Forums > Social Discussion > US trucking strike
Login/Join to ParticipateGOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
https://www.wesh.com/news/15756801/detail.html
So. Some thoughts:
1) Who exactly are they trying to strike against? Who is this strike hurting? It appears to hurt the consumer more than it hurts anyone else. I am not sure who they think is going to take action on their complaint.
2) So fossil fuels went up in price. Maybe the cost of the goods they're transporting should go up in price. Maybe that's how we force the U.S. to re-think its infrastructure.
3) The vast majority of cargo in the U.S. already travels by train. Maybe we need more train lines for both cargo and passengers?
4) Perhaps more local production is warranted?
But bring on high fuel prices. Higher, higher, and higher. If that's what it takes for us to stop burning fossil fuels for energy then that's what it takes.
https://www.wesh.com/news/15756801/detail.html
Written by
LONGWOOD, Fla. -- Diesel fuel prices are nearing $4 a gallon, which is putting the squeeze on truck drivers.
They said they're fed up and plan to fight back.
Fuel costs are mounting and profits are disappearing.
So. Some thoughts:
1) Who exactly are they trying to strike against? Who is this strike hurting? It appears to hurt the consumer more than it hurts anyone else. I am not sure who they think is going to take action on their complaint.
2) So fossil fuels went up in price. Maybe the cost of the goods they're transporting should go up in price. Maybe that's how we force the U.S. to re-think its infrastructure.
3) The vast majority of cargo in the U.S. already travels by train. Maybe we need more train lines for both cargo and passengers?
4) Perhaps more local production is warranted?
But bring on high fuel prices. Higher, higher, and higher. If that's what it takes for us to stop burning fossil fuels for energy then that's what it takes.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
We had the same thing happen locally back in 2005, and it was all about demanding the federal government lower fuel taxes. It didn't happen, and as a result trucking companies are adding a fuel surcharge on their deliveries so you could say the price of goods has risen in response.
Fuel prices are going to go higher and higher, that's a given BUT I'd suggest that those who are worried about the consumption of fossil fuels for global warming purposes stop flying around the world for vacations.
I managed to equate one return flight Vancouver to Bangkok to equal six years of driving around my 4.6l, V6 and that was assuming all my driving was done with just me in the truck. If I want to work it out using mpgpp, then I could probably make it equal 10 years.
We had the same thing happen locally back in 2005, and it was all about demanding the federal government lower fuel taxes. It didn't happen, and as a result trucking companies are adding a fuel surcharge on their deliveries so you could say the price of goods has risen in response.
Fuel prices are going to go higher and higher, that's a given BUT I'd suggest that those who are worried about the consumption of fossil fuels for global warming purposes stop flying around the world for vacations.
I managed to equate one return flight Vancouver to Bangkok to equal six years of driving around my 4.6l, V6 and that was assuming all my driving was done with just me in the truck. If I want to work it out using mpgpp, then I could probably make it equal 10 years.
SILVER Member
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
SILVER Member
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Posted:
*sings*
IIIIIIIIIII got Earl Haggard on the radio
Uh my eightteen wheeler's all ready to go....
*sings*
IIIIIIIIIII got Earl Haggard on the radio
Uh my eightteen wheeler's all ready to go....
O.B.E.S.E.
Owned by Mynci!
SILVER Member
Member
Location: USA
Member
Location: USA
Posted:
did y'all know that diesel fuel is the first and most crude by-product of the oil refinement process? the mark-up on diesel fuel is staggering. it definitely costs significantly less to produce diesel than to produce standard automobile gas.
here's the thing though. here in the US, gas is expected to come close to $4/gallon which is ridiculous. the average american, i.e., ME, can't afford to drive his freakin' car anymore. this gas hike is definitely the first leap of faith into the recession this country's been in for like 2 years now that nobody wants to admit. case in point: George W. Bush and his administration singlehandedly screwed America. once we get him out and put a stop to this foolishness in the middle east, maybe we can establish oil trade and do something about out plundering economy?
and yes, btw, i feel as though i'm changing the world with this forum post. fear me.
did y'all know that diesel fuel is the first and most crude by-product of the oil refinement process? the mark-up on diesel fuel is staggering. it definitely costs significantly less to produce diesel than to produce standard automobile gas.
here's the thing though. here in the US, gas is expected to come close to $4/gallon which is ridiculous. the average american, i.e., ME, can't afford to drive his freakin' car anymore. this gas hike is definitely the first leap of faith into the recession this country's been in for like 2 years now that nobody wants to admit. case in point: George W. Bush and his administration singlehandedly screwed America. once we get him out and put a stop to this foolishness in the middle east, maybe we can establish oil trade and do something about out plundering economy?
and yes, btw, i feel as though i'm changing the world with this forum post. fear me.
SILVER Member
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Posted:
...remember when Clinton had us...like OUT of debt?
/sigh
...remember when Clinton had us...like OUT of debt?
/sigh
O.B.E.S.E.
Owned by Mynci!
SILVER Member
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
Posted:
Petrol here in the UK is already at £5/gallon which in US Dollars is $9.94.
:nolol:
Written by :Holzy
here in the US, gas is expected to come close to $4/gallon which is ridiculous.
