Republicans crush payrise


Off-Topic Discussions

451 to 500 of 570 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thats a couple of times this week I've seen people trying to pass off the belief in an opinion poll to justify a fact to justify an opinion poll.

Fox news has metastasized!


2 people marked this as a favorite.

With all due respect to the GOP and the Tea Party, yes, Americans want to work, but we DON'T want to work jobs that pay SHIT!


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Thats a couple of times this week I've seen people trying to pass off the belief in an opinion poll to justify a fact to justify an opinion poll.

Fox news has metastasized!

You go to war -- or to debate -- with the army you have, not the army you want. If you are called upon to justify an opinion that is literally unjustifiable, what other tactic do you recommend?


Orfamay Quest wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Thats a couple of times this week I've seen people trying to pass off the belief in an opinion poll to justify a fact to justify an opinion poll.

Fox news has metastasized!

You go to war -- or to debate -- with the army you have, not the army you want. If you are called upon to justify an opinion that is literally unjustifiable, what other tactic do you recommend?

GRARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRG!

Liberty's Edge

Orfamay Quest wrote:


You go to war -- or to debate -- with the army you have, not the army you want. If you are called upon to justify an opinion that is literally unjustifiable, what other tactic do you recommend?

As I'm familiar enough with human beings to know that, "change your opinion?" isn't going to work, how about going with something along the lines of "trying to do anything about global warming will harm my income from the fossil fuel industry and harm our country's economy generally"?

Thats a least a tenable position, as few people can document the possible costs of mitigation.

The Exchange

Also not crushing our economy while mexico, india and china have tire fires for fun and will just farther ahead of us in the global market while laughing at our silly restrictions.
Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Good thing your point is completely wrong then.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Spent most of this weekend arguing with a birther. Now reading some good ole climate change denial.

I must still be in Murica.


Andrew R wrote:

Also not crushing our economy while mexico, india and china have tire fires for fun and will just farther ahead of us in the global market while laughing at our silly restrictions.

Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much

We can not afford a Tire Fire Gap! Sorry, I've been watching a lot of Dr. Strangelove recently.

Rather then racing to the bottom, we should look to countries that are doing better then the US in almost every measurable way - like Germany. They have a robust green economy, and a robust economy at the same time. Yet I doubt China and India are laughing at them.

But sure, this fossil fuel economy is working out great for us... I just can't think of a single example to back up that statement at the moment...

EDIT: Between your Green Final Solution and Arnwen's "representative democracy = totalitarianism" I'm beginning to think that you right-wingers have some real bizarre ideas about what government means.

The Exchange

Fergie wrote:
Andrew R wrote:

Also not crushing our economy while mexico, india and china have tire fires for fun and will just farther ahead of us in the global market while laughing at our silly restrictions.

Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much

We can not afford a Tire Fire Gap! Sorry, I've been watching a lot of Dr. Strangelove recently.

Rather then racing to the bottom, we should look to countries that are doing better then the US in almost every measurable way - like Germany. They have a robust green economy, and a robust economy at the same time. Yet I doubt China and India are laughing at them.

But sure, this fossil fuel economy is working out great for us... I just can't think of a single example to back up that statement at the moment...

EDIT: Between your Green Final Solution and Arnwen's "representative democracy = totalitarianism" I'm beginning to think that you right-wingers have some real bizarre ideas about what government means.

The trick is to make SMART choices not knee jerk reactions by the ones that do not care about what effects environmental policies can have

The Exchange

Squeakmaan wrote:
Good thing your point is completely wrong then.

How so? That america cannot save the world by changing ourselves too much while nothing is done about other nations or that humans and our consumerism is the only real problem?


So you think that people in the US and other countries don't want efficient homes, cars, and industry because we want to spend more on fuels and that the "richest" country in the world must waste resources to be competitive with some of the poorest peoples in the world?

The Exchange

Fergie wrote:

So you think that people in the US and other countries don't want efficient homes, cars, and industry because we want to spend more on fuels and that the "richest" country in the world must waste resources to be competitive with some of the poorest peoples in the world?

When the cost for efficiency becomes that the vast majority of americans can no longer afford them what good are they to most of us? Maybe some of us would rather be ABLE to buy the 20 mpg "clunker" than have a $90,000 electric car dangled over us that we cannot afford. Or to have the jobs that MIGHT have let us afford them sent to a nation that still is allowed to have those "polluting" manufacturing jobs


Andrew R wrote:

Also not crushing our economy while mexico, india and china have tire fires for fun and will just farther ahead of us in the global market while laughing at our silly restrictions.

Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much

Perhaps its possible to make just a little less profit and have a little more oxygen?

