[HarryBosch]

Rustico, I knew that was coming. What can I say 🙂

Actually, I found out the hard way – our minivan was supposed to get smog checked earlier this year and it didn’t pass. So I took it to our local dealer and they wanted to charge about $1400 to fix everything. They said I’d need: a valve replacement kit, an Intake Manifold (IMRC) kit and a tune-up. I took it back to the Precision Tune Auto Care and they did all the repairs for just under a $1000.

I had thought about just making greater than $450 in repairs and then taking the car to a Referee smog station to see if I could get the other $550 in repairs delayed for two years just to save some money. But my wife was tired of seeing the Check Engine light constantly on for the past year and a half – it never affected performance, at least not that we could tell. So I finally got that fixed. Oh yeah, we did drive around for a month or so with the number “4” on the windshield – that went over real well with my wife :)))

[HarryBosch]

I guess the only thing amusing about it is that the owner didn’t have enough money – or was delaying – to pay for his smog check. As denoted by the number “5” on his rear window. He has until the end of May to get his car “PASSED” for his smog check and/or repairs 🙂

[HarryBosch]

I guess the only thing amusing about it is that the owner didn’t have enough money – or was delaying – to pay for his smog check. As denoted by the number “5” on his rear window. He has until the end of May to get his car “PASSED” for his smog check and/or repairs 🙂

[HarryBosch]

I guess the only thing amusing about it is that the owner didn’t have enough money – or was delaying – to pay for his smog check. As denoted by the number “5” on his rear window. He has until the end of May to get his car “PASSED” for his smog check and/or repairs 🙂

[HarryBosch]

I guess the only thing amusing about it is that the owner didn’t have enough money – or was delaying – to pay for his smog check. As denoted by the number “5” on his rear window. He has until the end of May to get his car “PASSED” for his smog check and/or repairs 🙂

[HarryBosch]

I guess the only thing amusing about it is that the owner didn’t have enough money – or was delaying – to pay for his smog check. As denoted by the number “5” on his rear window. He has until the end of May to get his car “PASSED” for his smog check and/or repairs 🙂

[HarryBosch]

The word “should”.

In my earlier years I used to say people should be this way or they “should” be that way or people shouldn’t do this or do that … until someone pointed out to me that people “should” not be or say what I think they “should” be or say.

(If that is true for all individuals, then if you and I are individuals, then it is true for both of us.)

It forced me to think about the word “should”, when it is used and what is behind the word “should”. When you say that people “… don’t have to like it, but legally, they should be entitled to it.” you are saying that based on YOUR MORALS, YOUR SENSE OF MORALITY “…they should be entitled to it.”

So you are really saying that based on YOUR MORALITY they “should” be (legally) entitled to it.

Tell me why “should” your MORALITY override my MORALITY? Legally? Anymore than mine should override yours?

I ask this not to be offensive or rude but just to point out that more thought needs to be put into this topic. To be honest, I struggle for a real answer and not just an answer that is an emotional reflex.

[HarryBosch]

The word “should”.

In my earlier years I used to say people should be this way or they “should” be that way or people shouldn’t do this or do that … until someone pointed out to me that people “should” not be or say what I think they “should” be or say.

(If that is true for all individuals, then if you and I are individuals, then it is true for both of us.)

It forced me to think about the word “should”, when it is used and what is behind the word “should”. When you say that people “… don’t have to like it, but legally, they should be entitled to it.” you are saying that based on YOUR MORALS, YOUR SENSE OF MORALITY “…they should be entitled to it.”

So you are really saying that based on YOUR MORALITY they “should” be (legally) entitled to it.

Tell me why “should” your MORALITY override my MORALITY? Legally? Anymore than mine should override yours?

I ask this not to be offensive or rude but just to point out that more thought needs to be put into this topic. To be honest, I struggle for a real answer and not just an answer that is an emotional reflex.

[HarryBosch]

The word “should”.

In my earlier years I used to say people should be this way or they “should” be that way or people shouldn’t do this or do that … until someone pointed out to me that people “should” not be or say what I think they “should” be or say.

(If that is true for all individuals, then if you and I are individuals, then it is true for both of us.)

