1st page | 2nd page | 3rd page | 4th page | 5th page | 6th page | 7th page | 8th page | 9th page | 10th page | 11th page | 12th page | 13th page | 14th page | 15th page | 16th page | 17th page | 18th page | 19th page | 20th page | 21th page | 22th page
Subject:
Re: $3/gal Gas coming soon?
From: doctor(at)netknow.ca (The Doctor)Subject: Re: $3/gal Gas coming soon?
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 14:18:59 +0000 (UTC)
Lines: 6
NNTP-Posting-Host: doctor.nl2k.ab.ca
Originator: doctor(at)netknow.ca (The Doctor)
______________________________________________
It is already C$3/gal in this country.
--
Member - Liberal International On 11 Sept 2001 the WORLD was violated.
This is doctor(at)nl2k.ab.ca Ici doctor(at)nl2k.ab.ca
Society MUST be saved! Extremists must dissolve.
Time to see the eternal relegation of Man U, Liverpool, Everton and Millwall
SUBJECT: Re: $3/gal Gas coming soon?
GO >>>
From: "Daniel J. Lavigne" Subject: Re: $3/gal Gas coming soon?
Lines: 123
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 09:40:59 -0500
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.209.132.102
______________________________________________
"Menwith"
news:403B0F7B.256CCB3C(at)hill.com...
> > similar to the citizens of "Third World Nations", shall be not
> able to pay.
>
> Perhaps the citizens of third world countries shoud investigate
> low cost alternatives to petroleum,
> such as wind, photovoltaic, biomass, hydrogen, or conservation.
>
> Menwith
****************************
They are doing so, with the assistance of men and women who long ago woke up
to the reality that the needs of greed could not survive the collapse of the
earth`s "Carrying Capacity" (Google, if need be.).
Do you consider the basic needs of third world citizens a subject that
should be discussed in a "Have" society, with a view to helping them prepare
to fend for themselves?
Otherwise, how will you explain to your very own poorer and politically /
totally disenfranchised citizens that they must simply expect to suffer due
to the coming end of "Lo-Cost" oil and gas?
Will you tell them that they should have had fewer children and that those
they do have should be "taught" to work for reasonable wages (As described
and paid by the rich.)?
Will you tell them that you expect them to work without hope of decent
health care or warm homes at "reasonable prices"?
Would you be willing to pay higher taxes in order to maintain social order?
Would you be willing to contribute yet more taxes in order that your nation
be able to maintain and improve its ability to mass murder millions, if need
be, in order to seize their oil, gas and other resources that will be so
necessary to the maintaining of social order and the necessary health of
your poor who are expected to clean your toilets and do other menial work?
What will you suggest that your society do when the energy crisis causes our
food production enterprises to contract / downsize in order to maintain
"Profitability", while producing and delivering much less food than
previously??
How will you guarantee to the poor that they will not be allowed to starve
to death?
Lastly, what will you do when your will and capacity to ignore the coming
crisis is shoved under your nose in the form of starving millions of utterly
disenfranchised sods who may well then decide, suddenly and enmasse, to make
the rich "pay" for having delivered the whole of humanity to that situation?
Take your time when answering "Menwith", our future depends on our ability
to "Get It Right The First Time!".
Should you fail, or allow the greed of your leaders to command your silent
and self-defeating acquiescence to their hopes that the news of the energy
crisis shall not become public until "they" have prepared their own survival
plans, you shall have acted against your immediate and long term interests.
To put it bluntly:
Whether the majority can accept the reality of the situation DOES NOT
MATTER.
We face the end of life as we have known it.
We should, if we are the "Sentient Beings" that we purport to be, DEMAND of
each other that all start to prepare, as best they may, to survive the
crisis; or to die with dignity without resorting to the futility of violence
to secure a few more barrels of oil, gas, fertilizers and food.
Thank you.
Daniel J. Lavigne
***********************************
Tired of supporting societal insanity?
Tired of lies that would have you ignore your
duty to refuse to support societies that would
commit mass murder?
JOIN THE TAX REFUSAL
http://www.taxrefusal.com
*********************************************************
> > "Menwith"
> > news:403AD010.22F13BFD(at)hill.com...
> > > That would appear unlikely, except in regional problem areas.
> > > nymex crude,today, 34.46.bbl
> > > nymex gasoline, 1.03 gal (thats commodity price, your retail will be
> > higher)
> > > to get commodity gas to 2.30/gal, the price to get retail to $3,
> > > that would happen at a crude price of over $70.
> > > (Such a price will put third world countries out of the market.)
> > >
> > > Menwith
> > > \r
> > > JPaul wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> >
http://netscape5.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid={40A4FE60-9FE7-4C04-B5C
> > 7-22EEB3113ACB}&siteid=netscape&dist=special
> >
> > ****************************************************
> > "Menwith"
> >
> > (Such a price will put third world countries out of the market.)
