60 mpg by 2025

[justme]

[quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.

[DWCAP]

[quote=justme][quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.[/quote]

I disagree that you have estabolished a double standard. Your argument can be run in reverse as well.

If the use of finite resources will leave our children worse off, then we should stop all use of them immediatly. But if we shut down our transportation industries, wont future generations be worse off as our economy implodes?

Wise spending, even deficit spending, will return future rewards in excess of costs. This improves the lives of future generations, making any remaining debts easily taken care of with extra to spare. The problem is when we go out and blow it all and have nothing to show for it. But who is to decide what ‘wise’ is? Is building a house out in BFE a wise decision, even if that person now needs to commute long distinces and use alot of gas? Well, it improved the value of the land in BFE, so maybe it is. At one time, Carmel valley was considered BFE, now it is prime RE, generating value for future generations.

What is wise and not wise if often far harder to figure out than you are making it out to be. (Carbon) Energy deficits are structural due to their limited amount of resource, Monitary deficits are not necessarly structural and as such not limited to the same constraints.

[DWCAP]

[quote=justme][quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.[/quote]

I disagree that you have estabolished a double standard. Your argument can be run in reverse as well.

If the use of finite resources will leave our children worse off, then we should stop all use of them immediatly. But if we shut down our transportation industries, wont future generations be worse off as our economy implodes?

Wise spending, even deficit spending, will return future rewards in excess of costs. This improves the lives of future generations, making any remaining debts easily taken care of with extra to spare. The problem is when we go out and blow it all and have nothing to show for it. But who is to decide what ‘wise’ is? Is building a house out in BFE a wise decision, even if that person now needs to commute long distinces and use alot of gas? Well, it improved the value of the land in BFE, so maybe it is. At one time, Carmel valley was considered BFE, now it is prime RE, generating value for future generations.

What is wise and not wise if often far harder to figure out than you are making it out to be. (Carbon) Energy deficits are structural due to their limited amount of resource, Monitary deficits are not necessarly structural and as such not limited to the same constraints.

[DWCAP]

[quote=justme][quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.[/quote]

I disagree that you have estabolished a double standard. Your argument can be run in reverse as well.

If the use of finite resources will leave our children worse off, then we should stop all use of them immediatly. But if we shut down our transportation industries, wont future generations be worse off as our economy implodes?

Wise spending, even deficit spending, will return future rewards in excess of costs. This improves the lives of future generations, making any remaining debts easily taken care of with extra to spare. The problem is when we go out and blow it all and have nothing to show for it. But who is to decide what ‘wise’ is? Is building a house out in BFE a wise decision, even if that person now needs to commute long distinces and use alot of gas? Well, it improved the value of the land in BFE, so maybe it is. At one time, Carmel valley was considered BFE, now it is prime RE, generating value for future generations.

What is wise and not wise if often far harder to figure out than you are making it out to be. (Carbon) Energy deficits are structural due to their limited amount of resource, Monitary deficits are not necessarly structural and as such not limited to the same constraints.

[DWCAP]

[quote=justme][quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.[/quote]

I disagree that you have estabolished a double standard. Your argument can be run in reverse as well.

If the use of finite resources will leave our children worse off, then we should stop all use of them immediatly. But if we shut down our transportation industries, wont future generations be worse off as our economy implodes?

Wise spending, even deficit spending, will return future rewards in excess of costs. This improves the lives of future generations, making any remaining debts easily taken care of with extra to spare. The problem is when we go out and blow it all and have nothing to show for it. But who is to decide what ‘wise’ is? Is building a house out in BFE a wise decision, even if that person now needs to commute long distinces and use alot of gas? Well, it improved the value of the land in BFE, so maybe it is. At one time, Carmel valley was considered BFE, now it is prime RE, generating value for future generations.

What is wise and not wise if often far harder to figure out than you are making it out to be. (Carbon) Energy deficits are structural due to their limited amount of resource, Monitary deficits are not necessarly structural and as such not limited to the same constraints.

[DWCAP]

[quote=justme][quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.[/quote]

I disagree that you have estabolished a double standard. Your argument can be run in reverse as well.

