
Welcome Guest
[Log In]
[Register]
Welcome to the New Caribbean forums. Here we can discuss a wide variety of issues ranging from the region's government to the official equipment of the NCTO. There are all sorts of things to do here and you wouldn't be getting the full NC experience without participating. Have a good time, and follow the rules!
We encourage frequent posting and the most active members are generally the most trusted and respected. Don't you want to be like them?
We encourage frequent posting and the most active members are generally the most trusted and respected. Don't you want to be like them?
| Welcome to the New Caribbean forums. You are welcome to look around at our less proprietary forums because you are considering going the region or simply because you are curious. Please contact Zinaire with any questions. |
| Race for the White house. Debate topic; Debate for election | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 19 2008, 07:19 AM (834 Views) | |
| Farflorin | Jun 25 2008, 01:43 PM Post #46 |
|
Moderator/Map Master
![]()
|
Or the strangle hold the oil industry has on the automanufacturing sector could be eased to allow for alternative fuels to enter the market. Climate Change is real and it is a problem even if you can't feel or see it. It affects a lot of what happens. We're not the owners of the planet earth; we're the caretakers of it. Then when the time comes, we turn the keys over to the next generation. Resources are finite. Drilling in ANWAR and offshore is only a temporary fix. It won't change a thing. The oil companies can keep prices artificially high by controlling supply. The real way to make oil prices drop is to CONSERVE existing supplies by investing in alternative fuels. Hydrogen and fuel cells have incredible potential. So do batteries but there is little incentive to change over because of the cost. So, instead companies whine and prices continue to go up. People whine yet continue to drive mini vans and SUVs. This is no different than the energy crisis of the 70s when we saw a shift to smaller compact Asian vehicles. People realised that there was a problem so they tried to change but once it passed people went back to their old habits. History is repeating itself. Drilling is nota long term sustainable solution. In addition to alternative fuels, instead of building outward, the economical thing to do is to build up. How do you think there are so many people in Japan? They built UP! By building up, there is less urban sprawl, which means less commuting, which is less reliance on the automobile. |
![]() |
|
| Corrosia | Jun 25 2008, 02:33 PM Post #47 |
![]()
|
Spoken like a true canadian. Yes, you've got a point there, but what are the chances of the bonehead politicians doing that unless an overwhelming number of people want that solution. The biggest problem in politics is that the politicians only care about their careers. |
![]() |
|
| Farflorin | Jun 25 2008, 02:57 PM Post #48 |
|
Moderator/Map Master
![]()
|
Yes, that is very true. Though, change will likely happen. The "greatest generation" is old and dying, and Gen X (or the Babyboom Echo/Boomerang - aka, my generation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_generations) is taking over now. There will be changes, especially as the babyboomers themselves age and they find that they need certain things. Once they are unable to retain their licenses, they will see that public transportation is important and being the largest generation at this time, they will have political clout. They are also beginning to retire and statistics show that retirees are more likely go out and vote.