> >
> > True. Such will come about as the "Have" nations cause the development
of
> > "Demand Destruction" due to price; and thereby secure "MORE!" of the
world`s
> > remaining "Lo-Cost Oil" for themselves, regardless that their poorer
> > citizens, similar to the citizens of "Third World Nations", shall be not
> > able to pay.
> >
> > Thank you.
> >
> > Daniel J. Lavigne
***********************************
SUBJECT: Re: $3/gal Gas coming soon?
GO >>>
From: hhc314(at)yahoo.com (Harry Conover)Subject: Re: $3/gal Gas coming soon?
Date: 24 Feb 2004 08:43:22 -0800
Lines: 41
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.128.225.233
______________________________________________
"Pete"
> We will never see gas prices lower than $1.30 again. It was $1.41 here in Ks
> until last week. One thing a lot of idiots don`t seem to understand is that
> the gas prices are very much related to how much oil Americas biggest oil
> producer, Opec is buying. The week before last they announced they would be
> cutting production by a some odd 10% and last week gas prices soar. Go
> figure.
Just for the record, my first used car cost $75, and gas was selling
at $0.29/gal for regular, and $0.39/gal for extra. My first new car
was a 1970 Chevy Malibu for which I pain $3100, and gas prices had
risen to $0.59/gal. In 1990, I purchase a new, Ford Bronco XLT (the
big Bronco) for $18,250, and by that time, fuel prices had risen to
around $1.00/for extra.
Is anyone starting to see a correlation between car prices and fuel
costs?
Today, a new Ford Expedition XLT is priced over $40,000, and fuel
prices here in Boston average about $1.75/gal for mid-range, but past
car price/fuel cost ratios indicate that it should be more like $2.50
- $3.00 per gallon, so I suppose we`re getting a bargain!
Now compare fuel prices with inflation, the rising cost of living, the
the effective devaluation of the dollar. Based on my purchasing
experience, the 1970 dollar is now worth about 10-cents. A home that
you could purchase for around $19,000 in 1970 sells today for around
$200,000 (east coast of the US), and a car that you could purchase for
$3,000 at that time now costs in excess of $20,000. During the same
time span, gasoline has risen only from $0.39/gal to $1.75/gal while
starting salaries of new college graduates have risen from around
$5,000 to today`s $60,000 range figures.
I suppose what I`m saying is that any family that is today financially
able to purchase a $20-40,000 vehicle, should certainly be in a
position to pay between $3.00 and $4.00/gal for the fuel to operate
it. Anything less is a bargain!
Then too, maybe I`m missing something.
Harry C.
Last "Tax" Post on Wordpress:
Title:
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 2009 12:51:40 +0000
Author: One Man's Thoughts
More on: http://onemansthoughts.wordpress.com/2009/09/27/2851/
______________________________________
Title: The "Cadillac" Health Tax
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 21:18:02 +0000
Author: stumdanger
Someone out there please. Please help me. Explain this to me please. Dear God someone out there who has more sense and reason and knowledge than me, break this down…..
So the White House Cheif of Staff….One of the TOP advisors to the president of the United States, went on national television to discuss health care reform. A health care reform that I would like to remind everyone, that the government says will not try and take over or put out of business the insurance companies, but merely offer a fair balance. But the White House Cheif of Staff, Rahm Emanuel, goes on national television and says to the nation that our president believes it will help cut the costs of their health plan and be a benefit to the people of the United States to tax….let me say that again… to TAX health insurance plans that have higher premiums and give out better benefits.
One of the top aides in the White House says the president is in favor of taxing those of us who were able to get a good health insurance plan to help pay for his plan that does not generate the money to work on its own. The president sent his top aide to go on CNN and tell the country that he wants to make insurance companies pay for offering us better benefits to help support his reforms that are designed to not interfer with the plans we already have.
I’m sorry if I seem a tad redundent. I had to phrase that several different ways to see if I understood it.
Ladies and gentlemen…What the FUCK is the White House thinking? I mean, seriously. How does this make sense? So much for all those people who gave up a raise for better insurance. Congrats. Now you make nothing and we’re going to tax your health plan….So much for the unions. Heh, so much for providing an affordable health care reform plan that promotes free and equal trade by dipping into the federal power of levying taxes.
Christ, someone help me understand this. Please, oh please explain how this works. Hehe, if only we had the political authority to get Rahm Emanuel on here to explain what the hell the White House meant by that.
I mean come on White House. I’m not Fox News. You can talk to me right? …You know what, I’d settle for a White House intern…Hell, I’d settle for Monica Lowenski to pop back up on scene and try to explain this. Any one? Please? Help?
More on: http://stumdanger.wordpress.com/2009/10/18/the-cadillac-health-tax/
_________________________________________________________________________
| Diablo | Alternative car fuels | Rewal
Trabalho Restaurantes | Emergency Cash Advance | Amor Internet | Kredit Für Selbständige | Cocktail
no host no host niezarejestrowana strona brak hosta wymiana linkow
Powered by v901.net | Contact: info@v901.net | XML Map | CSV Map