RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us

RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

celticlord2112 -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 5:58:57 AM)
quote: Who do you think fights the hardest when the subject of ethanol is brought to a vote in many states? Exxon and their competitors. Which would explain why they win. However, their power to influence legislation and market activities comes directly from the dollars we fork over at the pump. Cut off the flow of dollars and that power weakens. If consumers do not like the way Exxon does business, boycott them. Buy gas elsewhere (or not at all, to the extent possible). Persuade friends and neighbors to do likewise. Look for and exploit options to avoid buying gas--or otherwise consuming energy. Force energy consumption as low as you can. Suppliers can't sell if buyers don't buy, and no sales means no profits mean no power to the suppliers. We should fret less about Exxon's power in the marketplace and do more to cultivate our own power in that same marketplace.

Irishknight -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 6:03:45 AM)
Wow. I lived in Iowa and I saw corn rotting in large piles because they couldn't sell it. Other years, I saw farmers who were paid to NOT plant there fields by the federal government. The biofuels companies began to buy corn that would have been rotting in place anyway. Biofuel is not making people starve. NOT planting is making people starve. Stop subsidizing farmers to not work and let them have faire access to these supposedly open world markets and more people will find food in their bellies. Blaming biofuel is just another attempt to discredit the whole industry by big oil. Honestly, we have the capacity to grow enough food to feed the frakkin world. We just don't.

pahunkboy -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 6:29:46 AM)
---the thing is heat and electric ARE oil- that is to say energy. your computer is using energy. Im getting good at riding my mountain bike. I use it for some errands and crime watch "patrol".

Sanity -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 6:32:40 AM)
You honestly believe that the headlines screaming every day about people the world over starving due in large part to biofuels demands is a trick by big oil? What did you think of the link I posted. There are articles like that every day, food riots in Mexico and riots in all kinds of far away places due to food shortages. Piles of corn rotting in silos is in the past, that shit is gold now. And Bush just vetoed the last farm bill because it was throwing money away and it was overridden, if I understand it correctly. If Congress is really paying farmers to not plant then they're completely mad. But I wouldn't doubt it, they won't let anyone open any new oil wells. They seem to enjoy it when people suffer, for whatever reason. Probably because it's more green... quote: ORIGINAL: Irishknight Wow. I lived in Iowa and I saw corn rotting in large piles because they couldn't sell it. Other years, I saw farmers who were paid to NOT plant there fields by the federal government. The biofuels companies began to buy corn that would have been rotting in place anyway. Biofuel is not making people starve. NOT planting is making people starve. Stop subsidizing farmers to not work and let them have faire access to these supposedly open world markets and more people will find food in their bellies. Blaming biofuel is just another attempt to discredit the whole industry by big oil. Honestly, we have the capacity to grow enough food to feed the frakkin world. We just don't.

pahunkboy -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 6:39:53 AM)
Sanity, congress; more specifically "we" pay farmers not to plant certain crops. This has occurred even in the 70s. Dave Letterman gets cash. Some mini estates are marketed with this "feature", Check it out.

Sanity -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 6:49:37 AM)
Every Congress has to renew the farm bill - and it's subject to change, every time. Who controls Congress currently? quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy Sanity, congress; more specifically "we" pay farmers not to plant certain crops. This has occurred even in the 70s. Dave Letterman gets cash. Some mini estates are marketed with this "feature", Check it out.

Irishknight -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 6:58:37 AM)
You miss the point. Its not the biofuels causing people to starve. Its NOT GROWING THE FOOD. As for the link you posted, it was tripe sponsored by the oil companies to try to destroy an industry that was cutting into their profits. Ask yourself a few simple questions. Were people starving before the biofuels industry? Were they starving when corn was rotting on the ground? Did unused food somehow feed people by its mere existence? Its conspiracy theory style nonsense. The food was not getting to people before. Why do you suddenly think that it would if the biofuel industry stopped all work today?

popeye1250 -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 7:17:35 AM)
Something everyone can do with these high prices is to just fill your tank halfway. That way you're not "storing" gasoline for the oil companies and it's about 100 lbs less weight in your vehicle to be carrying around.

