Real World Event Discussions

Boycott Gas on May 19th

POSTED BY: DucesTecum
UPDATED: Saturday, May 22, 2004 03:40
VIEWED: 11801
PAGE 3 of 5

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 3:42 AM

Quote:

and actually, The US, Russia, Iran, Mexico, Norway, China, Venezuela, Canada, and the UK (none Gulf states) all produce more barrels per day than Iraq.


I haven't looked at the figures but I'm sure you are right. There are other oil producing countries that don't produce as much but still contribute to the overall pool of available crude.

Most of the largest producers make up OPEC.

"I ain't crazy and I've got papers to prove it"

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 4:30 AM


I skipped the Gulf states (Saudi Arabia, United Emerites, etc.) since they are well known. I suppose it wouldn't have been wrong to *assume* that they rest of that area falls in the same line.


Quote:

Originally posted by WhooDahn:
Quote:

and actually, The US, Russia, Iran, Mexico, Norway, China, Venezuela, Canada, and the UK (none Gulf states) all produce more barrels per day than Iraq.


I haven't looked at the figures but I'm sure you are right. There are other oil producing countries that don't produce as much but still contribute to the overall pool of available crude.

Most of the largest producers make up OPEC.

"I ain't crazy and I've got papers to prove it"




NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 4:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
I skipped the Gulf states (Saudi Arabia, United Emerites, etc.) since they are well known. I suppose it wouldn't have been wrong to *assume* that they rest of that area falls in the same line.



I was thinking of some of the smaller producers. Don't Korea and Japan export crude?

"I ain't crazy and I've got papers to prove it"

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jasonzzz:

No, it just points to the glaringly apparent need that we just need new and better conspiracy theories.

and actually, The US, Russia, Iran, Mexico, Norway, China, Venezuela, Canada, and the UK (none Gulf states) all produce more barrels per day than Iraq.

The US alone produces 3 times more than Iraq...



Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Let me get this straight...

The USA invades and occupies the richest oil producing country on the planet... and oil prices go up?

Somehow it seems to me we are very, very, gullable. Hoaxes asside.






Wow, you are just full of fun facts!

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 2:21 PM



They prolly do. I just made a list of folks (non Gulf states) who pumps more crude than Iraq.


Quote:

Originally posted by WhooDahn:
Quote:

Originally posted by Jasonzzz:
I skipped the Gulf states (Saudi Arabia, United Emerites, etc.) since they are well known. I suppose it wouldn't have been wrong to *assume* that they rest of that area falls in the same line.



I was thinking of some of the smaller producers. Don't Korea and Japan export crude?

"I ain't crazy and I've got papers to prove it"




NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 2:23 PM

and *real* too!

Can you imagine writing *fun*, *real*, and the truth?!

Well, at least you can imagine it


Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Quote:

Originally posted by Jasonzzz:

No, it just points to the glaringly apparent need that we just need new and better conspiracy theories.

and actually, The US, Russia, Iran, Mexico, Norway, China, Venezuela, Canada, and the UK (none Gulf states) all produce more barrels per day than Iraq.

The US alone produces 3 times more than Iraq...



Quote:

Originally posted by Ghoulman:
Let me get this straight...

The USA invades and occupies the richest oil producing country on the planet... and oil prices go up?

Somehow it seems to me we are very, very, gullable. Hoaxes asside.






Wow, you are just full of fun facts!




NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 3:04 PM

Some of the folks in our (liberal) church were complaining that we went to war for oil.

We turned to them and said, "We don't own a car! We walked here today! Don't you live closer than us?"

I have arthritis in the left hip and developing in the right.

My wife is blind and 8 months pregnant.

We do not have, we cannot afford, we do not WANT a car. We hike it and we like it.

Still, yes, we are indirect oil consumers. We accept rides from friends occasionally. The cow didn't walk to the meat market. The chicken did NOT cross the road under its own power. That corn didn't get in the can and on the shelf under solar power.

Still, it's fun to hassle the left and the right when they start screaming about oil. Nyah.

Now if you will excuse me, my wife has a doctor's appointment that we need to start walking to.

"You're 34 weeks pregnant, you walked here, and your blood pressure is only 128 over 68?!?!?" --OB/GYN


"I give up. I admit it. I'm a Browncoat."

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 3:06 PM

Quote:

The oil companies don't own the car companies. The oil companies didn't create the demand for gas, they are trying to fill the demand for gas.


This is very true. The demand for cheap gas began just after WWII when President Truman opted to fund the Interstate Highway System instead of expanding out railway system. At the time this was the SMARTEST thing he could have done. After seeing the destruction to supply lines during the war, Truman was desperate to get us off our dependence on railroads. A train cannot jump the track; a big truck can always drive through a field if desperate enough to get somewhere.

Don't like gas prices now? Buy a hybrid or give a donation to someone reseaching longer lasting power sources for electric cars. There is no short term fix for our oil dependence.

--Kala

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 3:09 PM

Addendum:

We don't want a car.

We want a midbulk transport.

Which uses some oil as lubricants and probably some plastics and the like, but it doesn't burn it.

So park yer SUVs and go for full burn. Given the shoestring budget they seem to work on, it MUST be cheaper to fuel than a Suburban.



"I give up. I admit it. I'm a Browncoat."

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Tuesday, May 18, 2004 3:32 PM

Quote:


This is very true. The demand for cheap gas began just after WWII when President Truman opted to fund the Interstate Highway System instead of expanding out railway system. At the time this was the SMARTEST thing he could have done. After seeing the destruction to supply lines during the war, Truman was desperate to get us off our dependence on railroads. A train cannot jump the track; a big truck can always drive through a field if desperate enough to get somewhere.

Don't like gas prices now? Buy a hybrid or give a donation to someone reseaching longer lasting power sources for electric cars. There is no short term fix for our oil dependence.

--Kala



I'm not familiar with Truman's decision but I imagine that he really had a fight with the railroad companies. They were very strong and didn't usually play by the rules. I can't imagine the politics involved in making a cultural decision to change a form of transportation.

The world really needs to make changes to it's fuel consumption. It isn't just automotive fuel, it's cruise ships, cargo ships, airplanes, military vehicles, plastics, lubricants, etc. The world relies on petroleum based products and one day it will run out.


"I ain't crazy and I've got papers to prove it"

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME