cmccool- hiteshsharma, on 07/03/2008, -18/+40" Drill Baby Drill" !!
:-P- fatfattymcfat, on 07/05/2008, -3/+11I realize that sometimes I don't have the greatest view of what people are saying throughout the US because I live in SF and it's generally pretty hard to find _anyone_ who is for offshore drilling, etc.
That being said: where exactly are these hippie turncoats? I've certainly never met one. If anything, their signs would be rewritten to say, "I told you so."- urbandistrict, on 07/05/2008, -1/+8I agree. The artist is simply pandering to the nation's guilty-conscience.
- Necoras, on 07/05/2008, -0/+3I'm all for drilling in the gulf... it beats paying Venezuela a premium to do it.
The issue is not one of environment vs civilization, as much as some people try to paint it that way. The issue is finding a way to co-exist. The only way to do that going forward is through high technology: nuclear, geothermal, space based power, hydroponics, etc. To do that requires a remarkable amount of energy up front. The problem is that instead of using the energy in oil and gas to advance technology to the point where we don't need oil or gas, we're driving around Hummers instead. - urbandistrict, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Necoras, I think you views are fairly narrow.
The argument is today's power solutions are outdated.
I fail to see how we need "a remarkable amount of energy up front" for R&D. I agree that we are not using our resources to their optimal potential. That doesn't justify the stance of wanting to pursue more oil, in fact it makes us irresponsible. We need to be progressive in our approach this this problem. This can be solved through re-educating ourselves and accepting our reality, then actually doing something about it. Why can't we have the same economic stimulus in the renewable-energy industry the way we had the tech boom? It's just as feasible as it is possible.
- djholybolt, on 07/05/2008, -0/+4'Save
(_(_|
My Ass!'
I like that one - ixelr8, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1That's what SHE said!
- fatfattymcfat, on 07/05/2008, -3/+11I realize that sometimes I don't have the greatest view of what people are saying throughout the US because I live in SF and it's generally pretty hard to find _anyone_ who is for offshore drilling, etc.
- ColonelTribune, on 07/03/2008, -30/+13Dugg for the headline. Although I'm not saying we shouldn't try to life a green lifestyle, I just don't think it's feasible for everyone.
- ChileanGoD, on 07/05/2008, -5/+13It's something that we all going to face sooner or later when we run out of oil.
- LittleDas, on 07/05/2008, -0/+8Defeatist surrender monkey.
- dragon76, on 07/05/2008, -3/+5It's feasible for the whole damn city of Dubai. Check it the ***** out.
- Mahluc, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2If its not feasible for everyone we then why should anyone try it?
- JoshJaros, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0Well i guess that sucks for us that we all don't live in Dubai.
- lazycat, on 07/03/2008, -18/+89Drill Baby Drill! This cartoon is awesome! $5 per gallon is awesome too. Finally I don't feel like a low-life idiot for not owning a car and taking subway to work everyday.
- Pinkshisno, on 07/05/2008, -2/+9I get frown upon because I don't want to drive yet. I can just take the bus to my college for free but that's bad for people.
- marx2k, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5Welcome to car culture. Worship or be turned out.
- SidiousX3, on 07/05/2008, -1/+8or ride a bike.
- DeFex, on 07/05/2008, -10/+5you should be proud you don't own a car. just because you are not a sheep doesn't make you a low-life.
just rent a van or car when you need it and save THOUSANDS per year.- bagelmaster, on 07/05/2008, -4/+18This post bleeds arrogance and ignorance of different life styles. Just because you live in NYC or LA doesn't mean the entire ***** country does.
- BetterOffEd, on 07/05/2008, -1/+8That's the entire point. Municipalities need transit. Period. Even small ones. The rail system that will soon open in Austin looks like it will be pretty nice, and that city is nowhere near metropolis size in relative terms.
Farms and small towns will never be able to accommodate mass transit, but mid-size cities have to adapt. - MrFurious2k, on 07/06/2008, -1/+1There are very, very few mass transit systems that operate in the black. Most of them will forever be doomed to operate at a loss while stealing money from the "transportation" budget (read: taxes on automobiles). It reeks of elitism because what's likely to happen is only the rich will be able to ford personal transportation. The rest of us peons will be forced into taking ***** public transport.
- AutoTom, on 07/05/2008, -1/+4This really pisses me off
gas is $6USD per gallon over here in australia ALREADY - aflaks, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1why would you feel like a lowlife idiot using the subway? During rush hour its the fastest way to get around.
- ducksauce001, on 07/06/2008, -0/+2It's all right, lazycat. Taking the subway is the best, except when it is like 2000 degrees in the station. Yeah, it's dirty and crowded, but at least you'll be saving the hassle of finding a parking spot and some money on insurance & gas!
I rather take a nap on the subway then waste my energy getting stuck in traffic. - executorzz, on 07/08/2008, -0/+1Why would you feel like a low-life idiot for not owning a car and taking a subway? The attempt at self-deprecation comes off as kind of smug.
- Pinkshisno, on 07/05/2008, -2/+9I get frown upon because I don't want to drive yet. I can just take the bus to my college for free but that's bad for people.
- wreckosaurus, on 07/03/2008, -41/+34logged in just to bury this, what utter ***** *****
- kawaiirobo, on 07/05/2008, -13/+26aww, I'm sorry you have sand in your vagina and can't appreciate humor. Even if I don't agree with the point of a joke, I can still laugh if it's funny.
- Zandarrr, on 07/05/2008, -6/+6Dugg for sand in vagina.
- cygnus2112, on 07/05/2008, -7/+29Wow. You logged in. That must have taken a lot of effort, you crusader.
- hyankov, on 07/05/2008, -22/+8This 'comic' is a *****.