Sanity -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 7:18:32 AM)
So that news article is a lie, and the UN's FAO food agency and Reuters are really in bed with Big Oil, working to keep biofuels down... [sm=abducted.gif] Sorry, but that's just rubbish. Read up, inform yourself. Biofuels are huge on the world stage, and they're only getting bigger - the perspective you're arguing from in this regard seems to be from the 1970's because it's completely detached from today's reality. Congress may still be paying farmers to not grow food but if that is the case, again, that's insane - practically manslaughter. Poor children the world over are really getting hungrier, this thing is headed in the wrong directioon and biofuels are playing a huge part in this travesty. Bush is a bastard for continuing to pushing biofuels, but everyone's doing it because it's "green". The PC crowd, you know? Big oil sells all the oil they want, they have no need to keep biofuels down. Really, you couldn't be more wrong on this issue.

Irishknight -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 7:24:27 AM)
When we are growing to our full capacity and only then can the argument be made that biofuels ar hurting the world food supply. Since we are not, you are arguing HALF of the problem. I have read. i have also watched what is really happening. When fields go unplanted that could grow food to feed these people, it is the fault of those who didn't plant or who encouraged them to not plant. Get Congress to stop paying people to not work and then we can have an actual evaluation of this problem. And the UN has been in bed with just about everyone. They are the dirtiest organization on this planet.

Sanity -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 7:32:25 AM)
Have you seen commodities prices lately? If Congress still pays farmers to let their cropland sit idle they'd have to pay an awful lot to beat what those farmers could be making in exchange for feeding people. If what you're saying is correct and Congress really is paying farmers to not work these days, we're in full agreement - that's totally senseless. quote: ORIGINAL: Irishknight When we are growing to our full capacity and only then can the argument be made that biofuels ar hurting the world food supply. Since we are not, you are arguing HALF of the problem. I have read. i have also watched what is really happening. When fields go unplanted that could grow food to feed these people, it is the fault of those who didn't plant or who encouraged them to not plant. Get Congress to stop paying people to not work and then we can have an actual evaluation of this problem. And the UN has been in bed with just about everyone. They are the dirtiest organization on this planet.

Sanity -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 8:09:42 AM)
What about Reuters though. They're ultra Liberal, they're not in bed with those evil, stinking, rotten, horrible uncaring, sociopathic capitalists... quote: And the UN has been in bed with just about everyone. They are the dirtiest organization on this planet.

DesertRat -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 8:26:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity So that news article is a lie, and the UN's FAO food agency and Reuters are really in bed with Big Oil, working to keep biofuels down... ...Read up, inform yourself. Biofuels are huge on the world stage, and they're only getting bigger - the perspective you're arguing from in this regard seems to be from the 1970's because it's completely detached from today's reality. Big oil sells all the oil they want, they have no need to keep biofuels down. Really, you couldn't be more wrong on this issue. I don't know how often you and I agree but you are right on this topic. People mention the 70s and 80s like they were yesterday. It's a whole new scene now and people need to do some reading to grasp what is going on. The push for biofuels is not just an American phenomenon. In fact, the mandates and incentives are even greater in Europe, Brazil, etc. Here's a scenario to consider. This is actually happening. I'm a farm operator. "Hmm" I say, "I could plant green beans and peas like I have been, but corn is through the roof and still going, so I think I'll plant more corn instead." "But," you say, "we need green beans and peas to EAT! Carrots, too. And some spuds." I say, "Well, sure, but I can make lots more money growing corn...tell you what: I'll keep growing green beans, peas, and, okay, carrots and potatos, too, but I'll need to raise the prices of those things quite a bit to compensate myself for not growing corn." This is actually happening right now. And...PC has nothing to do with it. In fact, being non-PC is now the new PC. I know...it took awhile for bell bottoms and big collars to go away, too. It's hard to keep up sometimes. Bob

Irishknight -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 8:34:53 AM)
For the record, I didn't live in Iowa in the 70s or 80s. I'm talking about 2005 and 2006. I didn't stay around for the end of the 2007 harvest season to see what was happening. Also, I'm not talking about silos filled with corn. the shit was piled on the ground. Nobody could ever explain to me why but thats where they had it. Some of it had been rotting there for over a year and was probably not good for anything BUT fuel. Has anyone looked into the fact that ADM is starting to use sawdust and other nonedibles and that they say the processes work even better on those and that it is actually cheaper to process than corn and grain? Have you been too busy bashing ADM to chek that out?