If the use of finite resources will leave our children worse off, then we should stop all use of them immediatly. But if we shut down our transportation industries, wont future generations be worse off as our economy implodes?

Wise spending, even deficit spending, will return future rewards in excess of costs. This improves the lives of future generations, making any remaining debts easily taken care of with extra to spare. The problem is when we go out and blow it all and have nothing to show for it. But who is to decide what ‘wise’ is? Is building a house out in BFE a wise decision, even if that person now needs to commute long distinces and use alot of gas? Well, it improved the value of the land in BFE, so maybe it is. At one time, Carmel valley was considered BFE, now it is prime RE, generating value for future generations.

What is wise and not wise if often far harder to figure out than you are making it out to be. (Carbon) Energy deficits are structural due to their limited amount of resource, Monitary deficits are not necessarly structural and as such not limited to the same constraints.

[equalizer]

[quote=sdduuuude]
To force people into a certain way of action because you think that is the way it should be is basically a totalitarian approach that never works, and invariably results in unexpected side-affects that screw up your original intentions or create worse problems. This idea is “Control Freaks Gone Wild.” Who is to say you are the guy to decide ? Why 60 mph ? Why not 1000? Why not 10?

Maybe we should restrict all art projects to 1 gallon of paint. That is about as smart.

The original poster’s user name should be “BigGovernmentIsGoodButOnlyIfTheBig
GovernmentForcesPeopleToDoWhatIWantThemTo” and I would like to suggest China as a new home for you.

Just let people buy the car they want and deal with what happens. The market may not go the way you want it to. Tough crap. This ain’t Burger King – you can’t always have it your way.[/quote]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx

[equalizer]

[quote=sdduuuude]
To force people into a certain way of action because you think that is the way it should be is basically a totalitarian approach that never works, and invariably results in unexpected side-affects that screw up your original intentions or create worse problems. This idea is “Control Freaks Gone Wild.” Who is to say you are the guy to decide ? Why 60 mph ? Why not 1000? Why not 10?

Maybe we should restrict all art projects to 1 gallon of paint. That is about as smart.

The original poster’s user name should be “BigGovernmentIsGoodButOnlyIfTheBig
GovernmentForcesPeopleToDoWhatIWantThemTo” and I would like to suggest China as a new home for you.

Just let people buy the car they want and deal with what happens. The market may not go the way you want it to. Tough crap. This ain’t Burger King – you can’t always have it your way.[/quote]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx

[equalizer]

[quote=sdduuuude]
To force people into a certain way of action because you think that is the way it should be is basically a totalitarian approach that never works, and invariably results in unexpected side-affects that screw up your original intentions or create worse problems. This idea is “Control Freaks Gone Wild.” Who is to say you are the guy to decide ? Why 60 mph ? Why not 1000? Why not 10?

Maybe we should restrict all art projects to 1 gallon of paint. That is about as smart.

The original poster’s user name should be “BigGovernmentIsGoodButOnlyIfTheBig
GovernmentForcesPeopleToDoWhatIWantThemTo” and I would like to suggest China as a new home for you.

Just let people buy the car they want and deal with what happens. The market may not go the way you want it to. Tough crap. This ain’t Burger King – you can’t always have it your way.[/quote]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx

[equalizer]

[quote=sdduuuude]
To force people into a certain way of action because you think that is the way it should be is basically a totalitarian approach that never works, and invariably results in unexpected side-affects that screw up your original intentions or create worse problems. This idea is “Control Freaks Gone Wild.” Who is to say you are the guy to decide ? Why 60 mph ? Why not 1000? Why not 10?

Maybe we should restrict all art projects to 1 gallon of paint. That is about as smart.

The original poster’s user name should be “BigGovernmentIsGoodButOnlyIfTheBig
GovernmentForcesPeopleToDoWhatIWantThemTo” and I would like to suggest China as a new home for you.

Just let people buy the car they want and deal with what happens. The market may not go the way you want it to. Tough crap. This ain’t Burger King – you can’t always have it your way.[/quote]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx

[equalizer]

[quote=sdduuuude]
To force people into a certain way of action because you think that is the way it should be is basically a totalitarian approach that never works, and invariably results in unexpected side-affects that screw up your original intentions or create worse problems. This idea is “Control Freaks Gone Wild.” Who is to say you are the guy to decide ? Why 60 mph ? Why not 1000? Why not 10?