PS
I just logged in to bury you kawaiirobo- kawaiirobo, on 07/05/2008, -3/+2"This 'comic' is a *****."
I might feel insulted if it was from someone who could master the English language.
- kawaiirobo, on 07/05/2008, -3/+2"This 'comic' is a *****."
- D14BL0, on 07/05/2008, -7/+17Logged in to tell you you're an idiot.
Just kidding, I've been logged in for weeks. But you're still an idiot. - Bkaufman, on 07/05/2008, -10/+5I'm glad that you are morally superior and don't mind paying towelheads in Saudi Arabia and people in Iran who hang people for being gay billions of dollars for gas each year.
- kawaiirobo, on 07/05/2008, -13/+26aww, I'm sorry you have sand in your vagina and can't appreciate humor. Even if I don't agree with the point of a joke, I can still laugh if it's funny.
- ryanlive, on 07/03/2008, -46/+19Lemmings. Man made global warming is a hoax. People rally around the popular cause of the time to feel better about themselves. Ultimately, they don't really give a damn about the cause and will only support it as long as it makes them feel good and is not too burdensome.
- dood, on 07/04/2008, -3/+20I could just as easily call the "global warming is a hoax" people lemmings, rallying around their cause (which is popular in some parts of society) to feel better (superior) about themselves.
You suggest that the man made global warming people only support the idea because it makes them feel good. I say that the hoax people only support the idea so they can feel good making no changes to their lives.
Both sides have their crazed proponents.- kawaiirobo, on 07/05/2008, -0/+9I think the real problem with the global warming people, and the hoax people is that Global Warming has become too politicized along party lines. People don't think for themselves and look at the evidence, they just agree with either political party they're behind. Honestly, I could care less if global warming was caused by man or not, I just want off of foreign oil,cleaner air and water, and affordable power. If other positive environmental effects come about, then awesome.
- Travis182, on 07/05/2008, -5/+7We support the global warming cause to...feel better...? I thought we wanted to get the message across to corporations to stop polluting the planet to death.
- kawaiirobo, on 07/05/2008, -10/+6Yea, Corporations man, the're stealing our lives man, and making us work for nothing man, and selling us stuff we don't need, and ruining our planet man.
Go smoke some reefer hippie and realize that it's all our faults, and that blaming "corporations" is just an easy scapegoat. Sure they're not innocent, but they are no more guilty that anyone else, we all have to do something to find a solution, not just blame it on someone else.
- kawaiirobo, on 07/05/2008, -10/+6Yea, Corporations man, the're stealing our lives man, and making us work for nothing man, and selling us stuff we don't need, and ruining our planet man.
- Kaitsu, on 07/05/2008, -3/+2Why does it matter what exactly is causing it? Should we just allow the loss of our current lifestyle and the environment even if it is a naturally occurring phenomena? The only reason why someone spouts ***** like that is if they're some corporate bigshot who wants more money by not handling the waste output of his factories.
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -9/+3So, if the planet gets a few degrees warmer in the next 100 years, why is that a bad thing? Who determined that this temperature, right now, is the best temperature for the planet for all time?
Anyone who thinks we can live on this planet without our existence having some kind of an effect, has their head in the sand. There are resources here for us to use and we should use them. Long as we clean up after ourselves, which we do in the USA better than any other country.- Rednik2011, on 07/06/2008, -2/+2Please, please, get a high school education. Hell, I'd be happy with you if you could get a middle school education
- whyknot2k, on 07/06/2008, -1/+1Rednik - your pathetic attempts at humor aside, do you actually have an answer? Anything valuable to contribute to the conversation here?
- ChappyChaps11, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1That's what I'm saying, how about the shifting poles, the jetstreams moving towards the poles, the weakening magnatic field, and most of all the ***** about global warming and "going green" heating the Earth?
Not only that, how about the natural warming and cooling of the Earth? Cuz I know for sure that our industrial ways didn't bring our frozen asses out of the re-occuring ice ages.
- dood, on 07/04/2008, -3/+20I could just as easily call the "global warming is a hoax" people lemmings, rallying around their cause (which is popular in some parts of society) to feel better (superior) about themselves.
- protodon, on 07/04/2008, -15/+10Inaccurate because all of those people would have found alternatives to gas a long time ago.
- ouzome, on 07/05/2008, -9/+4What alternative would they have found? There are no alternatives right now that can replace the amount of oil we have to use! stupid....
- cygnus2112, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5Turning vegan and avoiding beans, broccoli and cabbage?
- DiogenesJr, on 07/05/2008, -6/+4I agree with ouzome. There are no viable alternatives to oil because if there were, we'd be using them now. I say just relax and let the market do what it does. Viable alternatives cannot be legislated, mandated, or subsidized into existence. Only the free market can provide real solutions and it will if the government does not interfere.
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -4/+2Sure they would have - until greenpeace or peta one of the other leftist organizations discovered that to access this alternative you would have to upset the habitat of the grasshopper slug or some such thing. They say they want alternatives but they resist every attempt to do so.
- laceration, on 07/05/2008, -1/+3"All of those people" killed the development of nuclear energy in the US. That would have been an "alternative" to greenhouse gas energy.
- TSCheredar, on 07/04/2008, -18/+11Haha. If only people really reacted that way. Dugg for inconvenient optimism.
- Gutterpunk, on 07/05/2008, -1/+10"If only people really reacted that way"? Is that sarcasm or you'd really like to live in a world of sellout?
- Acglaphotis, on 07/05/2008, -1/+1Obviously sarcasm. We already live there,
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -3/+2I'd really like to live in a world where, when people realize that the paranoia and hypocrisy of hucksters like al gore have led us here, they stop blindly following him.
