How Much Do You Pay For Petrol/fuel/gasoline

[jeff_archer7]

I am paying $1.16AUD, 0.92USD, 0.48GBP, 0.70EUR for 1Litre (0.26US Gallons, 0.22UK Gallons) of PETROL (Fuel, Gasoline) on average.

It has jumped to this from 0.95AUD, 0.75USD, 0.39GBP, 0.56EUR,

It don't look like its going Down.....

On average I do 120Kilometres (77.67miles) per day

its costing me about $125AUD, 99.09USD, 51.74GBP, 74.94EUR per week......

I am a little ticked off by this....

What are you guys paying
(dont bother to reply if you don't know/drive)



:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

AUD = Australian Dollars
USD = United States Dollars
GBP = British Pound
EUR = Euro

[Jupac]

$2.27 - $2.36

[Daniel T]

Hey, what about Canadian dollars? :mad:

We pay around 0.83CAD/litre.

Edit
Conversions: 1 litres = 0.264172051

Therefor, we pay about $3.14CAD/gallon.

[rhsunderground]

we pay a little under $2.00 USD per gallon

[Jupac]

Originally posted by rhsunderground
we pay a little under $2.00 USD per gallon What? What state in cali its like too much

[jeff_archer7]

Originally posted by Daniel T
Hey, what about Canadian dollars? :mad:

We pay around 0.83CAD/litre.

Edit
Conversions: 1 litres = 0.264172051

Therefor, we pay about $3.14CAD/gallon.

CANADIAN DOLLARS LMAO@U


(dont you mean Francs... LMAO@U FRENCHIE Again)

[Daniel T]

Originally posted by jeff_archer7
dont you mean Francs
No, I mean Canadian dollars, the ones that are worth more than your dollars.

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by Jupac
What? What state in cali its like too much http://www.stark-schaedeli.ch/robert/fahrradtour/images/nebraska.jpg
http://img.groundspeak.com/track/log/6a75e701-b99b-40b3-983f-fa255dbd1f92.jpg
http://www.cycletourist.com/Boulder_to_Minneapolis/Nebraska_State_Line.jpg
http://chambers.pc-arts.com/images/nebraska3.gif

[Jupac]

Its cuz you guys are closer to Iraq.

[smercer]

Originally posted by jeff_archer7
I am paying $1.16AUD, .92USD, .48GBP, .70EUR per litre of PETROL (Fuel, Gasoline) on average.
It has jumped to this from .95AUD, .75USD, .39GBP, .56EUR,
It don't look like its going Down.....
On average I do 120Kilometres (77.67miles) per day so
its costing me about $125AUD, 99.09USD, 51.74GBP, 74.94EUR per week......

I am a little ticked off by this....

What are you guys paying
(dont bother to reply if you don't know/drive)



:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

AUD = Australian Dollars
USD = United States Dollars
GBP = British Pound
EUR = Euro

In Kempsey (South of Coffs Harbour, north of Port Macquarie) its AU$1.02 per litre and up to AU$1.14, Between Brisbane and Sydney, Kempsey is the highest price along the coast because this town is right in the middle of both cities.

$1.16AUD??? Thats a high price for a city such as Melbourne.

have a look at this website: http://www.reclaimaustralia.net/petrol_prices.htm

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by Jupac
Its cuz you guys are closer to Iraq. right...

[jeff_archer7]

SO We are paying 3.68USD Per GALLON.... I'm P1ssed Off

Oh Did I mention the prices was for

premium Unleaded (i.e unleadeead with an octane value of 98)

regular unleaded (octane value 92)

is like 0.12AUD cheaper per litre

[Fang]

SO We are paying 3.68USD Per GALLON.... I'm P1ssed Off
Your pissed off! What about me:
1.33 euro/liter or 6.75 $US/gallon :(

I'm moving to NEBRASKA ...the good life :cool:

[smercer]

Before the war, we were paying 95 cents per litre now its gone up by 10%. (notice this is how much we pay in GST(Goods and Services Tax) on our goods?). The petrol companies blame the government for the price rise(for fuel excice), and the government blames the petrol companies for increasing petrol prices. Our fuel in Australia suffer a 60% tax excise on fuel, because before John Howard brought his GST scam in we were paying .70 to .80 cents per litre on fuel, and then after that it was always above the .90 or higher. the only exception to this is when I visited the Gold Coast and they were enjoying .80 cents per litre during year 2002. not sure what it is like now. Last time I went to Sydney and Central Coast which was last year, the prices were about $$$$1.00 per litre (I did not add extra dollar signs by accident).

[thuko135]

I've seen my gas proces go down over the last couple of years from $1.99 to $1.72 or so. I remember the good old days where the regular here was just $.89, and that was only like '96. (in USD/gal)

[wamboid]

3 weeks ago it was $1.71 per gallon, last week $1.79, yesterday $1.98. Prior to the war we were as low as $1.49 occasionally. It was way lower prior to the first Gulf War. Proof positive that we only went to war for oil, we Americans can't live with just driving cars that use too much gas, we prefer to pay as much as possible for the gas too. lol

[smercer]

Originally posted by wamboid
3 weeks ago it was $1.71 per gallon, last week $1.79, yesterday $1.98. Prior to the war we were as low as $1.49 occasionally. It was way lower prior to the first Gulf War. Proof positive that we only went to war for oil, we Americans can't live with just driving cars that use too much gas, we prefer to pay as much as possible for the gas too. lol

Hold on a moment, I will just recover from the surprise.

What was that??? You admitting that the wars were for oil? In the last political debate you said exactly the opposite that it was all for WMD

Originally posted by wamboid

we Americans can't live with just driving cars that use too much gas, we prefer to pay as much as possible for the gas too. lol
Does that include the price of innocent lives and the lives of the puppets that went to Iraq?

[wamboid]

I thought you were intelligent enough for me not to include <sarcasm></sarcasm> tags. Do you think we are really dumb enough to want to pay higher prices?

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by Fang
I'm moving to NEBRASKA ...the good life :cool: we got another one!


please guys, we don't need any politics. war changes a lot of things, including the economy, so let's leave it at that.

[Fantatier]

lol, your joking right,

in Germany we pay 1,15€/l for unleeded fuel,

thats the reason germans (BMW, Audi, ect) develop good cars that dont eat thousands of littres a mile ;)

[thuko135]

Do you know what that converts to in USD/gal ?

[Fantatier]

Originally posted by thuko135
Do you know what that converts to in USD/gal ?

nope but i know we pay more than you, thats why we dont drive SUVs :p

google:
1 US gallon = 3.7854118 liters
1 US Dollar = 0.749513 €

so we pay ~ 5,8 US$ a Gallon :eek:

so, stop complaining ;)

[Fantatier]

the UK is even more expencive than the netherlands(Fang) and Germany(me)

[PeOfEo]

it cost me $30 usd to fill up my 15 gallon tank, so 2 bucks a gallon. I drive about 50 miles a day and get 23ish miles to the gallon. So I fill up once a week. So I spend 30 a week on gas.

There is the break down of my weekly gas consumption and expences.

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by Fantatier
the UK is even more expencive than the netherlands(Fang) and Germany(me) Yes but all of these countries are small... I could fit some of them in my pocket. You don't even need a car :D

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by thuko135
I've seen my gas proces go down over the last couple of years from $1.99 to $1.72 or so. I remember the good old days where the regular here was just $.89, and that was only like '96. (in USD/gal) Yeah, I remember that too. I just want my gas to go back to the days when it was $1.10 or 1.15. I remember when we could cross the border to georgia (florida has a higher gas tax) and we could fill up at like 60 or 70 cents a gallon!

[jeff_archer7]

Originally posted by PeOfEo
Yeah, I remember that too. I just want my gas to go back to the days when it was $1.10 or 1.15. I remember when we could cross the border to georgia (florida has a higher gas tax) and we could fill up at like 60 or 70 cents a gallon!
Iremember this... i remember that... when i was a boy...
oh wait.... you still are

LOL @ U NICK

[philaweb]

Well, in the good old days (when some of you guys still had diapers on) a gallon of unleaded only costed me around $0.95-$1. That was way back in 1991 during the first Gulf War, when I visited my brother and toured Colorado, Wyoming and South Dakota. The US$ was just as low as it is now, so the vacation was pretty cheap, even though the plane ticket wasn't compared to now.