Petrol here in the UK is already at £5/gallon which in US Dollars is $9.94.
:nolol:
SILVER Member
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Posted:
Ya, but don't you guys go by liters? Or is it litres?
AND I'm pretty sure cars over there get like 23523523523km/litre
I'm so british savvy
Ya, but don't you guys go by liters? Or is it litres?
AND I'm pretty sure cars over there get like 23523523523km/litre
I'm so british savvy
O.B.E.S.E.
Owned by Mynci!
member
51 posts
51 posts
Posted:
I agree whole heartedly that we need to get off of fossl fuel. Honestly I could care less about the environment, dependancy on expensive fuels just doesn't make sence.
However hopeing for the further deterioration of the US economy to get us off fossil fuel isn't the answer either kid.
I think you have some serious flaws in your "thoughts". I'll point a few out.
I apologise for sounding bitter, I come from a trucking and dry land farming community so I empathise with the truckers. The hike in oil prices is hitting the rural communities harder than anywhere else. People live and die by diesel fuel.
(1) no comment here
(2)
The cost of goods is already going up, even things as simple as cerial are increasing in price and decreasing in "box size".
(3)
So what you're saying is that we should muck up more of the natural beauty of the country to lay more rail roads? Who would build said rail lines? The foundation of our rail system was built on slave labor and "practically" slave labor. I wonder how many will die in the creation of your new rail system.
(4)
The U.S. infastructure is not geared towards local communities supporting themselves. If they were either nobody would live in the arid states or they would live there and eat only dry-land crops and who wants to eat peanuts all day everyday??
You may have thought about somethings and up front some of them look half way decent. But you have yet to think about how things will get done nor have you thought about what the reprocussions would be if anything like that happend.
I don't have the answers any more than you do.
Written by :Doc Lightning
So. Some thoughts:
1) Who exactly are they trying to strike against? Who is this strike hurting? It appears to hurt the consumer more than it hurts anyone else. I am not sure who they think is going to take action on their complaint.
2) So fossil fuels went up in price. Maybe the cost of the goods they're transporting should go up in price. Maybe that's how we force the U.S. to re-think its infrastructure.
3) The vast majority of cargo in the U.S. already travels by train. Maybe we need more train lines for both cargo and passengers?
4) Perhaps more local production is warranted?
But bring on high fuel prices. Higher, higher, and higher. If that's what it takes for us to stop burning fossil fuels for energy then that's what it takes.
I agree whole heartedly that we need to get off of fossl fuel. Honestly I could care less about the environment, dependancy on expensive fuels just doesn't make sence.
However hopeing for the further deterioration of the US economy to get us off fossil fuel isn't the answer either kid.
I think you have some serious flaws in your "thoughts". I'll point a few out.
I apologise for sounding bitter, I come from a trucking and dry land farming community so I empathise with the truckers. The hike in oil prices is hitting the rural communities harder than anywhere else. People live and die by diesel fuel.
(1) no comment here
(2)
The cost of goods is already going up, even things as simple as cerial are increasing in price and decreasing in "box size".
(3)
So what you're saying is that we should muck up more of the natural beauty of the country to lay more rail roads? Who would build said rail lines? The foundation of our rail system was built on slave labor and "practically" slave labor. I wonder how many will die in the creation of your new rail system.
(4)
The U.S. infastructure is not geared towards local communities supporting themselves. If they were either nobody would live in the arid states or they would live there and eat only dry-land crops and who wants to eat peanuts all day everyday??
You may have thought about somethings and up front some of them look half way decent. But you have yet to think about how things will get done nor have you thought about what the reprocussions would be if anything like that happend.
I don't have the answers any more than you do.
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
You could care less about the environment? Um? Huh?
So not having food to eat, air to breathe, or water to drink is not important to you?
Why no comment? That's my main point. A strike is an action taken against the individual(s) and/or organization(s) with whom you have a grievance. How does backing up traffic or refusing to deliver goods in any way harm the oil companies? It harms American citizens. And no, it doesn't "raise awareness," either; we're already all painfully well aware.
Good. We haven't been paying the true value and cost for our goods. Perhaps making them cost more will lead to more conservation.
I am EXACTLY proposing mucking up some of the natural beauty of the country to lay more railroads. I am proposing that it be done by government contract to paid, unionized workers. Some will die, as will happen in any major construction project. However, the Interstates weren't laid down by slave labor.
"Mucking up" the country to lay more railroads and to start installing usable nationwide and local railroads encourages transit-centered development, rather than urban sprawl, which is a far greater threat to the natural beauty of the country than a railroad ever was.
Fair enough. But why on Earth are Washington apples for sale in Michigan? Michigan apples should be on sale in Michigan.
Written by :Dragon_Drafin
Honestly I could care less about the environment, dependancy on expensive fuels just doesn't make sence.
You could care less about the environment? Um? Huh?
So not having food to eat, air to breathe, or water to drink is not important to you?
Written by
However hopeing for the further deterioration of the US economy to get us off fossil fuel isn't the answer either kid.
I think you have some serious flaws in your "thoughts". I'll point a few out.
