"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...

Meanwhile, asking people to grow up and
take responsibility for their actions is free, and will actually work,
starting immediately.

So you're going to tell a single mom making $8 an hour that they need to
trade in their 1983 Electra for a $22,000 Accord? How is that "free"?

Are you resistant to the idea of voluntary
behavioral changes?

Nothing that involves government is voluntary. Government is by
definition
coercion ("you must") or proscription ("you can't"). That you do not
understand this most basic concept explains the inanity of most of your
posts.


I never said anything about telling anyone to trade in their car
immediately. I'm talking about upcoming purchases. And, there is nothing
coercive about a president using his TV time to ask people to rethink
their habits.

Does this qualify?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/27/business/gas.php

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...

Meanwhile, asking people to grow up and
take responsibility for their actions is free, and will actually work,
starting immediately.

So you're going to tell a single mom making $8 an hour that they need to
trade in their 1983 Electra for a $22,000 Accord? How is that "free"?

Are you resistant to the idea of voluntary
behavioral changes?

Nothing that involves government is voluntary. Government is by
definition
coercion ("you must") or proscription ("you can't"). That you do not
understand this most basic concept explains the inanity of most of your
posts.


I never said anything about telling anyone to trade in their car
immediately. I'm talking about upcoming purchases. And, there is nothing
coercive about a president using his TV time to ask people to rethink
their habits.

Does this qualify?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/27/business/gas.php


It doesn't go far enough, because asking people to pick a different car is
venturing into a decision that verges on religion. I can't think of any
other product which is so tightly bound to people's egos or crotches than
automobiles. Like I said, it would take a real president with balls to touch
the subject. The message would be somewhat insulting, but sometimes, people
need a bucket of cold water dumped on their heads.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...

Meanwhile, asking people to grow up and
take responsibility for their actions is free, and will actually work,
starting immediately.

So you're going to tell a single mom making $8 an hour that they need
to
trade in their 1983 Electra for a $22,000 Accord? How is that "free"?

Are you resistant to the idea of voluntary
behavioral changes?

Nothing that involves government is voluntary. Government is by
definition
coercion ("you must") or proscription ("you can't"). That you do not
understand this most basic concept explains the inanity of most of your
posts.


I never said anything about telling anyone to trade in their car
immediately. I'm talking about upcoming purchases. And, there is nothing
coercive about a president using his TV time to ask people to rethink
their habits.

Does this qualify?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/27/business/gas.php


It doesn't go far enough, because asking people to pick a different car is
venturing into a decision that verges on religion. I can't think of any
other product which is so tightly bound to people's egos or crotches than
automobiles. Like I said, it would take a real president with balls to
touch the subject. The message would be somewhat insulting, but sometimes,
people need a bucket of cold water dumped on their heads.

This is from the above link. Sounds like he did ask us to cut back, not
only to buy more efficient vehicles

He added that if Americans could avoid going on "a trip that's not
essential," that would be "helpful."

He also issued a directive for all federal agencies to cut their own energy
use and to encourage employees to use public transportation.

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in message
...

Meanwhile, asking people to grow up and
take responsibility for their actions is free, and will actually
work,
starting immediately.

So you're going to tell a single mom making $8 an hour that they need
to
trade in their 1983 Electra for a $22,000 Accord? How is that "free"?

Are you resistant to the idea of voluntary
behavioral changes?

Nothing that involves government is voluntary. Government is by
definition
coercion ("you must") or proscription ("you can't"). That you do not
understand this most basic concept explains the inanity of most of
your
posts.


I never said anything about telling anyone to trade in their car
immediately. I'm talking about upcoming purchases. And, there is
nothing coercive about a president using his TV time to ask people to
rethink their habits.

Does this qualify?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/27/business/gas.php


It doesn't go far enough, because asking people to pick a different car
is venturing into a decision that verges on religion. I can't think of
any other product which is so tightly bound to people's egos or crotches
than automobiles. Like I said, it would take a real president with balls
to touch the subject. The message would be somewhat insulting, but
sometimes, people need a bucket of cold water dumped on their heads.

