Truth in Environmental Science

Archived discussion from Toril-2.
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Truth in Environmental Science

Postby teflor the ranger » Fri Jul 29, 2005 6:41 am

"Ethanol production in the United States does not benefit the nation's energy security, its agriculture, the economy, or the environment," according to the study by Cornell's David Pimentel and Berkeley's Tad Patzek. They conclude the country would be better off investing in solar, wind and hydrogen energy."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8607389/

One of the many reasons you shouldn't believe the eco-hype. Solid science should dictate the course of US environmental policy, not pressure from international treaties or theoretical emissions theories.

While there is economic benefit in building a completely new infrastructure for no good reason, the negative effects will be felt soon after and profoundly enough that you will wish someone based their decision on science instead of hype.
Ragorn
Sojourner
Posts: 4732
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2001 6:01 am

Postby Ragorn » Fri Jul 29, 2005 11:51 am

This is a moot point. Our environmental policy is dictated by Exxon-Mobil and the utilities. Post this again in 2008 when it might be an issue.
- Ragorn
Shar: Leave the moaning to the people who have real issues to moan about like rangers or newbies.
Corth: Go ask out a chick that doesn't wiggle her poon in people's faces for a living.
Vandic
Sojourner
Posts: 280
Joined: Wed May 02, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Nashville, TN USA
Contact:

Postby Vandic » Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:16 pm

Ragorn wrote:This is a moot point. Our environmental policy is dictated by Exxon-Mobil and the utilities. Post this again in 2008 when it might be an issue.


First of all, if it's moot, there is no point. Don't say that around Vandy or she'll smack you.

Second, if you really think Exxon-Mobil is in charge of environmental policy, take a look at an NPDES permit for one of their refineries.
Vandic wields a massive mithril axe of gazebo chopping.
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Ashiwi » Fri Jul 29, 2005 2:28 pm

I should probably stay out of this topic because it's pissed me off for the last decade.

Imagine where we would be in the research if 1/10th the money we've invested in non-producing holes had been invested into alternative forms of energy since 1970.

Besides putting all those poor people in the oil industry out of business... awwwww, so sad. And try to remember that I live in Oklahoma, and I have a damned good idea how deeply impoverished this state would be without the oil industry... but the money just isn't worth it in the long run, and we would recover eventually.

Nobody can tell me that we can go from building the first computer, which was the size of a house, to technology where one box the size of a man's palm has computing power thousands of times greater, but we STILL can't build an efficient and affordable solar cell.

I'm not prone to "Area 51" type of thinking, but in this case my money is on the odds that there are already improvements to energy systems out there that are so amazing we would be in awe, but they've been covered up, locked away, and hushed, because so much of our lives is driven by the need to support the oil industry.
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Fri Jul 29, 2005 4:02 pm

i call bs on ashiwi. we aren't the type of country that would put someone in power with a primary concern for the oil and fossil fuel industry. thats just silly.
Shevarash OOC: 'Muma on Artificial Intelligence - Muma OOC: 'someday the quotes really will just become AI and then i'll talk to the AI and be like, hey you come from me, but it will get angry at me and revolt and try to kill me or something heheheh. like in the movies''
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Fri Jul 29, 2005 4:05 pm

Well, if I were wise I would just stay out of this, but I'm not.

Big oil absolutely controls the energy sector of America. In fact, it would be hard to understate their presence, imo. As for NPDES or any other regulation, any positive net effect is due to relentless pressure from non-profit groups leveraging the energy companies against their own customers.

Case in point. My day job is working for one of these non-profits. We don't only work on energy issues, we actually work on grassroots rural organizing, but wind energy is a big component of that. Well, last year in the state legislature, we proposed a bill that would have set a renewable energy standard for the state. Half of all new energy consumed would be from renewable. Considering my state increases electrical consumption by less than 2% per year, this was in no way radical. Even the conservative PUC had a renewable energy bill this year. None of them passed. It is absolutely amazing to watch the energy companies lobby because essentially all they do is raise their eyebrows and legislators quiver in fear.