The Exchange

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:

Also not crushing our economy while mexico, india and china have tire fires for fun and will just farther ahead of us in the global market while laughing at our silly restrictions.

Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much
Perhaps its possible to make just a little less profit and have a little more oxygen?

perhaps but stopping those nations will do more for that than ever more punitive measure for americans will


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:
When the cost for efficiency becomes that the vast majority of americans can no longer afford them what good are they to most of us? Maybe some of us would rather be ABLE to buy the 20 mpg "clunker" than have a $90,000 electric car dangled over us that we cannot afford. Or to have the jobs that MIGHT have let us afford them sent to a nation that still is allowed to have those "polluting" manufacturing jobs

OK, your mixing up several issues.

First of all, a fuel efficient car would only be slightly cheaper to buy then the gas guzzler (much cheaper then most SUVs). The total ownership experience would be much cheaper in the long run. MORE people would be able to experience car ownership, not less. Same with homes, industry, etc.

Second, gas is only cheap because so much or our resources (and lives) are redirected to keep it that way. Imagine how much more wealth our nation would have if we didn't have a gulf war or two ever decade... Imagine if all those soldiers were part of the work force, not dead or trapped in the VA maze... Imagine if ExxonMobile and others actually paid taxes... Imagine if we didn't have to prop up horrible human rights violators like Israel, Saudi Arabia, and all those other "strategic allies". Imagine the money we would save if we weren't like desperate crack addicts for gas.

Third, manufacturing goes to other countries because they are hellholes. You can either make the US a hellhole (Olde Southern model) to compete with them, or do what they did since the dawn of time - use tariffs to make trade fair, not "free".

I'm saying we need to invest in a long term rise of the lower and middle classes, not lower ourselves to be Bangladesh West.


Andrew R wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:

Also not crushing our economy while mexico, india and china have tire fires for fun and will just farther ahead of us in the global market while laughing at our silly restrictions.

Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much
Perhaps its possible to make just a little less profit and have a little more oxygen?
perhaps but stopping those nations will do more for that than ever more punitive measure for americans will

Stop them by....? We don't control them. We're not going to shoot them all, and every time we try to lead the way in innovating green technology fox news and rush limbaugh grarg about solyndra and you start echoing it.

Liberty's Edge

meatrace wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
meatrace wrote:


Until they declare their major as geology, as my mother did.
Fun Fact: All the science professionals I know were Liberal Arts students.

Weird. Every science major I know was majoring in a science from day 1. (probably because my school didn't have many 1st and second year students)

Quote:

Dude, you have the worst habit of using an incorrect and rhetorical definition of a word, and then refusing to admit you're wrong when shown.

How are you better than the people you constantly decry?

I'm not corresponding to your subjective and ultimately nit picky terminology. They're not corresponding to reality. HUGE difference between calling a palm tree a tree and thinking it would be great for a raft.

There's nothing "subjective" about my terminology. I'm going by the terminology used by post-secondary education institutions. You know, the colleges and universities in which people are ostensibly taking these classes. Also known as "liberal arts colleges", like Yale, Harvard...

"Science" isn't a major anywhere I know of, and a lot of students who are determined to go into a specific branch of science (say, biology) take time to decide whether they want to specialize in. Do they want to get a general biology degree, or go into zoology? Botany, or environmental sciences?

Didn't you say you have a degree in forestry? A BS or a BA (the two types of liberal arts degrees)?

To reinforce meatrace's post: these are the fields that historically cover "libera; arts":

Visual arts
Great books
History
Languages
Linguistics
Literature
Mathematics
Music
Philosophy
Political science
Psychology
Religious studies
Natural science
Social science
Performing arts

Engineering, medical degrees, trade degrees, etc (anything not covered by the "classic seven" of ancient and medieval times, aren't covered under the "liberal arts" umbrella.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:


Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much

Right, the 'learned helplessness' argument. That's where the anti-science folks admit that climate change really is happening, but that nothing can be done about it because it is too expensive.

It at least has the virtue of being more honest than yelling 'there's no consensus!' :)

The Exchange

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:

Also not crushing our economy while mexico, india and china have tire fires for fun and will just farther ahead of us in the global market while laughing at our silly restrictions.

Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much
Perhaps its possible to make just a little less profit and have a little more oxygen?
perhaps but stopping those nations will do more for that than ever more punitive measure for americans will

Stop them by....? We don't control them. We're not going to shoot them all, and every time we try to lead the way in innovating green technology fox news and rush limbaugh grarg about solyndra and you start echoing it.