This is from the above link. Sounds like he did ask us to cut back, not
only to buy more efficient vehicles

He added that if Americans could avoid going on "a trip that's not
essential," that would be "helpful."

He also issued a directive for all federal agencies to cut their own
energy use and to encourage employees to use public transportation.


Not far enough. Sorry. I understand I may be insulting one of your icons,
but that's just the way it goes.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
message ...

Meanwhile, asking people to grow up and
take responsibility for their actions is free, and will actually
work,
starting immediately.

So you're going to tell a single mom making $8 an hour that they need
to
trade in their 1983 Electra for a $22,000 Accord? How is that
"free"?

Are you resistant to the idea of voluntary
behavioral changes?

Nothing that involves government is voluntary. Government is by
definition
coercion ("you must") or proscription ("you can't"). That you do not
understand this most basic concept explains the inanity of most of
your
posts.


I never said anything about telling anyone to trade in their car
immediately. I'm talking about upcoming purchases. And, there is
nothing coercive about a president using his TV time to ask people to
rethink their habits.

Does this qualify?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/27/business/gas.php


It doesn't go far enough, because asking people to pick a different car
is venturing into a decision that verges on religion. I can't think of
any other product which is so tightly bound to people's egos or crotches
than automobiles. Like I said, it would take a real president with balls
to touch the subject. The message would be somewhat insulting, but
sometimes, people need a bucket of cold water dumped on their heads.

This is from the above link. Sounds like he did ask us to cut back, not
only to buy more efficient vehicles

He added that if Americans could avoid going on "a trip that's not
essential," that would be "helpful."

He also issued a directive for all federal agencies to cut their own
energy use and to encourage employees to use public transportation.


Not far enough. Sorry. I understand I may be insulting one of your icons,
but that's just the way it goes.

He's not one of my icons. I don't agree with many of the things he has and
has not done. But you said he should say something....he already has.

"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
message ...

Meanwhile, asking people to grow up and
take responsibility for their actions is free, and will actually
work,
starting immediately.

So you're going to tell a single mom making $8 an hour that they
need to
trade in their 1983 Electra for a $22,000 Accord? How is that
"free"?

Are you resistant to the idea of voluntary
behavioral changes?

Nothing that involves government is voluntary. Government is by
definition
coercion ("you must") or proscription ("you can't"). That you do
not
understand this most basic concept explains the inanity of most of
your
posts.


I never said anything about telling anyone to trade in their car
immediately. I'm talking about upcoming purchases. And, there is
nothing coercive about a president using his TV time to ask people to
rethink their habits.

Does this qualify?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/27/business/gas.php


It doesn't go far enough, because asking people to pick a different car
is venturing into a decision that verges on religion. I can't think of
any other product which is so tightly bound to people's egos or
crotches than automobiles. Like I said, it would take a real president
with balls to touch the subject. The message would be somewhat
insulting, but sometimes, people need a bucket of cold water dumped on
their heads.

This is from the above link. Sounds like he did ask us to cut back, not
only to buy more efficient vehicles

He added that if Americans could avoid going on "a trip that's not
essential," that would be "helpful."

He also issued a directive for all federal agencies to cut their own
energy use and to encourage employees to use public transportation.


Not far enough. Sorry. I understand I may be insulting one of your icons,
but that's just the way it goes.

He's not one of my icons. I don't agree with many of the things he has
and has not done. But you said he should say something....he already has.


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.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
news
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
message ...

Meanwhile, asking people to grow up and
take responsibility for their actions is free, and will actually
work,
starting immediately.

So you're going to tell a single mom making $8 an hour that they
need to
trade in their 1983 Electra for a $22,000 Accord? How is that
"free"?

Are you resistant to the idea of voluntary
behavioral changes?

Nothing that involves government is voluntary. Government is by
definition
coercion ("you must") or proscription ("you can't"). That you do
not
understand this most basic concept explains the inanity of most of
your
posts.


I never said anything about telling anyone to trade in their car
immediately. I'm talking about upcoming purchases. And, there is
nothing coercive about a president using his TV time to ask people
to rethink their habits.

Does this qualify?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/27/business/gas.php


It doesn't go far enough, because asking people to pick a different
car is venturing into a decision that verges on religion. I can't
think of any other product which is so tightly bound to people's egos
or crotches than automobiles. Like I said, it would take a real
president with balls to touch the subject. The message would be
somewhat insulting, but sometimes, people need a bucket of cold water
dumped on their heads.

This is from the above link. Sounds like he did ask us to cut back,
not only to buy more efficient vehicles

He added that if Americans could avoid going on "a trip that's not
essential," that would be "helpful."

He also issued a directive for all federal agencies to cut their own
energy use and to encourage employees to use public transportation.


Not far enough. Sorry. I understand I may be insulting one of your
icons, but that's just the way it goes.

He's not one of my icons. I don't agree with many of the things he has
and has not done. But you said he should say something....he already has.


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?

On Tue, 08 May 2007 20:45:09 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"D.Duck" wrote in message
m...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute" wrote in
message ...

Meanwhile, asking people to grow up and
take responsibility for their actions is free, and will actually
work,
starting immediately.

So you're going to tell a single mom making $8 an hour that they
need to
trade in their 1983 Electra for a $22,000 Accord? How is that
"free"?

Are you resistant to the idea of voluntary
behavioral changes?

Nothing that involves government is voluntary. Government is by
definition
coercion ("you must") or proscription ("you can't"). That you do
not
understand this most basic concept explains the inanity of most of
your
posts.


I never said anything about telling anyone to trade in their car
immediately. I'm talking about upcoming purchases. And, there is
nothing coercive about a president using his TV time to ask people to
rethink their habits.

Does this qualify?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/27/business/gas.php


It doesn't go far enough, because asking people to pick a different car
is venturing into a decision that verges on religion. I can't think of
any other product which is so tightly bound to people's egos or
crotches than automobiles. Like I said, it would take a real president
with balls to touch the subject. The message would be somewhat
insulting, but sometimes, people need a bucket of cold water dumped on
their heads.

This is from the above link. Sounds like he did ask us to cut back, not
only to buy more efficient vehicles

He added that if Americans could avoid going on "a trip that's not
essential," that would be "helpful."

He also issued a directive for all federal agencies to cut their own
energy use and to encourage employees to use public transportation.


Not far enough. Sorry. I understand I may be insulting one of your icons,
but that's just the way it goes.

He's not one of my icons. I don't agree with many of the things he has
and has not done. But you said he should say something....he already has.


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.


You are so full of crap! You and HK make a great team.

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

It doesn't go far enough, because asking people to pick a different car is
venturing into a decision that verges on religion. I can't think of any
other product which is so tightly bound to people's egos or crotches than
automobiles. Like I said, it would take a real president with balls to
touch the subject. The message would be somewhat insulting, but sometimes,
people need a bucket of cold water dumped on their heads.


Have no fear. The concept of supply and demand in a free market will do all
the policing required. At some price people will take drastic action and
demand will fall quickly. The oil companies and others involved still have
to sell product to sustain growth while covering costs.
Prices will drop.

Eisboch

"RCE" wrote in message
...

"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...

It doesn't go far enough, because asking people to pick a different car
is venturing into a decision that verges on religion. I can't think of
any other product which is so tightly bound to people's egos or crotches
than automobiles. Like I said, it would take a real president with balls
to touch the subject. The message would be somewhat insulting, but
sometimes, people need a bucket of cold water dumped on their heads.


Have no fear. The concept of supply and demand in a free market will do
all the policing required. At some price people will take drastic action
and demand will fall quickly. The oil companies and others involved still
have to sell product to sustain growth while covering costs.
Prices will drop.

Eisboch


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.