
bill WILL go up as a result, is.

Dave



Are you saying that you are willing to pay no increase of any kind, to
provide your children with a cleaner world? Zero? Zip? Yes or no question.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:


I now pay $35-$50 per month for electricity. I'd pay $100-$150
before
I'd
write my senators and ask for an explanation. Keep in mind, however,
that
ANY number you choose, and any comment about whether the poor can
afford
clean power are 100% irrelevant, since you have NO clue as to how
much a
typical electric generating plant in Ohio would pay for cleaner
equipment,
and for how many years it would affect their balance sheet in a
major
way.

But suffice to say that it WILL cost more than nothing at all. What
that
exact figure is, is not important. The fact that everyone's electric
bill WILL go up as a result, is.

Dave



Are you saying that you are willing to pay no increase of any kind, to
provide your children with a cleaner world? Zero? Zip? Yes or no
question.

Certainly I am willing to kick in a little more. But not nearly what was
proposed by the kyoto summit, when the subject of global warming and
other environmental impact was discussed, and proposals along the line
of increasing fuel costs as a method to "dissuade" people from using
fossil fuels.

The effect on the economy would be widespread and devestating....

Not if it were focused on areas where ELECTIVE use was predominant. You DO
know what that means, right? Or do you need help?

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:


I now pay $35-$50 per month for electricity. I'd pay $100-$150
before
I'd
write my senators and ask for an explanation. Keep in mind, however,
that
ANY number you choose, and any comment about whether the poor can
afford
clean power are 100% irrelevant, since you have NO clue as to how
much a
typical electric generating plant in Ohio would pay for cleaner
equipment,
and for how many years it would affect their balance sheet in a
major
way.

But suffice to say that it WILL cost more than nothing at all. What
that
exact figure is, is not important. The fact that everyone's electric
bill WILL go up as a result, is.

Dave



Are you saying that you are willing to pay no increase of any kind, to
provide your children with a cleaner world? Zero? Zip? Yes or no
question.

Certainly I am willing to kick in a little more. But not nearly what was
proposed by the kyoto summit, when the subject of global warming and
other environmental impact was discussed, and proposals along the line
of increasing fuel costs as a method to "dissuade" people from using
fossil fuels.

The effect on the economy would be widespread and devestating....

Not if it were focused on areas where ELECTIVE use was predominant. You DO
know what that means, right? Or do you need help?

Spare me the condescending attitude, and I might enlighten you with a
combination of human nature and free market logic.

Any time you artificially raise the cost of an item (Through a tax or
tariff) you essentially remove it, or reduce its availability, to people
of lesser financial means. So a tax on fuel will become effective at
controlling fuel usage, but based along socio- economic lines. The rich
will just dig a little deeper in their pockets and pay a little more to
continue their lavish lifestyles. While those not so financially well
off, will be forced to abandon or radically change their lifestyles.
This will only add to the rift between the socio-economic classes.

This whole country, and our culture of consumerism, means that a very
big part of our economy is based on elective use (Assuming your context
of the term "elective" means usage which is not necessary). A tax on
fuel would just about put an end to the RV industry, put a damper on
vacations, travel, tourism, etc. Many states (like Florida) raise much
of their working budgets through proceeds from tourism. I'm sure you can
see what would happen if this source was curtailed to any great degree.

Then of course, since the costs to operate a business, and to
manufacture goods, will increase due to taxes on fuel, the obvious
reaction will be a further push to relocate businesses offshore. Surely
you are not in favor of that?

These are only some examples. How many more do you need?

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

Certainly I am willing to kick in a little more. But not nearly what
was
proposed by the kyoto summit, when the subject of global warming and
other environmental impact was discussed, and proposals along the line
of increasing fuel costs as a method to "dissuade" people from using
fossil fuels.

The effect on the economy would be widespread and devestating....

Not if it were focused on areas where ELECTIVE use was predominant. You
DO
know what that means, right? Or do you need help?

Spare me the condescending attitude, and I might enlighten you with a
combination of human nature and free market logic.

Any time you artificially raise the cost of an item (Through a tax or
tariff) you essentially remove it, or reduce its availability, to people
of lesser financial means. So a tax on fuel will become effective at
controlling fuel usage, but based along socio- economic lines. The rich
will just dig a little deeper in their pockets and pay a little more to
continue their lavish lifestyles. While those not so financially well
off, will be forced to abandon or radically change their lifestyles.
This will only add to the rift between the socio-economic classes.