(1) no comment here
Why no comment? That's my main point. A strike is an action taken against the individual(s) and/or organization(s) with whom you have a grievance. How does backing up traffic or refusing to deliver goods in any way harm the oil companies? It harms American citizens. And no, it doesn't "raise awareness," either; we're already all painfully well aware.
Written by
(2)
The cost of goods is already going up, even things as simple as cerial are increasing in price and decreasing in "box size".
Good. We haven't been paying the true value and cost for our goods. Perhaps making them cost more will lead to more conservation.
Written by
(3)
So what you're saying is that we should muck up more of the natural beauty of the country to lay more rail roads? Who would build said rail lines? The foundation of our rail system was built on slave labor and "practically" slave labor. I wonder how many will die in the creation of your new rail system.
I am EXACTLY proposing mucking up some of the natural beauty of the country to lay more railroads. I am proposing that it be done by government contract to paid, unionized workers. Some will die, as will happen in any major construction project. However, the Interstates weren't laid down by slave labor.
"Mucking up" the country to lay more railroads and to start installing usable nationwide and local railroads encourages transit-centered development, rather than urban sprawl, which is a far greater threat to the natural beauty of the country than a railroad ever was.
Written by
(4)
The U.S. infastructure is not geared towards local communities supporting themselves. If they were either nobody would live in the arid states or they would live there and eat only dry-land crops and who wants to eat peanuts all day everyday??
Fair enough. But why on Earth are Washington apples for sale in Michigan? Michigan apples should be on sale in Michigan.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
member
51 posts
51 posts
Posted:
I have no comment to your (1) point because I don't disagree with it. There was nothing to say, but I felt leaving it with out mention would be void in the conversation.
My comment about the environment was in realtion to polution caused by fossel fules. I'm not concerned about it because as soon as we stop using it, the planet will repair itself. Look at England post extreme coal use. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we nuked the places and yet people and plants are growing just fine in those areas. The planet is made to survive anything we humans can throw at it. (to an extent of course)
The raise in food prices isn't good. Well maybe on your salary it doesn't matter, but for people who are legitimatly on welfare it matters a whole lot. What about schools? The cost food raises the cost of lunches at schools 35% of the nation's students are already on some sort of reduced cost school lunch program.
Tell me why is the rise in the cost of food a good thing? If anything, every politician and leader in this country should be doing all they can to decrease the cost of food and shame on you for think its a good thing that its going up!
Conservation has nothing to do with it. Farmers are already paid not to farm their lands due to food surplusses.
Some people think that those countries like the US who have surplusses should do all they can to solve world hunger and I agree to an extent (I feel each country that can should contribute to their means, the responsibility of feading the world should not fall on the shoulders of just a few countrys but all). So how would your theory of food/crop growing conservation assist with solving world hunger?
The nation already has a useable rail system and it is a lot larger than you probably think. See it isn't just rail ways that would have to be built. It is all of the additional stops, not to mention additional costs of maintanence and fuel. Yes our trains run on diesle!
By the way, who is going to pay for your new rail way? How much tax increase is there going to be? I mean an additional large transcontinental rail system would probably run the US tax payer another two Iraq wars. Face it if they spend $10,000 on a hammer then a new mile of track must cost a few billion!
Why shouldn't Washington apples be sold in michigan? Idaho potatoes are sold all over the country, even world! Whats wrong with that? Its called commerice. If the people of michigan want their own apples they should grow them. Nobody is stopping them. But why shouldnt the orchards of washington sell thier apples to who ever wants to buy them?
I have no comment to your (1) point because I don't disagree with it. There was nothing to say, but I felt leaving it with out mention would be void in the conversation.
My comment about the environment was in realtion to polution caused by fossel fules. I'm not concerned about it because as soon as we stop using it, the planet will repair itself. Look at England post extreme coal use. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we nuked the places and yet people and plants are growing just fine in those areas. The planet is made to survive anything we humans can throw at it. (to an extent of course)
The raise in food prices isn't good. Well maybe on your salary it doesn't matter, but for people who are legitimatly on welfare it matters a whole lot. What about schools? The cost food raises the cost of lunches at schools 35% of the nation's students are already on some sort of reduced cost school lunch program.
Tell me why is the rise in the cost of food a good thing? If anything, every politician and leader in this country should be doing all they can to decrease the cost of food and shame on you for think its a good thing that its going up!
Conservation has nothing to do with it. Farmers are already paid not to farm their lands due to food surplusses.
Some people think that those countries like the US who have surplusses should do all they can to solve world hunger and I agree to an extent (I feel each country that can should contribute to their means, the responsibility of feading the world should not fall on the shoulders of just a few countrys but all). So how would your theory of food/crop growing conservation assist with solving world hunger?
The nation already has a useable rail system and it is a lot larger than you probably think. See it isn't just rail ways that would have to be built. It is all of the additional stops, not to mention additional costs of maintanence and fuel. Yes our trains run on diesle!
By the way, who is going to pay for your new rail way? How much tax increase is there going to be? I mean an additional large transcontinental rail system would probably run the US tax payer another two Iraq wars. Face it if they spend $10,000 on a hammer then a new mile of track must cost a few billion!