So, why don't we have wind turbines all over the Midwest? Two reasons: one, the big energy companies haven't figured out how to make maximum profit off of wind yet and in addition, still have money to be made off of coal. Two, the transmission isn't there yet and those kind of projects are nigtmares logistically, as well as costing billions.

As for ethanol. The reason Pimental doesn't like it is because it is predicated on conventional ag...which uses enormous amounts of fossil fuel. Well, Pimental also recently published a study showing that organic methods produce the same yields as conventional with at least 30% less fossil fuel usage. So, while I am not a huge advocate of ethanol, I think it has its place. Our energy sources need to be diversified mightily. Which, to me, includes wind, solar, hydro, ethanol, biomatter, hydrogen, ethanol, and coal (for the time being).
Birile
Sojourner
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Albany, NY

Postby Birile » Fri Jul 29, 2005 4:33 pm

Daz wrote:i call bs on ashiwi. we aren't the type of country that would put someone in power with a primary concern for the oil and fossil fuel industry. thats just silly.


:lol:
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Ashiwi » Fri Jul 29, 2005 4:36 pm

Oh, this reminded me of something I've been meaning to bring to the BBS to ask about.

I just picked up 3.4 acres way the hell out in the country. To get to my place you have to go a few miles past that one-horse town, turn right at that water tower, drive a little ways, make a right at that smaller water tower, turn left on that next gravel road, follow it to the dirt road and keep going, and then when you finally run out of road it's only a little farther and hang a left. I'm a mile off the lake, I have a natural spring on my property, and I've already plotted exactly where the garden's going to be laid out and picked up a book on organic gardening. It's like a dream come true for me. Did I mention I'm approximately a mile away from the lake?

I've promised myself that I'm going to have some form of alternative energy on my property within ten years, and I wanted to go ahead and start looking into the resources for building my own windmill and how to set up the system to run it into a residence. I'm totally clueless when it comes to this stuff at the moment.

Does anybody have any good links or resources for do-it-yourselfers on this subject? I don't doubt my ability to accomplish it, as I'm self-taught and do all my own automotive repairs, metal work, and plumbing, and I'm taking up carpentry as soon as I have the space to build my own workshop. The part that concerns me most is the electrical wiring.
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
rylan
Sojourner
Posts: 2903
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Hudson, MA

Postby rylan » Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:23 pm

Check out HomeDepot. Not sure if they sell it in your area, but in parts of the country they have solar panel roofing. Basically it is done so the solar cells look like the roofing tiles so it doesn't stick out and blends in nicely with the dark roof.
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Ashiwi » Fri Jul 29, 2005 5:33 pm

::boggle::

No kidding??? I didn't have any clue!
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Fri Jul 29, 2005 10:42 pm

You want less dependance on oil.. well transportation (mostly vehicular) accounts for about 78% of our fossil fuel usage. Lets start there. Show me one practical alternative to fossil fuels for transportation purposes. Hybrids are great but your still relying upon fossil fuels. Hydrogen is an option.. but it actually takes more energy to create hydrogen than the amount of energy stored within it. To create a hydrogen economy we would have to exponentially increase our electrical capacity. And most electricty is generated by burning natural gas anyway. Perhaps nuclear is a solution.. we could build several thousand nuclear plants and start converting the electricity into hydrogen for use in transportation. But then, uranium is a finite resource too, with its own ecological problems.

Btw, do a web search on 'peak oil'. Chances are we're hitting it about now. The major oil producing wells of the world are mature and declining in output.. few new sources of oil are being found. Meanwhile, demand is surging as India and China industrialize. Energy will be THE number one challenge that we face in the coming decades.

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth

Goddamned slippery mage.
Yasden
Sojourner
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Lake Stevens, WA, USA

Postby Yasden » Sat Jul 30, 2005 1:37 am

I say we burn useless BBS posts for fuel.