This whole country, and our culture of consumerism, means that a very
big part of our economy is based on elective use (Assuming your context
of the term "elective" means usage which is not necessary). A tax on
fuel would just about put an end to the RV industry, put a damper on
vacations, travel, tourism, etc. Many states (like Florida) raise much
of their working budgets through proceeds from tourism. I'm sure you can
see what would happen if this source was curtailed to any great degree.

Then of course, since the costs to operate a business, and to
manufacture goods, will increase due to taxes on fuel, the obvious
reaction will be a further push to relocate businesses offshore. Surely
you are not in favor of that?

These are only some examples. How many more do you need?

Dave



No increases for heating oil. I believe most people have learned that
keeping the house at 79 degrees is not a good idea. For those who have not,
there's nothing that can be done.

No increases for fuel used to move freight.

A poll here (Rochester) about 5 yrs back found that over 65% of commuters
would be happy to use mass transportation, if it existed and was run in a
sensible fashion. There is no reason to believe this city is different from
others, so it's safe to assume people feel this way elsewhere.

Europeans have been dealing with much higher gasoline prices for quite
some time. They adjust and their societies haven't collapsed. Our country
isn't willing to sacrifice jack ****.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...

Certainly I am willing to kick in a little more. But not nearly what
was
proposed by the kyoto summit, when the subject of global warming and
other environmental impact was discussed, and proposals along the line
of increasing fuel costs as a method to "dissuade" people from using
fossil fuels.

The effect on the economy would be widespread and devestating....

Not if it were focused on areas where ELECTIVE use was predominant. You
DO
know what that means, right? Or do you need help?

Spare me the condescending attitude, and I might enlighten you with a
combination of human nature and free market logic.

Any time you artificially raise the cost of an item (Through a tax or
tariff) you essentially remove it, or reduce its availability, to people
of lesser financial means. So a tax on fuel will become effective at
controlling fuel usage, but based along socio- economic lines. The rich
will just dig a little deeper in their pockets and pay a little more to
continue their lavish lifestyles. While those not so financially well
off, will be forced to abandon or radically change their lifestyles.
This will only add to the rift between the socio-economic classes.

This whole country, and our culture of consumerism, means that a very
big part of our economy is based on elective use (Assuming your context
of the term "elective" means usage which is not necessary). A tax on
fuel would just about put an end to the RV industry, put a damper on
vacations, travel, tourism, etc. Many states (like Florida) raise much
of their working budgets through proceeds from tourism. I'm sure you can
see what would happen if this source was curtailed to any great degree.

Then of course, since the costs to operate a business, and to
manufacture goods, will increase due to taxes on fuel, the obvious
reaction will be a further push to relocate businesses offshore. Surely
you are not in favor of that?

These are only some examples. How many more do you need?

Dave



No increases for heating oil. I believe most people have learned that
keeping the house at 79 degrees is not a good idea. For those who have not,
there's nothing that can be done.

I keep mine at 68.



No increases for fuel used to move freight.

But what about fuel used to power the company or used in the process of
manufacture?

A poll here (Rochester) about 5 yrs back found that over 65% of commuters
would be happy to use mass transportation, if it existed and was run in a
sensible fashion. There is no reason to believe this city is different from
others, so it's safe to assume people feel this way elsewhere.

It would not be cost effective for a municipality to run public
transportation from the "city" out to "the sticks" like where I live.
Besides, I don't work in "the city" either. I run from one suburb to
another. That's part of the problem we are now facing. Many decades of
suburban sprawl, were brought about thanks to the independence that the
automobile has granted us. It allows us to live away from where we work.
But trying to ween us from this lifestyle will not come easy, and will
have financial rammifications. For instance, if measures were put in
place to discourage driving individual cars, the attractiveness of rural
living will decrease along with associated property values. "Urban"
space will increase in value in proportion to the increase in demand,
likely to the point where most middle class people will end up with
little or nothing more than a 2 bedroom flat, for the same cost as their
spacious 4 bedroom suburban home now costs. Of course, where does that
leave the poor? As demand for quality living in the city goes up the
prices will too, and the poor will be forced out and away from the major
job opportunities.