meatcleaver -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 8:36:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesertRat quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity So that news article is a lie, and the UN's FAO food agency and Reuters are really in bed with Big Oil, working to keep biofuels down... ...Read up, inform yourself. Biofuels are huge on the world stage, and they're only getting bigger - the perspective you're arguing from in this regard seems to be from the 1970's because it's completely detached from today's reality. Big oil sells all the oil they want, they have no need to keep biofuels down. Really, you couldn't be more wrong on this issue. I don't know how often you and I agree but you are right on this topic. People mention the 70s and 80s like they were yesterday. It's a whole new scene now and people need to do some reading to grasp what is going on. The push for biofuels is not just an American phenomenon. In fact, the mandates and incentives are even greater in Europe, Brazil, etc. The EU is stopping its biofuels policy as wrong headed, expensive, enviromentally pointless and a complete waste of land use. Apart from that, biofuels aren't efficient or more green than ordinary fuels when all the carbon is accounted for during its production. If the USA used all its agricultural land to grow crops for biofuels, it could only produce a fraction of its needs.

Alumbrado -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 8:37:13 AM)
I'm never too busy to bash ADM, but I'm not surprised that they would explore ways to increase their profit margin.

MadRabbit -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 8:48:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Irishknight So we shoot all the speculators and gas prices go down? Nah. You just change the rules so anyone who makes an oil purchase on the commodity market has to take delivery of it instantly. Then Jim playing the market off his laptop by his pool next to his manison will be fucked, because where the hell is he going to put 1000 barrels of oil? Only people who will actually use the product would be able to buy it and thus the price returns to supply and demand. Assuming...that I want oil prices to go down...I am all for it in the big picture sense even if it sucks on a personal level. High gas prices at the pump is the only catalyst powerful enough to encourage self centered Americans to change. Edited to Add : In fact, if they went back to 2.50 at the pump, I think gas consumption would get a lot worse. When things get "really bad", then they get "really really bad", then go back to being "really bad", then what was "really bad" isn't really all that bad anymore.

Irishknight -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 9:03:51 AM)
In an effort to be fair, I reread the article. It did make a number of interesting points. 1) in the very last paragraph it says that investors are driving the prices higher. Its only mentioned but since oil speculators have caused oil prices to rise to 3 times what they should be, isn't this exactly the same thing. People are now getting their food prices artificially raised by greed. 2) They claimed figures for grain and corn usage for ethanol production for 2022 that would be unacceptable. Its a nice guess but as I pointed out, the companies stand to make more money by using other things that we don't need for food. 3) The article itself points out that there was a drought in places like Australia that are normally big producers. Unlike our farmers who have been paid to slack off these guys couldn't grow their crops. I guess that means that THERE WAS LITTLE TO NO FOOD GROWN THERE. That might have something to do with the problem as I said earlier. 4) The article goes out of its way to point out how bad the biofuel drive is but merely mentions other contributing factors to price and "shortages." The writer had an agenda other than spreading truth. In essence, its tripe. Half truths and guesses get called lies on here all the time so I guess it fits.

Irishknight -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 9:05:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MadRabbit Nah. You just change the rules so anyone who makes an oil purchase on the commodity market has to take delivery of it instantly. Then Jim playing the market off his laptop by his pool next to his manison will be fucked, because where the hell is he going to put 1000 barrels of oil? Only people who will actually use the product would be able to buy it and thus the price returns to supply and demand. THERE is an idea that makes sense. I like it.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Thomas Friedman: $4 a gallon is good for us (5/29/2008 10:29:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesertRat Here's a scenario to consider. This is actually happening. I'm a farm operator. "Hmm" I say, "I could plant green beans and peas like I have been, but corn is through the roof and still going, so I think I'll plant more corn instead." "But," you say, "we need green beans and peas to EAT! Carrots, too. And some spuds." I say, "Well, sure, but I can make lots more money growing corn...tell you what: I'll keep growing green beans, peas, and, okay, carrots and potatos, too, but I'll need to raise the prices of those things quite a bit to compensate myself for not growing corn." Sounds like the marketplace doing its thing.....

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875