Anyone see the Daily Show tonight? Great bit on the Iraq debt...however I had no idea it was that bad.
250 billion spent, and Bush just had the balls (he must have a whole bag of them) to ask for another 65 billion!
And how much were we promised this would cost at the beginning? 1.7 billion!!! The best part was the clips they showed from white house staff and Bush stating we will not ask for more, no how, no way. We will spend the 1.7 wisely, and we will not ask for more later.
Frankly if I had to spend $1,700 on something at my work, and laid my word and job on the line claiming that was all I needed, and then asked for 65,000 a couple years later after I over spent 249,000; not only would I be fired but I be black listed from architecture!!!
Sadly the political environment right now is such that we all knew there was no way Iraq was going to cost 1.7 billion and everyone still ok'd it. The freaking Getty Center cost a billion, how are we supposed to re-build a whole country on 1.7? I guess they didn't take those fancy bris soleil for the whole country into account....
Seriously, the Dems need to get some balls and start voting their conscience rather than their cynicism. Did anyone NOT think we would be in Iraq for years when the original vote went down? Did anyone NOT think that the Sunnis and Shia wouldn't start going after each other? I knew it, and it's not my job.
The level of incompetence in DC is staggering right now, at least the press is starting to wake up, dragged along by the Daily Show of all things. I do love John Stewart doing double takes to archival footage. Making hypocrisy funny for America, God Bless you Mr. Stewart.
I'm betting incompetence isn't really an issue... but deliberate choice? I dunno, not like Cheney himself is stirring the Iraqis to arms, but I'm sure Halliburton is loving this.
Look at the bright side, the whole Iraq shit storm has pushed oil prices way up and effectively awaken the American consumer to the once absurd thought of energy conservation. If oil were $30/barrel I'm sure GM would be riding high on their latest deployment of land yachts to the SUV buying American public. Instead they are collecting dust on the sales floors while the Honda dealer cannot keep the new Civic on their lot.
Gov't spending doesn't ever surprise me anymore. How many billions are we dumping into New Orleans?!? Saving a city that's below sea level doesn't sound like a wise investment. It reminds me of the line from that move Contact. "First rule of gov't spending is if you can build one for a billion dollars why not build two for two billion?"
Seriously though, a year or two ago I was praying for the gas prices to go up, even to 5 a gallon. Because I knew that it would cause (over the long term) not only energy efficiency technology, but encourage central urban development and lessen the living to work travel distance...So keep rising gas prices, my Honda gets over 40 mpg!
I caught the Daily Show episode repeat tonight. Most disturbing was the part where they mentioned that this $250 billion actually translates to over $2000 per taxpayer, which we aren't necessarily eating but which future generations will.
I think that wishing for an extreme rise in gas prices is unwise. This is why. Yes, car companies are finally starting to get on board the energy conservation thing....they have to. Consumers demand it. But along with trucking, think of how many industries use gasoline as a necessary part of their work. I was passing a construction site on the way home and I'm staring at a bulldozer that's digging up a road and I'm thinking, that thing uses gas. What about the heavy crane guy. What about the dump truck.
My thought is that construction materials are so expensive to begin with....this is all linked. Steel is astronomical because China is building so fast that it is cannibalizing its own supply and not exporting it, thus American steel makers can jack up the prices. And let's not even get into the cost of transporting all these materials. If gas goes any farther, construction will halt. The economy will tank. None of us will have any jobs.
Not to bring out the doomsday scenario but I think it's best we ween ourselves from gas before we let it get the best of us.
duh, wonderk, did you really think car companies are the only ones who could raise efficiency? Guess what, all other industries have homework to do as well...
wishing for a sudden, ridiculous rise in gas prices is wishing for an american economic collapse.
i always just think that this is an argument for maintaining the status quo. how have those crafty europeans been dealing with such high fuel prices for so long? how do they have jobs? move goods around from warehouse to warehouse?
haven't heard about economic collapse there - just lots of better ideas about energy conservation and alternative energy sources.
realize this is simplistic, but no more so than the initial challenge statement...