Europeans have been dealing with much higher gasoline prices for quite
some time. They adjust and their societies haven't collapsed.

Europeans have always lived with higher fuel costs, and their societies
have not embraced the automobile in the same fashion as we have. It's a
lot easier for Europeans to make a small adjustment to their already
urbanized living, than it is for Americans, who would have to make
radical changes.


Our country isn't willing to sacrifice jack ****.

Not when it means an end to the lifestyle we've grown accustomed to. If
I were given a choice of living where I am now, and making a 44 mile
commute in my car, versus living in a row home in a city and taking
public transportation to work, I'd opt for what I have now. I never
liked cities, and only financial necessities would force me to move
there (But not without a fight).

Dave

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Trains already work very nicely for New York and Boston, not to mention
virtually ALL of Europe.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Trains already work very nicely for New York and Boston, not to mention
virtually ALL of Europe.



Most of Europe is very densely populated relative to the land mass. Not a
lot of suburbs as we think of them. So you can run trains between the major
population centers and mass transit in the city then works. Paris is also
cheap to travel around in their subway. A Carnet (10 tickets is about $8)
Each ticket is good for any place in the central area of paris. Change
trains just like the NY subway and as long as you do not leave the station,
you get to travel for 1 ticket. Out local mass transit, BART, costs a
minimum of $1.50 for one station and to go about 30 miles is $5.10. Way to
expensive, and the connecting busses take for ever to get point A to B.
Bill

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Trains already work very nicely for New York and Boston, not to mention
virtually ALL of Europe.



Most of Europe is very densely populated relative to the land mass. Not a
lot of suburbs as we think of them. So you can run trains between the
major
population centers and mass transit in the city then works. Paris is also
cheap to travel around in their subway. A Carnet (10 tickets is about $8)
Each ticket is good for any place in the central area of paris. Change
trains just like the NY subway and as long as you do not leave the
station,
you get to travel for 1 ticket. Out local mass transit, BART, costs a
minimum of $1.50 for one station and to go about 30 miles is $5.10. Way
to
expensive, and the connecting busses take for ever to get point A to B.
Bill



We do things backwards.

Fact: When we widen or build new highways from major urban centers, we make
sprawl worse. So, we end up with cities like NY & Boston which are
surrounded by dense suburbs. In many cases, the population hasn't grown,
either. It's just relocated. In places like this, trains are ideal.

Cost is subjective, I guess. It certainly makes no sense to NOT build light
rail systems if only SOME people think it's expensive. Lots of people in big
cities feel no need to own a car.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Trains already work very nicely for New York and Boston, not to
mention
virtually ALL of Europe.



Most of Europe is very densely populated relative to the land mass. Not
a
lot of suburbs as we think of them. So you can run trains between the
major
population centers and mass transit in the city then works. Paris is
also
cheap to travel around in their subway. A Carnet (10 tickets is about
$8)
Each ticket is good for any place in the central area of paris. Change
trains just like the NY subway and as long as you do not leave the
station,
you get to travel for 1 ticket. Out local mass transit, BART, costs a
minimum of $1.50 for one station and to go about 30 miles is $5.10. Way
to
expensive, and the connecting busses take for ever to get point A to B.
Bill



We do things backwards.

Fact: When we widen or build new highways from major urban centers, we
make
sprawl worse. So, we end up with cities like NY & Boston which are
surrounded by dense suburbs. In many cases, the population hasn't grown,
either. It's just relocated. In places like this, trains are ideal.

Cost is subjective, I guess. It certainly makes no sense to NOT build
light
rail systems if only SOME people think it's expensive. Lots of people in
big
cities feel no need to own a car.



Do not know if it still true. Used to be 50% of the population of the USA
lived within 500 miles of Cleavland, OH. Includes Boston / NYC. Very good
to have mass transit in this situation. Problem with most new Mass transit,
is the Politics and Union required laws. Bart ends in my town. Livermore,
Calif is 7 miles away, and has also been paying BART taxes since 1957. To
run BART the extra 7 miles is projected to run $900 million to $1.5 billion!
It is an above ground light rail. No tunnels required. Where do these
costs come from? Even figuring in another train does not add up. Also, if
the job could be done wrong BART did it. Non-standard guage railways.
Wrong frequency and voltage for signaling the train as they did not want to
pay the railroads for the right to use there system. So we spent anothor
100 million or so and still lost trains. A high tech fare system that
costs more to monitor than the extra money a simple ticket or token for
anywhere in the system ala Paris / London / NYC costs.
Bill

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Calif Bill wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Trains already work very nicely for New York and Boston, not to
mention
virtually ALL of Europe.



