Oil Speculation

[Galen Sevinne]

And here it is. While each previous generation of Americans wanted their children to increase the standard of living, liberals want us all to scale back to minimalism.

Scaling back isn't really a point of "liberalism". Is really more about being comfortable enough with the merits of self that one doesn't have to rely on objects and items to feel good. It's a noble path not a political statement.

They don't say it out-right, but read the take. Smaller cars, smaller houses, less energy, just do with less.

I'll say it outright and feel free to quote me, I will even put the quotes in for you:

"G7 believes in the merits of living with smaller cars, smaller houses, less energy, just do with less".

WHY? We don't have to. We have enough energy in our own resources to keep us going for decades and decades.

I want my children to have more than I have. Not less.

I want my children to "have more than me" too so philosophically we are similar, I just think our values are different.

I want my kids to have more days outside without Code Red warnings because of poor air quality,

I want my kids to have more crabs to eat out of the bay because the quality of the water is cleaner and better,

I want my kids to have more days hiking in the Blue Ridge mountains where they can actually see down into the Shenandoah Valley because the smog isn't there anymore,

I want my kids to have more sense of self so that they don't feel bad because when their friend Johnny has a more expensive pair of shoes and when my kids are older, they continue to feel strongly enough in themselves that they don't need big trucks, big boats and big houses to feel successful or happy,

I want my kids to seek more into themselves for who and what they will become and have more gut-level experiences that enlighten them to truths in the world and not get hung up on material illusions that are never really attainable.

This isn't about politics Greg, its about compassionate living and seeking a higher spiritual sense of self.

[HoustonRaven]

This isn't about politics Greg, its about compassionate living and seeking a higher spiritual sense of self.

... or in other words "I am better then you and you should live the live I want you to live".

Please. Dems go on and on about choice. Besides extolling the virtues of killing babies, choice seems to be very limited on the left.

If you choose to not live in a big house or drive an SUV, fine. But keep your hands out of my pocket. I CHOOSE to live my life the way I see fit, not the way you'd like it to be.

THAT's liberty. THATS real choice.

[Galen Sevinne]

So

"This isn't about politics Greg, its about compassionate living and seeking a higher spiritual sense of self."

is interpreted as:

... or in other words "I am better then you and you should live the live I want you to live".

If that is truly your projection, you are very insecure HR. I expressed to Greg that we are similar in wanting more for our kids, we just value differently in how we do it.

Please. Dems go on and on about choice. Besides extolling the virtues of killing babies, choice seems to be very limited on the left.

You are truly unable to discuss topics on this or any thread. The only thing you do is look for ways to try to put down what in your mind is left or liberal. If you want to know the truth, I actually voted for Bush Sr. in my first election. Clinton changed my views, Bush Jr. and the mess of neocons have only cemented the idea with me that my views are really too progressive to fit in with current conservative ideology.

But truly, my views aren't so liberal as they are compassionate towards those who also demonstrate equal compassion as well as insight. Yes, I have admitted an intolerance to types who think wasting resources and over-consuming is their choice or even better their "liberty". That's fucking brilliant. Again, I just imagine you taking that approach into some of the countries I have traveled and well, I hope they think you are Canadian.

If you choose to not live in a big house or drive an SUV, fine. But keep your hands out of my pocket. I CHOOSE to live my life the way I see fit, not the way you'd like it to be.

THAT's liberty. THATS real choice.

THAT"S really just outright paranoia. Who has their hands in your pockets??? And I tell you how to live because I express my belief in conservation and intrinsic human development vs. extrinsic??? Come again???

This is a forum to post opinions...if you can't get beyond the belief that someone's opinion is really a clandestine attempt to tell you how to live your life, maybe you need to not spend much time here....I would think it would be difficult.

You need to slow down a little here big boy and read a little more carefully. Get involved in the debates and stop trying to "out-coulter", coulter. Try to add something useful and just don't look for any and every opportunity to jump on the left.

[HoustonRaven]

[QUOTE=Galen Sevinne;86578]If that is truly your projection, you are very insecure HR. I expressed to Greg that we are similar in wanting more for our kids, we just value differently in how we do it.

Nope.

You are truly unable to discuss topics on this or any thread. The only thing you do is look for ways to try to put down what in your mind is left or liberal. If you want to know the truth, I actually voted for Bush Sr. in my first election. Clinton changed my views, Bush Jr. and the mess of neocons have only cemented the idea with me that my views are really too progressive to fit in with current conservative ideology.

OK. And I voted for Clinton, even working on his campaign. I even have a signed letter from him he sent me while I was in Basic Traning. What does who we voted for have to do with your accusations that I am "truly unable to discuss topics"?

But truly, my views aren't so liberal as they are compassionate towards those who also demonstrate equal compassion as well as insight. Yes, I have admitted an intolerance to types who think wasting resources and over-consuming is their choice or even better their "liberty". That's fucking brilliant. Again, I just imagine you taking that approach into some of the countries I have traveled and well, I hope they think you are Canadian.

I guarantee 100% that I have traveled the world as much, if not more, then yourself. And I am just as opinionated there as I am here. Your backhanded slap not withstanding, I do just fine and am confident people come away from my debates with a better understanding of what an American conservative is besides what they see on the BBC, SKY or some European state-run mag.