- Gutterpunk, on 07/05/2008, -1/+10"If only people really reacted that way"? Is that sarcasm or you'd really like to live in a world of sellout?
- lodwar, on 07/04/2008, -17/+7I REALLY fell off my chair laughing ,GOOD ONE!
I feel i should say something deep to defend myself but F$%@ that was funny!! - hyankov, on 07/05/2008, -22/+149That's really, really, really dumb.
- Wakkyweed, on 07/05/2008, -4/+36Would have made more sense if in the last couple of panels the people look at the $5 gas and then changed their signs to say "We told you to invest in alternative energy, moron!" and "This is why you shouldn't have bought SUV's" and "This is what you get for having a ***** energy policy!"
- Hrodrik, on 07/05/2008, -4/+5Exactly.
- PhoenixAvatar2, on 07/05/2008, -6/+4You misspelled moran.
- badenglishihave, on 07/05/2008, -2/+5Oh yah I almost forgot, the solution to alternative energy can only be found through more government funding.
- MofugginPaulrus, on 07/06/2008, -0/+3That's not funny either, though.
- MrPig, on 07/05/2008, -7/+1*woosh*
- urbandistrict, on 07/05/2008, -0/+4*echo*
- specialK16, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1*echo*
- rz8472, on 07/05/2008, -2/+5Agreed; Environmental concerns (valid as they are) notwithstanding, "Reality" is that it would take 10 years just to set up the infrastructure to drill for half a year's supply of oil in ANWR, and possibly even more offshore. Both the people and the government can save a lot more money by increasing our pitifully low CAFE standards.
- ZoolTool, on 07/05/2008, -1/+3I like the enhance your vocabulary section. I think it is really, really, really... good.
- TheCaterpillar, on 07/05/2008, -0/+4I guess that argument goes in the "asshat" section:
http://x56.xanga.com/d5585271566a8183708200/b14073 ...
- Wakkyweed, on 07/05/2008, -4/+36Would have made more sense if in the last couple of panels the people look at the $5 gas and then changed their signs to say "We told you to invest in alternative energy, moron!" and "This is why you shouldn't have bought SUV's" and "This is what you get for having a ***** energy policy!"
- philrenaud, on 07/05/2008, -18/+70Sweet, I love overgeneralized views of why gas is as high as it is. Bonus points for showing environmentalists as flaky and self-centered, and patting the right-wing on the back.
*sigh*- D14BL0, on 07/05/2008, -21/+5Way to completely miss the point of the comic.
- richbleak, on 07/05/2008, -1/+7I'm pretty sure the comic was meant to infer that A. drilling would actually have a positive effect on gas prices and B. environmentalists are more interested in saving money than serve their cause. This fits perfectly into the skewed world view of fox-news-watching "casual" (read:uninformed) political aficionados. Unless you are suggesting that mocking this world view was the point of the cartoon, I'm quite sure you are the one who has missed the point.
- urbandistrict, on 07/05/2008, -1/+8I doubt that was a comic posted in the Sierra Club Newsletter.
It's more than likely something owned by Newscorp. - earful, on 07/05/2008, -4/+1Ever heard of irony?
- homanh, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5Yeah! It’s like goldy and bronzy, only it’s made of iron.
- D14BL0, on 07/05/2008, -21/+5Way to completely miss the point of the comic.
- oriondr, on 07/05/2008, -7/+42Yeah.. cuz that's what is happening lol.
Environmentalists are definitely against off-shore drilling.- JonGalt, on 07/05/2008, -9/+3They aren't?
If you honestly believe that then youre the ***** retard and not them.
- JonGalt, on 07/05/2008, -9/+3They aren't?
- TomJoad, on 07/05/2008, -5/+21reality? not really. i dont have a car and bike/BART everywhere i need to be. The reality is that most people (including plenty hopping on the "green" bandwagon) are to ***** lazy to move themselves. Obviously the automobile has been so far ingrained in our culture that people these days see it as a necessity rather than a commodity and for many they are completely dependent. which is sad and disgusting.
- buildbyflying, on 07/05/2008, -2/+2Hate to say it but SF/OAK doesn't count. You might as well be living in Canada.
- choppa1890, on 07/05/2008, -0/+6I think it is due to Urban Planning. In Texas going anywhere with a bike would be quite a workout due to the long distances to arrive at each place.
- lisaawesome, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2Exactly. The Dallas/Ft Worth metroplex is absolutely massive. Everything is spread out so much that biking is not an option unless you're a marathon athlete. We have the same problem in Oklahoma City. We are very spread out and have only a handful of very limited bus routes and no bike lanes anywhere. There is absolutely no cross city public transit so if I want to go from the north side to the south side I have to drive. We could really benefit from an entire metro light rail system but I am doubtful that would ever happen.
- Tyrghast, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1I live in Tarrant county (right outside Ft. Worth), and outside the immediate area of Crowley I cannot bike anywhere in a reasonable amount of time. I live 20 miles from where I work, the grocery store alone is 6 miles away.
- sonofalink, on 07/05/2008, -2/+6I don't have mass transit where I live and I work 20 miles away so I can't bike. So shove it.
Not everyone lives in the bay area of california. - geoffg, on 07/05/2008, -1/+0Stay in Frisco please.
- chubbybubba, on 07/05/2008, -1/+22I'm pretty sure Karl Rove rides in a Limo and not an SUV.
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -7/+7I'm pretty sure al gore rides in a private jet and not an SUV
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5Of course I get dugg down on this, but none of you will defend gore's hypocrisy, will you?
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -7/+7I'm pretty sure al gore rides in a private jet and not an SUV
- vanguardanon, on 07/05/2008, -4/+3Mirror?
- flashingcurser, on 07/05/2008, -2/+11It is very difficult to be an idealist and poor at the same time. It is human nature to try to save yourself and your family over any belief system.