As for gas prizes, in Sweden it is about $6 a gallon, up from $5 before the recent raises. And most ppl are still employed, we can afford free health care for all and generous state pensions. And quite a few have their own villas and plasma TV's.
As for the war, I agree that starting it was one of the stupidest and most self-centered and incompetent things that have happened for a long time. But like it or not, when you invade a country you have a responsability to stay as long as it takes to fix things. An expensive budget should be the last reson to pull out! As long as that is the main Democratic argument I dont' feel very much more sympathy for them than the Republicans.
largely because there is a not a huge portion of the population driving 1.5 hours to work, and that's not to mention how far trucks drive.
At one time I thought increased gas prices would help. But I do think it would cause an economic catastrophe. American's rely on transport unlike anywhere in the world. It's really the SUVs that kill it all. They are just pumping money down the drain and it'll have the largest impact on them, which is mostly middle America.
The solution I see is what is happening (brief pause to thank God) - good ol' supply and demand. Finally car manufacturers are making decent hybrids due to the demand. The Gov. should have encouraged this long ago (more more 'thank you W') with the CAFE, but didn't.
The problem I see down the road is with all the SUVs. They'll be utterly useless humps of crap that so many are stuck with - no resale value long term. That also goes for the McMansion. I do think it'll hurt the economy as so many are stuck with impractical, poorly designed behemoths that cost a fortune to maintian and use.
Hm, I disagree. I don't think the SUV's are the problem, but rather how cities are built. Trucks drive as far in Europe, but people don't. The reason isn't so much about the gas prices but rather the structures of cities and of society.
Take a place like Dallas/Ft Worth. EVERYTHING there is based on cars. As a result, people get more cars, drive further and buy cheaper houses further away from the city. New result: roads get more crowded, and public opinion wants more money spent on new highways, and defeat that public transport system for the 18'th time in a referendum. With new shiny roads and cheap gas, happy families (living in a trailer home maybe) buy another car for their 16-year old. And the process restarts...
So yes, raising gas prices will have a big impact on the States. Maybe the main reason is that Europe was built when there were no cars, so we never had that easy choice. But you are going to have to break the circle somehow! Architecture, planning, democrats in office and raising gas prices are my guesses on how it will happen.
Or maybe flying, hydrogen (fusion-produced) driven cars. :)
BTW, I think it is really cool that the States (even ol' GW!) are realizing the scope of the energy problem! Somehow I have a feening that when you get aroung to it you're gonna overtake Europe in a decade. :)
Trace and Cassiel both have a point to be made. Yes, places like DFW aren't the same as cities like Paris or Berlin. Things are largely spread out and reliance on auto transportation is huge. Then again, the long haul trucking in the USA doesn't even compare to Europe. Germany is about the size of Wisconsin & Minnesota. France is smaller than Texas. A manufaturer moving goods from New York to California doesn't compare to someone moving goods from France to Poland.
One thing the USA does have is good freight railroad infastructure. That's the best way to move stuff around here over the long distances.
I could admit that population is more centralized in europe, but the differences shouldn't be that large. European Union is less than half that, but still transports as much by truck as US. You are right about freight railroad though!
Transport of goods (billion tkm)
- road transport EU 1516 USA 1634
- rail transport EU 358 USA 2183
Our Debt
Anyone see the Daily Show tonight? Great bit on the Iraq debt...however I had no idea it was that bad.
250 billion spent, and Bush just had the balls (he must have a whole bag of them) to ask for another 65 billion!
And how much were we promised this would cost at the beginning? 1.7 billion!!! The best part was the clips they showed from white house staff and Bush stating we will not ask for more, no how, no way. We will spend the 1.7 wisely, and we will not ask for more later.
