It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
All we need to do is stop EVERYTHING. If we just all stopped with the cars, and the electricity, etc. for just a week, or a month, the whole state of affairs would come tumbling down around us and those execs and oil tycoons would be BEGGING for us to get back in our cars and drive around and eat their fast food.
Originally posted by Regenmacher
Well if it's any consolation, they will propbably die younger by sucking up all the exhaust fumes in line and eating that nutritionally challenged fastfood.
Net effect will be they won't be around as long to use up energy.
Originally posted by sardion2000
Did you consider the amount of energy it takes to keep these fat asses alive? All that medical equipment needs power and money to operate, and I think if it was totalled up completely, 10 or 20 less years of life doesn't make much of a difference.
Originally posted by WyrdeOne
If I'm not mistaken, cars burn more fuel on startup than they do idleing for hours. I used to drive cross country frequently, and on those occasions where I had to take a rest at a highway stop, it made more sense, gas-wise, to idle the car for a couple hours than to turn it off and back on again.
If I understand the process correctly, an idle engine burns only a miniscule amount of fuel, whereas startup floods the engine and burns a great quantity, all at once and inefficiently, to start the cylinders pumping.
I might be wrong, as I have only a cursory knowledge of automotive engines, but my understanding is that it's better to idle for short periods of time rather than turn off the engine and restart it.
[edit on 11-9-2005 by WyrdeOne]
That's a good argument for non-government funded medical care then.