Why shouldn't Washington apples be sold in michigan? Idaho potatoes are sold all over the country, even world! Whats wrong with that? Its called commerice. If the people of michigan want their own apples they should grow them. Nobody is stopping them. But why shouldnt the orchards of washington sell thier apples to who ever wants to buy them?
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
Dragon_Drafin, perhaps it’s time to restructure your “highly subsidized” agricultural industries, and consider importing produce from efficient producing countries.
Dragon_Drafin, perhaps it’s time to restructure your “highly subsidized” agricultural industries, and consider importing produce from efficient producing countries.
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
member
51 posts
51 posts
Posted:
Importing is whats getting the US into trouble, dependency on forign oil and all that, and what do you mean efficient? They are being paid NOT to farm IE they grow too much. You can't get more efficiant than growing too much.
Importing is whats getting the US into trouble, dependency on forign oil and all that, and what do you mean efficient? They are being paid NOT to farm IE they grow too much. You can't get more efficiant than growing too much.
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Local pollution tends to clean itself up by distributing itself around the world. Global pollution (elevated CO2 levels) will not repair itself without assistance in the likely timespan that human civilization has remaining on this planet.
Because our food is often very fossil fuel-inefficient. If a pound of steak actually cost what it should it would be what it should: a luxury for occasional enjoyment.
Exotic fruits and vegetables (papaya) should be expensive because they have to travel a long way.
LOCAL food, particularly vegetarian food, would remain quite inexpensive because that is rather inexpensive.
Well, the proposed California High-Speed Rail system has a projected cost of about US$24 bn. An aircraft carrier costs about US$4.6bn. In fact, taxes should pay for it. It will also make money in fares. Taxes paid for such systems in France, Germany, Spain, Japan, and Belgium. So why not here?
Washington can sell their apples wherever they would like to. However, it should cost more (and it currently doesn't, which makes no sense) to buy an imported product over a local one.
Written by :Dragon_Drafin
My comment about the environment was in realtion to polution caused by fossel fules. I'm not concerned about it because as soon as we stop using it, the planet will repair itself. Look at England post extreme coal use. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, we nuked the places and yet people and plants are growing just fine in those areas. The planet is made to survive anything we humans can throw at it. (to an extent of course)
Local pollution tends to clean itself up by distributing itself around the world. Global pollution (elevated CO2 levels) will not repair itself without assistance in the likely timespan that human civilization has remaining on this planet.
Written by
Tell me why is the rise in the cost of food a good thing? If anything, every politician and leader in this country should be doing all they can to decrease the cost of food and shame on you for think its a good thing that its going up!
Because our food is often very fossil fuel-inefficient. If a pound of steak actually cost what it should it would be what it should: a luxury for occasional enjoyment.
Exotic fruits and vegetables (papaya) should be expensive because they have to travel a long way.
LOCAL food, particularly vegetarian food, would remain quite inexpensive because that is rather inexpensive.
Written byThey needn't. The system can be electrified
The nation already has a useable rail system and it is a lot larger than you probably think. See it isn't just rail ways that would have to be built. It is all of the additional stops, not to mention additional costs of maintanence and fuel. Yes our trains run on diesle!
Written by
By the way, who is going to pay for your new rail way? How much tax increase is there going to be? I mean an additional large transcontinental rail system would probably run the US tax payer another two Iraq wars. Face it if they spend $10,000 on a hammer then a new mile of track must cost a few billion!
Well, the proposed California High-Speed Rail system has a projected cost of about US$24 bn. An aircraft carrier costs about US$4.6bn. In fact, taxes should pay for it. It will also make money in fares. Taxes paid for such systems in France, Germany, Spain, Japan, and Belgium. So why not here?
Written by
Why shouldn't Washington apples be sold in michigan? Idaho potatoes are sold all over the country, even world! Whats wrong with that? Its called commerice. If the people of michigan want their own apples they should grow them. Nobody is stopping them. But why shouldnt the orchards of washington sell thier apples to who ever wants to buy them?
Washington can sell their apples wherever they would like to. However, it should cost more (and it currently doesn't, which makes no sense) to buy an imported product over a local one.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
GOLD Member
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Stream Entrant
2,829 posts
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posted:
:lol
Do a search.
US farmers are being subsidised, for example 50 cents a bushel to grow crops like wheat etc. Because they cannot compete on a world market due to inefficient production methods.
Written by Dragon_Drafin
They are being paid NOT to farm IE they grow too much. You can't get more efficiant than growing too much.
:lol
Do a search.
US farmers are being subsidised, for example 50 cents a bushel to grow crops like wheat etc. Because they cannot compete on a world market due to inefficient production methods.
If we as members of the human race practice meditation, we can transcend our fear, despair, and forgetfulness. Meditation is not an escape. It is the courage to look at reality with mindfulness and concentration. Thich Nhat Hanh
member
51 posts
51 posts
Posted:
Heh cut the military budget, last time a president did that, the next chap in office had 2 planes flown into the twin towers a plane flown into the pentagon and a plane in field in PA.
Look at New Mexico (my state) for example. We have the Rail Runner a new train system put in just in recent years. If we raised the ticket cost by $5 and filled every seat on every train it would still loose money! Way to go Dems and Bill Richardson.
