"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

In order for this to be done right, it would require a real president,
as I stated earlier. We do not have that at this moment. Someone like
Mario Cuomo would be an example of someone real. Someone who can
function without a script.


"Just Say No to Drugs" worked great! Eh?


And that was a response to what in particular, assuming you can still
remember why you typed it?


I guess you don't remember posting "And, there is nothing coercive about a
president using his TV time to ask people to rethink their habits." That
slogan was not coercive but it certainly did nothing.

On a personal note: You would carry more credibility in a discussion if you
would stop the personal attacks as they generally show that you have nothing
else to add to support your position. Give it a try Doug.

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

In order for this to be done right, it would require a real president,
as I stated earlier. We do not have that at this moment. Someone like
Mario Cuomo would be an example of someone real. Someone who can
function without a script.


"Just Say No to Drugs" worked great! Eh?


And that was a response to what in particular, assuming you can still
remember why you typed it?


I guess you don't remember posting "And, there is nothing coercive about a
president using his TV time to ask people to rethink their habits." That
slogan was not coercive but it certainly did nothing.

On a personal note: You would carry more credibility in a discussion if
you would stop the personal attacks as they generally show that you have
nothing else to add to support your position. Give it a try Doug.



You think a president making suggestions would be an example of coercion?

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

In order for this to be done right, it would require a real president,
as I stated earlier. We do not have that at this moment. Someone like
Mario Cuomo would be an example of someone real. Someone who can
function without a script.


"Just Say No to Drugs" worked great! Eh?


And that was a response to what in particular, assuming you can still
remember why you typed it?


I guess you don't remember posting "And, there is nothing coercive about
a president using his TV time to ask people to rethink their habits."
That slogan was not coercive but it certainly did nothing.

On a personal note: You would carry more credibility in a discussion if
you would stop the personal attacks as they generally show that you have
nothing else to add to support your position. Give it a try Doug.



You think a president making suggestions would be an example of coercion?


Remind me where I said that Doug.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


I'm not so sure about that. A lot of people think that if they can afford
expensive gasoline, it means there's no problem. They don't think outside
of their own situation. Someone needs to impress upon them (through
suggestions, not laws) that "there's a world outside of you". The
prevalence of certain types of vehicles is proof that this message hasn't
gotten through yet.


That's because we are a relatively free society that measures cost versus
benefit on an individual basis. We are not accustomed to being "told" what
to do with our personal resources nor do most respond well to lectures.

But .... at some point ... each of us, based on our own situations, will
make the judgment that maybe the SUV really isn't necessary because the fuel
for it is getting too expensive. In time even those left that can afford
the high gas prices won't be driving them because the automakers will no
longer be building them.

Supply and demand, man.

Eisboch

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

In order for this to be done right, it would require a real
president, as I stated earlier. We do not have that at this moment.
Someone like Mario Cuomo would be an example of someone real. Someone
who can function without a script.


"Just Say No to Drugs" worked great! Eh?


And that was a response to what in particular, assuming you can still
remember why you typed it?


I guess you don't remember posting "And, there is nothing coercive about
a president using his TV time to ask people to rethink their habits."
That slogan was not coercive but it certainly did nothing.

On a personal note: You would carry more credibility in a discussion if
you would stop the personal attacks as they generally show that you have
nothing else to add to support your position. Give it a try Doug.



You think a president making suggestions would be an example of coercion?


Remind me where I said that Doug.

Right here, Jimmy boy. 4:47 PM today:
"Here you go again trying to dictate what consumers can purchase."

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Tim" wrote in message
oups.com...

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"Eisboch" wrote in message
. ..

Do you know what cracks me up about some of the various views
expressed
about fuel prices?

It wasn't too many years ago that those with more left leaning
political
views were concerned about the high consumption rate of gasoline
in the
USA, it's continued supply and it's artificially low price per
gallon
compared to the rest of the world. Conservation was preached,
encouraged
and some even advocated raising the price of gas to force further
conservation and the use of smaller, fuel efficient autos in order
to
reduce demand.


Fast forward to today and it seems that the same people are now
blaming
big business greed and politicians lining their pockets for the
natural
increase in prices.

Can't win.

Eisboch


The problem with preaching conservation is that the suggested
methods
usually involve long term solutions. I wonder what would happen if a
real
president with some balls said the following during one of his TV
appearances:

"I can fund research until the cows come home, but we might never
find
solutions which make every type of vehicle more efficient. And, at
some
point, you have to stop looking for others to find solutions, and
volunteer
to do the one thing that's inarguably effective. Next time you're
ready to
buy a car, be honest, and buy based on your real needs. Stop
thinking that
the only alternative to an SUV is a Ford Focus. Ignore the crap
you're being
told in the commercials. Is the only reason you bought an SUV that
you have
a family of 5 and a week's worth of groceries? Wouldn't a van fit
your needs
equally well? Did you justify the SUV by convincing yourself they
were
safer, or that you wanted to be able to see over all the other
trucks? Did
you buy a pickup to haul 3 sheets of plywood just once in the entire
time
you owned the vehicle? Those aren't reasons. I'm not saying you have
to go
out and buy a Prius or a Mini-Cooper. But, how about reducing your
gas usage
by 30%, just by looking at the difference between an SUV and a
mini-van?
(points to chart with 5 car models shown below) We can't create laws
to
change your buying habits, and there's nothing I can do about what
oil
companies charge for fuel. But, you are capable of having a
significant
impact on how much oil this country uses.

If you're not buying a car this year, write to your favorite car
manufacturer and tell them what you want to buy when you're ready.
If they
continue to pile up SUVs at their dealerships, that's their problem,
not
yours.

