what happened to flight 77?

"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
...

"David Brooks" wrote in message
...

The Libertarian answer would be that you are free to own an even bigger
vehicle, so get one and make yourself safer, crybaby.


Ad Hominem attacks do nothing to advance your (or any) argument. Is that
the best you can do?

Go ahead, argue that one group should have to pay for others' "freedoms."
We are all not separate islands here, we have to live together, and where
one person's freedoms impact another person's freedoms is where things get
grey.

Perhaps I should have made my intention clearer by putting quote marks
before "you" and after the period.

-- David Brooks

"David Brooks" wrote in message
...
"Peter Gottlieb" wrote in message
...

"David Brooks" wrote in message
...

The Libertarian answer would be that you are free to own an even bigger
vehicle, so get one and make yourself safer, crybaby.


Ad Hominem attacks do nothing to advance your (or any) argument. Is that
the best you can do?

Go ahead, argue that one group should have to pay for others' "freedoms."
We are all not separate islands here, we have to live together, and where
one person's freedoms impact another person's freedoms is where things
get
grey.

Perhaps I should have made my intention clearer by putting quote marks
before "you" and after the period.

-- David Brooks


Ok, I'm cool with that. But I would still prefer if you can add something.

Dave wrote in message ...
onsitewelding wrote:


I will say this though.......My opinion of Bush is he is a sneaky S.O.B that
used the 9/11 attacks for his campain into Iraq. "Saddam has WOMD so we must
go in and remove the axis of evil" soo much Bunk!
It should have read-"I George W Bush so solomly swear to use the 9/11
terrorist attacks as an excuse to invade Iraq so that my rich American
friends and I can control all the middle east oil reserves"

This is just my opinion however.


What really peeves me is that ..If it *were* all about the oil, why
are gas prices outrageous??

The liberals have quietly backed away from that. If the war was about
oil, why didn't we take any oil? The liberals have a hard time saying
they were wrong.

-Robert

In article , "Peter
Gottlieb" wrote:

look at it this way, you complain that someone driving a big SUV
is endangering you in your little Honda Accord (the SUV might
be what, 4 to 5 times your vehicle weight). Well, that Honda
is at least 5 times the weight of my Honda. Why are you driving
that a vehicle that endangers me?

Heh. Because I got rid of my 350 when I had a family, which was
untransportable on the two wheeler.

another downside of motorcycles is that the gate sensors at
KBED can't detect them - at least not the 250cc one I have. ARGH!


But seriously, I would love to use something much smaller for local
transportation. The bike works for just myself, and if there were small
rechargeable electric golf-cart like vehicles that could handle these
hills
we would get one for local errands. Boy would parking be easy!!

I think the difference is that I would like to get the smallest vehicle
that
will get me and family around and others look to get the biggest one that
can do the job.

a real challenge is to distinquish between the "I'll buy the biggest
thing I can because I can" people and the folks who are need the capacity
as well as the safety.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

"Bob Noel" wrote in message
...

a real challenge is to distinquish between the "I'll buy the biggest
thing I can because I can" people and the folks who are need the capacity
as well as the safety.


You can't. It's a tough problem, which is why there is talk along the lines
of:
Classifying SUVs and other trucks designed to carry passengers as
passenger vehicles.
Legislating improved fuel economy.
Increasing usage taxes to more closely match cost of highways and
environmental effects.
Improving safety of smaller vehicles through improved engineering of
large and small vehicles.
Improving safety of SUVs through active suspension systems (eg,
Bose).
Restructuring insurance to account for changed risk profiles.
Black boxes in all new vehicles.
Alternate fuel (eg, hydrogen, electric) motive systems and
infrastructure.
Improvement of some, and abandonment of other, mass transit systems.

I'm sure there's more, that's just a quick list. Personally I favor a
market based system since it requires the least government intervention to
run. Under such a system the attempt is made to make the purchase and usage
of any vehicle very accurately match the full costs to society of such
purchase and use. The base cost may have to include the legally mandated
minimum insurance requirement, which should be reduced to decrease the
insulation provided to irresponsible drivers. What is assumed to be a
"right" to drive should probably move more toward more of a priviledge, to
be earned, and respected.

"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message
om...
Dave wrote in message
...
onsitewelding wrote:


I will say this though.......My opinion of Bush is he is a sneaky S.O.B
that
used the 9/11 attacks for his campain into Iraq. "Saddam has WOMD so we
must
go in and remove the axis of evil" soo much Bunk!
It should have read-"I George W Bush so solomly swear to use the 9/11
terrorist attacks as an excuse to invade Iraq so that my rich American
friends and I can control all the middle east oil reserves"

This is just my opinion however.


What really peeves me is that ..If it *were* all about the oil, why
are gas prices outrageous??

The liberals have quietly backed away from that. If the war was about
oil, why didn't we take any oil? The liberals have a hard time saying
they were wrong.
Cheney, the president, Bush the gofer just underestimated the post invasion
chaos. Plans foiled - simple as that.

In article , "Peter
Gottlieb" wrote:

[snip]
Under such a system the attempt is made to make the purchase and
usage
of any vehicle very accurately match the full costs to society of such
purchase and use.

and that isn't easy. For example, a lot of people talk about
zero emissions vehicles which leads to the soundbite of
those cars really being pollute-elsewhere vehicles. And
which costs society more, the car powered by oil, the car
powered by electricity from nukes, or the car powered by
electricity from oil/gas/coal? Don't forget the decommissioning
of the nuke and the waste, but don't forget the cost of
mining and transporting the oil/coal/gas. etc etc etc.

--
Bob Noel
Seen on Kerry's campaign airplane: "the real deal"
oh yeah baby.

Bush is stupid. Cheney's sneaky.

What a team!

mike regish


Come own... Either he's stupid or sneaky enough to personally plan a war.
Not both.