*nod me*

Let's start with this one! *cackle*
Support Your Addiction! Vote for TorilMUD Today!

Top Mud Sites: http://www.topmudsites.com/cgi-bin/topmuds/rankem.cgi?id=shev

Why Nerox is jealous of me:

Nerox tells you 'man this thing is kicking my ass and i have blisters!'
Nerox tells you 'ok attempting it again put tape on my fingers for easier sliding'
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Sat Jul 30, 2005 1:39 am

Well, one of the reasons why we can't move on alternative energy sources is because lobbyists and special interest groups keep pushing psuedo-sciences.

They end up being a non-producing hole in the ground like ethanol.
Botef
Sojourner
Posts: 1056
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Eastern Washington
Contact:

Postby Botef » Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:07 am

Corth wrote:You want less dependance on oil.. well transportation (mostly vehicular) accounts for about 78% of our fossil fuel usage. Lets start there. Show me one practical alternative to fossil fuels for transportation purposes. Hybrids are great but your still relying upon fossil fuels. Hydrogen is an option.. but it actually takes more energy to create hydrogen than the amount of energy stored within it. To create a hydrogen economy we would have to exponentially increase our electrical capacity. And most electricty is generated by burning natural gas anyway. Perhaps nuclear is a solution.. we could build several thousand nuclear plants and start converting the electricity into hydrogen for use in transportation. But then, uranium is a finite resource too, with its own ecological problems.

Btw, do a web search on 'peak oil'. Chances are we're hitting it about now. The major oil producing wells of the world are mature and declining in output.. few new sources of oil are being found. Meanwhile, demand is surging as India and China industrialize. Energy will be THE number one challenge that we face in the coming decades.

Corth



http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,54456,00.html

From 2002, an article about Algae that produces hydrogen that some company in Berkley is working on turning into a large scale source. If only more people invested in this kind of research and development...
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Sat Jul 30, 2005 2:30 am

If there is potentially money to be made in alternative sources of energy, companies will invest... There are really no vested interests in the Western world for limiting energy production to fossil fuels. If exxon/mobile can make money producing something else, they certainly will do it.

There is plenty of capital out there for investing in energy. Spending billions of dollars to develop oil fields and refineries is not uncommon. If this algae thing works and is cost effective relative to oil, the company doing the research will do well and you will see others jumping aboard.

As oil prices increase, which they will, you will see a lot more investment in alternative energy because the alternatives will become more cost-effective relative to fossil fuels. A gallon of gasoline is incredibly underpriced currently. A gallon of starbucks coffee, for instance, costs more. But a gallon of gasoline can push a 2 ton chunk of metal for 30 miles or so at 70 mph. Can you believe its only $2.50 a gallon?

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:42 am

Corth wrote:If there is potentially money to be made in alternative sources of energy, companies will invest... There are really no vested interests in the Western world for limiting energy production to fossil fuels. If exxon/mobile can make money producing something else, they certainly will do it.

There is plenty of capital out there for investing in energy. Spending billions of dollars to develop oil fields and refineries is not uncommon. If this algae thing works and is cost effective relative to oil, the company doing the research will do well and you will see others jumping aboard.

As oil prices increase, which they will, you will see a lot more investment in alternative energy because the alternatives will become more cost-effective relative to fossil fuels. A gallon of gasoline is incredibly underpriced currently. A gallon of starbucks coffee, for instance, costs more. But a gallon of gasoline can push a 2 ton chunk of metal for 30 miles or so at 70 mph. Can you believe its only $2.50 a gallon?

Corth


Why convert to newer energies when you still have decades of oil still left to sell? All of these refineries and oil pumps would become obsolete while the fuel that they refine becomes too cheap to justify the means to gather? The oil companies will continue to pursue this avenue until the last drop has been sold; until then, they will do their research quietly and do what they can to keep alternative energy out of the spotlight. When the time is right, the oil industry will reveal their research and probably have already constructed "test" facilities to "modernize" the rest of the country/world. Seriously, if you think the oil companies will throw away a cash cow by switching to alternative energy before using the rest of what they have, you're mistaken.

