How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Oil well, well, well....   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ]
 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Oil well, well, well....

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


50 posted 03-05-2011 07:30 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

but that doesn't have anything to do with creating jobs that harm our country rather than help it.

Ok, let's go there, Ron. You must believe that further oil exploration  or opening up new oil fields would harm our country and that providing employment to hundreds of thousands, beneficial as it might be to the economy, would not offset the harm it would do.

What harm? I'm assuming that the harm you refer to is that it would keep us from seeking new sources of energy. My question to that would be....why? What is stopping the government and scientists from working on those new areas right now? The fact that, since there is plenty of oil, they don't give it a high enough priority? Ok, I can buy that....but that simply means they are too short-sighted to see it.   You don't seem to be asking them to account for their lack of initiative. You prefer that the citizenry suffer, by way of higher prices, than to hold government responsible. In a period of time with unemployment in the stratosphere, the housing market in the trash can, and people putting up a real struggle to make their paychecks or their savings stretch from week to week, you believe this is the right time for them to pay more and suffer further. Yes, Ron, I know your answer..."Then when is the right time?". I've seen it before. I won't disagree that the right time is now for the government to get serious enough to kick it into high gear and find those alternatives. I disagree that it should take the people suffering to the point of rioting in the streets to get the government to do something. Do I blame Obama from not having come up with alternatives? Yes....along with Bush, Clinton, Reagan, Nixon and every other president that should have been preparing for the eventual oil crisis.  I disagree with your "let them eat cake" philosophy toward the general populace, however.

Ok, then. The next question is...would opening up oil drilling in the United States help? I'm no geologist, government worker, oil executive and anyone in that loop. I'm certainly not as knowledgeable as Uncas as to how the whole thing works. I can only speak with the brain of a poet and scratch golfer who looks for a little sense in the whole thing.

It is said that whoever gets the right to drill calls the shots concerning price and where the oil will go. Ok, but, since the oil is in the United States, I'm assuming that these companies would have to have permissions and pay for the right to drill, like in leases, I would assume. Otherwise BP or Venezuela would be up in Alaska drilling right now. If I were the US, those leases would be heavy and go to the high bidders. There would also be restrictions. I lease a house out in Colorado but the lease doesn't give the lessee the right to paint the house purple, knock down the walls, or keep a camel for a pet. We all know that the majority of the cost we pay for gasoline at the pump is federal taxes. Is it so far-fetched to have the monies paid to the country for the right to drill replace or, at least, cut down the taxes on a gallon of gas at the pump? Or would you not trust the government to do that?

Now, what would this increase of oil on the market do to the price of oil? Up or down? If it goes down...less cost to consumers. If it goes up, the percentages the drilling companies pay for the right to drill produces more revenue. Do you say the oil companies would not agree to such agreements? Then we would be no worse off than we are now. I think you know they would, though. Earning a little less is still earning. Would the infusion of oil into the market influence OPEC to raise or lower prices/production?

The next point is security. With what is happening in the middle east today, I consider that to be an important factor. I've seen pictures from WW2 of tanks and heavy equipment stranded in the desert, due to supply lines broken. With all of the oil-supplying countries in the middle east now involved in revolutions, we have no idea which groups will rise to power. What if they are groups that are anit-American and they decide to cut off supplies to the U.S? Is that far-fetched? I don't know. I do know that we are basically at the mercy of the oil-producing countries, with the exception of Canada and our own reserves? In the case of actual war, I would not want to be at that mercy and I don't see that possibility as being that off the wall. ALso, in the case of war, it would be appropriate for the government to assume control of the wells in the interest of national defense.

Those are my pedestrian thoughts. If none of these things were to happen, then the worst thing would be that over 800,000 people would have jobs, that many would be off the unemployment roll, and that much more money would be going to the government in the form of taxes on their earnings. Is that such a bad thing?

Please note that no Obamas were harmed in the construction of this comment.


Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


51 posted 03-05-2011 09:29 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
What harm? I'm assuming that the harm you refer to is that it would keep us from seeking new sources of energy.

Partly. Though honestly, Mike, I think our own collective short sightedness will probably do that any way. There's also that little thing about the Gulf? We had our own smaller but similar incident locally, too, where an underground pipeline ruptured and spilled about a million gallons of oil into our lakes. I didn't realize just how toxic that stuff was 'til I saw what it did to people and animals? The smell alone put people in the hospital. And property values will never recover.

I don't mind taking risks, Mike. But there has to be a potential gain commensurate with the risk. Drilling in our own backyard offers no gain at all. None.

quote:
What is stopping the government and scientists from working on those new areas right now? The fact that, since there is plenty of oil, they don't give it a high enough priority? Ok, I can buy that....but that simply means they are too short-sighted to see it. You don't seem to be asking them to account for their lack of initiative.

LOL. Sometimes, Mike, I think I'm a lot more Republican than you are. "Government" and "initiative" are not two words you would ever hear me use in the same context.

Yes, the government is short sighted. They don't care about anything at all beyond the next election. Ironically, the few who might care are rarely around beyond that next election. It’s the nature of the beast, I suppose.

The oil problem wasn't created by the government, and I certainly don't expect it will be solved by the government. If a politician ever invented anything I sure don't know what it was. Alternatives to fossil energy have to come from the private sector. From free enterprise. That's where the problem was born and that's where it must be resolved. That won't happen until there's an economic incentive. And that won't happen until oil gets a whole lot more expensive than it is right now. Unfortunately, while government can't solve the problem (and anyone who wants a smaller government shouldn't expect it to), government can delay the solution.

quote:
In a period of time with unemployment in the stratosphere, the housing market in the trash can, and people putting up a real struggle to make their paychecks or their savings stretch from week to week, you believe this is the right time for them to pay more and suffer further.

No. It should have happened fifty years ago.

Prosperity is not an entitlement, Mike. The only reason there was ever a time when people didn't have to struggle to make a living is because we were robbing the past to build a better present. We were using up resources that took millions of years to accumulate. We were like the rich kid who took his father's estate and used it to live the high life. That ride is coming to a close, my friend. The rich kid is going to have to go to work. He's going to have to struggle. And trying to make the ride last a little longer is only going to make the struggle a whole lot harder.

quote:
Ok, then. The next question is...would opening up oil drilling in the United States help?

I don't know the answer to that either, Mike. There's nothing I've seen that suggests it would. Convince me otherwise and I might be willing to change my opinion. I'm not adverse to risk, I just want the risk to be calculated.

Jobs? Take the same amount of money you want to invest in oil drilling and spend it on something with a future. The jobs will follow the money. That's economics 101.

quote:
The next point is security. With what is happening in the middle east today, I consider that to be an important factor.

Now that argument could potentially get my attention, Mike. But I'd have to be convinced.

My current understanding is that we get enough oil from the Middle East to be concerned, but not enough to be scared. Most of our oil already comes from this side of the world? And we stockpile enough of it to insure our immediate security. People who want to use that stockpile to lower consumer prices are, well, idiots to be perfectly frank.

quote:
If none of these things were to happen, then the worst thing would be that over 800,000 people would have jobs, that many would be off the unemployment roll, and that much more money would be going to the government in the form of taxes on their earnings. Is that such a bad thing?

Again, let's use the same resources to create the same jobs in an industry with a future. Put those people to work building wind turbines or creating better batteries. All the good things you foresee will still happen. And all the bad things I foresee won't.

quote:
Please note that no Obamas were harmed in the construction of this comment.

And trust me, I very much appreciate the opportunity to talk about the issues without all the distractions.


Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


52 posted 03-06-2011 10:24 AM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


Is nuclear more attractive now?

The wind doesn't always blow
and the sun doesn't always shine.

What about China and India?