France, Germany, Spain and Belgum, even if you combined them all into one country they woudn't come close to the amount of acreage that the US is, not to mention that the two major mountain ranges and multiple minor mountain ranges.
As far as the apples goes, you're right, it doesn't make sence. I have no answer for you there. At least without knowing a lot more facts about the abilities of the orchards in Michigan. Maybe there is something that is making it more difficult to produce the apples.
New Mexico is primarily dry land farming. We can grow just about anything out here we have good soil we just don't have a lot of water, especially out on the high plains where there is the majority of the farm land. If I wanted to plant an orange grove, it would be cheeper to buy imported oranges because the cost of water would be too much for me to compete.
Thats just an example, I know Michigan and Washington are fairly well off in the water department.
An electric rail system would be great. I agree 100%. Small problem... power. We'd have to build multi billion dollar power stations to power the lines. You yourself admit that reuseable energy sources need more work before they can be truly efficiant and others here have pointed out the probems with nuclear energy.
(Just a thought, not a point to debate on, but if anybody knows the answer would be interesting to learn. If a power station that powers the rail line goes down, how much of the track would it effect? If you think about it a power rail line from San Diego to LA would have power stations at both ends, if the San Diego power station went out for whatever reason, would the trains get stuck half way or what?)
Doc I wonder if John Doe in Anytown USA would rather pay more for gas, or pay extra taxes for a rail system that he will never "directly" use.
Heh cut the military budget, last time a president did that, the next chap in office had 2 planes flown into the twin towers a plane flown into the pentagon and a plane in field in PA.
Look at New Mexico (my state) for example. We have the Rail Runner a new train system put in just in recent years. If we raised the ticket cost by $5 and filled every seat on every train it would still loose money! Way to go Dems and Bill Richardson.
France, Germany, Spain and Belgum, even if you combined them all into one country they woudn't come close to the amount of acreage that the US is, not to mention that the two major mountain ranges and multiple minor mountain ranges.
As far as the apples goes, you're right, it doesn't make sence. I have no answer for you there. At least without knowing a lot more facts about the abilities of the orchards in Michigan. Maybe there is something that is making it more difficult to produce the apples.
New Mexico is primarily dry land farming. We can grow just about anything out here we have good soil we just don't have a lot of water, especially out on the high plains where there is the majority of the farm land. If I wanted to plant an orange grove, it would be cheeper to buy imported oranges because the cost of water would be too much for me to compete.
Thats just an example, I know Michigan and Washington are fairly well off in the water department.
An electric rail system would be great. I agree 100%. Small problem... power. We'd have to build multi billion dollar power stations to power the lines. You yourself admit that reuseable energy sources need more work before they can be truly efficiant and others here have pointed out the probems with nuclear energy.
(Just a thought, not a point to debate on, but if anybody knows the answer would be interesting to learn. If a power station that powers the rail line goes down, how much of the track would it effect? If you think about it a power rail line from San Diego to LA would have power stations at both ends, if the San Diego power station went out for whatever reason, would the trains get stuck half way or what?)
Doc I wonder if John Doe in Anytown USA would rather pay more for gas, or pay extra taxes for a rail system that he will never "directly" use.
BRONZE Member
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
wandering thru the woods of WI
3,556 posts
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posted:
Actually-and I have no evidence to support this statement-but I was in a couple of econ classes and the professors/teachers said that while it looked like we were out of debt, what we were doing was not sustainable and would have detrimental affects on our economy
And my friend's farm is subsidized not to grow corn, not wheat. They only grow corn
Actually-and I have no evidence to support this statement-but I was in a couple of econ classes and the professors/teachers said that while it looked like we were out of debt, what we were doing was not sustainable and would have detrimental affects on our economy
And my friend's farm is subsidized not to grow corn, not wheat. They only grow corn
Faith
Nay, whatever comes one hour was sunlit and the most high gods may not make boast of any better thing than to have watched that hour as it passed
member
51 posts
51 posts
Posted:
Regardless if our farmers are subsidised or not, the topic is about truckers and the crap they are having to go through.
Doc, I agree that a more efficiant system is needed for transporting goods across the country. While I think a larger rail system is a good idea at first glance, I think that the practicality of it is extremely limited.
I think that our time and money would be better spent on research and development for non-fossle fule sources.
We have the trucks and the people already driving them. If we could change the fuel it would be more cost effective in the long run.
Regardless if our farmers are subsidised or not, the topic is about truckers and the crap they are having to go through.
Doc, I agree that a more efficiant system is needed for transporting goods across the country. While I think a larger rail system is a good idea at first glance, I think that the practicality of it is extremely limited.
I think that our time and money would be better spent on research and development for non-fossle fule sources.
We have the trucks and the people already driving them. If we could change the fuel it would be more cost effective in the long run.
SILVER Member
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Posted:
It's not liek we don't have them...
My friend's dad works with metals in this huge warehouse. They have a welding/cutting torch that is the size of a pen. Now coming off the back of this torch is a tube leading to a tank...inside the tank is water.....something like this but bigger.
https://www.sra-solder.com/ww.htm?gclid=CKGE9MWgv5ICFQE8xwodhkNibA
Is there a reason this can't be used to power a car?