As far as gas being cheap. I have to laugh at that one. You can't compare a gallon of gas to a gallon of coffee. People buy gas because they need it. People buy coffee as a luxury. While you may be able to categorize gas as a luxury, in that we don't "need" it to survive, that is not how the economy sees it. Luxury items always cost more than necessities for a reason. Example: Why is gold so expensive? It doesn't do much sitting on my finger, yet my wife payed quite a bit of money for my band. Do you think it would be fair to compair a gallon of molten gold to a gallon of $100.00 water and then say that we should feel lucky that water is so cheap?
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Sun Jul 31, 2005 1:40 pm

Gas is cheap from a value perspective. For $2.50 you can lug a couple tons of metal for 30 miles. How much would it cost you to hire someone to push your car for 30 miles? The point is that oil is the cheap labor that props up our very nice standard of living.

Second, you are being naive and simplistic in your attitude towards the oil companies. To call them an oil company is misleading. These are energy companies. If all they want to do is pump every last drop of oil out of the ground (really stupid suggestion if you think about it), then why is Shell building <a href ="http://www.shell.com/home/Framework?siteId=hydrogen-en">hydrogen fueling stations</a>, Chevron promoting a <a href = "http://willyoujoinus.com/">website</a> for the discussion of alternative fuels, and the many other examples im too lazy to list of 'big oil companies' trying to build market share in the post-oil economy?
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Ashiwi » Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:18 pm

The companies that are considering alternative fuel sources right now are the ones with an eye towards their long-term investments. Odds are, they've weighed costs and potential outcomes, and have decided that if they begin the investment now, they'll come out ahead of their competitors in future years when the demands for alternative fuel substitution become mandated instead of simply voluntary. If they begin a years-long switch to alternative fuels they will be capable of drastically undercutting those competitors who will have to invest enormous chunks of their profits into switching over at crunchtime, and will also stand a good chance of capturing more of the green market during their period of investment.
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
Lahgen
Sojourner
Posts: 542
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 2:58 am

Postby Lahgen » Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:34 pm

So you're complaining that the businesses are doing it for pragmatic reasons rather than altruistic ones?
Kesena OOC: 'i wish my daddy bought me power tools'
Dorgh group-says 'damn, even with Cofen helping Mori, they STILL can't kill someone
Hekanut says 'I know level doesn't matter much, but most won't take seriously if a level 2 claims to be the best thing before, during, and after sliced bread.'

Rather than seeing "subpar race/class," see "challenge."
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Postby Ashiwi » Sun Jul 31, 2005 3:47 pm

You got the idea that I was complaining??? No, Lahgen, if I were complaining I'd be going on about people that have to see negative in every statement and seem to want to turn everything into a bitchfest.

I rather thought it was a combination of good business coupled with long-term environmental common sense and a concern for the future. If you'd rather see complaining, however, do feel free.
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Sun Jul 31, 2005 6:04 pm

But what happens when the masses who know nothing about business much less running good business dicatate to the business what good business is?

Solid environmental policy is good for business. Why not let good business figure out how to do it?
Last edited by teflor the ranger on Sun Jul 31, 2005 9:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Sun Jul 31, 2005 6:31 pm

Corth wrote:Gas is cheap from a value perspective. For $2.50 you can lug a couple tons of metal for 30 miles. How much would it cost you to hire someone to push your car for 30 miles? The point is that oil is the cheap labor that props up our very nice standard of living.

Second, you are being naive and simplistic in your attitude towards the oil companies. To call them an oil company is misleading. These are energy companies. If all they want to do is pump every last drop of oil out of the ground (really stupid suggestion if you think about it), then why is Shell building <a href ="http://www.shell.com/home/Framework?siteId=hydrogen-en">hydrogen fueling stations</a>, Chevron promoting a <a href = "http://willyoujoinus.com/">website</a> for the discussion of alternative fuels, and the many other examples im too lazy to list of 'big oil companies' trying to build market share in the post-oil economy?