The truth is were it not for immigration the population of the West
would be in decline, (indeed the populations of some countries will
decline regardless), thereby diminishing consumption, on top of
innovations which already make consumption more efficient.


PS

“problem for our kids and grandkids to face”

I thought about that.
As a boomer I grew up in a world that was inundated
about the threat of overpopulation.  None of my friends
has more than two children, some have one, many none
at all.  In so far as any future, my West has atoned itself
out of existence.  Seems we did our bit . . .
.

[This message has been edited by Huan Yi (03-06-2011 12:21 PM).]

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


53 posted 03-06-2011 12:19 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Is nuclear more attractive now?

More attractive than when, John? More attractive than my earlier post when I said I supported it?

quote:
The wind doesn't always blow and the sun doesn't always shine.

That's not entirely true, John. The wind doesn't always blow nor the sun shine in your particular location, perhaps? Still, I don't necessarily disagree with your point so much as I don't see where you want to go with it.

The sun doesn't always shine on my garden, either, but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop growing vegetables. I grow them when it DOES shine. Then I can store them for when it doesn't.

quote:
What about China and India?

What about them?

The population in Michigan is declining, too, John. Do you think that should give us some kind of inherent advantage over California?

I don't usually look at things from a state versus state perspective. We're all one country, after all, and our economies depend on dependence. Similarly, John, I don't typically take a nationalistic view of things, either. In fact, I avoid it as much as I possibly can.


Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


54 posted 03-06-2011 12:30 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


I don't think China or India
buy into wind or sun as a now solution
Ron,  nor do they wish to resign
the majority of their current or
future populations still to life
on their feet behind the back
of an ox.  Until those viable alternatives
emerge they're going to go with what
they can get.


.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


55 posted 03-06-2011 02:29 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Ron, I apologize if my popping in was/is off topic or a diversion of the issue, but I wanted to say that while I knew of other environmental issues, I hadn't heard of the events in your back yard.

The importance of environmental quality doesn't seem to have impact until it literally hits home.  

Genuine sympathy from me to you, your neighbors, and for all the efforts I know you've put into to giving back to nature.

I seriously hope that you have better luck prompting a sense of urgency in people before they feel the despair of living in a doomed land.

And I brought up Robert Kennedy, Jr. because somewhere, I still have an old article he'd published in Vanity Fair regarding the challenges facing a new president regarding the juggling act of prosperity, environmental issues, and rebuilding a cleaner more efficient infrastructure, and more.

I feel so sad when I think about it; and I do feel compelled to tell everyone that by the time you can see it, smell it, and taste it--it's too late. Besides the obvious exposure to concentrated carcinogens, there's the impact of something as simple as sinusitis, untreated turns necrotic--something as simple as one unfortunate polyp in your sinus cavity can cause seizures. The CNS is impacted as the lungs are jeopardized, and there's a bizarre palsy that accompanies that.

I try to not talk about it so much here, though.

I don't think people need to know that they are pretty much lab rats...

But it might not be too late for others--investigate and discover for yourselves how much toxic waste is being dumped into natural streams, etc. Demand environmental reform, and yes, that requires REGULATION.

So sad, today...I miss our clarion, Midnitesun/Kacy.

She was so right.

The sky is falling.

And John? I'm not educated enough to defend the rights of an insect, but for all we know, those bugs may build their nests using excrement from whatever they are eating in their natural habitat--and you just never know if there's some vital scientific medical data that will be uncovered by those studied.

We'll never know if we keep destroying everything.

Not at parades.(Heh. I came to back to clarify that I am not at the parades today, nor are my kids. But for all I know somebody is studying the crazed insects in attendance there today. *laugh*cough*laugh*)

Everybody in the house has sinusitis.

It sounds an awful lot like Katrina cough, too.

And did you know that a chronic cough can enlarge the heart, contribute to vasculitis and complicate just your general sense of well being?

*smile*

I need to go make some chicken soup.

And I'll try not to think about how our meats are processed...