So we layer on rules and regulations to starve americans of rights, resources and jobs in the name of being green while they burn the rest of the world about us. We can suffer under the name of saving the planet for nothing then, and when we weaken ourselves enough by doing so another nation will take us and see that those resources are used. We need to be smart about this, it is a global game and we lose if we self destruct. "green tech" is a laudable goal but we cannot cripple the economy in its name before it can do what we need it to.

The Exchange

Fergie wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
When the cost for efficiency becomes that the vast majority of americans can no longer afford them what good are they to most of us? Maybe some of us would rather be ABLE to buy the 20 mpg "clunker" than have a $90,000 electric car dangled over us that we cannot afford. Or to have the jobs that MIGHT have let us afford them sent to a nation that still is allowed to have those "polluting" manufacturing jobs

OK, your mixing up several issues.

First of all, a fuel efficient car would only be slightly cheaper to buy then the gas guzzler (much cheaper then most SUVs). The total ownership experience would be much cheaper in the long run. MORE people would be able to experience car ownership, not less. Same with homes, industry, etc.

Second, gas is only cheap because so much or our resources (and lives) are redirected to keep it that way. Imagine how much more wealth our nation would have if we didn't have a gulf war or two ever decade... Imagine if all those soldiers were part of the work force, not dead or trapped in the VA maze... Imagine if ExxonMobile and others actually paid taxes... Imagine if we didn't have to prop up horrible human rights violators like Israel, Saudi Arabia, and all those other "strategic allies". Imagine the money we would save if we weren't like desperate crack addicts for gas.

Third, manufacturing goes to other countries because they are hellholes. You can either make the US a hellhole (Olde Southern model) to compete with them, or do what they did since the dawn of time - use tariffs to make trade fair, not "free".

I'm saying we need to invest in a long term rise of the lower and middle classes, not lower ourselves to be Bangladesh West.

I can remember 10 years ago i could buy a used car in cash, even in my relatively poor situation, now thanks to fun programs like "cash for clunkers" and attempts to force us into higher milage we cannot. A new car was available for less than a house but now, in part thanks to better economy and environmental standards, they are becoming out of reach to most of us. I would rather HAVE a car that gets 20 mpg than to hear commercials talk about how great the car is that gets 50mpg that i cannot afford without a decade or more of debt.

Without govenment in my way i could make my own fuel for very little. They call it moonshine and make it illegal for ME to produce even as they make laws to force it into vehicles never designed for its use.

Factories once were the main core of our economy, cheap imports from nations without our strangling regulations ended that. Forcing apple to make it's Icrap here via ending the "free trade" nonsense would do what to make america a hellhole exactly? Are american auto factories making us a hellhole right now? i mean this is important i live very near a GM plant and all. All i see are some folks with well paying jobs creating a machine that can be sold for real value instead of another service job that creates nothing

The Exchange

Usagi Yojimbo wrote:
Andrew R wrote:


Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much

Right, the 'learned helplessness' argument. That's where the anti-science folks admit that climate change really is happening, but that nothing can be done about it because it is too expensive.

It at least has the virtue of being more honest than yelling 'there's no consensus!' :)

Not at all we could do something about it, we lack the will and desire to do so.


Andrew R wrote:
Fergie wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
When the cost for efficiency becomes that the vast majority of americans can no longer afford them what good are they to most of us? Maybe some of us would rather be ABLE to buy the 20 mpg "clunker" than have a $90,000 electric car dangled over us that we cannot afford. Or to have the jobs that MIGHT have let us afford them sent to a nation that still is allowed to have those "polluting" manufacturing jobs

OK, your mixing up several issues.

First of all, a fuel efficient car would only be slightly cheaper to buy then the gas guzzler (much cheaper then most SUVs). The total ownership experience would be much cheaper in the long run. MORE people would be able to experience car ownership, not less. Same with homes, industry, etc.

Second, gas is only cheap because so much or our resources (and lives) are redirected to keep it that way. Imagine how much more wealth our nation would have if we didn't have a gulf war or two ever decade... Imagine if all those soldiers were part of the work force, not dead or trapped in the VA maze... Imagine if ExxonMobile and others actually paid taxes... Imagine if we didn't have to prop up horrible human rights violators like Israel, Saudi Arabia, and all those other "strategic allies". Imagine the money we would save if we weren't like desperate crack addicts for gas.

Third, manufacturing goes to other countries because they are hellholes. You can either make the US a hellhole (Olde Southern model) to compete with them, or do what they did since the dawn of time - use tariffs to make trade fair, not "free".

I'm saying we need to invest in a long term rise of the lower and middle classes, not lower ourselves to be Bangladesh West.

