National Debt

[Wild Cobra]

they have an interest in maximizing profit on their infrastructure and resource rights. regardless of whether those interests serve the people of the US or not. which they dont. we dont have any interest in being run over the cliff of $10 a gallon oil or the cliff of natural disasters as we have to invade more and more difficult geography when all the easy oil is gone.

The american public deserves policies that would have alternatives in the batters box. elected officials are trying hard to ensure that they get in on the take. Dems and Repugs.

So you would dictate how people buy and sell.

Didn't you say you were a libertarian?

Like I said, you are a liberal authoritarian.

[Parker2112]

True libertarian would be completely hands off. And If we had been hands off all this time, allowing alternatives to compete without gov/business interference, the batters box would already be full. but because special interest/corruption has left us completely addicted and vulnerable, we have no choice but to correct the scales. And for that reason, I believe the American people need elected officials to step up, to provide the bridge to our future. We need corrective action to displace the sinister interests from thier throne in our government, and that may require the exertion of some authority.

[LnGrrrR]

only since WWII...we were justified there. But there were people in the US making money from the Nazis even then. War profiteers and traitors.

Thank you for proving my point that a war can be just AND people can make profit off of it.

[admiralsnackbar]

That's laughable. They have supply and demand on their side. They don't have to try to squash them.

If you sell steer, and all of a sudden you start seeing a trend towards vegetarianism because it's cheaper and healthier and some people think it's more ethical, what are you going to do? Can you sell me beef that's cheaper than growing my own veggies (with less effort than it would take me to go to the McDonald's)? What's your pitch?

You forget. These energy companies already know about geothermal, solar, wind, hydrogen etc. They know the impracticality of the science, and know it's not a threat.

You assume it's impractical because its profit margins are lower than oil's, but the vast majority of industries are less profitable than oil. You'd have to convince me that buying gas and paying for electricity off the grid sum to a lower number than the monthly payment on a rented/mortgaged windmill which juiced my car and home.

Why would they spend time against a non-starter. there's your tin hat my friend. You see things that don't exist.

So there's no demand for cheap sustainable energy on the consumer end? And solar can't provide for basic household electricity, forgetting what modest wind turbines could add? You seriously have to reduce this to my being a fantasist when all you have to do is scan the internet to see all these concepts are being incorporated by architects into functional, affordable homes already?

http://archrecord.construction.com/n...1greenhome.asp

http://www.sdeurope.org/index.htm

Tin hat ya mutha, Cobra

[LnGrrrR]

Depends on the libertarian. Ever listen to Neal Boortz?

Neal Boortz may be a self-proclaimed libertarian, but everytime I've listened to him, his personal views agree with the Republicans platform 99% of the time. Is there any "big issue" in which he doesn't agree with Republicans? Is he, for instance, for gay marriage, as many libs are? Is he against warrantless wiretapping? Is he against indefinite detention?

[Wild Cobra]

Admiral, your last post is rather idiotic, and makes it completely obvious you fail to understand the concepts I outlined.

I don't know how to explain it any simpler.

This is why I end up getting angry so easy with people here. Concepts that are so simple, are completely not seen by you guys.

[admiralsnackbar]

Admiral, your last post is rather idiotic, and makes it completely obvious you fail to understand the concepts I outlined.

I don't know how to explain it any simpler.

Were that it weren't, but coming from you, "rather idiotic" is high praise.

Carry on

[Winehole23]

Admiral, your last post is rather idiotic, and makes it completely obvious you fail to understand the concepts I outlined.

I don't know how to explain it any simpler.

Can you explain it at all?

Your conclusion is not intuitively clear to me, unless AS's failure to understand in fact amounts to his "failure" to be an echo of you.

Isn't that the real problem here, WC?

[Wild Cobra]

Can you explain it at all?

Your conclusion is not intuitively clear to me, unless AS's failure to understand in fact amounts to his "failure" to be an echo of you.

Isn't that the real problem here, WC?

I'm sorry if you don't understand the concepts.

How can we have a free nation if you are going to take such authoritarian actions against the people?

[admiralsnackbar]

I'm sorry if you don't understand the concepts.

How can we have a free nation if you are going to take such authoritarian actions against the people?

Where exactly does authoritarianism come into this?

[Wild Cobra]

Where exactly does authoritarianism come into this?

It's called control.

You saying you don;'t need regulations to do this?

[admiralsnackbar]

It's called control.

You saying you don;'t need regulations to do this?

You saying you don't need regulation to do anything in a multidimensional modern republic?

At the same time, I think you just flashed on you paranoid fear that the government is going to tell you how to live... which seems absurd. The incentives are there for the consumer.

[Winehole23]

I'm sorry if you don't understand the concepts.

Your manner of describing them occasionally leaves something to be desired.