Edited by Farflorin, Jun 25 2008, 02:58 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Corrosia | Jun 25 2008, 04:21 PM Post #49 |
![]()
|
So basically we're going to have a political revolution? You're saying that these people will have so much influence that they will destroy political greed? Forgive me for laughing. |
![]() |
|
| Julianoso | Jun 25 2008, 06:59 PM Post #50 |
![]()
|
Nice proof of the generations. It's true that it wouldn't be a long-lasting solution to drill off-shore and in Alaska. We should start looking at the use of ethanol and building up ethanol stations around the world and then maybe use fuel cell as the next step. If this were possible, which I don't think it would be, we could build cars running on water vapor, but that would take at least five centuries. I've seen in some TV public service announcements that by 2050, water levels would rise by a lot and the temperature would get warmer by six degrees. But some countries are making some solutions to the energy crisis and global warming issue. In Germany, along the Autobahn, on the sides of the road, there are solar panels, making lots of homes have an abundant amount of electricity from the Sun. In Italy, in the city of Verona, people are encouraged to ride bikes instead of driving, and they urge this so much, that the city government loans you a bike free. In some cities in California, like in San Diego, city buses run on natural gas. I remember reading an article in a car magazine that in Iceland, a pretty considerable amount of people drive cars that run on hydrogen fuel cell or another fuel similar to that. If we can like Iceland, Italy, or in Germany, than North and South America would have much cleaner environments. In Brazil and Mexico, since they don't have enough capital to set up strict environmental regulations, especially in big cities, like in Sao Paulo, or in Mexico City, smog happens everyday. Scientists say that smog is what would cause greenhouse effect. Several months ago, I heard that Los Angeles was the most polluted city, nationally, I think. When I was in Paris with my father last year for a European tour of Switzerland, Austria, Germany, Italy, Liechtenstein, Spain, and Andorra, when my father and I waited for the Gare de Lyon bus at the Charles De Gaulle Airport to take us to a train that took us to Brittany in the northwestern coast of France, his eyes were burning, and he thought that it might be because the air was polluted. When you're in big cities, you can actually feel some pollution, like your eyes burning like crazy. Although some countries are outstanding with their environmental levels in the world, most countries, like the U.S., China (the most polluted country in the world) and others still need to work on solutions to our energy crisis, regarless of your political ideologies or your religion. If six and a half billion work together as one to solve global warming with some ingenious ideas, then we all can make our Earth a better place for our children. |
![]() |
|
| Farflorin | Jun 26 2008, 04:29 AM Post #51 |
|
Moderator/Map Master
![]()
|
About the generation thing; I'm NOT saying there will be a revolution. I'm saying that change will happen because there will be different voters now that there is a new generation of voters at the same time that we're losing an older one. Mexico City is considered one of the smoggiest cities in the world along with Beijing. The problem with a place like China is that it developed extremely quickly and it resulted in a surge in green house emissions. They underwent their "industrial" revolution rather quickly and at a great cost. Especially since it's profitable for their nation to just mass produce crap as North Americans thrive on cheap crap. The mass production also yields another issue; many of the goods are heavily packaged and some of the packaging is not environmentally friendly, nor are the bags you bring home. Yes, most bags given out at stores are given because they're dirt cheap, but here's the problem - those cheap bags are taking up fossil fuels. Yes, that's right; it's adding to the energy crisis. But I digress, some stores are moving to reduce our dependency. Too bad we can't say the same thing about politicians and energy solutions. Hence my statement about the newer generations voting. We were raised in an age when environmentalism wasn't just for hippies and vegans. So it will come up on the ballot. |
![]() |
|
| Julianoso | Jun 26 2008, 06:26 AM Post #52 |
![]()
|
Well one step at a time, we can eliminate dependancy once and for all. I always save my plastic bags and recycle them, as I do with plastic bottles and cans. More people should be doing that so that we won't have to find anymore resources to make new plastic bottles and cans, because we are running out of supplies in the world to keep us going. And back to the Chinese crap thing, their exports of toys are what cause North American children to get sick with lead poisoning and die every year, which are causing lawsuits everywhere. The Chinese socially capitalist economy is driven on exports in which the Chinese have few regulations for what they can export and import and the environment, which causes them to package poor quality products to Western European countries, U.S. and Canada, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, and Japan, and with the environment, the few regulations are also what cause Beijing to be one of the smoggiest cities besides Mexico City and Sao Paulo. Anyways, I made my point. |
![]() |
|
| Hisperians | Jun 27 2008, 10:23 AM Post #53 |
![]()
Moderator
![]()
|