- prahareturns, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5The problem is that most people complaining about higher energy costs are not cutting back on luxury items. The majority of Americans feel that many items that were not "normal" only a few years ago (10-15) are now necessities that are not being cut from their monthly budget. A few examples would be cell phones, internet connectivity, bottled water, coffee (i.e., Starbucks), etc. The list of luxury items we waste money on could easily offset the majority or all of the higher energy costs.
If people want to "save" themselves they can make cuts in other non-necessity items and maintain their belief system.- flashingcurser, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1I agree, *mostly*. If gas prices double from where they are now the combination of inflation and direct fuel price will force people to give up luxury items and still not be able to pay for fuel to get to work.
As a side note, Americans are not the only ones. Market penetration of quality coffees, mobile phones, bottled water (anyone remember perrier?) and internet are much higher in Europe. Much of asia has more internet and mobile phones. The one thing that is different in the US is the lack of good public transportation. We use our cars when others would use some sort of public transportation. That in its self is a complicated issue, the state I live in has 800,000 people in a area slightly larger than Germany. Germany has 80million people and it is much more cost effective/useful with that kind of population density. A similar situation can be found in much of Colorado ;-) - prahareturns, on 07/06/2008, -0/+0Flashingcurser: I completely agree. I have spent a significant amount of time working overseas in Europe and Asia Pac. The efficiency and utilization of public transportation provides for both individual cost savings and environmental impacts. Washington DC is one of the few American cities where I have lived and worked that compares to some European public transportation systems. We need to significantly improve our public transportation infrastructure and the publics view of utilizing public transit. At the same time it's good to see that you recognize the geographical challenges which the US faces in implementing any mass public transportation overhaul.
- flashingcurser, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1I agree, *mostly*. If gas prices double from where they are now the combination of inflation and direct fuel price will force people to give up luxury items and still not be able to pay for fuel to get to work.
- prahareturns, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5The problem is that most people complaining about higher energy costs are not cutting back on luxury items. The majority of Americans feel that many items that were not "normal" only a few years ago (10-15) are now necessities that are not being cut from their monthly budget. A few examples would be cell phones, internet connectivity, bottled water, coffee (i.e., Starbucks), etc. The list of luxury items we waste money on could easily offset the majority or all of the higher energy costs.
- ajb2015, on 07/05/2008, -4/+24I am hurting from the high energy prices, but I really hope they don't go down so we finally see electric cars and alternative energy happen.
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -12/+3Then maybe you should sell your car, never ever ride the bus or the subway or an airplane. You should stop using electricity in your home since it takes fuel to harness and distribute that energy. You should go through your house and remove every product that required oil at some point in its production. You should never buy anything from a store that had the products on its shelves shipped in from somewhere via truck, train, boat, or airplane. You should grow your own food and dig a well for your own water.
That is, if you are serious about not wanting oil prices to go down...
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -12/+3Then maybe you should sell your car, never ever ride the bus or the subway or an airplane. You should stop using electricity in your home since it takes fuel to harness and distribute that energy. You should go through your house and remove every product that required oil at some point in its production. You should never buy anything from a store that had the products on its shelves shipped in from somewhere via truck, train, boat, or airplane. You should grow your own food and dig a well for your own water.
- Ghoztt, on 07/05/2008, -16/+8Except....
Money isn't real. It's an abstract concept created by humans because they can't share with one another. Wow. The ignorance... just... wow.- PabloMac, on 07/05/2008, -7/+2What do you expect when you're living in a dictatorship: a self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes...
Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
Wow.- Hartley1942, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2Horde or Alliance?
- PhoenixAvatar2, on 07/05/2008, -0/+6Go back to Russia, you communist!
- JonGalt, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5tell that to the make believe money in your wallet.
- PabloMac, on 07/05/2008, -7/+2What do you expect when you're living in a dictatorship: a self-perpetuating autocracy in which the working classes...
- Rohhob, on 07/05/2008, -13/+96Environmentalists aren't saying this at all. They want high gas prices to force the market to explore alternative fuels. This comic is just stupid.
- InetRoadkill, on 07/05/2008, -4/+22The comic also falsely claims that drilling offshore will have any substantive effect on gas prices.
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -2/+1so your case is that if we have more oil that won't effect the cost at the pump? Really?
- JoshJaros, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0Duh, economics is nothing but a theory that doesn't remotely apply to real life, especially when gas is involved.
- drmangrum, on 07/05/2008, -12/+6Not entirely. The WEALTHY environmentalists want high gas prices so alternative fuels are explored. Those without a fat bank account just want to get to work without it costing half their pay check.
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -11/+6It's not the comic that's stupid - it's the morons who think we aren't paying enough for gas yet.
- SpinningHead, on 07/05/2008, -5/+4The comic also suggests its a supply and demand issue, which it isnt. Gas has been rising the past year, while use has been falling. Look up Enron Loophole. The neocons bent us over....again. Now they're trying to blame us for dropping the soap.
- JonGalt, on 07/05/2008, -2/+5Not a supply and demand issue. LOL LOL falling LOL LOL!
Do you even know what Asia is?- marx2k, on 07/05/2008, -2/+0LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
- InetRoadkill, on 07/05/2008, -4/+22The comic also falsely claims that drilling offshore will have any substantive effect on gas prices.
- dropoutfilms, on 07/05/2008, -9/+43Environmentalists (like me) don't drive cars and are happy to see $5/gallon gas - because we might actually get the wheels turning on eco-friendly energy. Let's turn the page and find a sustainable method of powering our world.
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -11/+4I'm wondering when the environmentalists took over and decided we no longer have freedom of choice... If you want to ride a bicycle all over town, great. But don't take away my right to have an automobile, and don't artificially inflate the price of oil when we've got plenty right here, just to make a political point.