Value perspective means nothing. In that aspect, water would be the most valueble liquid on earth. I can see the point you were making, but the anaolgy was poor and misleading.

As far as naivety, well, I'm not too sure about that. You can say, "well, they are doing this and this research, and making this and this that isn't oil," but it doesn't truely mean anything in the end. They are setting themselves up so they don't go under when oil goes out and "alternative" energy comes in -- that is all, but don't think for a second they aren't going to try and milk this oil thing until it is no longer financially lucrative to do so.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Sun Jul 31, 2005 9:44 pm

Of course they will try and make as much money as they can. Which is great for everyone. The point though is that if they can make money from alternative energy, they'll do that too. They have no reason to hinder progress in that area. The two are not mutually exclusive. They can make money from both, and they are doing so.

I'm still not quite sure why people get offended when companies make money.

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
fotex
Sojourner
Posts: 288
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 12:23 am

Postby fotex » Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:18 pm

Yay! We all agree!! :)
avak
Sojourner
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 6:01 am

Postby avak » Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:19 pm

While I would certainly agree that capitalism is an effective means at generating innovation, it does have its limitations. In general, the limitations revolve around the human perception of time and space.

If we operate in a complete devotion to self-interest (which we are close to in the US and it sounds to me like Corth is advocating) we really only care about the effects of our actions on -us- in -our- lifetime. Obviously, some actions have latent effects only felt long after the impetus of those effects has passed away. For example, there is still atrazine in many of the wells in my area even though the use of atrazine was banned long ago.

As an alternative view, some American Indian tribes talk about the 7th generation. What will effects my actions have on the 7th generation. That is the place where pure capitalism is self-defeating; it is not able to consider the long-term future adequately because it is governed by people who have no genuine self-interest in that future.

So, in my view, to really achieve a sustainable world, we have to compromise pure capitalism. That means coming together as a community and making strategic, altruistic decisions about our future. One of those arenas in which we need to come together is the condition of the global ecosystem.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Mon Aug 01, 2005 12:04 am

Corth wrote:I'm still not quite sure why people get offended when companies make money.

Corth


Maybe I can help you with this :) It's not that they make the money, its how they make it and who they step on to make it. Take for instances a chemical company. They make a product that helps me, I like it, they take my money, that's fine. They make money, and I get my thing. I'm not mad at them; however, when they pour their waste into my water supply to make more money, that's what makes people angry. It's the greed that drives them to take the "looking out for myself" to the extreme.

You can't look at business as black and white, and I know somewhere in that chest of yours is a heart, maybe the size of the grinch's heart, but it is there. Maybe you wouldn't really care if your wife got cancer from the chemicals dumped in your water supply. Maybe you would applaud the company at finding that way to cut corners. Most people, rational people, would probably get a little, if not extremely, upset that this company chose to turn its back on humanity and let a portion of the society suffer greatly to save a penny here and there. Of course, you'll probably say you'd be upset, but it was only a small portion of society that was harmed and the greater portion of society benefited from the lower cost of their product, and so on.... Here's the thing though: Utilitarianism has a large flaw; this flaw is that you can never quantify pleasure. Bentham was wrong, sadly. There is no way to say that the suffering that company caused the small portion was justifiable by selling people soap at a price ten cents cheaper than if they had properly disposed of the waste.

I'm probably assuming and taking your business sense to the extreme here, but the ideas are right. You are a capitalist and you are a utilitarian, for the most part.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Mon Aug 01, 2005 2:17 am

Where exactly am I or anyone else advocating dumping chemicals into lakes? My understanding is that when someone gets caught doing this, they goto jail. Not exactly accepted business practice.