Frankly if I had to spend $1,700 on something at my work, and laid my word and job on the line claiming that was all I needed, and then asked for 65,000 a couple years later after I over spent 249,000; not only would I be fired but I be black listed from architecture!!!
Seriously though, really funny bit.
Sadly the political environment right now is such that we all knew there was no way Iraq was going to cost 1.7 billion and everyone still ok'd it. The freaking Getty Center cost a billion, how are we supposed to re-build a whole country on 1.7? I guess they didn't take those fancy bris soleil for the whole country into account....
Seriously, the Dems need to get some balls and start voting their conscience rather than their cynicism. Did anyone NOT think we would be in Iraq for years when the original vote went down? Did anyone NOT think that the Sunnis and Shia wouldn't start going after each other? I knew it, and it's not my job.
The level of incompetence in DC is staggering right now, at least the press is starting to wake up, dragged along by the Daily Show of all things. I do love John Stewart doing double takes to archival footage. Making hypocrisy funny for America, God Bless you Mr. Stewart.
I'm betting incompetence isn't really an issue... but deliberate choice? I dunno, not like Cheney himself is stirring the Iraqis to arms, but I'm sure Halliburton is loving this.
I think we should consolidate our student loans and pass that tab along to ol' W.
Look at the bright side, the whole Iraq shit storm has pushed oil prices way up and effectively awaken the American consumer to the once absurd thought of energy conservation. If oil were $30/barrel I'm sure GM would be riding high on their latest deployment of land yachts to the SUV buying American public. Instead they are collecting dust on the sales floors while the Honda dealer cannot keep the new Civic on their lot.
Gov't spending doesn't ever surprise me anymore. How many billions are we dumping into New Orleans?!? Saving a city that's below sea level doesn't sound like a wise investment. It reminds me of the line from that move Contact. "First rule of gov't spending is if you can build one for a billion dollars why not build two for two billion?"
LOL, great quote A.
Seriously though, a year or two ago I was praying for the gas prices to go up, even to 5 a gallon. Because I knew that it would cause (over the long term) not only energy efficiency technology, but encourage central urban development and lessen the living to work travel distance...So keep rising gas prices, my Honda gets over 40 mpg!
My bike gets better than that.
like what, 45 mpg?
or a trusty pair of PF Flyers
I have no problem being poor.
J -- now don't ya go tossin' rational thought around quite so breezily.
First rule in government spending: why build one when you can have two at twice the price?
I rode that once...kind of scary, shit my pants.
I caught the Daily Show episode repeat tonight. Most disturbing was the part where they mentioned that this $250 billion actually translates to over $2000 per taxpayer, which we aren't necessarily eating but which future generations will.
I think that wishing for an extreme rise in gas prices is unwise. This is why. Yes, car companies are finally starting to get on board the energy conservation thing....they have to. Consumers demand it. But along with trucking, think of how many industries use gasoline as a necessary part of their work. I was passing a construction site on the way home and I'm staring at a bulldozer that's digging up a road and I'm thinking, that thing uses gas. What about the heavy crane guy. What about the dump truck.
My thought is that construction materials are so expensive to begin with....this is all linked. Steel is astronomical because China is building so fast that it is cannibalizing its own supply and not exporting it, thus American steel makers can jack up the prices. And let's not even get into the cost of transporting all these materials. If gas goes any farther, construction will halt. The economy will tank. None of us will have any jobs.
Not to bring out the doomsday scenario but I think it's best we ween ourselves from gas before we let it get the best of us.
you;ll have to pry my suv from my cold dead hands. why dont you commies go back to commie land!!!
i agree. but it's happened.
duh, wonderk, did you really think car companies are the only ones who could raise efficiency? Guess what, all other industries have homework to do as well...
i always just think that this is an argument for maintaining the status quo. how have those crafty europeans been dealing with such high fuel prices for so long? how do they have jobs? move goods around from warehouse to warehouse?
haven't heard about economic collapse there - just lots of better ideas about energy conservation and alternative energy sources.
realize this is simplistic, but no more so than the initial challenge statement...
