Well, looks like I have no choice but to become rich and build myself a solar powered house

[edit on 9-4-2005 by Cutwolf]

LOL!

Maybe it is because I am from Alabama and have been wearing shoes for only about the last ten years of my 41 year existence (Not true, but I like misleading my yankee friends), but I am not that concerned about personal survival. I'm in a rural part of the country with natural resources, and while some might think of stocking up on that which won't be available or affordable, might forst thought is buying even more ammunition. Not only is it handy in food-gathering and in the protection of the family, it is also a good item with which to barter. When the economy goes to Hades in a handbasket, the dollar might not help you very much.

must be nice to be rich enough to be able to have your own means to generate power. thus able to ignore the riseing cost of energy. as they say "the rich get richer, the poor get poorer. just another way in which it is true.

this being said how can you expect someone to work towards a means of cutting prices and expand supply when it will have apsolutely no effect on how he lives? you can't, as he will not be affected one way or the other, except of course to perhaps proffit off of higher prices ie: higher profits.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Sounds as if George Bush understands oil, if he is a bit slow on some other things. Maybe that is why he owns a house that is energy self-sufficient in that it uses solar and wind-produced power.

I have no doubt at all that the current players at the top of the US government have been well aware of this problem for some time.

I've heard about both George Bush and Dick Cheney having off-grid, self-sufficient estates a few times. Does anybody have any links or info on this?

I'm curious as to why this is not better known. This fact alone is enough to raise eyebrows and make you wonder.

So this administration stacked with oil executives are really tree-hugging environmentalist? ... or are they simply survivalists?
.


[edit on 4/9/2005 by Gools]

Yeah I knew about Georgie boys ranch being self-sufficient and you can bet your ass its not because he's strapped for cash and cant pay his leckie bill. I didnt know that Cheney had one too, now thats starting to get scary.

When the cost of oil reaches $100 a barrel they arent going to bat an eyelid. They are in the supply business and they have little demand for it, but considering their income is generated by said $100/barrel you can see they can afford it.

It seems though that China is coping blame for this though. The fact is that if the USA didnt exist we'd have dirt cheap commodity prices as America is a vast consumer of all raw material. Do we begrudge America's use of these material? No we dont, its pure economics.

I think the fact that Bush is trying to grow connections in the publics mind between higher prices and Chinese consumption as laying the ground for a possible economic/military war for resources.

From Life After The Oil Crash:

If the actions - rather than the words - of the oil business's major
players provide the best gauge of how they see the future, then ponder
the following. Crude oil prices have doubled since 2001, but oil
companies have increased their budgets for exploring new oil fields by
only a small fraction. Likewise, U.S. refineries are working close to
capacity, yet no new refinery has been constructed since 1976. And oil
tankers are fully booked, but outdated ships are being decommissioned
faster than new ones are being built.

That is the definitive paragraph that should quell any ideas that Peak Oil is a lie.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
"In terms of world supply, I think if you look at all the statistics, demand is outpacing supply, and supplies are getting tight. And that's why you're seeing the price reflected."
[edit on 9-4-2005 by Thomas Crowne]

That's what you call a white lie. He is not directly lieing, as demand is outpaciing supply, a hundred years out, but he is of course lieing to the public to make us feel there is a reason for high gas prices besides Venezuela and OPEC.

The Bush administration knows exactly why oil prices are so high - they certainly created the hike. Anything on oil stemming from the white house will be fabricated distractions of the real issue - OPEC and Venezuela cutting production due to Iraq and failed coup attempts, and I quote, "And that's why you're seeing the price reflected." When a president makes a decison that he can lie to the American people over and over again and manipulate the truth then that president no longer deserves the honor of being commander in chief. In fact the office of president is supposed to be built on integrity, honesty, truth, justice, the American way - not the corporations way.

That's what you call a white lie. He is not directly lieing, as demand is outpaciing supply, a hundred years out, but he is of course lieing to the public to make us feel there is a reason for high gas prices besides Venezuela and OPEC.

Can you back this up with evidence? Not that I'm doubting you, but I just like to have as much verifiable information as I can.

There is evidence posted under Oil and the lack of knowledge. It's a recent post today. Also evidence is easily available to anyone who is interested to look. You could start with the department of energy. However, if you don't know much about oil commodities you will have to take the time to find out.

Originally posted by vincere7
There is evidence posted under Oil and the lack of knowledge. It's a recent post today. Also evidence is easily available to anyone who is interested to look. You could start with the department of energy. However, if you don't know much about oil commodities you will have to take the time to find out.

I'll do that. Thanks

Just didn't want to go repeating stuff I hear only to find out what I'm repeating has no foundation. I've had that happen before

Unfortunately learning how things operate such as a V8 motor or economics can hardly happen overnight. Nor can the understanding of DoD contract purchasing or policy within the White House unless you spend years studying or being actively involved in such.

You find on forums that you have people giving an opinion and those giving education. In light of there not being an actual physical meeting, or credentials, it's easy to form opinion's or answer responses with contempt for information. All you can do is get some knowledge out there and if someone benefits, or light is shed on the subject to where another is no longer ignorant of such then great.

I think it would be foolhardly to sit idly by and let responses of ignorance fly back and forth without delegating some understanding on a matter where it is obvious there is a lack of understanding. Just as if you had four guys working on a motor trying to align the crankshaft - if you see something wrong you point it out if you have knowledge on the subject.