[James Arthur]

By what indicator? White House press release volume?

Durable goods orders and shipments are mixed, new home starts are way
down, the stock market is oscillating wildly, GFP annual growth rate
is 1.2% (low on historic scale). But cheer up: e-commerce sales are
doing nicely. All that online shopping may be impacting worker
productivity.

By what measure do you consider the economy depressed? You've
mentioned a few d/dt items, nothing more. We're backing off a period
of unsustainable growth, which is a good thing.

Besides, yours would be a current complaint, not an explanation for
2006. The simple explanation is that Americans conserved, and used
less 'carbon intensive' energy sources.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[John Larkin]

By what measure do you consider the economy depressed? You've
mentioned a few d/dt items, nothing more. We're backing off a period
of unsustainable growth, which is a good thing.

Besides, yours would be a current complaint, not an explanation for
2006. The simple explanation is that Americans conserved, and used
less 'carbon intensive' energy sources.

Cheers,
James Arthur

Quit being such an optimist. Nobody likes an optimist.

John

 

[MooseFET]

Yes, the words say that, but the economy is thriving, not depressed.

The economy is doing so-so at best. We have a mixed collection of
measures of it.

I did find it interesting that there's a surge in CO2 every election
year.

Everyone was holding their breath.

 

[MooseFET]

You find a practical way to move a real-world three-ton wheeled
vehicle 100 miles on a gallon-of-gas-equivalent, and I guarantee
you you'll have PLENTY of people's attention.

But you don't really have that, do you?

That was done years ago. Unfortunately, it results in an average speed
of about 15MPH. On level ground, the friction losses can be made low
enough at low speeds to get very long ranges out of a small amount of
gas.

 

[Shadowland]

Let the gov't fund it, won't cost a farthing!

Oh no you didn't say that...Scotty beam me up !!

 

[James Arthur]

Quit being such an optimist. Nobody likes an optimist.

John

Would it help if I were bitter?

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Richard The Dreaded Libertarian]

Just because Al Gore isn't Yiddish enough, is this why the rest of you
folks don't like him?

The regular laws of physics and the science is there to behold,
whereas at least 10% and possibly as great as 25% of the ongoing GW
fiasco is in fact human related.

The GW *FIASCO* is, in fact, human related, by lunatics like Al Gore
screaming, "The sky is falling, and it's your fault!!!!!"

"Global Warming" itself is a natural thing and is going to happen
anyway, just like global cooling - the right answer isn't to devote all of
humankind to some kind of doomed project to try to control the climate,
but to learn to adapt to changing conditions, which is what free people do
best.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Richard The Dreaded Libertarian]

We need to go back to restricting voting rights to just property
owners. That would thin things down a bit.

What's this "we" shit, fat boy?

You wanna make sure only bushists and other nazis can get elected?

Sorry - in the US, we have a Constitution. Maybe you'd get along
better in one of those dictatorships where everybody marches in
lockstep to the beat of the inner party drum?

Why do you hate the Constitution?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[James Arthur]

The economy is doing so-so at best. We have a mixed collection of
measures of it.

Indications are always mixed--it's quite impossible for all sectors to
simultaneously boom, as many are in competition.

Overall, growth, inflation, employment, etc. are as good as it gets.
If you're not happy now, you never will be.

Everyone was holding their breath.

My theory: politicians flitting about in their private jets. ;-)

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Eeyore]

The GW *FIASCO* is, in fact, human related, by lunatics like Al Gore
screaming, "The sky is falling, and it's your fault!!!!!"

"Global Warming" itself is a natural thing and is going to happen
anyway, just like global cooling - the right answer isn't to devote all of
humankind to some kind of doomed project to try to control the climate,
but to learn to adapt to changing conditions, which is what free people do
best.

Do they teach the story of Canute in the USA ? It seems curiously appropriate.

Graham

 

[James Arthur]

No.

This is another reason why hybrids make more sense. Pure EVs have too many
limitations.

Graham

A little late, perhaps, to comment on the first posting of this
thread, but what of Toshiba's 1-minute [sic] Li-Ion cells? Great
potential, IMHO.

Toshiba Lithium Ion Batteries (80% charge in 1 minute):
http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2005_03/pr2901.htm
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/04/toshibarsquos_f.html

related discussion:
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2006/nf20060124_5834.htm

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[MooseFET]

Indications are always mixed--it's quite impossible for all sectors to
simultaneously boom, as many are in competition.

Overall, growth, inflation, employment, etc. are as good as it gets.
If you're not happy now, you never will be.

You haven't looked closely enough. Right now the US is running a
large deficit and has quite low interest rates. These are both things
that in the short term stimulate the economy. It is like a car with
the gas pressed all the way to the floor and only gets up to 45 MPH.
It is a lot faster than I can run but still a lot less that should be
expected.

The US has a decreasing size of middle class. The working class is
seeing a net loss of standard of living. Most of the middle class is
also seeing a decrease in standard of living. The debt is piling up
and the average worker age is increasing. None of these are things by
them selves would be a major problem but combined they point to a
decline.

There is also a serious concentration of power and wealth happening.
The trend is towards a small number of companies being a big fraction
of the economy. This is never a good thing for the long term survival
of an empire. It leads to a fragile situation. With many small
companies, a mistake only impacts a small part of the economy.
Increasingly, a mistake by a company impacts a larger part of the
overal economy.

My theory: politicians flitting about in their private jets. ;-)

No, that can't be it. We would also see a spike in the water vapor in
the upper atmosphere.

