Susan's Place Logo

News:

According to Google Analytics 25,259,719 users made visits accounting for 140,758,117 Pageviews since December 2006

Main Menu

Paris Hilton strikes back (Yes it's political :P)

Started by Susan, August 06, 2008, 02:37:28 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Susan

Susan Larson
Founder
Susan's Place Transgender Resources

Help support this website and our community by Donating or Subscribing!
  •  

Annwyn

I think the next president should be elected based off votes on who looks best in a swim suit.  TOTALLY.
  •  

Case

Hmm..

That actually doesn't sound like a half bad idea X_X

She totally didnt come up with that herself  :laugh:
  •  

Janet_Girl

Hey she like could be our first woman president.  ???

Yeah, sure. Not !  Although I do like the idea of the limited offshore drilling* and tax breaks for new hybrids.

*Just not off my shores. ;) Pacific or Atlantic
  •  

Laura91

Quote from: Chelsea on August 06, 2008, 07:08:17 AM
Hmm..

That actually doesn't sound like a half bad idea X_X

She totally didnt come up with that herself  :laugh:

:D Like, do you think so??



Totally  :D
  •  

lisagurl

Why are the candidates hiding the truth? First offshore wells would take 10 years to start pumping. Second they would not even off set the increase for the world's oil demand for one year. All the World's oil goes into one big pot and sold to the highest bider. Alaska oil usually makes it way to Japan. Third it is probable that a catastrophes will cause spills off the coasts. Fourth it will do very little to change the price of oil maybe one or two cents. The most it will do is get people to vote, because people are not interested in the effort it takes to solve problems either are the politicians. There is not a solution to satisfying peoples greed for energy at this point in time. It is a matter of suffering the least. Improving the nations rails will make for more efficient moving of freight saving oil. It would also put many truckers out of a job and increase shipping time. Moving manufacturing back to the US would create jobs but increase product costs and save energy.

Everything is a trade off and the candidates do not want to point that out because the one's that would lose something would not vote for them.
  •  

NicholeW.

Lisa has the whole off-shore appeal down right. It does nothing except to make more profits for already bloated oil companies, continues the Bush-twig agenda in that regard and saves nowt. And we are just stoopid enough to fall for it.

Heck, even Obama is moving that way now! Jeez, the American public! It's a wonder we aren't all dead.

And the rest of what she said is absolutely true. We simply refuse to recognize that the world and the economy is not as simple as Paris Hilton is.

Nichole
  •  

Mnemosyne

Actually you missed a point on the offshore drilling: new equipment (like rigs, etc) will have to be manufactured for the increased demand. It is part of the reason why it would take 10 years. Obama and McCain get a lot wrong and both will be a disaster for this country. I never thought I would have to pick between a Bush 2.0 and a Carter 2.0.

I am looking forward to watching the vid when I get home. :)
  •  

lisagurl

Quote from: Mnemosyne on August 06, 2008, 12:08:15 PM
Actually you missed a point on the offshore drilling: new equipment (like rigs, etc) will have to be manufactured for the increased demand. It is part of the reason why it would take 10 years. Obama and McCain get a lot wrong and both will be a disaster for this country. I never thought I would have to pick between a Bush 2.0 and a Carter 2.0.

I am looking forward to watching the vid when I get home. :)

The age of carbon powered energy has reached it's peak. Oil does carry an advantage of having a high BTU content per volume but it is better used in products than as a fuel. For the next few generations we do not have a single replacement choice. Everything should be on the table including conservation. People have been trained to consume, it is going to be difficult to get them to live sparingly.  Everything from city design to education needs an overhaul to reflect a more human approach to life.

We pick our Representatives like we pick the American idol. The truth is we do not want an entertainer as President, we need a leader with a plan and intellectual skills. I suppose a little charisma would be helpful.
  •  

Sephirah

If you want to get people to conserve energy, you could always adopt the UK's current approach. This seems to involve ramping up the cost of gas and electricity by up to 35% every quarter, to the point where people are forced to conserve energy usage or face starvation through not being able to buy food - partially through energy bills taking up most of household finances, but also because the cost of food skyrockets through the massively increased cost to transport and refridgerate it.

Add in phenomenally expensive petrol prices through a government unwilling to reduce the 60-odd percent tax it adds to the base cost of it... and the choice is simple. Use less or be destitute.

There are hundreds of alternative ways to produce energy and vehicle propulsion systems. All of these could be used in conjunction to eliminate the need for oil as a fuel source. But they won't be. Because, as we all know, it's easier to suck the planet dry than to consider using the free, renewable sources of energy - solar, tidal, geothermal, wind etc - to produce unlimited electricity... which could be used to produce hydrogen fuel cells in vehicles. This would have the added benefit of neutralising vehicle carbon emissions, and emissions from power stations... helping to combat climate change.

But no, that's unfeasable because it requires money. And the vision to see beyond one person's or individual country's interests. We can't have the oil companies using the billions they make through profits to do something that might actually benefit them in the long run. No. It's easier to go scratching around in evermore remote, and ecologically sensitive areas in order to keep pumping out the black blood of the planet.

*sigh*

It makes me sad. There is so much that could be done... but won't be. Because we can't see past our own selfish desires... like China devouring everything because it thinks it has a right to the 'prosperity' the Western countries have.

"Well you did it, so why shouldn't we?"

"Because we screwed up the planet... and now so are you. Don't you see?"

*shakes head*

The answer isn't new ways of getting the last vestiges of oil, coal and gas from the Earth before it all goes to hell and we start killing each other for the final few drops... the answer is new ways of thinking and the courage to make the changes necessary to stop that from happening.

I just wish that people in power could see that and not just what will win them votes. :-\ Anyone with the vision to take these steps will leave a far greater legacy in history than a fake tan and a stick-on smile.
Natura nihil frustra facit.

"You yourself, as much as anybody in the entire universe, deserve your love and affection." ~ Buddha.

If you're dealing with self esteem issues, maybe click here. There may be something you find useful. :)
Above all... remember: you are beautiful, you are valuable, and you have a shining spark of magnificence within you. Don't let anyone take that from you. Embrace who you are. <3
  •  

tekla

We pick our Representatives like we pick the American idol.

Woo-Hoo, not so fast there - I think most Americans worry a lot more about American Idol than their representatives - more people vote in AmIdol than the last presidential election, for sure on that.

Like, do you think so??

Like no.  Despite some of her party girl companions Paris is not Lindsey or Brittany.  She is a Hilton, and was raised like a Hilton.  She had first rate education and did not grow up on-set or in some trailer park down south.  So I'm sure she was speaking for herself.  I've watched her speak several times and she is poised, articulate and smart when she's not coked up and drunk.  Fact is, her energy policy makes more sense then the old duffers policy.  And unlike McCain, she is a real Republican, she was born into money, and didn't have to marry into it.



Even if you could get the wells going in five to ten years, there is nothing to force the companies that buy the leases from producing on them, as opposed to just parking them and waiting for the price of oil to rise, which it will continue to do sort of some mythical discovery that would make it obsolete in each and every way its used.
FIGHT APATHY!, or don't...
  •  

lisagurl

Quoteusing the free, renewable sources of energy - solar, tidal, geothermal, wind etc - to produce unlimited electricity.

Many think that is true. The fact is it takes plenty of energy to make and maintain the equipment enough so that energy wise it is not the answer under present technology. Life of solar systems are 15 to 20 years, it takes at least 7 years at least for them to produce the amount of energy it took to make them. Not to mention all the water and pollution used in the process. Many environmental problems have not been solved in renewable sources. Electricity also produces heat. (3414 Btu per KWh) Unlimited heat production could also cause problems.

QuoteEven if you could get the wells going in five to ten years, there is nothing to force the companies that buy the leases from producing on them,

Even if they sold the oil it would only add 2-3% to the worlds production. Then you need that many more refineries and the pollution that goes with it. Who is going to add one in their back yard. It would be easier to start using Yucca MT for nuclear waste.
  •  

tekla

In fact, its not the oil that is in shortage (that's the simple explanation favored by simple minds) its a problem in the refining sector.  That's where supply can no longer match demand.  And there is a reason for that.  No really new refineries have been built in the last decade or more.  Reason for that too.  It takes 30-40 years, running at a 98% production load to make back the money it costs to build a refinery.  And the people who buy such things just don't think they can make that money back, think on that for a while.
FIGHT APATHY!, or don't...
  •  

Sephirah

Quote from: lisagurl on August 06, 2008, 05:34:32 PM
Many think that is true. The fact is it takes plenty of energy to make and maintain the equipment enough so that energy wise it is not the answer under present technology. Life of solar systems are 15 to 20 years, it takes at least 7 years at least for them to produce the amount of energy it took to make them. Not to mention all the water and pollution used in the process. Many environmental problems have not been solved in renewable sources. Electricity also produces heat. (3414 Btu per KWh) Unlimited heat production could also cause problems.