Hey, listen, I have no problem with environmental regulations. I'm a huge advocate of clean alternative energy... in part because we're running out of dirty energy.. but also because clean is good! Generally speaking, I feel that companies should have to pay to clean up their messes. Its a cost of doing business. In fact, most of them do clean up their own messes.

I'm more curious about people who hate business just because the purpose is to make money. I don't understand what is wrong with providing a valuable good or service out of greed for something in return. Greed is the reason we live so damn comfortably as a species.. because face it.. I'm not going to do anything for you unless you do something for me in return. But when that gets accomplished, we both produce something of value.
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth



Goddamned slippery mage.
Daz
Sojourner
Posts: 1942
Joined: Wed May 08, 2002 5:01 am
Location: newark, delaware
Contact:

Postby Daz » Mon Aug 01, 2005 3:57 am

if i wasnt unemployed, uninsured, handicapped, and two hundred thousand dollars in debt, i'd be all about people doing things for each other for money.

that said, i am essentially useless as a human being, and every day becoming more so. thank you hippies, even though none of the millions of incentives created on your behalf will help me with my so-called life. appreciate the gestures, though!

oh, i don't recycle, but i do wash my hands after i pee.
Shevarash OOC: 'Muma on Artificial Intelligence - Muma OOC: 'someday the quotes really will just become AI and then i'll talk to the AI and be like, hey you come from me, but it will get angry at me and revolt and try to kill me or something heheheh. like in the movies''
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Mon Aug 01, 2005 4:11 am

Of course, Kifle would ignore the fact that the entire point of democratic capitalism is to take advantage of the types of behaviors that some would find unsavory.

Just because you cannot see how it works in a system doesn't mean that it isn't helping.

And yes, last I checked, dumping carcinogenic materials into water would be illegal.
Teflor does. Teflor does not.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:37 am

Corth wrote:Where exactly am I or anyone else advocating dumping chemicals into lakes? My understanding is that when someone gets caught doing this, they goto jail. Not exactly accepted business practice.

Hey, listen, I have no problem with environmental regulations. I'm a huge advocate of clean alternative energy... in part because we're running out of dirty energy.. but also because clean is good! Generally speaking, I feel that companies should have to pay to clean up their messes. Its a cost of doing business. In fact, most of them do clean up their own messes.

I'm more curious about people who hate business just because the purpose is to make money. I don't understand what is wrong with providing a valuable good or service out of greed for something in return. Greed is the reason we live so damn comfortably as a species.. because face it.. I'm not going to do anything for you unless you do something for me in return. But when that gets accomplished, we both produce something of value.


I answered your question. That is why people hate greed. Greed leads to taking advantage of people and bettering ones condition at the price of anothers. People do not hate people that make money, they envy them -- there is a difference; however, envy can be misconstrued as hate. I have no problem paying my mechanic when I can't fix my problem. He's there for a reason; however, I do hate the mechanic that fixes my problem along with other things I don't need while he tells me I do need them and then jacks up the prices. This is what people hate -- greed.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Postby Kifle » Mon Aug 01, 2005 8:51 am

teflor the ranger wrote:Of course, Kifle would ignore the fact that the entire point of democratic capitalism is to take advantage of the types of behaviors that some would find unsavory.

Just because you cannot see how it works in a system doesn't mean that it isn't helping.

And yes, last I checked, dumping carcinogenic materials into water would be illegal.


No, of course Kifle would ignore teflor...
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Mon Aug 01, 2005 9:13 pm

Kifle wrote:
teflor the ranger wrote:Of course, Kifle would ignore the fact that the entire point of democratic capitalism is to take advantage of the types of behaviors that some would find unsavory.

Just because you cannot see how it works in a system doesn't mean that it isn't helping.

And yes, last I checked, dumping carcinogenic materials into water would be illegal.


No, of course Kifle would ignore teflor...


Teflor + Kifle = Teflor

Kifle = ? Hmm.

Just givin' you a hard time Kif :P
Teflor does. Teflor does not.

Return to “General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests