![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 9 to 33 of 33. Go back in thread:
Posted by Kath on May 21, 2008, at 12:26:30
In reply to Lou's reply to Kath-glumndume » Kath, posted by Lou Pilder on May 21, 2008, at 4:56:35
Hi Lou,
Nope I'm from Canada - don't know why I said that really - I guess it just sounded cheery & friendly. I wanted you to know I was feeling friendly towards you! :-))))))
Thanks for the link Lou, :-)) Kath
Posted by Lou Pilder on May 21, 2008, at 19:45:31
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to Kath-glumndume » Lou Pilder, posted by Kath on May 21, 2008, at 12:26:30
> Hi Lou,
>
> Nope I'm from Canada - don't know why I said that really - I guess it just sounded cheery & friendly. I wanted you to know I was feeling friendly towards you! :-))))))
>
> Thanks for the link Lou, :-)) KathKath,
You wrote,[...feeling friendly...].
Lou's first smiley this year, :-)
Lou
Posted by Lou Pilder on May 21, 2008, at 19:51:24
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to Phillipa-deppat » Lou Pilder, posted by Phillipa on May 21, 2008, at 12:18:17
> Lou I want to know what is happening in this country and what the job market will be. Phillipa
Phillipa,
You wrote,[...what is happening in this country...the job market....].
What part of {what is happening in this country} would you like to know?
Lou
Posted by Phillipa on May 21, 2008, at 20:49:46
In reply to Lou's reply to Phillipa- » Phillipa, posted by Lou Pilder on May 21, 2008, at 19:51:24
Are we going into a depression with people losing a lot of jobs? Phillipa
Posted by Lou Pilder on May 22, 2008, at 20:53:23
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to Phillipa- » Lou Pilder, posted by Phillipa on May 21, 2008, at 20:49:46
> Are we going into a depression with people losing a lot of jobs? Phillipa
Phillipa,
You wrote,[...into a depression...losing jobs?...]
I can not see into the future. Yet today, I see the circumstances surrounding the depression that started in 1929 to be at hand. And today, there are others that can see those paralles also. The issue to me is not as to if there is going to be a depression, but as to what can be done now to prevent a depression. For IMO all that is needed to be to have a depression, is for it to be allowed to happen.
Lou
Posted by Kath on May 23, 2008, at 20:18:41
In reply to Lou's reply to Kath-gtngtunoghu » Kath, posted by Lou Pilder on May 21, 2008, at 19:45:31
Aw :-)))))))
There's a REALLY big smiley :-)
hugs, Kath
Posted by Sigismund on May 25, 2008, at 18:58:38
In reply to Lou's reply to Phillipa-szhehzdamezlsbthzrlyhvgfn » Phillipa, posted by Lou Pilder on May 22, 2008, at 20:53:23
The increased demand from India and China for oil will lead to a price increase until demand slows.
This will lead into price rises across the board (especially food!) and might (for all I know) slow economic growth more.
As for the immediate credit thing, it's beyond me, but I would have expected it to last a bit longer.
Posted by Sigismund on May 25, 2008, at 19:05:28
In reply to Re: Lou's reply to Phillipa-szhehzdamezlsbthzrlyhvgfn, posted by Sigismund on May 25, 2008, at 18:58:38
Out of interest, how much do you pay for petrol and deisel?
Deisel is now A$1.65/litre here, which might be about US$1.50/l.
1 gallon equals 4.8 litres?
Or are there imperial gallons and American gallons?
Anyway if the gallons we used to have are the same as yours, we pay around US$7.20/gallon.
Does that sound right?
Posted by Phillipa on May 25, 2008, at 21:18:43
In reply to Petrol prices, posted by Sigismund on May 25, 2008, at 19:05:28
Depends where you live in the USA today in North Carolina paid $3.86 gallon. Love Phillipa
Posted by Sigismund on May 26, 2008, at 0:25:20
In reply to Re: Petrol prices » Sigismund, posted by Phillipa on May 25, 2008, at 21:18:43
Half our prices then, PJ.
Posted by Sigismund on May 26, 2008, at 1:57:00
In reply to Re: Petrol prices » Phillipa, posted by Sigismund on May 26, 2008, at 0:25:20
Hey, that's unfair.
Not only is your petrol half price but from what I hear alcohol is half price too.
Posted by Larry Hoover on May 26, 2008, at 7:08:14
In reply to Petrol prices, posted by Sigismund on May 25, 2008, at 19:05:28
> Out of interest, how much do you pay for petrol and deisel?
>
> Deisel is now A$1.65/litre here, which might be about US$1.50/l.
>
> 1 gallon equals 4.8 litres?1 Imperial gallon = 4.54609188 liters
> Or are there imperial gallons and American gallons?
Yes, there are two different gallons to consider. A U.S. gallon is based on four cups to the quart, rather than the Imperial five. That gives a U.S. quart of 32 oz (vs 40), and a U.S. gallon of 128 oz (vs 160).
1 US gallon = 3.78541178 liters
The two conversion ratios I provide are from Google Calculator. Just enter any mathematical calculation or conversion you desire, in real language, right in the search box, and it will spit out the answer. E.g. 39 Fahrenheit in Celcius, U.S. gallon in litres, 64.22 divided by 11....
> Anyway if the gallons we used to have are the same as yours, we pay around US$7.20/gallon.> Does that sound right?
In U.S. gallons, you're paying US$5.68/gallon.
In the U.K., they're paying ~US$9.60.
I last paid US$5.10 (Canada), and we are a huge petroleum exporter nation. Our prices have been sitting about 10-20% higher than typical U.S. prices since the beginning of the year.Gasoline (petrol) is cheaper than diesel locally, for the first time I can recall. There's a diesel shortage in Europe, and they're buying up North American supplies.
Lar
Posted by Sigismund on May 26, 2008, at 14:13:00
In reply to Re: Petrol prices » Sigismund, posted by Larry Hoover on May 26, 2008, at 7:08:14
They say the Chinese are stockpiling deisel, perhaps in response to the earthquake, perhaps for the Olympics.
Posted by caraher on May 26, 2008, at 14:43:13
In reply to Re: Petrol prices » Larry Hoover, posted by Sigismund on May 26, 2008, at 14:13:00
> They say the Chinese are stockpiling deisel, perhaps in response to the earthquake, perhaps for the Olympics.
heck, I can see stockpiling it simply because we're at or near "peak oil" and the price of petroleum products can only increase until we wean ourselves from the stuff. Which I hope we have the wisdom to do voluntarily, rather than involuntarily as it becomes impossible to extract in an economically and environmentally-responsible way.
From that perspective, price hikes aren't all bad - they should spur a change that needs to happen anyway. Though it's a shame the way it's clobbering the budgets of ordinary people...
Posted by Sigismund on May 26, 2008, at 19:33:51
In reply to Re: Petrol prices, posted by caraher on May 26, 2008, at 14:43:13
That's right. The sooner they rise the better...not from the point of view of ordinary people trying to cope (and eat!!), but because nothing else will convince people that we have to do something.
Australia could have lead the world in solar technology. Instead our people went to California (where one is building a solar power plant), China (dunno what he's doing, but he's made a mint) and Germany (dunno). Instead the government thought it was more clever to use the issue to wedge the opposition with a suggestion of nuclear power. And otherwise did nothing. Whole suburbs have been built with houses with black roofs.
I don't get it: This has been staring us in the face since 1980. Peak oil has already passed, hasn't it?
It is interesting how Islamic banking and the Chinese are doing joint venures around this. Looks like globalisation is not the City on the Hill.
Posted by caraher on May 27, 2008, at 10:53:56
In reply to Rant, posted by Sigismund on May 26, 2008, at 19:33:51
I find this promotion quite disturbing: http://www.chrysler.com/en/refuel/index.html?bid=1758115&adid=202631600&pid=12206054
Let's Re-Fool America!
Posted by Lou Pilder on May 27, 2008, at 11:16:38
In reply to Re: Rant, posted by caraher on May 27, 2008, at 10:53:56
> I find this promotion quite disturbing: http://www.chrysler.com/en/refuel/index.html?bid=1758115&adid=202631600&pid=12206054
>
> Let's Re-Fool America!Friends,
It is written here,[...this promotion ..disturbing...].
I am unsure as to what the advertisment purports as to be disturbing. If anyone could list the criteria seen in the advertisment that could constitute to be disturbing in your opinion, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by caraher on May 28, 2008, at 16:13:31
In reply to Lou's response to caraher's post-leiokoka, posted by Lou Pilder on May 27, 2008, at 11:16:38
> Friends,
> It is written here,[...this promotion ..disturbing...].
> I am unsure as to what the advertisment purports as to be disturbing. If anyone could list the criteria seen in the advertisment that could constitute to be disturbing in your opinion, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.It's not that there's any particular element of the ad/promotion that is in itself disturbing. I definitely would not post the link if that were so!
What disturbs me is the collective myopia required for the automaker's most visible response to the current elevation in fuel prices. Rather than promoting more efficient vehicles or (better still) laying out a plan for transitioning to renewable energy in transportation, they chose to subsidize the purchase of inefficient cars by capping customers' short-term fuel expenses.
It's disturbing to me to see someone - or in this case, many people - willfully ignore facts they find inconvenient in order to pursue a path that can lead only to ruin. It's a little like seeing a soldier head off to battle in a war he cannot win - there's nothing intrinsically disturbing about a photograph of him marching away in uniform, but knowing that there's a good chance he won't come back adds new dimensions to the picture. (Which I say not to compare the soldier's situation to this one! I use it only to discuss how something with no obviously unsettling elements can acquire them upon reflection. If I were to choose a metaphor for the fossil fuel situation it would probably involve lemmings...)
Posted by Lou PIlder on May 28, 2008, at 18:05:52
In reply to Re: Lou's response to caraher's post-leiokoka, posted by caraher on May 28, 2008, at 16:13:31
>
> > Friends,
> > It is written here,[...this promotion ..disturbing...].
> > I am unsure as to what the advertisment purports as to be disturbing. If anyone could list the criteria seen in the advertisment that could constitute to be disturbing in your opinion, then I could have the opportunity to respond accordingly.
>
> It's not that there's any particular element of the ad/promotion that is in itself disturbing. I definitely would not post the link if that were so!
>
> What disturbs me is the collective myopia required for the automaker's most visible response to the current elevation in fuel prices. Rather than promoting more efficient vehicles or (better still) laying out a plan for transitioning to renewable energy in transportation, they chose to subsidize the purchase of inefficient cars by capping customers' short-term fuel expenses.
>
> It's disturbing to me to see someone - or in this case, many people - willfully ignore facts they find inconvenient in order to pursue a path that can lead only to ruin. It's a little like seeing a soldier head off to battle in a war he cannot win - there's nothing intrinsically disturbing about a photograph of him marching away in uniform, but knowing that there's a good chance he won't come back adds new dimensions to the picture. (Which I say not to compare the soldier's situation to this one! I use it only to discuss how something with no obviously unsettling elements can acquire them upon reflection. If I were to choose a metaphor for the fossil fuel situation it would probably involve lemmings...)caraher,
You wrote,[...a path that can lead only to ruin...].
I am unsure as to what the {ruin} could be in the context of your post. Could you describe the ruin that the path in your text leads to? If you could, then I could have the opportunity yo respond accordingly.
Lou
Posted by Sigismund on May 29, 2008, at 3:43:31
In reply to Lou's response to caraher's post-leiokoka, posted by Lou Pilder on May 27, 2008, at 11:16:38
Ruin?
Starvation for the poor.
Some kind of green fascism as an understandable response.
God knows Lou.
We shall see, and in our lifetimes.
Posted by Sigismund on May 29, 2008, at 5:04:04
In reply to Re: Lou's response to caraher's post-leiokoka, posted by Sigismund on May 29, 2008, at 3:43:31
Resource wars
Posted by caraher on June 2, 2008, at 16:59:23
In reply to Not to speak of, posted by Sigismund on May 29, 2008, at 5:04:04
As a for instance, climate change will at best disrupt current agricultural practices, and competition for arable land between plants for food and plants for fuel can only make it harder to feed everyone.
Which leads to this: http://www.duggback.com/comedy/Market_Forces_in_the_Third_World/
Posted by Sigismund on June 7, 2008, at 21:53:10
In reply to Re: Not to speak of, posted by caraher on June 2, 2008, at 16:59:23
On the news last night they were talking about the $10 per barrel increase in the price of oil, and how petrol is expected to get to A$1.80/litre.
Posted by caraher on June 9, 2008, at 21:45:34
In reply to Oil » caraher, posted by Sigismund on June 7, 2008, at 21:53:10
Friday I read the Fortune piece this blog critiques: http://moralequivalentofwar.wordpress.com/2008/06/06/fortune-why-the-oil-boom-will-end/
I didn't think much of the original analysis - it seems based on a stubborn insistence that if we want there to be more oil badly enough, it will exist. I don't think the opinions of economists have any capacity to change the amount and form of remaining oil. Certainly what extraction is economically feasible does depend on a lot of factors beyond straight petroleum geology, including how much of the landscape we are willing to scar in search of energy (from what I've seen about "mountaintop removal" coal mining, the answer seems to be: an almost unlimited amount).
Posted by Sigismund on June 10, 2008, at 17:14:47
In reply to Re: Oil, posted by caraher on June 9, 2008, at 21:45:34
Much of Queensland sits on top of coal. Where I grew up is now a place where there is prospecting for natural gas contained within the coal seams.
They'll be able to ramp that up and there is lots (as I understand it) to be said for natural gas. My home town there now has its power from gas.Still, that Fortune guy sound like he is unused to limits, and I think we are up against one.
The view he has of the world outside the US is comic.
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Social | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.