If you're serious about this, never ever ride the bus or the subway or an airplane. You should not mow your lawn or heat your home in the winter. You should stop using electricity in your home since it takes fuel to harness and distribute that energy. You should go through your house and remove every product that required oil at some point in its production. You should never buy anything from a store that had the products on its shelves shipped in from somewhere via truck, train, boat, or airplane. You should grow your own food and dig a well for your own water.
That is, if you are serious about "eco-friendly energy".- Rolamoto, on 07/05/2008, -1/+5I'm sorry, but can you show me where in the Constitution it say you have a "right to have an automobile".
Also, mass transit is much better for the environment than everybody driving their own cars, so your argument that environmentalists shouldn't ride them is invalid. Every little step towards less energy use helps. - tmbrwolf19, on 07/05/2008, -3/+7Way to put the blame on the wrong people. Environmentalism is in no way connected to gas prices. Do you think drilling ANWAR or Offshore is really going to bring the price of gas down? Hardly. It's not supply and demand, because demand has been dropping and the price keeps climbing. More oil isn't going to fix that. You think all those oil derricks are free and just appear where the oil is? Nope, letting them drill is only going to mean price of gas is going to climb again to offset their expenditures when moving into a completely undeveloped market. The problem is the companies. The problem is there is only so much oil. The problem is we are still willing to pay these absurd gas prices.
No one is talking about taking your freedom's away, so wake up. You're more then free to drive a 5 ton behemoth that gets 2 gallons to the mile. You are the one who has to foot the bill for the gas tab. The gas price is set by the company. And trust me, the aren't raising it because they are environmentally sensitive and want to do their part to force people to use less gas. They see a quick buck, and they are going for it. That guy down the road riding his bike to work everyday has no real control over what you are paying for gas, so why does he get blamed for your willingness to bend over and take the price the oil company is willing to shovel you?
Environmentalism isn't about no impact. Its about the biggest gain from the least amount of damage done. It's called being efficient with your resources and not believing in superfluous waste. Only idiot hippies believe we should all go back to living in caves, sitting in drum circles, and singing love songs. Stop labeling us environmentalist with a least half a wits worth of sense as the moronic hippies of the local college or the middle age band wagoners. Most of us know what the hell we are talking about, and there is real economic and social benefit to actually listening to what we have to say. - JonGalt, on 07/05/2008, -3/+2@Rolamoto
You god damn ***** retard.
If its not PROHIBITED or GAURENTEED in the constituion it means that it is gaurenteed to the STATES or the PEOPLE as an INHERENT right. Please see 10th amendment, you fool.
Its retards like you that make the world a terrible place. - marx2k, on 07/05/2008, -1/+0"gaurenteed"? Really?
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -3/+1Rolamoto - the Constitution no more guarantees you a right to access the internet than it does me the right to have an automobile. I'm sure, though, if a special interest group took it upon themselves to block your access to the internet or restrict it in any way, you would complain loudly about the loss of rights.
tmbrwlf19 - "Do you think drilling ANWAR or Offshore is really going to bring the price of gas down?"
Of course it will. Supply and demand still works. More oil means more jobs, a healthier economy, and lower prices. The less you have of something the more it costs.
Even if it did not lower the prices, it won't harm us and would be a good step in the direction of no longer depending on foreign countries for our oil. Same with offshore drilling - now China is going to be drilling for oil 60 miles off the coast of Florida while we have tied our own hands from doing so. Do you really think based on their record they will do it cleaner than we would? We do a much better job cleaning up our messes than any other nation in the world.
On alternative fuel sources, I agree. Let's find them. All for it - but let's not weaken ourselves by shutting off the tap until those sources are viable. We have plenty of resources right here and we should be using them while we also look for alternatives. But then again, the enviros complain about that as well. Ted Kennedy doesn't want wind farms anywhere he may have to see them because they are unsightly - others complain they kill too many birds. The same people who are desperate for me to have to pay more to fuel my car also reject nuclear energy and everything else that has been proposed.
You can't say that "environmentalism is about no impact" when that's the goal of those driving the movement. I'm sick and tired of hypocrites like gore telling me I should have to pay $5 a gallon for gas to limit my consumption, while he flies all around the world in his private jet, and sleeps in his energy-guzzling mansion. If he and his lemming-like followers are really committed to a cleaner environment and want to impinge upon my freedoms, they should first lead by example. The fact that they won't proves they don't really believe the bs they are trying to spread. They want everyone else to change except themselves. I'm not buying it. - 01101010, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1whyknot2k-
"the Constitution [...] loss of rights."
Or, maybe, a reasonable person would be irritated by the loss of a _privilege_, not a right. I don't think anyone truly wants to take your car away, I think they would just prefer that it (along with the millions of others on the road) didn't have such adverse effects.
Your last two paragraphs, interestingly, are all about pointing fingers at others- "Kennedy doesn't want this... Al Gore's telling me that..." Some people aren't intimidated by others' lifestyle choices and just feel like taking a little responsibility for their own actions by reducing the impact they have on their surroundings; regardless of how messy my neighborhood can get from time to time, I'm still not in the habit of regularly dumping my garbage on my neighbors' lawns.
Also, there is no one "driving the movement". Progress is driven by more than the few high-profile characters. Sure there are famous supporters, but environmentalism is made up of a large group of people with a common concern- lessening our impact on the environment.
The highlight of your post was this: "it won't harm us and would be a good step in the direction of no longer depending on foreign countries for our oil". Why not take that logic a few small steps further towards not being dependent on oil at all? Is filling up at a gas station all the time really that much fun? - whyknot2k, on 07/06/2008, -1/+0I'm all for taking responsibility for our actions and personally, I do. I hate pollution and I hate seeing garbage by the side of the road. It is our job to take good care of our homes, neighborhoods, etc...