I really couldn't care less about the price of gas. I'm the owner of a Volkswagen Lupo 3L TDI, which under the right circumstances drives 100 km with only 3 liters of gasoil (diesel). Now, as it's winter with snow and frost it manages 100 km with 3.7 liters of gasoil (diesel), which still is something any other serial produced car isn't capable of.

Let's see, 1 US gallon = 3.7854118 liters, which means I currently use about 1 gallon of gasoil to drive 100 kilometres (about 62.5 miles).
The price of gasoil swings about 10% depending on what part of town I go to and what sort of gas station (serviced or not). The last time I filled up the car with gasoil the price was 6.48 Danish Kroner a liter, which is about US$ 1.17 (€0.87 Euro), which makes it US$ 4.42 (€ 3.29 Euro) a gallon.

As I use about 1 gallon to drive about 62.5 miles at a price of about US$ 4.42 a gallon, I spend US$ 0.07 driving 1 mile. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Only sad thing is, that Volkswagen is discontinuing the production of the Lupo model, as it is to expensive to produce and therefore to sell. Well, I don't mind spending the extra money saving some money in the long haul. My monthly fuel budget is only about $25. :)

[jeff_archer7]

Diesel here is the most expensive...... it would be nice to have a fuel budget of only $25 a month Philaweb.... but some of us need our cars on a daily basis as part of our jobs....... I need another desk job... lol:D

[smercer]

Originally posted by philaweb
Only sad thing is, that Volkswagen is discontinuing the production of the Lupo model, as it is to expensive to produce and therefore to sell. Well, I don't mind spending the extra money saving some money in the long haul. My monthly fuel budget is only about $25. :)

The whole idea is not to provide economical cars that are so cheep to run, because oil companies would be out of business.

Have you ever heard of Hydrogen fuelled cars? they produce water when the hydrogen is burnt, instead of carbon monoxide.

Hydrogen and oxygen can be produced from water using electrolysis. and has been done by connecting the accelerator to the power of the electrolysis container so that the more you put your foot down on the accelerator, the more hydrogen it produces.

This is very safe as only water is stored and the hydrogen is only produced while the engine is running.

[philaweb]

Originally posted by smercer
The whole idea is not to provide economical cars that are so cheep to run, because oil companies would be out of business.
Actually, they wont be out of business. They just have to sell the same volume to more consumers, since the number of gas/gasoil driven cars are increasing. Lowering the consumption per unit enables the expansion of units without harming the environment additionally. And, it's economically and technically feasible.

Originally posted by smercer
Have you ever heard of Hydrogen fuelled cars? they produce water when the hydrogen is burnt, instead of carbon monoxide.
Haven't yet heard of a massproduced car that runs on hydrogen entirely.

BTW... The Volkswagen Lupo 3L TDI is able to run on biofuel as well, which means old grease (the kind used for french fries etc.) from any kitchen could be blended with diesel and poured into the fueltank, ready for consumption. I know that in Germany there are such biofuel stations ready to serve.

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by jeff_archer7
Iremember this... i remember that... when i was a boy...
oh wait.... you still are

LOL @ U NICK ?

You are a decrepit old man... lol @ you jeff.

[Ben Rogers]

@Original post... holy shizz, what's with all the conversions? Are people so lazy you needed to remember all that!? Originally posted by Jupac
Its cuz you guys are closer to Iraq. WTF? Are you on drugs, boy?

[jeff_archer7]

lol

[smercer]

Originally posted by philaweb
Actually, they wont be out of business. They just have to sell the same volume to more consumers, since the number of gas/gasoil driven cars are increasing. Lowering the consumption per unit enables the expansion of units without harming the environment additionally. And, it's economically and technically feasible.

If they had no one buying their fuels because everyone has an alternative to it and cheeper than the oil based crap it would make everyone want to convert and then they would go broke.

However water based cars are not promoted, and people do not know that they could be free from paying the oil companies just to go from A to B.
Originally posted by philaweb

Haven't yet heard of a massproduced car that runs on hydrogen entirely.


You have now:

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/ptech/10/09/fuelcell/
but this is just a experimental car so far.

Originally posted by philaweb

BTW... The Volkswagen Lupo 3L TDI is able to run on biofuel as well, which means old grease (the kind used for french fries etc.) from any kitchen could be blended with diesel and poured into the fueltank, ready for consumption. I know that in Germany there are such biofuel stations ready to serve.
I have heard of even the most ridiculous fuels, eg toilet waste. that would be embarrassing to fill up at a servo in town while on a holiday round Australia.

heres a site I just found that says you can put water in to the fuel along with petrol and you car would still run. Put a rust hole in you gas tank more like it and give you a job cleaning out your carburettor.
http://www.earthisland.org/project/newsPage2.cfm?newsID=617&pageID=177&subSiteID=44

[jeff_archer7]

Meh......


Pointless Propoganda smercer....

I like petrol..... dont like enviro friendly fuel.... I was a Mechanic in a previous time....
Petrol rocks

[smercer]

Originally posted by jeff_archer7
I like petrol..... dont like enviro friendly fuel.... I was a Mechanic in a previous time....
Petrol rocks
While you are complaining about petrol companies making the prices skyrocket, you are saying now that petrol, a resource that is sure to run out within the next ten years, a fuel that has scientists worrying about the hole in the ozone layer, a fuel that creates pollution that makes cities like Hong Kong shrouded in smog, a fuel that makes the air a poison to breathe a "good" fuel to use.

If you had a look at it's chemical makeup, petrol contains hydrogen and small amounts of oxygen, and that is what makes the petrol burn. Its the extras in the petrol that causes the carbon monoxide when petrol is burnt because oil and oil based products contain a lot of carbon.

being a mechanic, would only mean that you were taught petrol and diesel engines, but do not have any idea about alternatives like hydrogen, and the fact that when water is electrolysis produces Hydrogen because you were not taught this.

The engines you are used to would rust away with hydrogen which probably gives you the idea that hydrogen is not appropriate as a fuel.

If you change the engine over to stainless steal for things like pistons and valves etc you have an engine that runs on hydrogen but won't rust away.

Petrol engines are so uneconomical, because they have to put 1 third of the energy you get from petrol into compressing the petrol before ignition.

With Hydrogen you don't need to compress it at all, and that means less refuelling because you don't waste 1 third of the energy from it and therefore more forward motion.

There are setbacks with Hydrogen, because it burns too fast, it burns before the piston completes it's full stroke.

That’s also what makes Hydrogen safe. I have heard a story about someone testing Hydrogen as far as safety goes. They used a gun to shoot a LPG gas tank and the LPG tank blew up and the flames came down the hill that they tested on (anyone underneath the tank would have been killed), when they did the same with a Hydrogen tank there was a small blue flame that came out with the bullet but the rest of the tank had remained intact. the reason for this is that the hydrogen had burnt before it could become a danger to bystanders.

The reason the petrol is so slow with burning is because of the carbon the hydrogen is attached to.

The only reason why Hydrogen is presumed dangerous is because of a blimp that was filled with hydrogen had caught fire and killed everyone underneath the blimp. Now I hope you remember that Hydrogen rises because it is lighter then air, having said that the hydrogen would be burning while it is rising. How is it then that the people underneath the blimp were affected by the blimp?
Reason: the fuels in the blimp is what had killed the people underneath.

[Fantatier]

thx smercer, i couldnt have said it better :)

[PeOfEo]

Nuclear power is safe and clean.... I think we need to quit pissing and moaning about automobiles when coal is what fules our cities when there is a clean, cheap, and safe alternative. Some russians built budget reactors where safty was not the first priority and a core melted through the bottom of one, does that mean it is not safe? No, because we follow standards today.

[smercer]

Originally posted by PeOfEo
Nuclear power is safe and clean....

<sarcasm>yes Neclear power is safe and clean...
(http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/fschernobyl.html)</sarcasm>


Originally posted by PeOfEo

I think we need to quit pissing and moaning about automobiles when coal is what fules our cities when there is a clean, cheap, and safe alternative.


from: http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/pubs_html/rea/feature1.html
Electric power plants that burn fossil fuels emit several pollutants linked to the environmental problems of acid rain, urban ozone, and the possibility of global climate change.