Personally I do not believe in Global warming doing the catastrophic damage speculators say will be done in the next 50-100 years. On that note I don't believe what we are doing to the world is helping either and I do not like the thought of breathing in pollutants. Republicans want to drill more oil even though they say they want to ween us off of it. Democrats want to find safe clean fuels to help us stop becoming another Mexico City or a Beijing. While we are doing this Liberals are going to change NAFTA. In case you don't know, NAFTA is a free trade agreement between Mexico U.S and Canada. I put my emphasis on Canada which holds a large portion of the oil in the world. Lower the prices now lower the prices in the future. That is the goal of Liberals. |
![]() |
|
| Farflorin | Jun 27 2008, 01:17 PM Post #54 |
|
Moderator/Map Master
![]()
|
It's not just the Liberals that want to change NAFTA. The NDP want to scrap it and build it from the bottom up because it fundamentally only truly benefits corporations and not the people of Canada. Though, being strictly Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition, how are the Liberals going to change NAFTA? The minority Conservatives won't amend it and there needs to be a motion filed for review, and even if it gets passed, it will still be the Tories doing the negotiations. As for the oil. Yes, Canada has vast reserves, however, these reserves aren't all easily accessible. The oil from Alberta comes from the Athabasca Tar Sands. The procedure for extracting the reserves from this different than others. It drives up price. There is much squabbling between provinces over the current oil reserves (ie: NFLD vs NS over oil in the St. Lawrence Gulf; though it did resolve to being in Newfie waters). The oil is just one aspect of NAFTA. Besides, doesn't Obama want to renegotiate NAFTA? Why even bring up the federal Liberals? |
![]() |
|
| Hisperians | Jun 28 2008, 07:06 AM Post #55 |
![]()
Moderator
![]()
|
Canadian oil would not drive up the price at all and might even lower it because of the shipping of oil from the middle east and the increased threat on oil through the Strait of Hormuz by the Iranian government which is driving up the costs in America and Europe. 30% of all middle eastern oil goes through the Strait of Hormuz. |
![]() |
|
| Farflorin | Jun 28 2008, 10:16 AM Post #56 |
|
Moderator/Map Master
![]()
|
Disregarding that 30% of oil goes through the Strait of Hormuz; there is also the market to take into account. Oil futures drive the cost; as well as market speculation. That and OPEC. You also need to take into account supply and demand. Even if there is ample supply; as long as people are willing to pay, and there is the demand, the prices are not going to go down. This translates into profit for the oil companies and a nice dividend for their investors. Even if Canada did export more, there is still market price. Even if companies operating in the Gulf of Mexico produced more, it wouldn't help. In addition to drilling, there is also the refining process, which converts crude oil into a usage format for vehicles. This is further hindered by the fact that companies don't have as many refineries as they previously did, which means that there are fewer places where crude oil can be refined and as a result, even if they output more barrels, they still can't speed up the process. There are a number of factors that are contributing to the rising price of oil and hence petrol. Which is why increasing output isn't necessarily a sound solution. It just sounds good for people who want a quick, simple fix. |
![]() |
|
| Julianoso | Jun 28 2008, 11:49 AM Post #57 |
![]()
|
Another factor besides the Athabasca Tar Sands and the 30% going through the Strait of Hormuz from Iran, is also the Indian and Chinese peoples. Since the Chinese and Indian populations are growing rapidly, more Chinese people are buying cars and in increasing numbers in later decades, which means more demand for oil. As of right now, statistics show that the average American uses an average twenty five barrels per day just to drive a car to work or to the supermarket. The Chinese people use an average two barrels a day, but as they buy more cars there, and more Chinese automobiles are being made there, there will be an unimaginable increase of demand for oil, which will make the usage of barrels of oil per day in China just for driving a car increase, which means skyrocketing gas prices. Not just that, but natural gas and the things we buy such as haircombs and other things made of petroleum. As for India, the population by 2050 will be at least 1.6 billion people surpassing China's future population of 1.4 billion, from 1.3 billion people as of right now. This means even more demand for oil in the future. We have to start looking for new non-polluting fuels for our automobiles since there is already global warming. As of now, the cost of oil per barrel is $143. On the news, John McCain is basically focusing his campaign on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico and in ANWAR. I doubt that oil prices will decrease even though drilling for oil could a possible but short term solution. Anyways, I've made my point. |
![]() |
|
| Hisperians | Jun 29 2008, 03:56 PM Post #58 |
![]()
Moderator
![]()
|
who voted for McCain? |
![]() |
|
| Farflorin | Jun 29 2008, 04:36 PM Post #59 |
|
Moderator/Map Master
![]()
|
I have no idea who I voted for... I think I voted in this poll when I was high. |
![]() |
|
| Hisperians | Jun 29 2008, 05:06 PM Post #60 |
![]()
Moderator
![]()
|
Hopefully you don't vote high. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
12:26 AM Jul 11
|









12:26 AM Jul 11