That being said, I am thankful to have such freedom in this country that we have access to many modes of transportation. I am irritated by those in the environmental movement who make it their mission to limit those freedoms.
"Why not take that logic a few small steps further towards not being dependent on oil at all? Is filling up at a gas station all the time really that much fun?"
I'm all for that - fantastic - let's find alternatives. But for now, the reality is, we are dependent on oil. So let's use what we've got until those alternatives are more than just a dream. That's my point with kennedy - he's opposed to us using the natural resources we have right here, but at the same time resists attempts to further explore the alternatives for fear it will obstruct his view or scar the landscape. What's his solution then? I didn't just pick him at random - he's in a position of power to actually do something about this problem and yet he has used his power to exacerbate the problem.
Gore is also an influencer in this area and a poor representative at that. Of course I'll point the finger at others when their hypocrisy is so blatant. - whyknot2k, on 07/06/2008, -1/+0"I don't think anyone truly wants to take your car away"
Those who are most vocal on the environment absolutely do, and have said so.
Even those who are more mainstream are celebrating that the price of gas is so high, hoping this will signal the end of the combustion engine. These people are freaks.
- Rolamoto, on 07/05/2008, -1/+5I'm sorry, but can you show me where in the Constitution it say you have a "right to have an automobile".
- Albumen, on 07/05/2008, -0/+12Not that I don't also want to see real progress in clean, renewable energy. I do, but let's remember that when gas prices soar so does everything else and that hurts the bottom part of the economic scale more than anyone. I am sure you didn't mean to take joy in the fact that paying their rent and feeding their families has gotten a whole lot harder for the poor in this country.
Environmentalists like you also live in large metropolitan areas with decent public transit, to which the vast majority of people do not have access. You are essentially unaffected by this so you can afford to happy about it. Good for you!!- dropoutfilms, on 07/05/2008, -2/+1"paying their rent and feeding their families has gotten a whole lot harder for the poor in this country"
Yes, unfortunately this is what it has taken for this country to get serious about finding sustainable sources of energy. I don't take pleasure in the misfortune of others, but the price of fuel reflecting its actual cost to our planet is a great thing.
- dropoutfilms, on 07/05/2008, -2/+1"paying their rent and feeding their families has gotten a whole lot harder for the poor in this country"
- whyknot2k, on 07/05/2008, -11/+4I'm wondering when the environmentalists took over and decided we no longer have freedom of choice... If you want to ride a bicycle all over town, great. But don't take away my right to have an automobile, and don't artificially inflate the price of oil when we've got plenty right here, just to make a political point.
- xXMetalJesusXx, on 07/05/2008, -4/+21I consider myself a "hippy" type person, as I've been called one numerous times. And if the stranglehold the oil companies have on us right now has taught me anything, it's that we are to dependent on them. So let gas hit 5$ a gallon, I'll still be hoping that we funnel more money into sustainable and Eco-friendly sources of energy.
- Arcesius, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Omg, a hippie being dugg up on digg. A miracle! I'm surprised you haven't been buried by people calling you a "dirty, smelly hippie," a la South Park.
- masch57, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Ok, I'll bite. Get a haircut and a job you smelly hippy! And please keep your commie flag tacked up inside of your garage.
- sabbatical, on 07/05/2008, -14/+6I didn't need 4-5 dollar a gallon gas to want to dig. I wanted to dig when it was a buck fifty.
Guess I'm just spoiled huh? Maybe I just like having a decent life without having to work like a dog to get there. What's that you say? What right do I have to that when there's others who have to pay more and work harder?
Why don't you tell me what right I DON'T have. I like being able to make my dollar go further.- marx2k, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Sounds like a commercial for WalMart
- JoshJaros, on 07/07/2008, -0/+0$1 > $1.50
- kawaiirobo, on 07/05/2008, -11/+14For ***** sake people, it's a comic, it's supposed to be a joke. Sure I don't completely agree with it, but I still laughed, because you know at least some people did this. So many people on Digg take things way too seriously, calm down and laugh a little, you'll live longer that way.
- misterhat, on 07/05/2008, -2/+8to me, comics are funny because they often demonstrate something very true, but not always readily apparent.
this comic fails in that every environmentalist i know is praising high gas prices. - joegibes, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2It's a political comic; it's supposed to make a statement.
- misterhat, on 07/05/2008, -2/+8to me, comics are funny because they often demonstrate something very true, but not always readily apparent.
- ericjohnson0, on 07/05/2008, -6/+4I think the 'Green Pioneers' are needed to deal with this problem...
http://thesaloon.net/blog/_archives/2008/7/4/37763 ...
We should have MANDATORY enlistment at a very young age for the Green Pioneers and teach people how to THINK GREEN all their lives.
/end sarcasm- superkendall, on 07/05/2008, -3/+3Good news, they're the core of Obama's mandatory service program!
- doshindude, on 07/05/2008, -8/+4yay another not-xkcd comic!
- sabbatical, on 07/05/2008, -8/+3*
- PeckerSlap, on 07/05/2008, -7/+10fcuk digg
- Kaitsu, on 07/05/2008, -3/+17Approximately the most stupid and trolly thing I've seen on Digg today.
- lazyfisherman, on 07/05/2008, -2/+5We don't need to dig more, we need better and more efficient sources of energy. The cartoon may have a point (even some of the most ardent tree-huggers will betray their former beliefs if it will save their asses in the short-term) but it's also missing the point.