...

Environmental Problems Related to Electric Power Plant Emissions


Electric power plant emissions are factors in three major environmental issues: acid rain, urban air quality, and global climate change. These issues are discussed below.

Acid rain. Acid rain refers to rain, fog, mist, or snow that is more acidic than normal. The acidity of precipitation is stated in terms of its pH level, which describes the concentration of hydrogen ions along a scale (from 0 to 14) that defines the continuum from acid to base. The pH scale is logarithmic; pH levels of 4.0 and 3.0, for example, are 10 and 100 times more acidic, respectively, than a pH level of 5.0. Although a pH level of 7.0 is neutral, unpolluted rainfall is normally slightly acidic (pH=5.6). Acid rain is defined as any precipitation with a pH of 5.5 or less.

Chemical analysis of data collected by means of cloud sampling and experimentation reveals the presence of sulfuric acid and nitric acid in precipitation in the United States (Figure FE2).(13) Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides in the air, partly the result of emissions from electric power plants, gradually react with water vapor and become acids. Precipitation becomes acidic by mixing with these acids. The acidity of the precipitation depends upon the amount of acid in the atmosphere and the amount of water in which it is dissolved. Undissolved acids may also fall to Earth by themselves or in combination with dust particles.

The most severely acidic conditions are found in the eastern United States. EPA believes that acid rain has been the primary cause of the acidification of hundreds of streams in the mid-Atlantic highlands and the New Jersey Pine Barrens and of many lakes in the Adirondack Mountains of New York.(14) The National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP) identified acid rain as one of several possible causes of increased nitrate leaching and acidification of surface waters in several northeastern watersheds. Episodes of acidification are believed to harm populations of fish and invertebrates in small streams and lakes.(15)

Field studies have implicated acid rain in observed damage to high-elevation red spruce forests in the northeastern United States. Nutrient leaching and changes in soil chemistry due to acid deposition have also been detected in forests south of the Great Lakes. In general, NAPAP concluded that acid deposition, among other stressors, threatens the long-term structure, function, and productivity of many sensitive ecosystems.(16)

Some research suggests that emissions of sulfates and other pollutants from the combustion of fossil fuels may be linked to abnormally high mortality rates in humans.(17) Clinical studies have shown lung irritation and impaired lung cleansing in human subjects exposed to acidic aerosols.(18)

Urban ozone. Electric power plants contribute heavily to NOx emissions, which are precursor chemicals that (along with VOCs) react in the atmosphere in the presence of sunlight to form ozone. Strong concentrations of ozone often occur in and downwind of large urban areas.

During cardiovascular exercise, human exposure to ozone at concentrations both above and below the 120-part-per-billion maximum allowed under the NAAQS has been shown to result in transient respiratory problems.(19) Ozone can also seriously irritate the eyes and mucous membranes. The effects of elevated ozone levels are not known for all types of vegetation, but such levels are harmful to many types of trees and crops. High ozone concentrations seem to be more detrimental than low-level extended exposure.(20)

The assessment of the impact of NOx controls on ozone concentrations is complex and must be studied carefully in developing ozone abatement strategies, according to a 1992 report (21) from a National Research Council committee. The committee found that ambient measurements of VOC/NOx ratios--which, as they vary, have different effects on ozone formation--were larger than expected from an assessment of emission inventories. The committee also determined that the effectiveness of efforts to control VOC and NOx emissions depends on ambient VOC/NOx ratios. Generally, at ratios of 10 or less, VOC control is more effective and NOx control may be counterproductive. At ratios greater than 20, NOx control is generally more effective. Hence, if VOC emission inventories have been understated, past ozone control strategies may have been misdirected. Tighter controls on NOx may be more effective in controlling ozone under certain circumstances.

The committee also found that combinations of biogenic VOCs and anthropogenic NOx can significantly affect ozone formation in some urban and rural regions of the United States and concluded, again, that the appropriate strategy may be to monitor and control NOx emissions.

Global climate change. Greenhouse gases are necessary for life on Earth because they keep ambient temperatures well above what they would otherwise be. Many scientists believe that anthropogenic additions (some from electric power plants) to the Earth's natural complement of greenhouse gases are augmenting this greenhouse effect and thus raising global temperatures.



from: Washington State Department of Ecology.
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/eap/pbt/hginenv.html

Mercury waste is found at mines, coal-power plants, refineries, laboratories, garbage incinerators, municipal sewage plants, auto wreckers and repair shops, cement plants and printing industries. Mercury is a naturally occurring constituent of fossil fuels, such as oil or coal.

When released into the environment, mercury can recycle through the air indefinitely or can bind with bacteria in water to create such compounds as methylmercury. When a fish eats organisms containing these bacteria, methylmercury is ingested and builds up in fish tissue. If a person eats a tainted fish, the methylmercury "load" is transferred to the human and lodges in numerous organs and tissues.

Several studies by the Department of Ecology have evaluated the presence of mercury in toxic cleanup sites, urban bays and other water bodies.



Originally posted by PeOfEo

Some russians built budget reactors where safty was not the first priority and a core melted through the bottom of one, does that mean it is not safe? No, because we follow standards today.
Just because you follow standards does not mean that accidents won't happen. not only that, what about storing the waste you get from nuclear reactors?

also your so busy worring about countries like North Korea having nuclear power that they might build a bomb.

[PeOfEo]

uh, wow, smercer, you just like to argue, it does not matter what we are talking about, it seems you will argue about it.

Nuclear plants are extremely safe. Aside from three mile island where people manually over rode the reactor and then their computers would not let them shut it down and people making reacters without safty in mind there have not been any other problems. We moniter our nuclear plants here in the states very carefully and they are very safe.

Also, all of that stuff you linked about pollution is why we should use nuclear power. Nothing burns in a nuclear plant, there is no combustion. The reactor supplies the heat to create the steam to turn the turbines.

Also this nuclear waste thing is a non-issue. I do not want to go into relativity again, but when you are using fission reaction you are turning matter into energy, you are not going to have a lot of waste basically. All you have to do is burry the little bit of waste in a remote area for a long period of time. Also, they are still working on cold fusion (it has been 10 years off since the sixtys though). They are thinking they can use electric feilds to force the fusion (something similar to a particle accelerater maybe), when this happens the emmission will be helium and the input will be water.

We also do not have a problem with countries having nuclear power, we have a problem with countries enriching uranium to be used in weapons or using plutonium.

[smercer]

Originally posted by PeOfEo
uh, wow, smercer, you just like to argue, it does not matter what we are talking about, it seems you will argue about it.

spoken by the person willing to support big business, and to do this, you hide the what really is, and promote crap such as Oil, coal, and Nuclear fision and nuclear waste.

But really why are you not promoting Hydrogen, a free resource that is not controled and cannot be controled by big business and has zero impact on the enviroment and does not have the potental to become the next Chernobyl?

Originally posted by PeOfEo

Nuclear plants are extremely safe. Aside from three mile island where people manually over rode the reactor and then their computers would not let them shut it down and people making reacters without safty in mind there have not been any other problems. We moniter our nuclear plants here in the states very carefully and they are very safe.

<sarcasm>we'll just wait until the first accident happens which would kill many thousands of nearby residents, harm the enviroment such as rivers and streams (our drinking water), create a radioactive area in farms that provide us with food, and make sure our living quarters are filled with radioactive dust that we walk in from outside, fill the air with radioactive particals that could be blown around in the wind. When this all happens we will review our foolishness then.</sarcasm>
Originally posted by PeOfEo

We also do not have a problem with countries having nuclear power

Bush worries about North Korea having Nuclear Power, and claims that they are using it for bombs. any excuse will do

[thuko135]

Nuclear power does not mean nuclear weapons. The US never had a problem with the Ukraine before the chernobyl incident. And I said incident, not catstrophe.

[PeOfEo]

Smercer, read my original post. I was saying we should use nuclear power for our power plants, I said nothing about car power, only that we should not be talking about it when our plants run on coal. It would be much easier to move our power plants to nuclear power than to completely change the fule source for all of our cars. Coal power is dirty and more expensive than nuclear is.