So why not make them in countries that already have renewable systems set up, like the geothermal plants in Iceland? The energy used to make them will be irrelevent then, because it will have used no fossil fuel and caused no pollution. Plus, the heat generated could be put back into the ground, replenishing the geothermal heat reservoir under the plants.

By their very nature, non-renewable energy sources will run out. It may take a long time but eventually it will happen. And the longer we put off developing renewable resources and the technology to utilise them, the harder it's going to be when, eventually, we no longer have a choice in the matter.

Maybe you can say "yeah, but by that time we'll have the technology that will be more efficient"... but how so if we don't do everything we can to develop it now?
Natura nihil frustra facit.

"You yourself, as much as anybody in the entire universe, deserve your love and affection." ~ Buddha.

If you're dealing with self esteem issues, maybe click here. There may be something you find useful. :)
Above all... remember: you are beautiful, you are valuable, and you have a shining spark of magnificence within you. Don't let anyone take that from you. Embrace who you are. <3
  •  

Annwyn

parris hilton is too skinny.

she need to eat a steak and some eggs.  work on them humps.  then she can run for president.
  •  

lisagurl

QuoteSo why not make them in countries that already have renewable systems set up, like the geothermal plants in Iceland?

Yes Geothermal works in Iceland but not in Cuba. You can not move heat very easy. In electric it is dissipated at the point of use. In making electricity ( 11000 Btu) kWh the heat is sent into the air in cooling towers which use a lot of water.

Iceland Geothermal works with very high temperature underground rocks that make steam that turn a turbine then the steam is cooled to water and reheated to steam underground. The heat is not pumped back. In my house I have A Geothermal heat pump that takes 60 F ground temperature and with a compressor makes it 100F for heat in or 120 F for hot water or 45 F for cooling. It still uses electricity but is much more efficient and costly to install. The return temp is put back in the ground for it is a big heat sink.

QuoteAnd the longer we put off developing renewable resources and the technology

It is not an easy task to invent and control energy. Fusion? Billions have been spent and we are no closer than when the idea came to mind.

The main problem is that today more people live on earth than it can naturally support. It would be an easier task to cut the population in half than to develop a clean renewable non polluting energy we could use and control. Every technology has some drawbacks to the human life.

The answer? None people will like, increase Nukes, use solar wind and geo where it makes sense, conserve, limit population growth, increase use of rails as we decrease air and road travel, mass transit, save water, reduce packaging, buy seasonal from local farms, clean coal where it makes sense, stop making war, reduce military, reduce special interest laws, build better quality buildings and products, reduce obsolescence, and a host of other things I am sure you could come up with.
  •  

tekla

Yeah, and I want a pony.

Humans aren't going to do anything except too little too late, its our way.  We've had these stats since the late fifties, by the seventies it could not have been more obvious but nada, when Carter tried to point it out he got run out of office and all his energy stuff was killed when Reagan took over.

But Paris was great, better than any film role, I like the 'see you at the debate bitches' line, it was perfect.
FIGHT APATHY!, or don't...
  •  

Laura91

Quote from: tekla on August 06, 2008, 08:39:57 PM
I like the 'see you at the debate bitches' line, it was perfect.

That is exactly what the politicians are too, and the lobbyists are their pimps.
  •  

lisagurl

QuoteThat is exactly what the politicians are too, and the lobbyists are their pimps.

Take ethanol as an example. Farmers like it it increases how much they make and reduces their work with a mono crop. The chemical companies like it because it sell a lot of chemicals (fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides) the oil companies like it because it takes more energy to produce than it delivers and a gallon of ethanol gets less energy and fuel mileage. It also takes 180 gallons of water to make one gallon of ethanol. It reduces crop land so people have to pay higher prices for food. It needs government subsidies to compete with oil. Corn depletes the soil quicker.

The lobbyists site Brazil, but Brazil use sugar cane which has a much higher sugar content than corn and they use slave labor in the fields. As the US subsidies corn syrup instead of sugar in most processed food. Corn syrup is partly the blame for obesity.
  •  

tekla

Ethanol is a prime example of the fantasy land that most people live in when it comes to energy.  You can't get something for nothing. 

Its Physics 101, one of the few things in science that gets to be called a law, and it goes like this.

The law of conservation of energy states that energy may neither be created nor destroyed.

You can only transfer it.  Ethanol is also responsible in part for the rising prices you see at the check out line in the supermarket.

Sure, there are lots of things we can be doing, should be doing and are not doing. Still at the end of the day, the amount of energy that is required to run the world the way it is currently set up is not replaceable by other means.  The American suburban/interstate system is not sustainable, nor is it exportable except to our own detriment.
FIGHT APATHY!, or don't...
  •