Written by :Dragon_Drafin
I think that our time and money would be better spent on research and development for non-fossle fule sources.
It's not liek we don't have them...
My friend's dad works with metals in this huge warehouse. They have a welding/cutting torch that is the size of a pen. Now coming off the back of this torch is a tube leading to a tank...inside the tank is water.....something like this but bigger.
https://www.sra-solder.com/ww.htm?gclid=CKGE9MWgv5ICFQE8xwodhkNibA
Is there a reason this can't be used to power a car?
O.B.E.S.E.
Owned by Mynci!
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
It's possible but what you'd end up with is a very complex electric car.
Written by :Poje
Is there a reason this can't be used to power a car?
It's possible but what you'd end up with is a very complex electric car.
member
51 posts
51 posts
Posted:
I think something like that would be great. Not to mention a cool toarch I need one of those.
I think something like that would be great. Not to mention a cool toarch I need one of those.
GOLD Member
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
HOP Mad Doctor
13,925 posts
Location: San Francisco, CA, USA
Posted:
Please provide evidence to support your contention that a decrease in military spending directly contributed to the 9/11 attacks.
You just hit a sore spot there. You will *NOT* ever use that horrible day to justify military spending or the reduction of civil liberties and rights. The attacks had nothing to do with how much we spend on our military. It's fearmongering. Discussion is closed.
Actually, they have a combined per-capita GDP lower than that of the U.S. They have a mountain range (the alps) and several minor ones (Dolomites, etc). So per unit-area, they produce less money than the U.S. However, they are more organized. So they built rail.
Interestingly, the U.S. Military has run many nuclear power plants for 50 years without a single significant incident. These plants are all on ships.
Either way, electricity is cleaner and less wasteful than individual fossil-fuel burning engines because of the inherent inefficiency with having multiple engines vs. one large one. This is why twin-engine aircraft are more efficient than 4-engine aircraft. Having an effective system would also significantly reduce the number of fossil fuel-burning engines on the roads.
And if he gets a nice HSR station in his town that connects him to a number of surrounding cities and towns in less than 2 hours? I bet he'll want it.
Europe has done it because they have more efficiency and foresight than the U.S.A. Europe is in it for the long-haul. Most of what I have seen the EU do involves sustainable growth. That means thinking long-term about infrastructure, ensuring healthcare for all citizens, discouraging the use of non-renewable resources, and having a system for preventing major corporate concerns from dictating national policy.
The U.S.A., at the current rate, will cease to be an important world power by 2050. Americans are too proud, too arrogant, and too set in our ways to maintain our country.
I refer you: Here.
The annual budget for the Department of Defense is the third-largest budget in the government at almost $600 bn (Health and Human Services and Social Security are the first two). The Department of Transportation has a budget of about $70 bn. So if we decreased Defense spending by about 12% (which could be done in about 1 month by pulling out of Iraq) we could double the DOT budget. For another 2-3% we could double the NASA budget, too. Dept. of Energy spending could be doubled for about 7% of the Defense budget.
So by reducing military spending to 80% of current levels, which would not lead to a significant national security threat, we could double spending on transportation, NASA, and energy. And for another 1% we could double the NSF.
Written by :Dragon_Drafin
Heh cut the military budget, last time a president did that, the next chap in office had 2 planes flown into the twin towers a plane flown into the pentagon and a plane in field in PA.
Please provide evidence to support your contention that a decrease in military spending directly contributed to the 9/11 attacks.
You just hit a sore spot there. You will *NOT* ever use that horrible day to justify military spending or the reduction of civil liberties and rights. The attacks had nothing to do with how much we spend on our military. It's fearmongering. Discussion is closed.
Written by
France, Germany, Spain and Belgum, even if you combined them all into one country they woudn't come close to the amount of acreage that the US is, not to mention that the two major mountain ranges and multiple minor mountain ranges.
Actually, they have a combined per-capita GDP lower than that of the U.S. They have a mountain range (the alps) and several minor ones (Dolomites, etc). So per unit-area, they produce less money than the U.S. However, they are more organized. So they built rail.
Written by
An electric rail system would be great. I agree 100%. Small problem... power. We'd have to build multi billion dollar power stations to power the lines. You yourself admit that reuseable energy sources need more work before they can be truly efficiant and others here have pointed out the probems with nuclear energy.
Interestingly, the U.S. Military has run many nuclear power plants for 50 years without a single significant incident. These plants are all on ships.
Either way, electricity is cleaner and less wasteful than individual fossil-fuel burning engines because of the inherent inefficiency with having multiple engines vs. one large one. This is why twin-engine aircraft are more efficient than 4-engine aircraft. Having an effective system would also significantly reduce the number of fossil fuel-burning engines on the roads.
Written by
Doc I wonder if John Doe in Anytown USA would rather pay more for gas, or pay extra taxes for a rail system that he will never "directly" use.
And if he gets a nice HSR station in his town that connects him to a number of surrounding cities and towns in less than 2 hours? I bet he'll want it.
Europe has done it because they have more efficiency and foresight than the U.S.A. Europe is in it for the long-haul. Most of what I have seen the EU do involves sustainable growth. That means thinking long-term about infrastructure, ensuring healthcare for all citizens, discouraging the use of non-renewable resources, and having a system for preventing major corporate concerns from dictating national policy.