- Arramol, on 07/05/2008, -4/+6Do these people not realize that green technology would HELP with gas prices? Prices are a result of supply and demand. Green products use less gas, thereby creating less demand, thereby bringing down prices. Since the supply is finite and will inevitably run out, using less is a better solution than producing more. After all, the better we get at using less, the longer the supply lasts, and the more alternatives we have ready when it does run out. Not everyone who wants green tech is some tree-loving hippy; some of us want it because it's better for HUMANS in the long run.
- sabbatical, on 07/05/2008, -2/+3Since when is it supply and demand? Supply is meeting demand just fine.
Speculation is why it's high. You can have all the energy in the world but if we base our damned prices off of what someone THINKS might happen to that supply in the future even though it's ***** IMPOSSIBLE to know, then we're at their mercy for whatever we want to believe.
Quit ***** speculating that it's going to be 200 dollars a damn barrel and speculate it for 50 dollars a barrel. GODDAMN IT!!! I hate the fact that I'm getting fleeced by greedy ***** pigs every time I fill up....- bicyclethief, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2live by the market, die by the market
- duckyinc, on 07/05/2008, -1/+1>Green products use less gas, thereby creating less demand
Won't there be MORE demand?- arjie, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1To explain, he meant there would less demand for gas because if you used a green product you would require less gas.
- sabbatical, on 07/05/2008, -2/+3Since when is it supply and demand? Supply is meeting demand just fine.
- Masternajee, on 07/05/2008, -6/+3It is time to hit Anwar while we are awaiting the development of alternative fuel cars.
- Anim8me2, on 07/05/2008, -1/+6Wow, that's really great. THe problem is I know of not a single environmental group or individual who is proposing more drilling because of high gas prices. In fact it is the opposite. They are calling for advancing research in renewables because of the gas hikes.
Idiocy at it's finest. - nocash23, on 07/05/2008, -1/+8what alternate reality was this based on?
- OnlyGirlOnDigg, on 07/05/2008, -3/+5***** that *****. Buried.
- FrankTheTank17, on 07/05/2008, -1/+3If everybody starts driving electric cars it's still going to hurt since power plants are going to have to burn that much fuel to give the needed energy to power their houses and their cars.
- zeebo, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Nuclear fission now, fusion in 25 years, orbital solar in 50.
- thevoiceless, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2That's the whole point behind looking for ALTERNATIVE energy sources.
- mriegger, on 07/05/2008, -2/+6The whole strip needs to be wrapped in an sleeping oil exec's dream bubble.
- ecastille924, on 07/05/2008, -4/+3i hate this.
- DeFex, on 07/05/2008, -1/+2gas could be flowing out the wazoo and you will NEVER see the price drop significantly.
wait till the neo con artists sell the rights to air and you have to pay some company to breathe. - gavin422, on 07/05/2008, -1/+6That doesn't even make sense. Expensive oil should drive us away toward alternative energy, not more drilling. Permanent solutions, people.
Also, don't environmentalists have bikes and stuff? - obliviousfool, on 07/05/2008, -1/+18This comic is beyond inaccurate. Environmentalists have been harping on about alternative energy, independence from oil, peak oil, and sustainability for about 40 years. All high gas prices do is give the environmentalists a chance to say "Ha! I told you so!"
- masch57, on 07/06/2008, -0/+0Er, I think this is targeted at the suburban "green moms" who were following the new decade's trend of environmental consciousness while still following the last decade's trend of driving an SUV. It used to be that only a few of the hardcore folks drove SUVs and a few hardcore folks worried about the environment. They didn't cross swords much back then, and in fact the conservationists utilized SUVs to do their work.
We're all aware of hardcore environmentalists' consistent opposition to drilling and physical hygiene.
- masch57, on 07/06/2008, -0/+0Er, I think this is targeted at the suburban "green moms" who were following the new decade's trend of environmental consciousness while still following the last decade's trend of driving an SUV. It used to be that only a few of the hardcore folks drove SUVs and a few hardcore folks worried about the environment. They didn't cross swords much back then, and in fact the conservationists utilized SUVs to do their work.
- KingGorilla, on 07/05/2008, -0/+3I don't get it!?!?!
- londubh, on 07/05/2008, -0/+5Actually the more extreme sign carrying environmentalists are going to say that price is still too low. In fact they'll suggest throwing a dollar a gallon tax on it.
- wonderchemist, on 07/05/2008, -2/+4Like Calvin's dad, I hope it goes to $8 a gallon.
- hagfish70, on 07/05/2008, -2/+4Yeah ***** alternative/clean energy sources! The only solution is to destroy nature preserves and drill up some more oil!
- johnnyfistfight, on 07/05/2008, -4/+3Quote Homer "It's funny because it's true."
- malex, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1I can't tell... Are you being sarcastic, or do you really think that?
- LotyBoy, on 07/05/2008, -3/+7This comic fails at being funny due to its logical fallacy. A joke has to be true to life in order for it to be funny. Otherwise nobody relates and it doesn't make any sense.
For instance Environmentalists would never abandon their ideals due to high gas prices. High gas prices are part of why they're protesting. Thus the Anti-SUV sign. Higher gas prices means less people drive, more people trade their gas guzzling cars for hybrids and fuel efficient vehicles and the planet is better off. Furthermore Environmentalists know offshore drilling is going to result in anything but reduced gas prices. Will poison and pollute the ocean and provide no real relief. Increase in oil supply will be negligible, several years down the road and only last for a few months.
- malex, on 07/06/2008, -1/+5Since the oil peak started, I've seen a lot more right-wingers abandoning their SUVs than I have environmentalists promoting more drilling.
- Kanele, on 07/06/2008, -0/+0yeah bikes dont run on oil :/
- jonask84, on 07/06/2008, -2/+2Psh, America deserves some higher gas prices right now. Seeing people around here whine about it is like seeing a fat kid crying because someone took his desert away =)
- aflaks, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1hey gas in london is 13 dollars a gallon (converted from pounds)
- minigamer1896, on 07/06/2008, -1/+1You don't have to drive nearly as far as we do to get anywhere.