Also: If we use nuclear power in our country today things like Chernobyl are not going to happen. The nuclear plants we have currently operating in our country are a) very well monitered b) very clean and c) saving lots of money. When the soviets built Chernobyl they were in a cold war and concerned with industrialization, rapidly. Which meant powering everything quickly and cheaply. Safety was not their big concern... that is why the core was able to melt through the bottom of their reactor.

ps: Smercer, north korea does have nuclear weapons. Hell, they test them and admit publicly to having them.


one more thing: I promote all business smercer, not just big business. I am a capitalist in favor of a free market

[rhsunderground]

keep the politics to a minimum, please :)

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by rhsunderground
keep the politics to a minimum, please :) This thread was destined to spin into politics from the moment it was created.... You do not need to be some sort of forum psychic to see that ;). It was just of matter of how long it would take!

[Fantatier]

im all with smercer here, nuklear power is BAD,
yea, maybe it is resonaly clean at first but as smercer has allready pointet out, what do you do with all the waste, that has a half life of quite a few years :rolleyes:

if anything we should be investing more into fusionreactor development.

[smercer]

Originally posted by PeOfEo

one more thing: I promote all business smercer, not just big business.
so I figured, you prefer the poor to feed the rich. there is a fine line between doing business to benefit the community, and doing business to benefit yourself regardless of how it effects the local environment, the peoples health, or the peoples wealth.

Originally posted by PeOfEo

I am a capitalist in favor of a free market
going back to this post:



Quote from Dictionary: "The Penguin Modern English Dictionary"
ISBN: 0-86136-651-4

capitalism [kapitaliszm] n possession of capital; economic system based on the private ownership of land or wealth.

capitalist [kapitalist] n one who has accumulated wealth and makes it available for business enterprises.

capitalization [kapitalizayshon] n act of capitalizing; c. issue issue of shares by a company to existing shareholders for which a cash payment is not required.

capitalize [kapitaliz] v/t convert to capital; convert into an equivalent capital sum; make profit out of, turn to account.


Now answer these questions: 1) How often do you hear that a government entity has been privatised? Last one I heard was that The New York Police department has been privatised and is now privately owned.

Why are you in support of your government selling of assets like the New York police Department? Now they are free to charge (if you call on them) you what ever they wish everytime someone commits a crime if they choose to.

and in regards to the free market, this includes tariffs, and what tariffs are (for those that don't know) it is a tax so that countries like brazil do not import their goods and undercut prices and compete and with industries that exist already in the nation. when you remove these tariffs, the industries of your homeland cannot compete and cannot lower their prices because of their running costs and taxes the government imposes on the companies. and because of this the imported materials are bought by more people because it is cheaper. having no one to buy your product the company soon closes, and all employees with the company is out of a job. this is just for one industry and that could mean many companies. the more industries, the more companies that will have to close because of this. and don't forget that some industries like the tourism depend on other industries such as farming etc to feed the tourists.

The chain reaction does not stop there, the dollar value of the nation is affected and prices go up, and a depression for the country happens.

The nation becomes a third world country.


from: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/R?r108:FLD001:S15645

This tariff is a lifeline for Florida's citrus industry and the State's economy because it helps to promote competition--and it enables us to compete in the global marketplace.

It is very clear that any reduction in the tariff would destroy Florida's citrus industry and devastate the State's economy. The citrus industry is the State's second largest, contributing over $9 billion to our economy. And the citrus industry accounts for nearly 90,000 direct and indirect jobs throughout Florida and the country.

A collapse of this industry would not only cost tens of thousands of jobs, it would also cost the State and county governments of Florida up to $1 billion in lost tax revenues.

This would mean less money for other vital public services, such as police and firefighters.



I do not support the Free trade agreement.

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by Fantatier
im all with smercer here, nuklear power is BAD,
yea, maybe it is resonaly clean at first but as smercer has allready pointet out, what do you do with all the waste, that has a half life of quite a few years :rolleyes:

if anything we should be investing more into fusionreactor development. The issue with fusion is that right now we do not have cold fusion (on a large scale)... to have fusion you need fission to start it.

Nuclear waste is not an issue. I have said this several times. The ammount of waste is very little and nuclear reaactors can run for a long time on their fule. The reason why there will always be less waste then the initial input is because pure matter is being turned into pure energy.

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by smercer
so I figured, you prefer the poor to feed the rich. there is a fine line between doing business to benefit the community, and doing business to benefit yourself regardless of how it effects the local environment, the peoples health, or the peoples wealth. No. Obviously you do not know very much about capitalism if you feel that way.

I do not support the Free trade agreement. [/B] No, you support paying an inflated price. Tarrifs are bad, infact all taxes are bad.

Taxes create a dead weight loss. If I were to put a tax on a supply and demand graph the tax would be a triangular area in the middle of the graph, that area is a loss of surplus from both business and the consumer. The less taxes the better.

Tariffs are bad because they keep our industries from being more efficient. If we put a massive tariff on cars, say imports, that is going to shelter our car companies. It is going to allow them to not have to compete.


Also, about the police being privatised. So? They will still get money from the tax payers, the city will hand them the money to uphold the law and that money will come from the tax payers. A lot of things work that way. The government is terribly inefficient, things get clogged up in horrible bureaucracy... profit incentive stream lines a whole lot of things and saves everyone time and money.

[smercer]

Originally posted by PeOfEo
Nuclear waste is not an issue.
...
The reason why there will always be less waste then the initial input is because pure matter is being turned into pure energy.

However, given the long half life of plutonium and the danger of both accidental exposure and theft for bomb-making, extraordinary measures have to be taken to find a place to safely bury the material. The US has been looking for a permanent storage site for years and has still not found one. It needs to not only be nowhere near the water table, but must not be near the water table for hundreds of thousands of years. It also must be geologically stable- no volcanoes or earthquakes that might damage the storage site. The rock has to be very resistant to heat, since the leftover waste will heat the rock walls to about 150C.


Originally posted by PeOfEo


I have said this several times. The ammount of waste is very little and nuclear reaactors can run for a long time on their fule.


Please tell us the emergency procedure on containing the nuclear chain reaction during an earthquake, tidal wave, hurricane, tornado and other acts of god.

even if you do have a system to prevent human error, no matter how good the system is, you would always get a disaster like the Indonesian 2004 tsunami/earthquake that will come along and there is nothing you could do to predict an earthquake, and there is not much you could do to prevent it doing damage to the reaction chamber.

You would not need any emergency procedures for hydrogen.

[smercer]

Originally posted by PeOfEo

No, you support paying an inflated price.

No, I support paying an inflated price on only imported goods so they do not directly compete with the local industries and puting them out of business.

Originally posted by PeOfEo

Tarrifs are bad, infact all taxes are bad.

Taxes create a dead weight loss.

tell me, If you did not pay tax, how do you expect the roads you drive on to be built? How do you expect to have public facilities like public toilets? water supply? etc

We need taxes to help us and to protect the ecconermy, yet too much tax creates a dead loss as you say (now you've got me into discussing tax).

If you have ever heard of the debit tax you would say that it is much better than the system John Howard has implemented, and possibly better than what America has currently.

Heres some details about debit tax:
1) when you withdraw your money from the bank, you are taxed a fixed amount. No rellying on any third parties other than the banks and is all done automaticly and electronicly does not take up peoples time to do their tax.

2) If you have the tax fixed at say 2%, I will do a calculation to show how good and fair it is.

Withdraw $100 = $2 tax

withdraw $1,000,000 (1 million) = $20000 tax


as I have shown, the rich pays their fair share and Multinational companies cannot avoid their tax by sending their money overseas via banking system.

for more info: http://www.rbv.gov.vu/Speeches/benefits%20of%20debit%20tax.pdf

Originally posted by PeOfEo

If I were to put a tax on a supply and demand graph the tax would be a triangular area in the middle of the graph, that area is a loss of surplus from both business and the consumer. The less taxes the better.

Huh??? I am not American and do not have knowledge of the American Tax system if that is what you are talking about. And do not have any idea of what you are talking about

Originally posted by PeOfEo

Tariffs are bad because they keep our industries from being more efficient. If we put a massive tariff on cars, say imports, that is going to shelter our car companies. It is going to allow them to not have to compete.

if industries are flooded with imports that are cheaper then what you can make localy, what do you think the consumer is going to buy, the import or the local made?

places like Brizil do not have employees that have a high pay range and they can make goods that are significanly cheaper then what your local industries could ever do even if they tried.