The U.S.A., at the current rate, will cease to be an important world power by 2050. Americans are too proud, too arrogant, and too set in our ways to maintain our country.
I refer you: Here.
The annual budget for the Department of Defense is the third-largest budget in the government at almost $600 bn (Health and Human Services and Social Security are the first two). The Department of Transportation has a budget of about $70 bn. So if we decreased Defense spending by about 12% (which could be done in about 1 month by pulling out of Iraq) we could double the DOT budget. For another 2-3% we could double the NASA budget, too. Dept. of Energy spending could be doubled for about 7% of the Defense budget.
So by reducing military spending to 80% of current levels, which would not lead to a significant national security threat, we could double spending on transportation, NASA, and energy. And for another 1% we could double the NSF.
-Mike
Certified Mad Doctor and HoP High Priest of Nutella
A buckuht n a hooze! -Valura
SILVER Member
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
BRONZE Member
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Pooh-Bah
1,872 posts
Location: Canada
Posted:
UCOF...that's an old scam.
Meyers car used electrolysis to extract hydrogen from water and that's what it actually ran on. Just like the torch, the real power to make it actually work came from electricity.
You didn't invest in it did you ?
UCOF...that's an old scam.
Meyers car used electrolysis to extract hydrogen from water and that's what it actually ran on. Just like the torch, the real power to make it actually work came from electricity.
You didn't invest in it did you ?
SILVER Member
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
15,417 posts
Location: South Wales
Posted:
Only my entire life savings
(about 50p)
Only my entire life savings
(about 50p)
member
51 posts
51 posts
Posted:
You're absolutly right Doc we can cut the military budget by 12%. Pull out the troops and destablize the region worse than it already is. Let the region go back to being rulled by tyrants but hey its better than free speech, women in schools and roadside bombs right? What is the price of freedom Doc?
However, I offer you an alternative. How about we cut an estimated $338.3 billion a year out of the budget and retask it for better purposes. Where is this magic 338.3 billion comming from? Quite simple, its the estimated cost per year that US tax payers are being charged to keep illegal immigrants here. I'm all for immigration, but if they arnt contributing by paying taxes, then they are being a drain on the economy. Worse than the war in Iraq.
Cut both and in a few years we'd be completly out of debt.
I bet you'll want to see the research behind it. Okay, here it is.
I'm sure I'll get some fallout from posting that, but hey if the truth hurts, make the change to improve the situation and then start complaining.
You're absolutly right Doc we can cut the military budget by 12%. Pull out the troops and destablize the region worse than it already is. Let the region go back to being rulled by tyrants but hey its better than free speech, women in schools and roadside bombs right? What is the price of freedom Doc?
However, I offer you an alternative. How about we cut an estimated $338.3 billion a year out of the budget and retask it for better purposes. Where is this magic 338.3 billion comming from? Quite simple, its the estimated cost per year that US tax payers are being charged to keep illegal immigrants here. I'm all for immigration, but if they arnt contributing by paying taxes, then they are being a drain on the economy. Worse than the war in Iraq.
Cut both and in a few years we'd be completly out of debt.
I bet you'll want to see the research behind it. Okay, here it is.
Written by
1. $11 Billion to $22 billion is spent on welfare to illegal aliens each year. https://tinyurl.com/zob77
2. $2.2 Billion dollars a year is spent on food assistance programs such as food stamps, WIC, and free school lunches for illegal aliens. https://www.cis.org/articles/2004/f%20iscalexec.html
3. $2.5 Billion dollars a year is spent on Medicaid for illegal aliens. https://www.cis.org/articles/2004/fiscalexec.html
4. $12 Billion dollars a year is spent on primary and secondary school education for children here illegally and they cannot speak a word of English! https://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt0..html
5. $17 Billion dollars a year is spent for education for the American-born children of illegal aliens, known as anchor babies.
https://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt01.html
6. $3 Million Dollars a DAY is spent to incarcerate illegal aliens. https://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt.01.html
7. 30% percent of all Federal Prison inmates are illegal aliens. https://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0604/01/ldt01.html
8. $90 Billion Dollars a year is spent on illegal aliens for Welfare and Social
Services by the American taxpayers. https://premium.cnn.com/TRANSCIPTS/0610/29/ldt.01.html
9. $200 Billion Dollars a year in suppressed American wages are caused by the illegal aliens.
10. The illegal aliens in the United States have a crime rate that's two-and-a-half times that of white non-illegal aliens. In particular, their children are going to make a huge additional crime problem in the
US.. https://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/12/ldt.01.html
11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border. Homeland Security Report. https://tinyurl.com/t9sht
12. The National Policy Institute, 'estimated that the total cost of mass deportation would be between $206 and $230 billion or an average cost of between $41 and $46 billion annually over a five year period.' https://www.nationalpolicyinstitute.org/pdf/deportation.pdf
13. In 2006 illegal aliens sent home $45 BILLION in remittances back to their countries of origin. https://www.rense.com/general75/niht.htm
14. 'The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration: Nearly One Million Sex Crimes Committed by
Illegal Immigrants In The United States '. https://www.drdsk..com/articleshtml
Total cost (tax dollars) for illegal immigrants is a whopping... $338.3 BILLION A YEAR!