THAT"S really just outright paranoia. Who has their hands in your pockets??? And I tell you how to live because I express my belief in conservation and intrinsic human development vs. extrinsic??? Come again???

Oh really? Count the ways the gubmint intrudes in your life in one day then get back to me. You side supports a whole host of programs, hand outs, environmental programs, crime prevention measures, etc that either take more tax money, take the choice from me on how to better protect the ones I love and care about and in general intrude into my home. My W2 takes exception to your paranoia comment. Remember your history of Rome? Liberty isnt wiped away all at once.

This is a forum to post opinions...if you can't get beyond the belief that someone's opinion is really a clandestine attempt to tell you how to live your life, maybe you need to not spend much time here....I would think it would be difficult.

Funny. I go back and read my posts and see nothing but opinon -- from me and a bunch of others. And it's most certainly not clandestine. It's there for all to see -- it's called the Democrat voting record on things like taxes, abortion, gun control, property rights, etc. And did you happen to notice you are again, in that sentence, telling me how to live my life? ;)

You need to slow down a little here big boy and read a little more carefully. Get involved in the debates and stop trying to "out-coulter", coulter. Try to add something useful and just don't look for any and every opportunity to jump on the left.

Third time telling me how to live my life. No thanks. I had 10+ years of being part of the side that tels people what to do. I like to make my own mind up.

And thanks for the compliment about Ann. That's an honor you'd even mention us in the same sentence. :-D

[Galen Sevinne]

I guarantee 100% that I have traveled the world as much, if not more, then yourself. And I am just as opinionated there as I am here. Your backhanded slap not withstanding, I do just fine and am confident people come away from my debates with a better understanding of what an American conservative is besides what they see on the BBC, SKY or some European state-run mag.

How can you make that guarantee? You know nothing about me...what I do...where I have lived. This is what I am alluding to, the way you make statements like that with absolutely no grounds. What if I have taught english in South America for 7 years, in Asian countries for 4, central american countries for 1. What if spent 2 years in undergrad at the Univ. of London and spent every break I had on the eurail? What if my parents sent me to Italy and Greece for high school? What if i visited my wife in Africa while she studied the democratization of Ghana on a Fulbright Scholarship for 6 months??? Would you want to debate on who has seen more shit in this world?

And did you happen to notice you are again, in that sentence, telling me how to live my life? ;)

telling to read the posts more carefully and stay germane to the topic is not telling you how to live your life...its asking for some forum etiquette. Its like if we were playing golf and you kept stepping in my line and I told you to cut it out. You'd go hysterical that I was telling you how to live your life. Etiquette is a good thing not a left wing conspiracy.

And thanks for the compliment about Ann. That's an honor you'd even mention us in the same sentence. :-D

No problem the comparison brings me a moment of joy as well.

[Greg]

I want my children to "have more than me" too so philosophically we are similar, I just think our values are different.

Immaterial, you have no right to push your values down my throat than I do mine, like my faith in God, down you throat.

I want my children to "have more than me" too so philosophically we are similar, I just think our values are different.

I want my kids to have more days outside without Code Red warnings because of poor air quality,

I want my kids to have more crabs to eat out of the bay because the quality of the water is cleaner and better,

I want all of that too, it just isn't necessary for us to stop driving bigger vehicles to meet those goals. If you want a clean environment the best thing is a healthy, mature and booming economy. The cleanest environments in the world (inhabited) are those in the western nations with healthy economies.

This isn't about politics Greg, its about compassionate living and seeking a higher spiritual sense of self.

Then seek it. My kids are being raised to care for others and protect the evironment by seeking a personal relationship with God. The only difference is I am not trying to force you into a lifestyle that fits my beliefs.

Who has their hands in your pockets??? And I tell you how to live because I express my belief in conservation and intrinsic human development vs. extrinsic??? Come again???

When you and/or those you vote for tax us to fulfill your belief system, you have your hands in our pockets. When you regulate us and legislate us into behaving as you or those you elect see fit you are telling us how to live. Yes, indeed.

Listen, I am not a greedy capitalist who spends his days chasing dollars to buy more stuff and burn more energy. But the fact is if we pursue the agenda of Al Gore our economy will be crushed. If we don't start drilling our own oil and using our own resources like coal and start building nuclear plants we are destined to have our economy beat down.

That means we will have less money to send overseas to feed the poor in the Dominican Republic or fight AIDS in Africa. We will have less ability to grow the excess food we do now, much of which is wasted as ethanol.

Our strong economy allows us to develop green technologies and alternative fuels, but rushing into those fuels would be a disaster. In the meantime, we have the resources to power ourselves for several decades. We just need the federal government to get the f--- out of the way.

[HoustonRaven]

We just need the federal government to get the f--- out of the way.

:word

Could not have put that any better. Kudos.

[Galen Sevinne]

:word

Could not have put that any better. Kudos.

yeah that worked well with the mortgage industry. Yeah, we need more of that.

It's really an easy argument to just say get the government out of my way. Really, do you think I like all of the restriction place on my business and how I do things? No, but do I understand leaving my industry unrestricted would lead to a boatload of abuse? Yeah so I deal with it..work within the boundaries just fine and enjoy the freedoms that are inherent in working for myself albeit with a shitload of oversight.

Because I politically, environmentally and socially do not believe in turning these oil fields over to private oil companies does not mean I don't love liberty and freedom and all that stuff. There are some things that need to be restricted and if you don't believe that then again, make me a case that Phil Gramm and the "get out of the way" approach he took hasn't really...really fucked things?

Yeah I know, the come back will be that it's not the governments responsibility to baby sit the mortgage industry and people buying houses and what happens to those loans as they work themselves to Wall Street so therefore Phil Gramm did nothing wrong but really?

Maybe Greg and Hr and myself can claim fiscal responsibility and should be able to have choices when it comes to loans so the unrestricted market would be good for us. I sit with my avg. credit score at about 780 and maybe you guys are even higher...I would hope so with all the big cars and big houses you guys want.

The truth is though that there are a lot of really uneducated people out there that got really duped and guess who will pay for their mistakes? So the end result is that by taking restrictions off the whole mortgage - subprime - swap market, you (greg) you (HR) and (G7) are going to watch the government sink their hands into our pockets and take a couple bucks.

This was initiated by a republican looking to loosen restrictions and now the bail-out, when necessary, will be initiated by a republican in the form of tax dollars. The only other solution would be to just let the people who failed to understand subprime loans lose their homes and say, "hey tough luck - should have read the contract" Well that would cause even more problems.

By saying...get the government out of the way of oil, you are putting all the decisions into the hands of the oil companies who have just one motive in mind. I really don't trust big oil so I would want someone who I entrust to have a greater understanding than me to place restrictions on oil companies that would create utilitarian results for all. That is what governmental oversight is really all about. Who do you trust more here Exxon or Congress? That is really what is at the heart of this debate more than just a simple "get the government out of the way". I don't need to say who i trust more and probably don't need to ask for whom you trust more. That is the difference though in this debate.

Finally in defense of foreclosure phil, I will spread the blame for the mortgage meltdown on individual greed and the disease of needing bigger and more. For that is really what drove people to purchase homes for more than they could afford. I know it is your liberty to buy more and big and if you are fiscally responsible when doing it...fine. The truth is there are 100,000's of people who obviously were not. Good old American greed is really why, in this case, the Republicans are in your pockets.

[HoustonRaven]

I have put a deposit down on a 2009 Jetti TDI "clean diesel". These cars are consistently getting in the mid 40's for mpg. Yes, there is a premium on diesel fuel at the moment but it is still at 23k the best car out there as far as mileage without paying a hybrid premium and has the cleanest emissions available.

Good choice.

I had a 2000 Jetta TDI and got around 45 to 50 MPG's. Dont be fooled though. The TDI engine has not changed since in the last 10+ years. That "clean diesel" moniker is marketing and nothing more.

Here is a good site for you: www.tdiclub.com

[HoustonRaven]

G7,

It's increased restrictions that Greg and I oppose. Of course we see the need for limited government restrictions -- but the key word if limited. And, why does it always have to be the Federal Gubmint? Gubmint has been overreaching for 150+ years and the larger picture is we're becomming more and more dependant on a federla system that is both inept and not built for such expansion.

Speaking of the mortgage mess, if someoner who goes out and gets an Adjustable Rate Mortgage and low and behold the rate adjusts, that's somehow my problem now?

I mean Hello?!?!? The word is right there for all to see -- adjustable!

I agree that some people out there bought too much house. I bought my house on Bank Street back in 2000, right when this housing boom started. I was offered an ARM and declined, simply by putting two and two together. It meant ahigher payment per month but I knew enough about simple economics to see that if the word "adjustable" was there, it could easily go up at anytime. It is not the Gubmints job to bail out people because of stupidity, as you put it.

If there was some shadyness going on (like in the savings and loan mess back in the 80's), then I guess a limited bail out is in order so the entire economy doesnt go in the tubes. But all I am seeing are dumb people making bad business decisions. I have no love (or money) to give these folks.

[Greg]

yeah that worked well with the mortgage industry. Yeah, we need more of that.

Are you familiar with the community reinvestment act of 1977, IIRC? Are you familiar with the pressure from politicians to make mortgage loans to those underpriveleged citizens? And finally, it was the loose money supply from the Fed that allowed the lending to go on. They could have tightened supply via reserve requirements and stopped it at any time.

If you think the federal government had nothing to do with the mortgage problems you are way off. Banks by nature would not have been making those loans without the above mentioned issues and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pumping boat loads of cash as well.

This was initiated by a republican looking to loosen restrictions . . .

Oh bullcrap. The Republicans didn't make banks lend to unqualified borrowers. It was loosened restrictions, banks won't make those loans with THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES CREATED BY DEMOCRATS providing the grist.

[HoustonRaven]

Good point Greg.

The Dem controlled congress in the 90's pushed for lenders to loosen their restrictions and lend more money to disadvantaged people and now its the GOP's fault for "predatory lending" practices.