You were right, John. A long time ago you started a thread about knowledge and happiness, and I agreed then and agree now that ignorance is bliss.

Just check out the smiling faces crammed together on the streets of New Orleans today.

Might as well live while yer livin' tho.

ciao,

and Ron? Again, please know I feel your pain and I'm grateful that someone else speaks out about this stuff, even as I deplore that it's happening elsewhere.

Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


56 posted 03-07-2011 06:08 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:


“problem for our kids and grandkids to face”

I thought about that.
As a boomer I grew up in a world that was inundated
about the threat of overpopulation.  None of my friends
has more than two children, some have one, many none
at all.  In so far as any future, my West has atoned itself
out of existence.  Seems we did our bit . . .





     The problems left by the overpopulation still remain, though, John.  And the overpopulation problem still remains as well.  Our population continues to grow as does the population of the world as a whole.  While U.S. population increases may have a lot to do with new immigration here, you can hardly say the same about population increases world-wide.  The strain on the ecology as a whole remains, and the environment continues to degrade.  

     Even placing the issue of who created the mess in the first place aside — and it's not clear whether this hinders or helps in this case — we as a world still have to deal with diminishing and degrading resources.  If guilt were the only reason to take responsibility, it might be nice, but it probably wouldn't be sufficient for anybody to step up to the plate.  The fact that the degradation of resources affects everybody, and that everybody feels the squeeze is barely enough as it is.  In fact, survival of the species may not be enough motive to take action to save the species; it may only be enough, and barely at that, to motivate folks to be the last people living in a species wide race for extinction.  Why?

     It costs too much and it's inconvenient are the reasons it seems to come down to in the various threads we've woven together about these various issues.  People will be inconvenienced in a major way by the transition to a non-oil economy.  And nobody wants to pay the taxes that will motivate people to change from oil to other sources of energy.  I happen to think that putting these things ahead of survival is short sighted in the extreme.

     The other rationale I hear for killing the species off prematurely is that there really is no problem/problems.  So we don't have to do anything except talk about how any attempt to frame and solve the problem is silly.  This seems to make a lot of sense to a lot of people, and I must wish them a lot of luck with it.

     The net effect, however, is that in the guns versus butter economic struggle, they come down solidly on the butter side of the equation.  Not many of these same people would do that in a discussion of guns versus butter in a purely military situation; they'd suggest it was fuzzy thinking, and they'd often be right.  But there are other sorts of survival issues that need to be dealt with, and the same solid appreciation for hard data and scientific evaluation should apply in these areas as well.  Denial is not a good substitute.

     Suggesting that we in the West have already done our duty is an interesting tack to take.  I don't agree, even remotely.  But assuming that you're right and that we have, so what?  It's not enough to sigh, unless you feel that it's simply too much effort to save the species.  As a member of the species, I'd have complaints to make about a stance like that.  And when it comes to other questions of this sort — the right and necessity of  defending ourselves against terrorists, for example, you have complaints as well.  As you should.

     Making ourselves a world of environmental casualties doesn't seem to me to be a good solution, and even India is likely to see that eventually.  China, for all our difficulties with China, is at least making a serious effort at dealing with some of these issues, though it's  using a method that is draconian to do so.  And China has taken us up on the challenge we issued them through years and years of the Cold War.  It is trying Capitalism, albeit it's own version.

     Now if we can just avoid polluting ourselves to death in the meantime.

    

moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


57 posted 03-10-2011 11:33 AM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

"Please note that no Obamas were harmed in the construction of this comment"

Be even better if "comment" could = "thread".

Do I dare to see a light at the end of the administration bashing tunnel?  Is this the first thread for 3 years where gratuitous and pointless political point scoring seems actually to have been almost outweighted by interesting discussion?  

Also a thread where I agree entirely with everything Ron said from start to finish.  

"Allowing" (or taxing) oil prices to rise higher seems so obviously sensible as to not even be worth debating.  What's perhaps more interesting and complex is the opposite side of the equation, the question of subsidy to "renewable" or quasi-renewable sources of energy.  