As for gas prizes, in Sweden it is about $6 a gallon, up from $5 before the recent raises. And most ppl are still employed, we can afford free health care for all and generous state pensions. And quite a few have their own villas and plasma TV's.
As for the war, I agree that starting it was one of the stupidest and most self-centered and incompetent things that have happened for a long time. But like it or not, when you invade a country you have a responsability to stay as long as it takes to fix things. An expensive budget should be the last reson to pull out! As long as that is the main Democratic argument I dont' feel very much more sympathy for them than the Republicans.
largely because there is a not a huge portion of the population driving 1.5 hours to work, and that's not to mention how far trucks drive.
At one time I thought increased gas prices would help. But I do think it would cause an economic catastrophe. American's rely on transport unlike anywhere in the world. It's really the SUVs that kill it all. They are just pumping money down the drain and it'll have the largest impact on them, which is mostly middle America.
The solution I see is what is happening (brief pause to thank God) - good ol' supply and demand. Finally car manufacturers are making decent hybrids due to the demand. The Gov. should have encouraged this long ago (more more 'thank you W') with the CAFE, but didn't.
The problem I see down the road is with all the SUVs. They'll be utterly useless humps of crap that so many are stuck with - no resale value long term. That also goes for the McMansion. I do think it'll hurt the economy as so many are stuck with impractical, poorly designed behemoths that cost a fortune to maintian and use.
Hm, I disagree. I don't think the SUV's are the problem, but rather how cities are built. Trucks drive as far in Europe, but people don't. The reason isn't so much about the gas prices but rather the structures of cities and of society.
Take a place like Dallas/Ft Worth. EVERYTHING there is based on cars. As a result, people get more cars, drive further and buy cheaper houses further away from the city. New result: roads get more crowded, and public opinion wants more money spent on new highways, and defeat that public transport system for the 18'th time in a referendum. With new shiny roads and cheap gas, happy families (living in a trailer home maybe) buy another car for their 16-year old. And the process restarts...
So yes, raising gas prices will have a big impact on the States. Maybe the main reason is that Europe was built when there were no cars, so we never had that easy choice. But you are going to have to break the circle somehow! Architecture, planning, democrats in office and raising gas prices are my guesses on how it will happen.
Or maybe flying, hydrogen (fusion-produced) driven cars. :)
BTW, I think it is really cool that the States (even ol' GW!) are realizing the scope of the energy problem! Somehow I have a feening that when you get aroung to it you're gonna overtake Europe in a decade. :)
Ans BTW again, I only disagree with the SUV's. The rest was all good. ;)
nice LinG....
by the way, plasma-gassification could be implemented for vehicles, but the powers-that-be would never let their cash cows die...
so much for that...
...deliberate choice? I dunno, not like Cheney himself is stirring the Iraqis to arms, but I'm sure Halliburton is loving this.
exactly. out of the taxpayer's pocket, into the beauro/aristo-crats...
don't worry. be happy. it's just our money.
Trace and Cassiel both have a point to be made. Yes, places like DFW aren't the same as cities like Paris or Berlin. Things are largely spread out and reliance on auto transportation is huge. Then again, the long haul trucking in the USA doesn't even compare to Europe. Germany is about the size of Wisconsin & Minnesota. France is smaller than Texas. A manufaturer moving goods from New York to California doesn't compare to someone moving goods from France to Poland.
One thing the USA does have is good freight railroad infastructure. That's the best way to move stuff around here over the long distances.
USA 9,400,000 sq km.
Europe 9,700,000 sq km.
I could admit that population is more centralized in europe, but the differences shouldn't be that large. European Union is less than half that, but still transports as much by truck as US. You are right about freight railroad though!
Transport of goods (billion tkm)
- road transport EU 1516 USA 1634
- rail transport EU 358 USA 2183
Source: Eurostat
http://www.iru.org/Events/EastWest/2005/Ruppert.E.html
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.