I'm sure I'll get some fallout from posting that, but hey if the truth hurts, make the change to improve the situation and then start complaining.
BRONZE Member
compfuzzled
1,182 posts
Location: hastings, England (UK)
compfuzzled
1,182 posts
Location: hastings, England (UK)
Posted:
(i added the bold)
there is no way in the world anyone could measure that figure, and what counts as a terrorist country?
does venezuela count because america doesnt like chavez?
that is a ridiculous statistic
and the second bit about the drugs bought over
simple fact is, if american people didnt buy the drugs they wouldnt be bought over
if american people didnt employ illegal aliens as servants then alot of them wouldnt come over
Written by :Dragon_Drafin
11. During the year of 2005 there were 4 to 10 MILLION illegal aliens that crossed our Southern Border also, as many as 19,500 illegal aliens from Terrorist Countries. Millions of pounds of drugs, cocaine, meth, heroin and marijuana, crossed into the U. S from the Southern border. Homeland Security Report. https://tinyurl.com/t9sht
(i added the bold)
there is no way in the world anyone could measure that figure, and what counts as a terrorist country?
does venezuela count because america doesnt like chavez?
that is a ridiculous statistic
and the second bit about the drugs bought over
simple fact is, if american people didnt buy the drugs they wouldnt be bought over
if american people didnt employ illegal aliens as servants then alot of them wouldnt come over
"the geeks have got you" - Gayle
SILVER Member
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Posted:
On the watercar.....
"A trillion dollar industry awaits you. You have a chance to become a millionaire. So go for it! Watch out it is risky business, though. Many of the inventors lives were threatened. Yull Brown had shots fired into his kitchen, Stan Meyers was threatened and eventually poisoned, a few months Yull Brown dies of old age. . Andrija Puharich mysteriously fell down a flight of stairs. Carl Cella died in prison."
On the watercar.....
"A trillion dollar industry awaits you. You have a chance to become a millionaire. So go for it! Watch out it is risky business, though. Many of the inventors lives were threatened. Yull Brown had shots fired into his kitchen, Stan Meyers was threatened and eventually poisoned, a few months Yull Brown dies of old age. . Andrija Puharich mysteriously fell down a flight of stairs. Carl Cella died in prison."
O.B.E.S.E.
Owned by Mynci!
SILVER Member
old hand
853 posts
Location: Behind you...
old hand
853 posts
Location: Behind you...
Posted:
Plus a lot of those figures seem to overlap. You've quoted the cost of social welfare twice (point 1 and point 8 above) and there's an $80billion (approx) difference between the figures you quote.
The second link does not work for me so I can't tell if it's a case of figures from different years, or different states, or what? It's hardly a comprehensive and clear breakdown of the costs of illegal immigration to the US.
Plus a lot of those figures seem to overlap. You've quoted the cost of social welfare twice (point 1 and point 8 above) and there's an $80billion (approx) difference between the figures you quote.
The second link does not work for me so I can't tell if it's a case of figures from different years, or different states, or what? It's hardly a comprehensive and clear breakdown of the costs of illegal immigration to the US. Idolized by Aurinoko
Take me disappearing through the smoke rings of my mind....
Bob Dylan
member
51 posts
51 posts
Posted:
Regardless (I didn't do the research, just quoting it) lots of money is being spent on people who are not contributing back to the society. So instead of cutting funding for a whole country's freedom why not cut the funding for freeloaders?
If we cut the funding people would leave, but simta is right. If we didn't buy the drugs they wouldnt come here, if we didn't employ illegals less would come. Others would still come regardless of employment opprotunities. Welfare and SS have enough fraud and moochers that are bonified citizens as it is.
TTF, 1 and 8 are a bit different while they both mention welfare, 8 also speaks of social services which is far more borad than just welfare.
And like I said its an estimated.
Regardless (I didn't do the research, just quoting it) lots of money is being spent on people who are not contributing back to the society. So instead of cutting funding for a whole country's freedom why not cut the funding for freeloaders?
If we cut the funding people would leave, but simta is right. If we didn't buy the drugs they wouldnt come here, if we didn't employ illegals less would come. Others would still come regardless of employment opprotunities. Welfare and SS have enough fraud and moochers that are bonified citizens as it is.
TTF, 1 and 8 are a bit different while they both mention welfare, 8 also speaks of social services which is far more borad than just welfare.
And like I said its an estimated.
SILVER Member
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Elusive and Bearded
3,597 posts
Location: Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Posted:
Ya because a lot of american citizens want to wash dishes at dennys and dig holes in the middle of the summer....
Written by :Dragon_Drafin
Regardless (I didn't do the research, just quoting it) lots of money is being spent on people who are not contributing back to the society. So instead of cutting funding for a whole country's freedom why not cut the funding for freeloaders?
If we cut the funding people would leave,
Ya because a lot of american citizens want to wash dishes at dennys and dig holes in the middle of the summer....
O.B.E.S.E.
Owned by Mynci!
© 1998 - 2024 Home of Poi
All prices converted to United States dollars using XE.com