How one chooses what, how and to what level to subsidize.  How the subsidy is funded.  And how long it remains ecomomically necessary.

Here in the UK we are grappling with this in a big way right now as we try desperately to "grow up" and move away from the short-termism that our democratic system has landed us with.  I sometimes wish that communism hadn't been such a gawdawful failure from a social perspective, because, as far as long term energy policy is concerned, I really reckon it might have served us better.

As Ron says, we are now paying for decades of juvenile behaviour - "the grab it because it's there and it's easy" syndrome.  And all the trillions of trillions that should have been invested in researching sustainable energy sources have been frittered away to sustain throwaway economies and horrendous overpopulation.  

Wind subsidy is creating a furore in the UK, and the government introduced Feed In Tariffs (FITs) last year mainly to encourage PV.  They are already having second thoughts about the level it has been set at.  It's all a total depressing mess.

Par for the course for the human race I suppose, when you consider that we are mainly driven by selfishness and short term self interest.  Our attitude to oil to date has been a classic example of the trait, and one which highlights the tension between the survival of the individual and the survival of the species.



Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


58 posted 03-10-2011 02:19 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Is this the first thread for 3 years where gratuitous and pointless political point scoring seems actually to have been almost outweighted by interesting discussion?

Actually, your math is off. Make that 10 years to include the eight that the "political point scoring" was directed at Bush...but I suppose those don't count, do they? Must be that new math...
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


59 posted 03-10-2011 04:11 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Well now, Mike, fair is fair. G.W. didn't really get the brunt of criticism until he was well into his second term.

So I say, after President Obama's re-election, then he'll certainly be fair game.



oh-my-lookit-the-time!

Gotta run! zippppppppppppppppp!
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


60 posted 03-10-2011 04:56 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

lol  I.will.keep.my.mouth.shut!
moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


61 posted 03-11-2011 05:10 AM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

"lol  I.will.keep.my.mouth.shut!"

What is there not to like about that? This thread is a revelation.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


62 posted 03-11-2011 06:07 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

If things I say tend to bother you so much, Rob, just don't read them. It's quite simple, really. When you see my name just keep moving on down the list to the next response from somebody else.
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


63 posted 03-11-2011 06:33 AM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

Thank you Denise, for taking my little joke with good nature, as it was intended.

*hugs*
moonbeam
Deputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 12-24-2005
Posts 2038


64 posted 03-11-2011 07:26 AM       View Profile for moonbeam   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for moonbeam

Sorry Denise, for not taking my little joke with good nature, as it was intended.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


65 posted 03-11-2011 06:46 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

You're welcome, Karen! I find your wit hilarious!

serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


66 posted 03-11-2011 07:29 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

You've been a compassionate friend to me, Denise. We are both passionate about our beliefs, but the fact that we can disagree and still have a laugh and a hug at the end of the day is just about...respect.

The fact that we both care enough to be here, and be vocal means that we come from a place of agreement of values. I like my friends to have opinions. Those opinions do not have to be in alignment with mine.

It's good to end a long day with dinner and a hug.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


67 posted 03-11-2011 07:38 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     I'm not sure the 800,000 people figure for the number of people who earn money from drilling oil is accurate.  It seems very high to me.  

     Even if it were accurate, why does that figure mean that we must hold on to an obsolete and dangerous technology that may well be doing more harm to the Country and planet that an evolution to a new (or several new) technologies?   One might have made the same argument for horses and asked what the economic impact would have been from replacing horses and animal power with steam or petroleum.  Think of the dislocations in the economy from those change-overs, and ask if the impact would be any more massive on the current economy.  Are any of these reasons enough to make us go back to animal and steam power?

     Think of the same question directed at the wheel.  Imagine all those dislocations.  One might well ask if it's worth going back to slave power to save the dislocations in the economy of — say — Egypt when people started substituting acxtual wheels for sledges in the building of the pyramids.  Imagine all those slaves.  What are the ancient Egyptians or the Romans supposed to do when they can use horses and mules to substitute for the somewhat more limited horsepower of humans?