This is why you need tariffs to bring up the prices of imports so that you protect the industry from the imported goods are competing with.

Originally posted by PeOfEo

Also, about the police being privatised. So? They will still get money from the tax payers, the city will hand them the money to uphold the law and that money will come from the tax payers. A lot of things work that way. The government is terribly inefficient, things get clogged up in horrible bureaucracy... profit incentive stream lines a whole lot of things and saves everyone time and money.

what a load of bull. and what about inefficient businesses that now own places like the NYPD? And what about responce times for the police now they have a business boss who's main concern is the tight budget and has to worry about such costs like insurance (life, property, health, company) for each employee, police car and building owned by the company, petrol costs, office consumables, inmate holding costs etc, (I could go on about this).

And now they are a law onto themselves, how do you know they are not doing what they please now that its been privitised? Yes I know what your going to say "just call in the FBI", that would be like calling the health inspecter, and as soon as he/she arrives, everything is normal while they are around. There is nothing stoping a well planed excuse for any crime they commit.

[theuedimaster]

Anyways, PeofEo, go read Catch-22. Good book, it'll make you laugh - (or scream in outrage).

Anyways, I believe there is a misconception about nuclear power. It has been so dramatized by the media and such because of a few mistakes that everyone thinks it is highly unstable and unable to be controlled without accident. The point it that we have no had enough time to put true backing and money behind it. With the technology we have today, if we, as a whole country, back the research into nuclear technology, then we can have a much cleaner and efficient system. The problem is that everybody is getting scared. We should put research into nuclear technologies, the amount of energy that we get out of it verses cost is an amazing oppurtunity that has been tainted because of problems during its birth.

Anyways, über capitalists are a definite no-no: the cause of the misery of so many others.....

At my school, which is mainly republican mind you, we had a great project where we had to design a utopia in groups of 3 students. Coincidently, even though there were many differences between us (liberals vs. conservatives), we all came out with a communist type of system to rule our imaginary type of world. This was not a fluke, it has happened in all 10 - 12 classes this year. Obviously, this has also happened in the past. Just something to think about...

P.S. PeofEo, before you start ranting like you know the basis of our government, I suggest you go read John Locke's Second Treatise, Of Civil Government. You might learn a thing or two.

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by smercer
However, given the long half life of plutonium and the danger of both accidental exposure and theft for bomb-making, extraordinary measures have to be taken to find a place to safely bury the material. The US has been looking for a permanent storage site for years and has still not found one. It needs to not only be nowhere near the water table, but must not be near the water table for hundreds of thousands of years. It also must be geologically stable- no volcanoes or earthquakes that might damage the storage site. The rock has to be very resistant to heat, since the leftover waste will heat the rock walls to about 150C. our reactors do not use plutonium or weapons grade uranium. Also, we have the facilities to bury the stuff... nevada is a very large very barron state.

Please tell us the emergency procedure on containing the nuclear chain reaction during an earthquake, tidal wave, hurricane, tornado and other acts of god.

even if you do have a system to prevent human error, no matter how good the system is, you would always get a disaster like the Indonesian 2004 tsunami/earthquake that will come along and there is nothing you could do to predict an earthquake, and there is not much you could do to prevent it doing damage to the reaction chamber.

You would not need any emergency procedures for hydrogen. Our reactors are pretty solid, like I said before, these are not the soviet reactors, we build them with safety as priority #1. Plus, like I said, the monitering is pretty darned precise. The reactors will cut off very quickly if anything is not right.

[PeOfEo]

Originally posted by smercer
No, I support paying an inflated price on only imported goods so they do not directly compete with the local industries and puting them out of business. who said they would put the local industry out of business? A tarrif just stifles competition.


tell me, If you did not pay tax, how do you expect the roads you drive on to be built? How do you expect to have public facilities like public toilets? water supply? etc

We need taxes to help us and to protect the ecconermy, yet too much tax creates a dead loss as you say (now you've got me into discussing tax). I am not saying all taxes should be removed, I know this is not possible, the government must run. I am saying we need few taxes and small taxes. We need to keep the taxing to a minimum as it creates a loss of efficiency.


Huh??? I am not American and do not have knowledge of the American Tax system if that is what you are talking about. And do not have any idea of what you are talking about I am talking about any tax... this does not have to do with taxes in just america or just any other place.

On a graph you have a supply curve, and a demand curve. On the top left side of the graph you have the producer surplus under the demand curve, on the bottom left you have the consumer surplus above the supply curve. They make a triangle. If you slap on a tax it will cut into both surpluses, which will hinder trade.


if industries are flooded with imports that are cheaper then what you can make localy, what do you think the consumer is going to buy, the import or the local made?

places like Brizil do not have employees that have a high pay range and they can make goods that are significanly cheaper then what your local industries could ever do even if they tried.

This is why you need tariffs to bring up the prices of imports so that you protect the industry from the imported goods are competing with. More power to brazill. If they can do it for less then we can possibly do it here then let them. We will be able to do something else cheaper then they can. Also, if brazill only pays their workers $.02 an hour then consumers can still refuse to buy their products, it will kill the demand curve for that industry. But like I said, even if it does not then more power to brazill. Labor should be shifted to the more profitable domestic industry.



what a load of bull. and what about inefficient businesses that now own places like the NYPD? And what about responce times for the police now they have a business boss who's main concern is the tight budget and has to worry about such costs like insurance (life, property, health, company) for each employee, police car and building owned by the company, petrol costs, office consumables, inmate holding costs etc, (I could go on about this).

And now they are a law onto themselves, how do you know they are not doing what they please now that its been privitised? Yes I know what your going to say "just call in the FBI", that would be like calling the health inspecter, and as soon as he/she arrives, everything is normal while they are around. There is nothing stoping a well planed excuse for any crime they commit. wow, um, what you said makes no logical sense. There is no 'inefficient business' only inefficient government. In the priavte sector you have a profit incentive, you are going to try to maximise that and remove inefficiencies. Also if the policie is private it will work just like any other service in a city, it will have to perform to secure a contract. If they are not doing their job the company that is incharge of running the police force will loose that contract. If that company is actually owned by the city its board will be whipped out or thirdy party groups can consult to figure out what the problem is (our city owns the electric company, it is an actual corporation that is completely owned by the city, and this is what would happen in this senario). If the company is not owned by the city the city will just remove that company's contract and give it to another company or run the department themselves again.

Originally posted by theuedimaster
P.S. PeofEo, before you start ranting like you know the basis of our government, I suggest you go read John Locke's Second Treatise, Of Civil Government. You might learn a thing or two. I have studied locke before.... I have also studied Adam Smith... I suggest you read The Wealth of Nations and maybe you will see where I am coming from.

[theuedimaster]

I suggest you read The Communist Manifesto and Darkness at Noon to see where I'm coming at. ;)

[theuedimaster]

Taxes are a way of giving power to the government. Since you know government so well PeofEo, the whole concept of government is because people escape the state of nature. They abuse their rights as their own "kings" and intrude upon other people's spaces and/or properties. The people who have been trespassed upon rise up together and give up some of their "kingly" rights in order for the protection from the whole. Taxes are a way of doing this. You are giving away a little of your independence each time you pay taxes, but in return, you are getting protection: whether it be economically, miltarily; or whether it just helps your way of life.

[jeff_archer7]

:mad: :mad: :mad: Ph4rkin hell PEOPLE........ The question was how much do you pay for fuel?

But no you had to go off on your hijacking RAMPAGE of pseudo-political Banter...... PH4RK

Every thread I stard (in Innocence, not being at all politically minded) turns to Sh!t

Yes when I wrote this i was thinking of PeOfEo an Smercer

ARRGGHHHHHH

[Jick]

Hmm... *reaches for close button* :D

[Ben Rogers]

Originally posted by Jick
Hmm... *reaches for close button* :D *slaps Jick's hand* Bad mod! Innocent on-topic debate is good!