- lazerflesh, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1Nope, I'm still saving my pennies for an affordable plug-in or alternative fuel vehicle. I don't like resource hoarding. It puts WAY to much money into the hands of evil people.
- Willinois, on 07/06/2008, -1/+2How idiotic. We wouldn't be in this mess if it weren't for St. Ronnie Reagan reversing what Jimmy Carter began at the urging of environmentalists.
Besides, the tree hugger crowd is already driving fuel efficient cars and biking to work. The conservative "drill, drill, drill" people who drive SUV's are the suckers getting screwed. More drilling keeps us dependent on oil, and the oil companies.- MrFurious2k, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1We wouldn't be in this mess if the democrats had allowed nuclear power and hadn't regulated the hell out of the various energy industries. If you look at what the Carter administration did, you'll see that his actions increased dependence on foreign oil. It was a direct relation. Carter was a poor, poor president.
You really don't understand conservatives if you think all they want is "drill, drill, drill." Drilling is an interim solution while we work on other potential energy sources. If you kill your industries and drive down the standard of living, you have a lot less available resources to actually work on alternative energies. I wouldn't expect you to believe this, but the oil companies have spent a TON of money looking at alternatives. I know it's hip to bash them, but reality says they're the ones putting the resources into finding our future power.- Willinois, on 07/06/2008, -0/+0What I see is the fossil fuel industry, and the conservatives who buy their smokescreen, promising that research is the answer someday down the road, but meanwhile, they fight tooth and nail against every law that would require them to use existing technologies we can implement today like wind, solar and efficiency programs. At some point you have to recognize the promises of research as the deceptive delaying tactic that it is. If we take the subsidies the fossil fuel industries want for research and spend it on developing real clean energies instead, we could actually accomplish something in the near-term for less money than clean coal and nuclear scams.
And what does Nuclear have to do with our dependence on oil? We aren't using nuclear plants to fuel cars yet. Would you like to name something specific Carter did to increase our dependence on oil? Or is that just talking point you heard from a talk radio loon? - MrFurious2k, on 07/07/2008, -0/+1First, if we’re going to have a discussion, I’m curious whether you simply want to argue or if you’re genuinely interested in the answer. I have no problem getting into the details if you’re interested, but if this is going to devolve into a series of insults then I think I’ll save us both the time.
There were three things Carter did to directly affect our dependence on foreign oil.
1) Limiting domestic drilling. When the Carter administration did this, he effectively capped the amount we could get domestically. Just because we have access to “oil”, not all oil is created equal. Some oil is better quality or can be more easily refined. Additionally, it can cost more to get it from one area than from another. The decision by the administration effectively raised the price domestically by negatively impacting supply. This made foreign oil more attractive.
2) Price caps. As you know from your supply/demand curve, only so much of a product is naturally produced at a certain price point. Since the supply was effectively limited, the price began to rise in response. The Carter administration attempted to hold it steady by capping the price that could be charged (in an effort to help suffering Americans). This only further exacerbated the problem by causing shortages. Since it already cost US companies more than foreign companies (see number 1), it further depressed US supply making the amount of foreign oil imported greater.
3) Heavy taxes (i.e. The Windfall profit tax). This was the icing on the cake. As a general rule, companies (this applies to all businesses) don’t pay taxes as they pass on their taxes to the consumer. However, since the price caps were in effect, they could not do that as effectively. Consequently, between their higher costs of doing business, limited supply, and price caps, it eventually drove business overseas (again damaging US supplies even more).
By the end of the Carter administration, we had actually increased (almost double) the amount we took in from foreign sources. His policies had ended up being a total disaster.
Carter can be a good example of how someone can be right, but being totally wrong in execution. He was right in that we needed to limit our dependence on foreign oil (and oil in general), but he was totally wrong in cutting our ability to access energy in the interim. Additionally, nuclear power plays into this because without it, oil and coal become a much, much larger part of producing energy. Our current technology makes solar and wind fairly difficult to deploy on the scale necessary to power a growing economy. Only nuclear power (as stated by the founder of Greenpeace) has the capability to do that in an environmentally sound way.
- Willinois, on 07/06/2008, -0/+0What I see is the fossil fuel industry, and the conservatives who buy their smokescreen, promising that research is the answer someday down the road, but meanwhile, they fight tooth and nail against every law that would require them to use existing technologies we can implement today like wind, solar and efficiency programs. At some point you have to recognize the promises of research as the deceptive delaying tactic that it is. If we take the subsidies the fossil fuel industries want for research and spend it on developing real clean energies instead, we could actually accomplish something in the near-term for less money than clean coal and nuclear scams.
- MrFurious2k, on 07/06/2008, -0/+1We wouldn't be in this mess if the democrats had allowed nuclear power and hadn't regulated the hell out of the various energy industries. If you look at what the Carter administration did, you'll see that his actions increased dependence on foreign oil. It was a direct relation. Carter was a poor, poor president.
-
Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
- All About Digg
- About Us
- Contact Us
- The Digg Blog
- Digg Townhalls & Meetups
- Jobs at Digg
- Advertise on Digg
- Diggnation Podcast
- Digg Store
- Get hats, shirts, hoodies, stickers, and more at the Digg Store.
- Digg Dialogg!
- Digg Dialogg lets you choose the questions.
- Elections 2008
- Digg the Candidates — track the US presidential candidates.
- Digg Meetups & Townhalls
-
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our Meetups and & Townhall Webcasts.
Townhall Webcast - Aug 28
London - Oct 10
More Dates TBA
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by
Digg users
is
dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.