I can remember 10 years ago i could buy a used car in cash, even in my relatively poor situation, now thanks to fun programs like "cash for clunkers" and attempts to force us into higher milage we cannot. A new car was available for less than a house but now, in part...

Did you seriously just b$%~% about cars being expensive and then directly turn around and point at GM and say, "how come we don't have more of that?"

How about because your cheap ass won't pay for a car built by an American!


houstonderek wrote:


To reinforce meatrace's post: these are the fields that historically cover "libera; arts":

etymological fallacy

Liberty's Edge

Andrew R wrote:
Usagi Yojimbo wrote:
Andrew R wrote:


Really if you want to be green you need to get rid of most industry and most people, nothing else will really do much

Right, the 'learned helplessness' argument. That's where the anti-science folks admit that climate change really is happening, but that nothing can be done about it because it is too expensive.

It at least has the virtue of being more honest than yelling 'there's no consensus!' :)

Not at all we could do something about it, we lack the will and desire to do so.

I don't follow. Were you intending to agree or disagree with something I wrote?

The Exchange

BigDTBone wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Fergie wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
When the cost for efficiency becomes that the vast majority of americans can no longer afford them what good are they to most of us? Maybe some of us would rather be ABLE to buy the 20 mpg "clunker" than have a $90,000 electric car dangled over us that we cannot afford. Or to have the jobs that MIGHT have let us afford them sent to a nation that still is allowed to have those "polluting" manufacturing jobs

OK, your mixing up several issues.

First of all, a fuel efficient car would only be slightly cheaper to buy then the gas guzzler (much cheaper then most SUVs). The total ownership experience would be much cheaper in the long run. MORE people would be able to experience car ownership, not less. Same with homes, industry, etc.

Second, gas is only cheap because so much or our resources (and lives) are redirected to keep it that way. Imagine how much more wealth our nation would have if we didn't have a gulf war or two ever decade... Imagine if all those soldiers were part of the work force, not dead or trapped in the VA maze... Imagine if ExxonMobile and others actually paid taxes... Imagine if we didn't have to prop up horrible human rights violators like Israel, Saudi Arabia, and all those other "strategic allies". Imagine the money we would save if we weren't like desperate crack addicts for gas.

Third, manufacturing goes to other countries because they are hellholes. You can either make the US a hellhole (Olde Southern model) to compete with them, or do what they did since the dawn of time - use tariffs to make trade fair, not "free".

I'm saying we need to invest in a long term rise of the lower and middle classes, not lower ourselves to be Bangladesh West.

I can remember 10 years ago i could buy a used car in cash, even in my relatively poor situation, now thanks to fun programs like "cash for clunkers" and attempts to force us into higher milage we cannot. A new car was available for less than a
...

Americans once built cars affordable, now thanks to what you want they are not.

Fun fact every car i have ever owned was ford or GM until my current crysler


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:
So we layer on rules and regulations to starve americans of rights, resources and jobs in the name of being green while they burn the rest of the world about us.

Dude, what dystopian world are you living in? Seriously, "Hey, arsenic in the water is bad, stop doing it" is starving americans of their rights??

No.

No dammit.

You do not get to pretend that your paranoid fantasies are an argument, much less reality. No one is going to conquer the us. We are not going to have to learn russian/japanese/chinese/ indian / whatever the next big scary monster is.

When children see a monster under the bed and feel afraid we go awww and leave the nightlight on for them. Fine, a few cents of electricity to soothe a frightened child is no big deal. When the republicans scare you you want to enact programs that hurt people.

No. We do not lose our access to education, clean water, clean air, and fucntioning ecosystems because someone knows how easy it is to scare you into an action that will increase their stock portfolio.

Man up.

The Exchange

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
So we layer on rules and regulations to starve americans of rights, resources and jobs in the name of being green while they burn the rest of the world about us.

Dude, what dystopian world are you living in? Seriously, "Hey, arsenic in the water is bad, stop doing it" is starving americans of their rights??

No.

No dammit.

You do not get to pretend that your paranoid fantasies are an argument, much less reality. No one is going to conquer the us. We are not going to have to learn russian/japanese/chinese/ indian / whatever the next big scary monster is.

When children see a monster under the bed and feel afraid we go awww and leave the nightlight on for them. Fine, a few cents of electricity to soothe a frightened child is no big deal. When the republicans scare you you want to enact programs that hurt people.

No. We do not lose our access to education, clean water, clean air, and fucntioning ecosystems because someone knows how easy it is to scare you into an action that will increase their stock portfolio.

Man up.

Taking land from people in the name of "environmental protection" IS. Sending jobs to other, to not see or hear or smell it, nations IS hurting americans and not doing a damn thing to help anyone but foreign workers and foreign economies

In the globe today economy is power more than military in many ways and that is a war we are close to losing. We won't have to learn the language of military conquerors, We will have to learn those of our new employers, those that own our companies and control our economy.

YOU are the one who wants to enact programs to hurt people, you do not care the cost nor the real effect as long as you are looking and feeling like you care.

Man what now? that is both a terrible personal shot that you and this forum should be above and sexist.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wait, you think we lost all of our manufacturing because of environmental regulations?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:
So we layer on rules and regulations to starve americans of rights, resources and jobs in the name of being green while they burn the rest of the world about us. We can suffer under the name of saving the planet for nothing then, and when we weaken ourselves enough by doing so another nation will take us and see that those resources are used. We need to be smart about this, it is a global game and we lose if we self destruct. "green tech" is a laudable goal but we cannot cripple the economy in its name before it can do what we need it to.

OR...

We toss money at it, investing in renewable energy and develop the technology to the point where it is of comparable cost. We lead the world in the production of green energy, we get Europe and other big economies on our side, and then force China and India to comply by way of trade sanctions, offering them for FREE the technology we've developed.

The Exchange

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Wait, you think we lost all of our manufacturing because of environmental regulations?

it is part of the reason, also zoning and whatnot to not have it in anyones backyard, but really money made by exploiting the lack of wage controls and willingness to work for less in other countries is the biggest factor

The Exchange

meatrace wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
So we layer on rules and regulations to starve americans of rights, resources and jobs in the name of being green while they burn the rest of the world about us. We can suffer under the name of saving the planet for nothing then, and when we weaken ourselves enough by doing so another nation will take us and see that those resources are used. We need to be smart about this, it is a global game and we lose if we self destruct. "green tech" is a laudable goal but we cannot cripple the economy in its name before it can do what we need it to.

OR...

We toss money at it, investing in renewable energy and develop the technology to the point where it is of comparable cost. We lead the world in the production of green energy, we get Europe and other big economies on our side, and then force China and India to comply by way of trade sanctions, offering them for FREE the technology we've developed.

I am all for devoloping green tech, but not if we are foolish in how we force it o people that cannot afford it. Make a truck that does't burn diesel instead of passing laws to make them horribly expensive to be cleaner, make affordable higher millage cars instead of high end crap we cannot buy


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:

I can remember 10 years ago i could buy a used car in cash, even in my relatively poor situation, now thanks to fun programs like "cash for clunkers" and attempts to force us into higher milage we cannot. A new car was available for less than a house but now, in part thanks to better economy and environmental standards, they are becoming out of reach to most of us. I would rather HAVE a car that gets 20 mpg than to hear commercials talk about how great the car is that gets 50mpg that i cannot afford without a decade or more of debt.

Without govenment in my way i could make my own fuel for very little. They call it moonshine and make it illegal for ME to produce even as they make laws to force it into vehicles never designed for its use.

Factories once were the main core of our economy, cheap imports from nations without our strangling regulations ended that. Forcing apple to make it's Icrap here via ending the "free trade" nonsense would do what to make america a hellhole exactly? Are american auto factories making us a hellhole right now? i mean this is important i live very near a GM plant and all. All i see are some folks with well paying jobs creating a machine that can be sold for real value instead of another service job that creates nothing

This is bad even by your usual standards.

First, in 1999 --- fifteen years ago -- the average used car bought at a dealer's lot cost $12,180.. Late last year, the most recent number I could find, it cost $15,617.

The median price for a house in 1999 was $161,100; today it's $275,800. So in 15 years, the price of housing has gone up by about 70%, while the price of a used car has gone up by less than 30%. So much for cars being unaffordable.

And as for buying cars for cash, you can still do that. There are literally more than 4 million hits on Google for "cars under $1000" (as a phrase). (And "a decade or more of debt"? Get real. Most places won't even offer a 120-month term on a car loan, especially a loan for a used car. 60 or 84 months are more typically the maximum term. For that kind of term, you are looking at an RV or a boat, and you need to borrow closer to $50,000 than $5,000.)

Of course, you're right that people in the lower end of the income spectrum are having difficulty purchasing cars, but that's not because of any particualr conspiracy on the part of the Democrats. It's quite the opposite. They're having difficulty purchasing anything because the standard of living has dropped so dramatically over the past fifteen years, as a direct result of the Republican policies that are designed to concentrate wealth upwards, as has been amply documented.

If it bothers you that a car is out of reach, and you want to know why,.... look in a mirror and tell yourself about how much it would hurt the economy if your minimum wage job paid better.


houstonderek wrote:


To reinforce meatrace's post: these are the fields that historically cover "liberal arts":

No.

The fields that cover the liberal arts are grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy.

That's it. Even philosophy was not a liberal art.

Most of your list:

Quote:


Visual arts
Great books
History
Languages
Linguistics
Literature
Mathematics
Music
Philosophy
Political science
Psychology
Religious studies
Natural science
Social science
Performing arts

were never part of the liberal arts and in fact, didn't even exist until well after the development of philosophy as a separate intellectual tradition, and in fact, didn't exist until well after science had developed as an intellectual tradition separated from (natural) philosophy.

So unless you're going to tell me that the city that I visited on the Bosporus a year or so ago was Byzantium, the capitol of the Ottoman Empire, you're simply making an anachronism stew and doing it very badly.


Orfamay Quest wrote:
Andrew R wrote:

I can remember 10 years ago i could buy a used car in cash, even in my relatively poor situation, now thanks to fun programs like "cash for clunkers" and attempts to force us into higher milage we cannot. A new car was available for less than a house but now, in part thanks to better economy and environmental standards, they are becoming out of reach to most of us. I would rather HAVE a car that gets 20 mpg than to hear commercials talk about how great the car is that gets 50mpg that i cannot afford without a decade or more of debt.

Without govenment in my way i could make my own fuel for very little. They call it moonshine and make it illegal for ME to produce even as they make laws to force it into vehicles never designed for its use.

Factories once were the main core of our economy, cheap imports from nations without our strangling regulations ended that. Forcing apple to make it's Icrap here via ending the "free trade" nonsense would do what to make america a hellhole exactly? Are american auto factories making us a hellhole right now? i mean this is important i live very near a GM plant and all. All i see are some folks with well paying jobs creating a machine that can be sold for real value instead of another service job that creates nothing

This is bad even by your usual standards.

First, in 1999 --- fifteen years ago -- the average used car bought at a dealer's lot cost $12,180.. Late last year, the most recent number I could find, it cost $15,617.

The median price for a house in 1999 was $161,100; today it's $275,800. So in 15 years, the price of housing has gone up by about 70%, while the...

And there are electric and hybrid cars that cost less new than the best selling vehicles in the US. Looking at the Tesla ads and going "Electric cars are ultra luxury vehicles only for the elite" is missing a lot.


Andrew R wrote:
make affordable higher millage cars instead of high end crap we cannot buy

The Mitsubishi Mi-EV is about $24,000 MSRP, about $16,300 once the federal benefits are factored in.

The Honda Insight is $19,515 MSRP.

The Toyota Prius c is $19,890 MSRP.

The Toyota Camry is $22,235 MSRP.


I drive a first gen Prius that my gf and I got for around 6k 3 years ago. Gets like 40 mpg even now. My mom's 2007 Prius gets upwards of 50 on desert highways (with the AC on).


meatrace wrote:
I drive a first gen Prius that my gf and I got for around 6k 3 years ago.

That's unpossible! Everyone knows that used cars can't be had for love nor money, and it's all Obama's fault!

The Exchange

Orfamay Quest wrote:
Andrew R wrote:

I can remember 10 years ago i could buy a used car in cash, even in my relatively poor situation, now thanks to fun programs like "cash for clunkers" and attempts to force us into higher milage we cannot. A new car was available for less than a house but now, in part thanks to better economy and environmental standards, they are becoming out of reach to most of us. I would rather HAVE a car that gets 20 mpg than to hear commercials talk about how great the car is that gets 50mpg that i cannot afford without a decade or more of debt.

Without govenment in my way i could make my own fuel for very little. They call it moonshine and make it illegal for ME to produce even as they make laws to force it into vehicles never designed for its use.

Factories once were the main core of our economy, cheap imports from nations without our strangling regulations ended that. Forcing apple to make it's Icrap here via ending the "free trade" nonsense would do what to make america a hellhole exactly? Are american auto factories making us a hellhole right now? i mean this is important i live very near a GM plant and all. All i see are some folks with well paying jobs creating a machine that can be sold for real value instead of another service job that creates nothing

This is bad even by your usual standards.

First, in 1999 --- fifteen years ago -- the average used car bought at a dealer's lot cost $12,180.. Late last year, the most recent number I could find, it cost $15,617.

The median price for a house in 1999 was $161,100; today it's $275,800. So in 15 years, the price of housing has gone up by about 70%, while the...

Cars in the $1000 to $5000 are far harder to get now than they once were, and will get rarer partly thanks to "cash for clunkers" destroying a lot of decent vehicles. You are right and i thought about editing the "decade of debt" part because of the fact that no one can GET a loan like that even if the average wage slave these days might be able to eventually pay it off

The Exchange

Orfamay Quest wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
make affordable higher millage cars instead of high end crap we cannot buy

The Mitsubishi Mi-EV is about $24,000 MSRP, about $16,300 once the federal benefits are factored in.

The Honda Insight is $19,515 MSRP.

The Toyota Prius c is $19,890 MSRP.

The Toyota Camry is $22,235 MSRP.

Ok so there are a handfull of, all foreign, electric cars that are affordable. Then again what are repairs like on those things? Not long ago we could fix our own


Andrew R wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
make affordable higher millage cars instead of high end crap we cannot buy

The Mitsubishi Mi-EV is about $24,000 MSRP, about $16,300 once the federal benefits are factored in.

The Honda Insight is $19,515 MSRP.

The Toyota Prius c is $19,890 MSRP.

The Toyota Camry is $22,235 MSRP.

Ok so there are a handfull of, all foreign, electric cars that are affordable. Then again what are repairs like on those things? Not long ago we could fix our own

I've got a 2001 Honda Insight that averages less than $500 a year in repairs. The only reason it is that high is because I had to get new batteries in 2008. I get 62mpg on average. If I take it on road trips I can get it up to 70mpg.

The Exchange

BigDTBone wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
make affordable higher millage cars instead of high end crap we cannot buy

The Mitsubishi Mi-EV is about $24,000 MSRP, about $16,300 once the federal benefits are factored in.

The Honda Insight is $19,515 MSRP.

The Toyota Prius c is $19,890 MSRP.

The Toyota Camry is $22,235 MSRP.

Ok so there are a handfull of, all foreign, electric cars that are affordable. Then again what are repairs like on those things? Not long ago we could fix our own
I've got a 2001 Honda Insight that averages less than $500 a year in repairs. The only reason it is that high is because I had to get new batteries in 2008. I get 62mpg on average. If I take it on road trips I can get it up to 70mpg.

It is nice that you have a choice to get that vehicle. If i would be happier recreating, fresh off the assembly line, a 1940's car for instance i would like to have that choice without government telling me it is not us to their standards


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Andrew R wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
make affordable higher millage cars instead of high end crap we cannot buy

The Mitsubishi Mi-EV is about $24,000 MSRP, about $16,300 once the federal benefits are factored in.

The Honda Insight is $19,515 MSRP.

The Toyota Prius c is $19,890 MSRP.

The Toyota Camry is $22,235 MSRP.

Ok so there are a handfull of, all foreign, electric cars that are affordable. Then again what are repairs like on those things? Not long ago we could fix our own
I've got a 2001 Honda Insight that averages less than $500 a year in repairs. The only reason it is that high is because I had to get new batteries in 2008. I get 62mpg on average. If I take it on road trips I can get it up to 70mpg.
It is nice that you have a choice to get that vehicle. If i would be happier recreating, fresh off the assembly line, a 1940's car for instance i would like to have that choice without government telling me it is not us to their standards

What exactly about that car from the 40s are you looking for? Low horse power and torque, or crappy gas mileage, or terrible emissions? I guarantee you can get a car upto emission standards, fully carborated (so you can work on it yourself), with better gas mileage and higher horse power and torque. And all of that for a lower % of income than for a similar used car in the 40s.

The only thing the government is telling you not to do is (1) don't piss away gasoline just for the hell of it and (2) don't dump a bunch of crap in the air just for the hell of it.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
BigDTBone wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
make affordable higher millage cars instead of high end crap we cannot buy

The Mitsubishi Mi-EV is about $24,000 MSRP, about $16,300 once the federal benefits are factored in.

The Honda Insight is $19,515 MSRP.

The Toyota Prius c is $19,890 MSRP.

The Toyota Camry is $22,235 MSRP.

Ok so there are a handfull of, all foreign, electric cars that are affordable. Then again what are repairs like on those things? Not long ago we could fix our own
I've got a 2001 Honda Insight that averages less than $500 a year in repairs. The only reason it is that high is because I had to get new batteries in 2008. I get 62mpg on average. If I take it on road trips I can get it up to 70mpg.
It is nice that you have a choice to get that vehicle. If i would be happier recreating, fresh off the assembly line, a 1940's car for instance i would like to have that choice without government telling me it is not us to their standards

What exactly about that car from the 40s are you looking for? Low horse power and torque, or crappy gas mileage, or terrible emissions? I guarantee you can get a car upto emission standards, fully carborated (so you can work on it yourself), with better gas mileage and higher horse power and torque. And all of that for a lower % of income than for a similar used car in the 40s.