[Jick]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
*slaps Jick's hand* Bad mod! Innocent on-topic debate is good!Lol... what...? The close button was calling to me... How can I resist? :p

[smercer]

Originally posted by PeOfEo
our reactors do not use plutonium or weapons grade uranium. Also, we have the facilities to bury the stuff... nevada is a very large very barron state.
[/COLOR]
Even in a desert, you can get rain. Weather patterns change and Deserts are deserts no more.

Also being on near the San Andreas fault line would mean there are many earthquakes and concrete, rock etc would crumble in an earthquake, and then the chamber would not be water tight.




Originally posted by PeOfEo

Our reactors are pretty solid, like I said before, these are not the soviet reactors, we build them with safety as priority #1. Plus, like I said, the monitering is pretty darned precise. The reactors will cut off very quickly if anything is not right.
having the reaction chamber concrete is the best way to contain radiation, but not the best material if you plan on building in earthquake terrority. having said that an earthquake can happen anywhere, in fact I have experianced two here in Australia (no part of Australia is near the fault line), one serious enough to cause enough damage to bring down concrete and brick buildings.

I have done research into how the chain reaction is slowed down (but not stoped), they use boron control rods that are placed in the chamber. the more the rods are in the chamber the more it slows down.
In an earthquake things move around and there is no guarrentee that the rods would remain in place because if you remove the control rods the nuclear chain reaction starts again.


I dont want to discuss Nuclear stuff anymore.

[smercer]

Originally posted by PeOfEo
who said they would put the local industry out of business? A tarrif just stifles competition.

Local competition is good and does bring down prices, international competition is bad because if you lower imported prices too much, you do not keep profits within the country and local companies don't have enough sales to keep them from closing down/going bankrupt. there are a lot of costs that you have to consider to market and sell a product and if these costs are higher then what can be done from a international company.

Originally posted by PeOfEo

I am not saying all taxes should be removed, I know this is not possible, the government must run. I am saying we need few taxes and small taxes. We need to keep the taxing to a minimum as it creates a loss of efficiency.

At least we can agree on something political...
But its what you take away and what to keep is where you are going wrong.

Originally posted by PeOfEo

More power to brazill. If they can do it for less then we can possibly do it here then let them. We will be able to do something else cheaper then they can. Also, if brazill only pays their workers $.02 an hour then consumers can still refuse to buy their products, it will kill the demand curve for that industry. But like I said, even if it does not then more power to brazill. Labor should be shifted to the more profitable domestic industry.

It's not just some things, it's anything they import, as they don't pay their employees like you would in a country like America and Australia.

Originally posted by PeOfEo

wow, um, what you said makes no logical sense. There is no 'inefficient business' only inefficient government. In the priavte sector you have a profit incentive, you are going to try to maximise that and remove inefficiencies. Also if the policie is private it will work just like any other service in a city, it will have to perform to secure a contract. If they are not doing their job the company that is incharge of running the police force will loose that contract. If that company is actually owned by the city its board will be whipped out or thirdy party groups can consult to figure out what the problem is (our city owns the electric company, it is an actual corporation that is completely owned by the city, and this is what would happen in this senario). If the company is not owned by the city the city will just remove that company's contract and give it to another company or run the department themselves again.


Look what happens to a privitised gov company in Australia: http://smh.com.au/news/National/Telstra-privatisation-fears-rise-in-bushs/2005/03/03/1109700576428.html?oneclick=true

Originally posted by PeOfEo

I suggest you read The Wealth of Nations and maybe you will see where I am coming from.

If we all started thinking like you the planet would have the following characteristics:

earth would not be a safe place to live.
we would be in a depression 100% of the time.
Unemployment statistics would be high.
only the rich who profit from a depression would strive.
Drugs would be a common problem (I know your sort, you probably don't believe in harsh punishments)
people would get away with Crimes, and even if they did get caught, they would be back on the streets again the next day(its like this anyway)
It would be a crime to punish your child by smacking for doing something wrong stating that it has a detrimental effect on the child and is domestic violence.
there would be many local factories closed and could not open because of imports being "too competitive"

[smercer]

Originally posted by Jick
Hmm... *reaches for close button* :D
Hmm... *reaches for new thread button* :D

[wamboid]

I'm just curious, what would you think of doing away with income tax totally and having a national sales tax on everything? At first glance, it looks like it would work, but I'm sure it probably wouldn't if looked at more deeply. Any thoughts?

(on topic even, since it would raise gas prices even more)

[smercer]

Originally posted by wamboid
I'm just curious, what would you think of doing away with income tax totally and having a national sales tax on everything? At first glance, it looks like it would work, but I'm sure it probably wouldn't if looked at more deeply. Any thoughts?

(on topic even, since it would raise gas prices even more)
John Howard did that with his Goods and Services Tax(GST) at 10% per item, and every thing did go up, but is not really fair for poor people since the rich are not paying the percentage of their fair share. Example: a person buys a can of peaches at a $1 each (excluding GST), $1.10 (including GST) does not matter if he/she is rich or poor they are both paying the same amount, while the poor are affected by the increase, the rich are not.

another bad thing about it is that small business has to hire accountants to sort out what was sold and how much GST they have to pay, they have to spend a gread deal of time just to work it all out. Its not such a big deal with supermarkets (big business) because of their computers, barcode scanners etc.

[wamboid]

Example: a person buys a can of peaches at a $1 each (excluding GST), $1.10 (including GST) does not matter if he/she is rich or poor they are both paying the same amount, while the poor are affected by the increase, the rich are not.

Where the fairness comes in is that the poor man buys peaches, the rich man buys caviar. The poor man buys 3 room house, the rich man bus mansion, etc.

When installed at 10%, did they do away with other taxes? Also, maybe you didn't have a sales tax at all before, here it wouldn't be any burden on small business because it would just be a higher sales tax rather than really adding any work. It would be more work on the tax agency. Here, all sales tax (city, county, and state) are sent to the same authority, and they sort it out. This would just be another for them to sort.

[wamboid]

Almost forgot to stay on topic: Poor man buys gas for his compact, rich man buys premium gas for his limo, and jet fuel for his private plane.

[smercer]

Originally posted by wamboid
Where the fairness comes in is that the poor man buys peaches, the rich man buys caviar. The poor man buys 3 room house, the rich man bus mansion, etc.
Good point, but how many rich people spend money on luxuries they don't need or want? And to add to that, rich people are often wise with their money, keeping the spending spree to a minimum.

Originally posted by wamboid

When installed at 10%, did they do away with other taxes? Also, maybe you didn't have a sales tax at all before, here it wouldn't be any burden on small business because it would just be a higher sales tax rather than really adding any work. It would be more work on the tax agency. Here, all sales tax (city, county, and state) are sent to the same authority, and they sort it out. This would just be another for them to sort.

It is much more complex than you think, I went to a seminar and it is like some goods are taxed, and some are not, eg food is not taxed (I was just using peaches as an example), some things like cigarettes and petrol have an excise that makes the price go through the roof.

I agree in a way that cigarettes should be taxed like that, but now it is like poker machines and other addictive stuff like drugs, people want to spend that money on cigarettes they should have put on their food, mortgage etc.

They said they would do away with other taxes, but we still get some of the taxes that should have been abolished such as duty tax(guess, I think that’s the one they charge monthly on bank accounts).

Now that we have got the GST, there is nothing stoping John Howard raising the 10%.

Here is a GST vs Debit tax: http://home.overflow.net.au/~nedwood/gst.html

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by smercer
Hmm... *reaches for new thread button* :D
LOL!!!

[jeff_archer7]

:o

[rhsunderground]

i came home to omaha to be excited (:() to see that gas was ONLY $1.99 USD/gallon. in crete (where i attend university) it had gone up to $2.15. BLEGH!

[wamboid]

$1.98 on the way to work yesterday, $2.05 on the way home, and me with a near empty tank.

[jeff_archer7]

:mad: :mad: :mad:

OMG The price here has gone up to $1.20 AUD for 1 Litre

thats $3.57 USD per GALLON

:( :mad: :(



:confused: :confused: :confused:

[thuko135]

Originally posted by jeff_archer7
:mad: :mad: :mad:

OMG The price here has gone up to $1.20 AUD for 1 Litre

thats $3.57 USD per GALLON

:( :mad: :(



:confused: :confused: :confused: And it disgraces me that people complain in the US that gas costs 2 bucks.

Mike

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by thuko135
And it disgraces me that people complain in the US that gas costs 2 bucks.

Mike yes, well this is rising for us. i can remember when gas was $0.89 per gallon and i'm only 18.

[wamboid]

OMG The price here has gone up to $1.20 AUD for 1 Litre

And you said you were glad not to live here!

And it disgraces me that people complain in the US that gas costs 2 bucks

We complain that it went up 7 cents in a day in the town I live in, when it actually went up 25 cents on the same day 75 miles away in Kansas City. Since when is it a disgrace to complain that the price you pay for something has gone up where you live?

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by rhsunderground
i came home to omaha to be excited (:() to see that gas was ONLY $1.99 USD/gallon. in crete (where i attend university) it had gone up to $2.15. BLEGH! since i came home gas has gone up at least 8 cents per gallon. that was in 3 days.

[thuko135]

Originally posted by wamboid
Since when is it a disgrace to complain that the price you pay for something has gone up where you live? Since I've been born, and further back in my opinion. I guess I'm the only person living in the East where gas prices are going down!

[jeff_archer7]

Originally posted by wamboid
And you said you were glad not to live here!


Damn Right Baby.....

I am WELL GLAD not to live there.......

So we pay more for fuel but least we don't have gun toting teenagers going on kill crazy rampages in OUR schools..... you can keep your psyco's we will keep our TO DAMN HIGH petrol Prices ;)

[Ben Rogers]

Originally posted by jeff_archer7
Damn Right Baby.....

I am WELL GLAD not to live there.......

So we pay more for fuel but least we don't have gun toting teenagers going on kill crazy rampages in OUR schools..... you can keep your psyco's we will keep our TO DAMN HIGH petrol Prices ;) Okay, that was an incredibly stupid thing to say. You know that their are morons, psychos, racists... what have you wherever you go, and that it will always be that way. A few incidents getting mass publicity over here because that's how the media works, and it gets blown out of proportion, pretty much. I doubt a single school shooting in America has ever gone unreported- but in European, Australian, Middle Eastern, and Asian countries, violence doesn't get the same airtime as it does over here. The media is ****ty...

[thuko135]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
Okay, that was an incredibly stupid thing to say. You know that their are morons, psychos, racists... what have you wherever you go, and that it will always be that way. A few incidents getting mass publicity over here because that's how the media works, and it gets blown out of proportion, pretty much. I doubt a single school shooting in America has ever gone unreported- but in European, Australian, Middle Eastern, and Asian countries, violence doesn't get the same airtime as it does over here. The media is ****ty... I couldn't have said it better myself.

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
Okay, that was an incredibly stupid thing to say. You know that their are morons, psychos, racists... what have you wherever you go, and that it will always be that way. A few incidents getting mass publicity over here because that's how the media works, and it gets blown out of proportion, pretty much. I doubt a single school shooting in America has ever gone unreported- but in European, Australian, Middle Eastern, and Asian countries, violence doesn't get the same airtime as it does over here. The media is ****ty... in america, the negative things in the world get much more media hype than the positive. it's a sad fact.:(

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
Okay, that was an incredibly stupid thing to say. You know that their are morons, psychos, racists... what have you wherever you go, and that it will always be that way. A few incidents getting mass publicity over here because that's how the media works, and it gets blown out of proportion, pretty much. I doubt a single school shooting in America has ever gone unreported- but in European, Australian, Middle Eastern, and Asian countries, violence doesn't get the same airtime as it does over here. The media is ****ty...

Whether you like it or not, there is more murder and overall domestic violence in our country that any others in the world. Actually, I don't believe there have been school shooting in any other country that ours. Sad. :(

Oh yeah, here is a nice right wing article that agrees with me.
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Crime-wave.html

[jeff_archer7]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
Okay, that was an incredibly stupid thing to say. You know that their are morons, psychos, racists... what have you wherever you go, and that it will always be that way. A few incidents getting mass publicity over here because that's how the media works, and it gets blown out of proportion, pretty much. I doubt a single school shooting in America has ever gone unreported- but in European, Australian, Middle Eastern, and Asian countries, violence doesn't get the same airtime as it does over here. The media is ****ty...

First of all, GRRRR @ U for calling me stupid (re: Okay, that was an incredibly stupid thing to say.)

second, we don't have school shootings

Third see first point

Originally posted by theuedimaster
Whether you like it or not, there is more murder and overall domestic violence in our country that any others in the world. Actually, I don't believe there have been school shooting in any other country that ours. Sad.

There have been a couple in europe,

Australia has strict gun control laws.....

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by jeff_archer7
First of all GO PH4RK YOURSELF (re:Okay, that was an incredibly stupid thing to say.)
that's unnecessary.

[jeff_archer7]

Originally posted by rhsunderground
that's unnecessary.

Probably was..... sorry...... I just find it sad he would type that, I mean I'm sure he wouldn't say it to my face therefore why type it....... I would however have said that to his face unlike most others I never say things online I wouldn't say in person...... it's funny how brave folks are in the comfort of their own homes with thousands of miles seperating them from those they abuse....

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by jeff_archer7
it's funny how brave folks are in the comfort of their own homes with thousands of miles seperating them from those they abuse.... that is something that i have been intrigued by for some time now.

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by rhsunderground
that is something that i have been intrigued by for some time now.

Deep thoughts there man, deep thoughts.... :cool:

[amazing_andr3]

Where I live, there's a lot of old cars being set up to use GPL. That cuts your fuel expense in half.

I wonder why I don't see any new cars running on GPL.

Let's face it, gasoline is gonna get more expensive, not cheaper so we need to look to alternative technologies instead.

As for the cheaper US prices, this has always been a mistery to me. After all, Europe produces more gasoline than it needs and it actually sells gasoline to the US...

[Fantatier]

Originally posted by amazing_andr3
Where I live, there's a lot of old cars being set up to use GPL. That cuts your fuel expense in half.

I wonder why I don't see any new cars running on GPL.

Let's face it, gasoline is gonna get more expensive, not cheaper so we need to look to alternative technologies instead.

As for the cheaper US prices, this has always been a mistery to me. After all, Europe produces more gasoline than it needs and it actually sells gasoline to the US...

thats only because the EU has much more enviroment friendly laws and taxes.
and quite rightly too if you ask me. i would not want to trade that for cheap petrol!

[Ben Rogers]

Originally posted by theuedimaster
Whether you like it or not, there is more murder and overall domestic violence in our country that any others in the world. Actually, I don't believe there have been school shooting in any other country that ours. Sad. :(

Oh yeah, here is a nice right wing article that agrees with me.
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/Crime-wave.html Good for the article. I could write one like it, it'd be full of ****. There's violence everywhere, don't try to deny it- in schools, offices... there're robberies, rapes, murders, shootings, and all that sucky stuff everywhere you go. It's not the massive problem non-US citizens seem to think it is... maybe in the inner cities, but violence is not as rampant as you make it out to be. You focus on something and nothing else, obviously it's going to seem more dramatic. Originally posted by jeff_archer7
First of all, GRRRR @ U for calling me stupid (re: Okay, that was an incredibly stupid thing to say.) A smart person can say stupid things, Jeff.Originally posted by jeff_archer7
Probably was..... sorry...... I just find it sad he would type that, I mean I'm sure he wouldn't say it to my face therefore why type it... Trust me, if you say something stupid, I will tell you so. Anything I'd say on these forums (assuming I'm not aiming for bannage) is something I'd say in real life, in a private conversation.

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
Trust me, if you say something stupid, I will tell you so. Anything I'd say on these forums (assuming I'm not aiming for bannage) is something I'd say in real life, in a private conversation. it's an attitude like that that will get you a swift kick in the pants.


i think that unless this thread calms down really quickly, i'm just going to lock it up and be done with it.

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by amazing_andr3
Where I live, there's a lot of old cars being set up to use GPL. That cuts your fuel expense in half.

I wonder why I don't see any new cars running on GPL.

Let's face it, gasoline is gonna get more expensive, not cheaper so we need to look to alternative technologies instead.

As for the cheaper US prices, this has always been a mistery to me. After all, Europe produces more gasoline than it needs and it actually sells gasoline to the US...