It forced me to think about the word “should”, when it is used and what is behind the word “should”. When you say that people “… don’t have to like it, but legally, they should be entitled to it.” you are saying that based on YOUR MORALS, YOUR SENSE OF MORALITY “…they should be entitled to it.”

So you are really saying that based on YOUR MORALITY they “should” be (legally) entitled to it.

Tell me why “should” your MORALITY override my MORALITY? Legally? Anymore than mine should override yours?

I ask this not to be offensive or rude but just to point out that more thought needs to be put into this topic. To be honest, I struggle for a real answer and not just an answer that is an emotional reflex.

[HarryBosch]

The word “should”.

In my earlier years I used to say people should be this way or they “should” be that way or people shouldn’t do this or do that … until someone pointed out to me that people “should” not be or say what I think they “should” be or say.

(If that is true for all individuals, then if you and I are individuals, then it is true for both of us.)

It forced me to think about the word “should”, when it is used and what is behind the word “should”. When you say that people “… don’t have to like it, but legally, they should be entitled to it.” you are saying that based on YOUR MORALS, YOUR SENSE OF MORALITY “…they should be entitled to it.”

So you are really saying that based on YOUR MORALITY they “should” be (legally) entitled to it.

Tell me why “should” your MORALITY override my MORALITY? Legally? Anymore than mine should override yours?

I ask this not to be offensive or rude but just to point out that more thought needs to be put into this topic. To be honest, I struggle for a real answer and not just an answer that is an emotional reflex.

[HarryBosch]

The word “should”.

In my earlier years I used to say people should be this way or they “should” be that way or people shouldn’t do this or do that … until someone pointed out to me that people “should” not be or say what I think they “should” be or say.

(If that is true for all individuals, then if you and I are individuals, then it is true for both of us.)

It forced me to think about the word “should”, when it is used and what is behind the word “should”. When you say that people “… don’t have to like it, but legally, they should be entitled to it.” you are saying that based on YOUR MORALS, YOUR SENSE OF MORALITY “…they should be entitled to it.”

So you are really saying that based on YOUR MORALITY they “should” be (legally) entitled to it.

Tell me why “should” your MORALITY override my MORALITY? Legally? Anymore than mine should override yours?

I ask this not to be offensive or rude but just to point out that more thought needs to be put into this topic. To be honest, I struggle for a real answer and not just an answer that is an emotional reflex.

[HarryBosch]

We Were Warned: Tomorrow’s Oil Crisis

I just watched this last night on CNN. I didn’t know that Brazil is completely independent of oil from other nations. They use “E85” and produce all of their own “sugar-cane ethanol”. The world production of oil could stop completely and Brazil would go on as if everything were normal. Besides Rio there’s another reason to move there :)(http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/03/10/brazil.ethanol.example.ap/index.html)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/03/14/cnnpce.we.were.warned/index.html

Program Overview

It is September 2009. A Category 5 hurricane roars through Houston, destroying oil refineries, drilling platforms and pipelines–the complex system that provides a quarter of our nation’s daily fuel supply. Three days later, terrorists attack two key oil installations in Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest supplier. In the days and weeks that follow, gasoline prices hit record highs, food prices soar as trucks cannot afford to make deliveries, and Americans begin to realize that their very way of life is in peril.

In We Were Warned: Tomorrow’s Oil Crisis, CNN’s Frank Sesno explores the potential ripple effects of this frightening scenario. The events depicted are hypothetical, but oil experts believe the scenario is entirely plausible. His interviews with energy experts reveal that we are nearing the point at which the world, led by the U.S. and China, will begin to consume more oil than can be pumped from the ground and the oceans. Tracking the global race to find new pools of oil, Sesno also considers the viability of alternative fuels, such as ethanol, which is used as fuel for 40% of cars in Brazil. Throughout his investigation, Sesno tries to find out whether any of these ventures can solve our looming energy crisis or whether we are already too late.