Most of Europe is very densely populated relative to the land mass. Not
a
lot of suburbs as we think of them. So you can run trains between the
major
population centers and mass transit in the city then works. Paris is
also
cheap to travel around in their subway. A Carnet (10 tickets is about
$8)
Each ticket is good for any place in the central area of paris. Change
trains just like the NY subway and as long as you do not leave the
station,
you get to travel for 1 ticket. Out local mass transit, BART, costs a
minimum of $1.50 for one station and to go about 30 miles is $5.10. Way
to
expensive, and the connecting busses take for ever to get point A to B.
Bill



We do things backwards.

Fact: When we widen or build new highways from major urban centers, we
make
sprawl worse. So, we end up with cities like NY & Boston which are
surrounded by dense suburbs. In many cases, the population hasn't grown,
either. It's just relocated. In places like this, trains are ideal.

Cost is subjective, I guess. It certainly makes no sense to NOT build
light
rail systems if only SOME people think it's expensive. Lots of people in
big
cities feel no need to own a car.



Do not know if it still true. Used to be 50% of the population of the USA
lived within 500 miles of Cleavland, OH. Includes Boston / NYC. Very good
to have mass transit in this situation. Problem with most new Mass transit,
is the Politics and Union required laws. Bart ends in my town. Livermore,
Calif is 7 miles away, and has also been paying BART taxes since 1957. To
run BART the extra 7 miles is projected to run $900 million to $1.5 billion!
It is an above ground light rail. No tunnels required. Where do these
costs come from? Even figuring in another train does not add up. Also, if
the job could be done wrong BART did it. Non-standard guage railways.
Wrong frequency and voltage for signaling the train as they did not want to
pay the railroads for the right to use there system. So we spent anothor
100 million or so and still lost trains. A high tech fare system that
costs more to monitor than the extra money a simple ticket or token for
anywhere in the system ala Paris / London / NYC costs.
Bill




Ahh, yes...those pesky union contracts that call for decent wages, hours
and working conditions. Perhaps, Bill, you could hire a labor contractor
from India who would hire some daytrippers to run your trains.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 23:50:12 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:

[snip]

Bart ends in my town. Livermore,
Calif is 7 miles away, and has also been paying BART taxes since 1957.

We should be nicer to each other, Bill, seeing as how we're neighbors! :)

Joe Parsons
Dublin, CA

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Trains already work very nicely for New York and Boston, not to
mention
virtually ALL of Europe.



Most of Europe is very densely populated relative to the land mass.
Not
a
lot of suburbs as we think of them. So you can run trains between
the
major
population centers and mass transit in the city then works. Paris is
also
cheap to travel around in their subway. A Carnet (10 tickets is
about
$8)
Each ticket is good for any place in the central area of paris.
Change
trains just like the NY subway and as long as you do not leave the
station,
you get to travel for 1 ticket. Out local mass transit, BART, costs
a
minimum of $1.50 for one station and to go about 30 miles is $5.10.
Way
to
expensive, and the connecting busses take for ever to get point A to
B.
Bill



We do things backwards.

Fact: When we widen or build new highways from major urban centers, we
make
sprawl worse. So, we end up with cities like NY & Boston which are
surrounded by dense suburbs. In many cases, the population hasn't
grown,
either. It's just relocated. In places like this, trains are ideal.

Cost is subjective, I guess. It certainly makes no sense to NOT build
light
rail systems if only SOME people think it's expensive. Lots of people
in
big
cities feel no need to own a car.