 

[MooseFET]

This is another reason why hybrids make more sense. Pure EVs have too many
limitations.

Graham

A little late, perhaps, to comment on the first posting of this
thread, but what of Toshiba's 1-minute [sic] Li-Ion cells? Great
potential, IMHO.

Toshiba Lithium Ion Batteries (80% charge in 1 minute):
http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2005_03/pr2901.htm
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/04/toshibarsquos_f.html

related discussion:
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2006/nf20060124_5834.htm

.... and when they fail you have a rocket powered car for a few
seconds.

 

[John Larkin]

Would it help if I were bitter?

It would certainly be more fashionable.

Cheers,

See, you're doing it again!

John

 

[Bob Myers]

That was done years ago. Unfortunately, it results in an average speed
of about 15MPH. On level ground, the friction losses can be made low
enough at low speeds to get very long ranges out of a small amount of
gas.

Yeah, but that's where the "practical" qualifier comes in.
I really doubt that you'd find many people willing to accept
limiting their driving to 15 MPH on level ground with special
low-rolling-resistance tires, etc..

In other words - "special demo" sorts of examples don't
count.

Bob M.

 

[Bob Myers]

What's this "we" shit, fat boy?

You wanna make sure only bushists and other nazis can get elected?

Sorry - in the US, we have a Constitution. Maybe you'd get along
better in one of those dictatorships where everybody marches in
lockstep to the beat of the inner party drum?

Why do you hate the Constitution?

I don't see any evidence in the above that Jim "hates the
Constitution" - his idea may seem radical, but it is hardly
unconstitutional per the original text of that document.
Why haven't you actually read the document you seem
to want to defend so vigorously?

Article 1, Section 4 reserves to the states the authority
to determine how Senators, Representatives, and Electors
(the members of the Electoral College) are elected.
Article 4, Section 4 guarantees that the basic form of
government of the individual states (and therefore the U.S.
as a whole) must be "republican" (which in this context
would be equivalent to the common usage of the term
"democratic." Outside of these, I defy you to find any
mention of "voting rights" in the Constitution until the
15th Amendment (ratified in 1870), which prohibited the
use of race as a criteria for voting. But having "property
ownership" as a criteria for voting rights was the law in
most if not all states at the time the Constitution was written
and ratified, and changed only on a state-by-state basis,
with the last such requirement in place until 1850. And
again, while Jim's suggestion may seem radical to some, there's
nothing at all in the U.S. Constitution which would prohibit
it from being adopted by any individual state.

Bob M.

 

[James Arthur]

On Aug 10, 6:43 am, MooseFET <[email protected]> wrote:

[..]

Indications are always mixed--it's quite impossible for all sectors to
simultaneously boom, as many are in competition.

Overall, growth, inflation, employment, etc. are as good as it gets.
If you're not happy now, you never will be.

You haven't looked closely enough. Right now the US is running a
large deficit and has quite low interest rates. These are both things
that in the short term stimulate the economy. It is like a car with
the gas pressed all the way to the floor and only gets up to 45 MPH.
It is a lot faster than I can run but still a lot less that should be
expected.

Exactly how fast do you think the economy should grow? The Federal
Reserve Board has been trying to *slow* the economy since mid-2004,
and that's still their focus today. Perhaps you should e-mail Mr.
Bernanke:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/feedback.cfm

As for the deficit, I don't like it, but find it hard to understand
why you think it's related to GDP, or why 3% of GDP would make any
difference in the short haul. It won't.

The US has a decreasing size of middle class. The working class is
seeing a net loss of standard of living. Most of the middle class is
also seeing a decrease in standard of living. The debt is piling up
and the average worker age is increasing. None of these are things by
them selves would be a major problem but combined they point to a
decline.

There is also a serious concentration of power and wealth happening.
The trend is towards a small number of companies being a big fraction
of the economy. This is never a good thing for the long term survival
of an empire. It leads to a fragile situation. With many small
companies, a mistake only impacts a small part of the economy.
Increasingly, a mistake by a company impacts a larger part of the
overal economy.

I understand you believe these things. I invite you to show the
quantitative basis for those beliefs.

It would help if you define some of your terms--what is "middle
class"? What is "standard of living"? Do you mean that real wages
have decreased? Kindly show that. Be sure to include benefits--
retirement and healthcare in your figures...the result may surprise
you.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

[Eeyore]

No.

This is another reason why hybrids make more sense. Pure EVs have too many
limitations.

A little late, perhaps, to comment on the first posting of this
thread, but what of Toshiba's 1-minute [sic] Li-Ion cells? Great
potential, IMHO.

Toshiba Lithium Ion Batteries (80% charge in 1 minute):
http://www.toshiba.co.jp/about/press/2005_03/pr2901.htm
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2005/04/toshibarsquos_f.html

related discussion:
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/jan2006/nf20060124_5834.htm

When they can make them in vehicle sizes there can be a discussion. Not until
then.

Graham

 

[Rodney Kelp]

Expensive, who cares? We're talking about the
ENVIRONMENT, we can't worry about filty lucre.
What are you, a greedy Republican?

Let the gov't fund it, won't cost a farthing! That's
why we need visionaries like Al Gore, bold men
not afraid to take on the special interests, leading
by example.

You can't fight the oil companies and all their stockholders.

 

[MooseFET]

You should ask her if it's OK for a convicted felon to sign a
petition... then sign a fictitious name and address along with the
annotation "convicted felon" ;-)

Whether that it is a felon matters varies from state to state.