Maybe we should restrict all art projects to 1 gallon of paint. That is about as smart.

The original poster’s user name should be “BigGovernmentIsGoodButOnlyIfTheBig
GovernmentForcesPeopleToDoWhatIWantThemTo” and I would like to suggest China as a new home for you.

Just let people buy the car they want and deal with what happens. The market may not go the way you want it to. Tough crap. This ain’t Burger King – you can’t always have it your way.[/quote]
“totalitarian approach that never works”- Really?

Although flu knows I hide out in a bunker with my xenophobic buddies listening to Buchanan and Art Bell, I did manage to sneak out to Singapore [why yes, twice last year]. They control everything including chewing gum, engine size, etc. It pains me to say this but their economy is a vibrant free market with strict dictatorship control. It worked so well that Chinese copied their economic model in the 70’s and look at China now – a totalitarian approach that seems to have growth.

Wait, you want democracy? Maybe it’s highly overrated. Just go over to India and look what that freedom brought – infrastructure that is 50 years behind USA. India could have been better off in many ways with a Chinese style Govt in order to get infrastructure built. Know it all investor Jim Roger says India won’t last another 30 years.

Heck, if we moved the **&&$ and their lobbyist friends from the Beltway to San Quentin and put in a couple of smart dictators like flu and sduude for 10 years, what would happen? We would have projects with real merit built in a few years – We would have nuclear plants, all the roads would be paved in a few years cutting massive pollution, all the laws schools would be turned into prisons, etc. Now a few insects may be hurt without the 15 year lawsuits stopping the I-56, but that only benefited fat landowners like me who want to keep out the riff-raff. Oh wait, we don’t want that! I think I see endangered insect on the I-15, I should be able to stop that noise for 5 years with my injunction tomorrow.

BTW, flu says job growth in USA is over and fat sloths like must be drinking too much Pabst BR if we think USA can still control world economy in the future or enjoy great standard of living.
The Forbes author concludes with “[W]hat the United States must do is clear: it must strengthen its educational and economic foundations and foster the innovation that will keep the United Staes ahead in the technology that underpins so many parts of the nation’s culture and the global economy”. I say don’t worry mon, we’ll just dumb down the other countries with Facebook, Twitter, Idol, etc. So you all go ahead and join my former pal Jim Rogers in Singapore while I enjoy another Pabst.

“The Elephant and the Dragon: The Rise of India and China and What It Means for All of Us” [Hardcover]
Robyn Meredith

“Accounting for Growth: Comparing China and India”,
Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 22, Number 1—Winter 2008—Pages 45–66

http://www.brookings.edu/papers/2007/0117china_bosworth.aspx

[sdduuuude]

[quote=justme][quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.[/quote]

It has nothing to do with good or bad. It has to do with the fact that you don’t have the right to make decisions for other people, even if you are trying to induce a result that, in your opinion, is good.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=justme][quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.[/quote]

It has nothing to do with good or bad. It has to do with the fact that you don’t have the right to make decisions for other people, even if you are trying to induce a result that, in your opinion, is good.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=justme][quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.[/quote]

It has nothing to do with good or bad. It has to do with the fact that you don’t have the right to make decisions for other people, even if you are trying to induce a result that, in your opinion, is good.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=justme][quote=sdduuuude]Our mutual rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness don’t, however, give the government the right to borrow money, spend it on stupid crap, then come after us and our grandchildren to pay it back.

In fact those very rights should prevent them from doing just that. Sadly, the constitution seems to no longer hold them back.

It is neither my borrowing, nor yours that will saddle future generations with massive debt. It is the government’s.[/quote]

So we have established the double standard that you have:

Monetary deficits are bad, energy deficits are not a problem.

In the end, your grandchildrens lives will be me much worse off from the energy deficit. All hail your special brand of personal freedom.[/quote]

It has nothing to do with good or bad. It has to do with the fact that you don’t have the right to make decisions for other people, even if you are trying to induce a result that, in your opinion, is good.

[Author]

Posts