Do not know if it still true. Used to be 50% of the population of the
USA
lived within 500 miles of Cleavland, OH. Includes Boston / NYC. Very
good
to have mass transit in this situation. Problem with most new Mass
transit,
is the Politics and Union required laws. Bart ends in my town.
Livermore,
Calif is 7 miles away, and has also been paying BART taxes since 1957.
To
run BART the extra 7 miles is projected to run $900 million to $1.5
billion!
It is an above ground light rail. No tunnels required. Where do these
costs come from? Even figuring in another train does not add up. Also,
if
the job could be done wrong BART did it. Non-standard guage railways.
Wrong frequency and voltage for signaling the train as they did not want
to
pay the railroads for the right to use there system. So we spent
anothor
100 million or so and still lost trains. A high tech fare system that
costs more to monitor than the extra money a simple ticket or token for
anywhere in the system ala Paris / London / NYC costs.
Bill




Ahh, yes...those pesky union contracts that call for decent wages, hours
and working conditions. Perhaps, Bill, you could hire a labor contractor
from India who would hire some daytrippers to run your trains.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.


In this state, the present governor and his legislature have sold out to the
unions. Make rules that raise the price of construction on public contracts
sky high. Pay levels higher than 95% of jobs requiring a college education.
Bill

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

"Joe Parsons" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 23:50:12 GMT, "Calif Bill"

wrote:

[snip]

Bart ends in my town. Livermore,
Calif is 7 miles away, and has also been paying BART taxes since 1957.

We should be nicer to each other, Bill, seeing as how we're neighbors! :)

Joe Parsons
Dublin, CA


And we share a BART station. Was in Dublin today at Finish Masters looking
for touchup paint for the boat.
Bill

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 01:01:50 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


"Joe Parsons" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 23:50:12 GMT, "Calif Bill"

wrote:

[snip]

Bart ends in my town. Livermore,
Calif is 7 miles away, and has also been paying BART taxes since 1957.

We should be nicer to each other, Bill, seeing as how we're neighbors! :)

Joe Parsons
Dublin, CA


And we share a BART station. Was in Dublin today at Finish Masters looking
for touchup paint for the boat.
Bill

Pick some up for me, wouldja? Four Winns, maroon.

Joe Parsons

OT- Power outage in NY. Coincidence?
 

Calif Bill wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
Trains already work very nicely for New York and Boston, not to
mention
virtually ALL of Europe.



Most of Europe is very densely populated relative to the land mass.
Not
a
lot of suburbs as we think of them. So you can run trains between
the
major
population centers and mass transit in the city then works. Paris is
also
cheap to travel around in their subway. A Carnet (10 tickets is
about
$8)
Each ticket is good for any place in the central area of paris.
Change
trains just like the NY subway and as long as you do not leave the
station,
you get to travel for 1 ticket. Out local mass transit, BART, costs
a
minimum of $1.50 for one station and to go about 30 miles is $5.10.
Way
to
expensive, and the connecting busses take for ever to get point A to
B.
Bill



We do things backwards.

Fact: When we widen or build new highways from major urban centers, we
make
sprawl worse. So, we end up with cities like NY & Boston which are
surrounded by dense suburbs. In many cases, the population hasn't
grown,
either. It's just relocated. In places like this, trains are ideal.

Cost is subjective, I guess. It certainly makes no sense to NOT build
light
rail systems if only SOME people think it's expensive. Lots of people
in
big
cities feel no need to own a car.



Do not know if it still true. Used to be 50% of the population of the
USA
lived within 500 miles of Cleavland, OH. Includes Boston / NYC. Very
good
to have mass transit in this situation. Problem with most new Mass
transit,
is the Politics and Union required laws. Bart ends in my town.
Livermore,
Calif is 7 miles away, and has also been paying BART taxes since 1957.
To
run BART the extra 7 miles is projected to run $900 million to $1.5
billion!
It is an above ground light rail. No tunnels required. Where do these
costs come from? Even figuring in another train does not add up. Also,
if
the job could be done wrong BART did it. Non-standard guage railways.
Wrong frequency and voltage for signaling the train as they did not want
to
pay the railroads for the right to use there system. So we spent
anothor
100 million or so and still lost trains. A high tech fare system that
costs more to monitor than the extra money a simple ticket or token for
anywhere in the system ala Paris / London / NYC costs.
Bill




Ahh, yes...those pesky union contracts that call for decent wages, hours
and working conditions. Perhaps, Bill, you could hire a labor contractor
from India who would hire some daytrippers to run your trains.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.


In this state, the present governor and his legislature have sold out to the
unions. Make rules that raise the price of construction on public contracts
sky high. Pay levels higher than 95% of jobs requiring a college education.
Bill



Well, many construction jobs do require skill, Bill.

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.