[HarryBosch]

We Were Warned: Tomorrow’s Oil Crisis

I just watched this last night on CNN. I didn’t know that Brazil is completely independent of oil from other nations. They use “E85” and produce all of their own “sugar-cane ethanol”. The world production of oil could stop completely and Brazil would go on as if everything were normal. Besides Rio there’s another reason to move there :)(http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/03/10/brazil.ethanol.example.ap/index.html)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/03/14/cnnpce.we.were.warned/index.html

Program Overview

It is September 2009. A Category 5 hurricane roars through Houston, destroying oil refineries, drilling platforms and pipelines–the complex system that provides a quarter of our nation’s daily fuel supply. Three days later, terrorists attack two key oil installations in Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest supplier. In the days and weeks that follow, gasoline prices hit record highs, food prices soar as trucks cannot afford to make deliveries, and Americans begin to realize that their very way of life is in peril.

In We Were Warned: Tomorrow’s Oil Crisis, CNN’s Frank Sesno explores the potential ripple effects of this frightening scenario. The events depicted are hypothetical, but oil experts believe the scenario is entirely plausible. His interviews with energy experts reveal that we are nearing the point at which the world, led by the U.S. and China, will begin to consume more oil than can be pumped from the ground and the oceans. Tracking the global race to find new pools of oil, Sesno also considers the viability of alternative fuels, such as ethanol, which is used as fuel for 40% of cars in Brazil. Throughout his investigation, Sesno tries to find out whether any of these ventures can solve our looming energy crisis or whether we are already too late.

[HarryBosch]

We Were Warned: Tomorrow’s Oil Crisis

I just watched this last night on CNN. I didn’t know that Brazil is completely independent of oil from other nations. They use “E85” and produce all of their own “sugar-cane ethanol”. The world production of oil could stop completely and Brazil would go on as if everything were normal. Besides Rio there’s another reason to move there :)(http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/03/10/brazil.ethanol.example.ap/index.html)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/03/14/cnnpce.we.were.warned/index.html

Program Overview

It is September 2009. A Category 5 hurricane roars through Houston, destroying oil refineries, drilling platforms and pipelines–the complex system that provides a quarter of our nation’s daily fuel supply. Three days later, terrorists attack two key oil installations in Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest supplier. In the days and weeks that follow, gasoline prices hit record highs, food prices soar as trucks cannot afford to make deliveries, and Americans begin to realize that their very way of life is in peril.

In We Were Warned: Tomorrow’s Oil Crisis, CNN’s Frank Sesno explores the potential ripple effects of this frightening scenario. The events depicted are hypothetical, but oil experts believe the scenario is entirely plausible. His interviews with energy experts reveal that we are nearing the point at which the world, led by the U.S. and China, will begin to consume more oil than can be pumped from the ground and the oceans. Tracking the global race to find new pools of oil, Sesno also considers the viability of alternative fuels, such as ethanol, which is used as fuel for 40% of cars in Brazil. Throughout his investigation, Sesno tries to find out whether any of these ventures can solve our looming energy crisis or whether we are already too late.

[HarryBosch]

We Were Warned: Tomorrow’s Oil Crisis

I just watched this last night on CNN. I didn’t know that Brazil is completely independent of oil from other nations. They use “E85” and produce all of their own “sugar-cane ethanol”. The world production of oil could stop completely and Brazil would go on as if everything were normal. Besides Rio there’s another reason to move there :)(http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/03/10/brazil.ethanol.example.ap/index.html)

http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/03/14/cnnpce.we.were.warned/index.html

Program Overview

It is September 2009. A Category 5 hurricane roars through Houston, destroying oil refineries, drilling platforms and pipelines–the complex system that provides a quarter of our nation’s daily fuel supply. Three days later, terrorists attack two key oil installations in Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest supplier. In the days and weeks that follow, gasoline prices hit record highs, food prices soar as trucks cannot afford to make deliveries, and Americans begin to realize that their very way of life is in peril.

In We Were Warned: Tomorrow’s Oil Crisis, CNN’s Frank Sesno explores the potential ripple effects of this frightening scenario. The events depicted are hypothetical, but oil experts believe the scenario is entirely plausible. His interviews with energy experts reveal that we are nearing the point at which the world, led by the U.S. and China, will begin to consume more oil than can be pumped from the ground and the oceans. Tracking the global race to find new pools of oil, Sesno also considers the viability of alternative fuels, such as ethanol, which is used as fuel for 40% of cars in Brazil. Throughout his investigation, Sesno tries to find out whether any of these ventures can solve our looming energy crisis or whether we are already too late.

[Author]

Posts