     The argument is more or less doomed on the face of it.

     The difference is that now we are dealing with larger populations and more limited resources, and if we don't switch over at a speed that's greater than the transitions I mentioned above took, the consequences could be even more devastating because food and water supplies can be affected more drastically.

     As a society, the information has been available from perhaps as early as World War II that these resources are limited.  It was certainly something we were talking about in late grade school in the late fifties.  The information isn't new.  If you believe it is, ask yourself how long we've been paying folk in the oil business "Oil Depletion Allowances" in this country.  At no point has the oil supply increased.  As long as I can remember, folks have been saying we can't afford to do it now.

     I believe the accurate statement is that the transition only becomes more difficult and more expensive the longer we put it off; and that if we began the transition yesterday it would be substantially cheaper than doing it next year.  Failing to do so is like failing to pay off credit card debt.  

  
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


68 posted 03-11-2011 08:28 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

So if someone will, set me straight:

are we arguing that instant gratification of economics has priority over long-term (and probably irreversible) of ecological impact on the planet?

And yes, I realize my conversational style without sources quoted seems to be pointless to many more educated in schools of debate, but I tend to be more comfortable in that friendly-like atmosphere--and had I not had a very comfortable chat with Balladeer earlier I might not have known about his sentiments regarding "Kennedy"--I'm assuming President John F.? ?

I'd like to ask Mike, in respect, if he agrees with this quote from JFK:

"Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We cherish our children’s future. We are all mortal."

-John F. Kennedy (1917–1963) 35th U.S. President

Is it less meaningful now, or more? And I know you'll help me out with why you think so.

I look forward to reading more--hopefully tomorrow. (I am leaving the cat out tonight, my early bird was really very early today--let the cat do his job, I say; and besides, I am...not quite exhausted but it might do me some good to keep a little something in the bank tonight, yes?)

*laughing*

My love and respect to you all.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


69 posted 03-11-2011 09:14 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

"Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We cherish our children’s future. We are all mortal."

It would be difficult to disagree with any of those points! (unless you are one of us immortals)
serenity blaze
Member Empyrean
since 02-02-2000
Posts 28839


70 posted 03-11-2011 11:45 PM       View Profile for serenity blaze   Email serenity blaze   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for serenity blaze

He's not.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


71 posted 03-12-2011 03:39 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     The events of the day have, to my mind, driven home the difficulty we seem to be in as a planet.  Not only is there difficulty with oil as a way of sustaining an economy, but there has been some difficulty with our nuclear power supplies as well.  On the Tidal wave and earth quake battered coast of Japan it appears that a total of five nuclear reactors on two different sites are threatening to collapse.  There have been already some venting — I'm told — of some radioactive steam into the atmosphere, and unless something is done to restore cooling ability to these five reactors, it appears that a considerably larger problem is possible, that of core reactor melt down.

     One can hope that these early reports are inaccurate, and that if there is any danger it will have passed by tomorrow.

     We need to do some serious thinking and planning for alternatives to both petrocarbons and atomics as power sources, and the longer we put this off the more expensive the price will be in any number of terms.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


72 posted 03-12-2011 05:15 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

You are a person I have a great deal of respect for, Karen. You have a heart of gold and it shows! Your hugs mean a lot to me!

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


73 posted 03-12-2011 05:35 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Serenity gal, JFK also said, as I'm sure you know, "Ask not what your country can do for you..." Unfortunately, in this day and age, that has been reversed. People are not only asking what their country can do for them, they are demanding it! Add that to an administration eager to tell the populace what they will do for them, and you have our current status.

JFK should be turning over in his grace....
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


74 posted 03-12-2011 07:53 PM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
Add that to an administration every administration since JFK eager to tell the populace what they will do for them, and you have our current status.



 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Oil well, well, well....   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors