HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 5:25�am, BAR wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
The History Channel ran a great documentary on oil over the weekend.
�It
explained how oil was (and still is) created from atoms of carbon and I
thought the whole thing was interesting. � It also opened my eyes a
bit.
For many reasons, not the least of which being the surprise
emergence of
China and the growing oil demands of it's population, �we looks like
we may
be in deep doo-doo much sooner than forecast even 10 years ago.
We may be right to prevent drilling in the locations within the US
territorial boundaries. Saving our own oil for our selves.

There is very little untapped oil that can be recovered efficiently in
the US. All the oilco's want to drill up ANWR, and maybe we will
someday.
I hear there's about a 90-day supply of oil up there.

We are one of the last generations of recreational power boaters,
recreational aviators, and private automobile travellers. Enjoy.

If we don't figure out a feasible alternative, our grandkids not only
won't be boaters, they will witness some bloody global conflicts over
the remaining puddles of crude oil, and the dawn of a new dark age.


We won't even be in that game.

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:


What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

You're not serious, I hope.

Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?

We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

You're not serious, I hope.

Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?

We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)


But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?

BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

You're not serious, I hope.

Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?

We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)


But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?

No need to worry; Bush has done that.

On Jan 28, 11:22Â*am, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

You're not serious, I hope.

Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?

We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)

But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, but I didn't see anybody recommending that. I was inquiring
about the statement "What are you doing to keep the Chinese and
Indians from burning all the oil".

I repeat my question: Isn't this a situation where free market
capitalism should prevail? (Let the country most willing to pay the
oilcos the most money get the oil). That would make Americans holding
stock in the oilcos very happy. Maybe some of that wealth will then
trickle down *to* those of us who are used to normally being trickled
*on*.

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 11:22 am, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:
What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?
You're not serious, I hope.
Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?
We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)
But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, but I didn't see anybody recommending that. I was inquiring
about the statement "What are you doing to keep the Chinese and
Indians from burning all the oil".

I repeat my question: Isn't this a situation where free market
capitalism should prevail? (Let the country most willing to pay the
oilcos the most money get the oil). That would make Americans holding
stock in the oilcos very happy. Maybe some of that wealth will then
trickle down *to* those of us who are used to normally being trickled
*on*.

Yes, it is. And, when we have all of the oil left we can sell it for
$100 per bbl.

On Jan 28, 7:29Â*pm, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 11:22 am, BAR wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Jan 28, 10:29�am, BAR wrote:
What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?
You're not serious, I hope.
Isn't the official position "Let the free market rule"?
We shouldn't take any organized action to cripple the economy of some
other country just so we can gas up our 12 mpg SUV's for another
couple of years. If the Chinese and Indians are willing to pay more
for the oil, I guess it flows their direction. New idea:
capitalism. :-)
But, we should do everything possible to hamstring and cripple our own
economy?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sorry, but I didn't see anybody recommending that. I was inquiring
about the statement "What are you doing to keep the Chinese and
Indians from burning all the oil".

I repeat my question: Isn't this a situation where free market
capitalism should prevail? (Let the country most willing to pay the
oilcos the most money get the oil). That would make Americans holding
stock in the oilcos very happy. Maybe some of that wealth will then
trickle down *to* those of us who are used to normally being trickled
*on*.

Yes, it is. And, when we have all of the oil left we can sell it for
$100 per bbl.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If taking control of "all the oil" means invading and occupying a
greater number of oil-producing countries I think that's simply a pipe
dream.
We've got our hands pretty well full with just one of those countries
now.
We don't have the troops, the budget, or the moral authority to
conquer the world just so we can continue putting relatively cheap gas
into decidedly inefficient personal transportation.

If we ever do get any oil out of Iraq, it should sell for about $500
bbl.
That would more closely approximate the actual cost of the occupation
required to "secure" the oil fields there.

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:29:36 -0500, BAR wrote:

What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

It's called nuclear power.

As in bombs.

BIG bombs. :)

On Jan 28, 7:35*pm, Duke Nukem wrote:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:29:36 -0500, BAR wrote:
What are you doing to stop the Chinese and Indian's from using up all of
the remaining oil?

It's called nuclear power.

As in bombs.

BIG bombs. *:)

with a name like Duke Nukem, I would expect nothing less...