It is because the U.S government has been subsidizing the energy industry for years. Technically we do pay the same, or more. We just pay through our taxes. :)

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
Good for the article. I could write one like it, it'd be full of ****. There's violence everywhere, don't try to deny it- in schools, offices... there're robberies, rapes, murders, shootings, and all that sucky stuff everywhere you go. It's not the massive problem non-US citizens seem to think it is... maybe in the inner cities, but violence is not as rampant as you make it out to be. You focus on something and nothing else, obviously it's going to seem more dramatic. A smart person can say stupid things, Jeff. Trust me, if you say something stupid, I will tell you so. Anything I'd say on these forums (assuming I'm not aiming for bannage) is something I'd say in real life, in a private conversation.

Whether you like it or not, the U.S does have more domestic violence than any other country in the world. You have been brainwashed too much by the "inherent evil" philosophy of capitalist pricks.

By the way, I AM A FREAKIN' US CITIZEN. You give our country too much credit and too many excuses. You try to brush everything aside as if there is no problem; but man, whether you like it or not, there is one in our country.

By the way BR, read that article again. If you are going to say it is full of crap you better give me some proof and reasons.

[Ben Rogers]

Originally posted by theuedimaster
Whether you like it or not, the U.S does have more domestic violence than any other country in the world. You have been brainwashed too much by the "inherent evil" philosophy of capitalist pricks.

By the way, I AM A FREAKIN' US CITIZEN. You give our country too much credit and too many excuses. You try to brush everything aside as if there is no problem; but man, whether you like it or not, there is one in our country.

By the way BR, read that article again. If you are going to say it is full of crap you better give me some proof and reasons. If I had been brainwashed by surrounding sources, then I'd beleive you- every media source around me makes it sound like everyone shooting everyone, and the terrorists are aiming at my head right now. :rolleyes: I never said there was no problem, there is a problem, but it's nothing anyone can solve- the problem is in human nature. Humans are violent, everyone is. There's problems in every place that humanity exists. I didn't read the article at all, by the way. I'm not interested in what they have to say.

[amazing_andr3]

You know in Syria there's very little crime in general, and almost no violent crime. :)

Gotta love these communist dictatorships!

[wamboid]

Is it a crime when the dictator or his minions kill someone?
Whether you like it or not, the U.S does have more domestic violence than any other country in the world. You have been brainwashed too much by the "inherent evil" philosophy of capitalist pricks.
Been to Baghdad lately, or even before the war, or how about Somalia, did you know there are still pirates in some island regions. I'm not saying the US isn't violent, but look around, most of the world is. Apparently it is human nature. We do seem to have the school shooting market almost cornered, but there are cities in every country of the world that have areas you don't want to go in on foot, alone, and at night.

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by wamboid
but there are cities in every country of the world that have areas you don't want to go in on foot, alone, and at night. there are cities that have areas that you don't even want to go to during the day.

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by wamboid
Is it a crime when the dictator or his minions kill someone?

Been to Baghdad lately, or even before the war, or how about Somalia, did you know there are still pirates in some island regions. I'm not saying the US isn't violent, but look around, most of the world is. Apparently it is human nature. We do seem to have the school shooting market almost cornered, but there are cities in every country of the world that have areas you don't want to go in on foot, alone, and at night.

We're talking about domestic violence as as people. We are not talking about genocide. D(*()t! That is what is wrong with most of the people in the world. IT IS NOT HUMAN NATURE TO BE VIOLENT OR EVIL! PEOPLE MAKE A CHOICE TO DO THAT, IT IS NOT FREAKIN' INHERENT! The question of violence in other countries is worthless; I mean, of course there is violence in other countries. But the scale that it is in our country is much higher that any other countries. BR, if you're not going to read the article then don't comment on the issue I am bringing up. The article has value purely for the DATA that it presents WITHOUT OPINION. The extra comments of course you may not have to agree with, but DATA is DATA. If the DATA is wrong, then show me another source with different DATA. Our country kills more people domestically than any other. In international terms, we're up there, but at the moment, I think its Sudan.

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by wamboid
Is it a crime when the dictator or his minions kill someone?

Been to Baghdad lately, or even before the war, or how about Somalia, did you know there are still pirates in some island regions. I'm not saying the US isn't violent, but look around, most of the world is. Apparently it is human nature. We do seem to have the school shooting market almost cornered, but there are cities in every country of the world that have areas you don't want to go in on foot, alone, and at night.

Do you see everyone being violent? No. You see only a select few. How can you say that something that is a minority is inherent? Thats just making an accusation without looking at the facts.

By the way, where is Smercer?

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
the terrorists are aiming at my head right now. :rolleyes:

i agree with you on that part; however, I am talking about domestic violence. It is not about fear man, it is about **** going on.

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by wamboid
Apparently it is human nature.
Originally posted by theuedimaster
IT IS NOT HUMAN NATURE TO BE VIOLENT OR EVIL!
that debate is something that has raged between schools of psychology for over a century, mainly between behaviorists and humanists.

[amazing_andr3]

Originally posted by rhsunderground
that debate is something that has raged between schools of psychology for over a century, mainly between behaviorists and humanists.

It is human nature to be violent in certain situations. And modern society should make sure those situations are quite uncommon.

If you see a lot of violence, there's something wrong with the society or culture or at least part of it.

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by rhsunderground
that debate is something that has raged between schools of psychology for over a century, mainly between behaviorists and humanists.
Well said.

[Ben Rogers]

Originally posted by theuedimaster
BR, if you're not going to read the article then don't comment on the issue I am bringing up. Just "Ben" is fine... I'm too distracted right now to write up a full response, so for the time being I'll honour that request (for another few hours). However, I don't see how not reading an outside source makes me have to leave a discussion... where's the logic? I'm not going to go digging up articles supporting my side, because I find it unnecessary (I really need to learn how to spell that without spellcheck (http://spellbound.sourceforge.net/), lol) in friendly conversation.

[rhsunderground]

Originally posted by theuedimaster
Well said. 3 semesters of psychology finally paid off :p

[amazing_andr3]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
I'm not going to go digging up articles supporting my side, because I find it unnecessary (I really need to learn how to spell that without spellcheck (http://spellbound.sourceforge.net/), lol) in friendly conversation.

Isn't that link a nice thing to do for people like myself who have been looking for an extension like that without success?

Thanks.

No more spelling mistakes for amazing_andr3 from now on!

[theuedimaster]

Originally posted by Ben Rogers
Just "Ben" is fine... I'm too distracted right now to write up a full response, so for the time being I'll honour that request (for another few hours). However, I don't see how not reading an outside source makes me have to leave a discussion... where's the logic? I'm not going to go digging up articles supporting my side, because I find it unnecessary (I really need to learn how to spell that without spellcheck (http://spellbound.sourceforge.net/), lol) in friendly conversation.

See, the point was that I was talking about the contents of this one article and you were taking a stance against it when you didn't even know what it said.

[jeff_archer7]

Actually evil is in Human nature, because humans fell in the garden of eden...... therefore our default setting IS for EVIL not Good....

but thats just the truth, your entitled to your own opinion....

[wamboid]

Wow Jeff, I almost fell out of my seat!we were going to write almost the same thing for a change!

If you believe the Bible, the first murder happened between the first and third people on the planet. Where I think violence becomes inherent is when we get more crowded, like in cities. Most rural areas have less violence.

I had much more to say, including about the article, but I'm out of time.

Oops, How Much Do You Pay For Petrol/fuel/gasoline is the topic. New Super Walmart opened here yesterday with price of $1.91, less with their credit card. That was 14 cents less than others in town.

[rhsunderground]

There are some topics that have been black-listed, i.e. they will not occur. Abortion, homosexuality, and religion are such topics. These topics can easily spark an enormous debate, occaisionally arguments, so we simply wish to avoid them all together. If these topics show up in a thread, a warning will be posted saying "get on-topic." If they pop up again, the thread will simply be closed.

consider this the warning. apparently messages are required to be longer than 10 words, so i'm typing this as well.

[Ben Rogers]

messages are required to be longer than 10 words:D:D:D Wootage! Now I have some policin' and tattlin' to do... you know who you are. ;)

[rhsunderground]

don't worry. i've just gone to the feedback forum to complain about it.