During WWII, our grandparents planted victory gardens. You can't
pick a
better car, in order to help this country? Grow up already."


Toyota Sequoia SUV: 15/18 mpg
Toyota Sienna van: 19/26 mpg
Chrysler Town & Country van: 19/26 mpg
Ford Crown Victoria: 17/26 mpg
Buick Lucerne: 17/28 mpg


Very valid and convincing thought, but *grow up, already* would shoot
it down.


Maybe. But let's face it: It's true. The only way to deny it is to
give many consumers a pass by saying they were brainwashed by
advertising, which is pretty powerful stuff.


Here you go again trying to dictate what consumers can purchase.


Once again, I said nothing of the sort. But, as I wrote the original
message, I wondered if you or someone like you would come along and
claim something was being "dictated".


Nice spin. No cigar though.


No spin. I remembered that you or one of your clones had the same
reaction......


When will I learn that trying to carry on an adult level discussion with you
is impossible.

Have a great night Doug. I am done with you.


Everything below is irrelevant to what I said in the original message.



Not really........you brought up the auto advertising.



Regarding the advertising, the Big 3 have knocked off attacking each
other and are focusing on "buy American". The problem is that buying
American may mean buying a Toyota and not a Cadillac. It is now a
global economy and one can no longer be assured that the GM, Ford or
Chrysler product is manufactured in the US or that the majority of
components are US made.

The Big 3 deserves what is happening to them. Lack of foresight,
management giving the unions whatever they wanted and executives
receiving outrageous salaries/bonus's/incentives have led to their
demise. One example is the new Ford CEO, Alan Mulally (hired on
September, 2006 taking over after Bill Ford Jr resigned) taking in $39
million in salary, stock options and bonus money for those 4 months.
This was after Ford had a net loss of almost $13 billion in 2006.

They continue to dig their own grave.

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...


I'm not so sure about that. A lot of people think that if they can afford
expensive gasoline, it means there's no problem. They don't think outside
of their own situation. Someone needs to impress upon them (through
suggestions, not laws) that "there's a world outside of you". The
prevalence of certain types of vehicles is proof that this message hasn't
gotten through yet.


That's because we are a relatively free society that measures cost versus
benefit on an individual basis. We are not accustomed to being "told"
what to do with our personal resources nor do most respond well to
lectures.

But .... at some point ... each of us, based on our own situations, will
make the judgment that maybe the SUV really isn't necessary because the
fuel for it is getting too expensive. In time even those left that can
afford the high gas prices won't be driving them because the automakers
will no longer be building them.

Supply and demand, man.

Eisboch


I see it as an issue of supporting countries where people are taught that we
should be destroyed. But hey....that's nothing, right? Everyone's free to
support terrorist regimes.

"JimH" wrote in message
...


Here you go again trying to dictate what consumers can purchase.


Once again, I said nothing of the sort. But, as I wrote the original
message, I wondered if you or someone like you would come along and
claim something was being "dictated".


Nice spin. No cigar though.


No spin. I remembered that you or one of your clones had the same
reaction......


When will I learn that trying to carry on an adult level discussion with
you is impossible.

Have a great night Doug. I am done with you.


You've got to be careful how you brand yourself. The marks remain visible
forever. You have kneejerk reaction to the suggestion that individuals can
improve conditions in this country. You want someone else to fix things. By
my definition, that is treason. You should renounce your citizenship.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

In order for this to be done right, it would require a real
president, as I stated earlier. We do not have that at this moment.
Someone like Mario Cuomo would be an example of someone real.
Someone who can function without a script.


"Just Say No to Drugs" worked great! Eh?


And that was a response to what in particular, assuming you can still
remember why you typed it?


I guess you don't remember posting "And, there is nothing coercive
about a president using his TV time to ask people to rethink their
habits." That slogan was not coercive but it certainly did nothing.

On a personal note: You would carry more credibility in a discussion
if you would stop the personal attacks as they generally show that you
have nothing else to add to support your position. Give it a try
Doug.



You think a president making suggestions would be an example of
coercion?


Remind me where I said that Doug.

Right here, Jimmy boy. 4:47 PM today:
"Here you go again trying to dictate what consumers can purchase."



Come on Doug........you are spinning again. I was referring to the mandates
you suggested now and in the past.

On the other hand........never mind..........as I said in my earlier post to
this thread I am done with you one cannot carry on a discussion with on an
adult level.

Have a nice evening Doug.

"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"JimH" wrote in message
...

In order for this to be done right, it would require a real
president, as I stated earlier. We do not have that at this moment.
Someone like Mario Cuomo would be an example of someone real.
Someone who can function without a script.


"Just Say No to Drugs" worked great! Eh?


And that was a response to what in particular, assuming you can still
remember why you typed it?


I guess you don't remember posting "And, there is nothing coercive
about a president using his TV time to ask people to rethink their
habits." That slogan was not coercive but it certainly did nothing.

On a personal note: You would carry more credibility in a discussion
if you would stop the personal attacks as they generally show that you
have nothing else to add to support your position. Give it a try
Doug.



You think a president making suggestions would be an example of
coercion?


Remind me where I said that Doug.

Right here, Jimmy boy. 4:47 PM today:
"Here you go again trying to dictate what consumers can purchase."



Come on Doug........you are spinning again. I was referring to the
mandates you suggested now and in the past.

On the other hand........never mind..........as I said in my earlier post
to this thread I am done with you one cannot carry on a discussion with on
an adult level.

Apprently, you're not done. I said a president should suggest changes. You
turned it into my dictating what people should buy, JUST AS YOU HAVE DONE IN
THE PAST.