The only thing the government is telling you not to do is (1) don't piss away gasoline just for the hell of it and (2) don't dump a bunch of crap in the air just for the hell of it.

Why should the government be able to tell me what to do just because it affects other people?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, this has gotten a bit off the original topic... However!
If you want to help getting rid of a lot of the dependence on foreign oil AND help create more jobs in the US in the future, then you still have 5 days left to throw some money at this project:
Solar Freakin' Roadways!

And a FAQ to put a lot of the worries I've seen asked elsewhere to rest.

The Exchange

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
make affordable higher millage cars instead of high end crap we cannot buy

The Mitsubishi Mi-EV is about $24,000 MSRP, about $16,300 once the federal benefits are factored in.

The Honda Insight is $19,515 MSRP.

The Toyota Prius c is $19,890 MSRP.

The Toyota Camry is $22,235 MSRP.

Ok so there are a handfull of, all foreign, electric cars that are affordable. Then again what are repairs like on those things? Not long ago we could fix our own
I've got a 2001 Honda Insight that averages less than $500 a year in repairs. The only reason it is that high is because I had to get new batteries in 2008. I get 62mpg on average. If I take it on road trips I can get it up to 70mpg.
It is nice that you have a choice to get that vehicle. If i would be happier recreating, fresh off the assembly line, a 1940's car for instance i would like to have that choice without government telling me it is not us to their standards

What exactly about that car from the 40s are you looking for? Low horse power and torque, or crappy gas mileage, or terrible emissions? I guarantee you can get a car upto emission standards, fully carborated (so you can work on it yourself), with better gas mileage and higher horse power and torque. And all of that for a lower % of income than for a similar used car in the 40s.

The only thing the government is telling you not to do is (1) don't piss away gasoline just for the hell of it and (2) don't dump a bunch of crap in the air just for the hell of it.

Why should the government be able to tell me what to do just because it affects other people?

people do crap every day that effect others, why not just ban everything. Car radios would be better off illegal than pushing higher mpg if you are worried about effecting others...

The Exchange

GentleGiant wrote:

Well, this has gotten a bit off the original topic... However!

If you want to help getting rid of a lot of the dependence on foreign oil AND help create more jobs in the US in the future, then you still have 5 days left to throw some money at this project:
Solar Freakin' Roadways!

And a FAQ to put a lot of the worries I've seen asked elsewhere to rest.

It i a decent idea, not sure about the details to just how practical it is but perhaps better than potholes asphalt doing nothing


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Andrew R wrote:
make affordable higher millage cars instead of high end crap we cannot buy

The Mitsubishi Mi-EV is about $24,000 MSRP, about $16,300 once the federal benefits are factored in.

The Honda Insight is $19,515 MSRP.

The Toyota Prius c is $19,890 MSRP.

The Toyota Camry is $22,235 MSRP.

Ok so there are a handfull of, all foreign, electric cars that are affordable. Then again what are repairs like on those things? Not long ago we could fix our own
I've got a 2001 Honda Insight that averages less than $500 a year in repairs. The only reason it is that high is because I had to get new batteries in 2008. I get 62mpg on average. If I take it on road trips I can get it up to 70mpg.
It is nice that you have a choice to get that vehicle. If i would be happier recreating, fresh off the assembly line, a 1940's car for instance i would like to have that choice without government telling me it is not us to their standards

What exactly about that car from the 40s are you looking for? Low horse power and torque, or crappy gas mileage, or terrible emissions? I guarantee you can get a car upto emission standards, fully carborated (so you can work on it yourself), with better gas mileage and higher horse power and torque. And all of that for a lower % of income than for a similar used car in the 40s.

The only thing the government is telling you not to do is (1) don't piss away gasoline just for the hell of it and (2) don't dump a bunch of crap in the air just for the hell of it.

Why should the government be able to tell me what to do just because it affects other people?

You answered your own question. That's the definition of being a member of a society. You don't get to do every crazy stupid thing you feel like at the moment because it may f&#! someone else over. In societies with governments, it is the principle job of that government to keep internal and external forces from screwing over the citizenry.


So polluting the air with noise is worse than polluting the air with pollution?


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
So polluting the air with noise is worse than polluting the air with pollution?

I'm not sure what's got you wound up now. If you just came out and said why you were cranky we might be able to get somewhere. If you are talking about catalytic converters then I will say that regulation doesn't exist in a vacuum but alongside emission standards as well.

451 to 500 of 570 << first < prev | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Republicans crush payrise All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.