If you're not angry...

[Papi/Manny]

Sorry but I think any historian would agree with me. The war with Japan in the Pacific was VERY much a part of WW2. Japan and Germany were allies. You really should read up on your history.

Its part of WWII. I never said it wasn'. Japan and Germany were allies. I know my history. Sorry if you can't gather key facts from history. They fought, people died, nothing happened. Story of those wars. But the significance of US/Japan fighting is very minimal in the Pacific.

 

[Azure Kite]

I'm no historian, but even I have to agree with drmario on this one. Even if it wasn't EVERYWHERE and ALL OVER the world, the fighting still had an great impact on several countries in the world, and I really think that can make something a serious part of the war.

 

[Marril]

I think when a war starts to span three or more continents, it qualifies as a world war.

 

[Chairman Kaga]

Oil prices will cap and correct themselves eventually. This is no different than the dot-com boom/bust. The market can't and won't sustain inflated prices forever.

 

[bullados]

There is a monstrous difference between this and the dot com boom.

Oil is singlehandedly responsible for almost all of the world's economy, in one form or another.

Think about any industry. Any industry at all. Any product, service, anything that you can think of that is sold. Oil is a part (and normally a big part) of that business.

 

[Articjedi]

Oil prices will cap and correct themselves eventually. This is no different than the dot-com boom/bust. The market can't and won't sustain inflated prices forever.

They can stick and probably will stick. You had alternatives to dotcom companies, you don't have an alternative to oil.

 

[V_For_Vendetta]

They can stick and probably will stick. You had alternatives to dotcom companies, you don't have an alternative to oil.

Agreed. And the gas companies are keen on keeping it this way.
There are no realistic alternative fule sources bieng researched and sponsored by our governemtn, and if one were discovered, it would be covered up and we would neevr see it. It would be the same thing if a cure for the common cold or a cure for AIDS or cancer were discovered, too much money flows into these businesses for our government to have any interest in seeing things change.

 

[drmario]

Agreed. And the gas companies are keen on keeping it this way.
There are no realistic alternative fule sources bieng researched and sponsored by our governemtn, and if one were discovered, it would be covered up and we would neevr see it. It would be the same thing if a cure for the common cold or a cure for AIDS or cancer were discovered, too much money flows into these businesses for our government to have any interest in seeing things change.

There ISN'T a cure for the common cold. Why? Because the "common cold" is never the same virus. There are hundreds (maybe thousands) of different viruses that get labeled as the "common cold". And why would they cover up a cure for cancer? Millions is spend researching cancer every year. Some people are far to cynical.

 

[V_For_Vendetta]

There ISN'T a cure for the common cold. Why? Because the "common cold" is never the same virus. There are hundreds (maybe thousands) of different viruses that get labeled as the "common cold". And why would they cover up a cure for cancer? Millions is spend researching cancer every year. Some people are far to cynical.

A cure for a virus would be as simple as stopping it from entering the cells in the first place, I am quite away of the fact that there is no one same cold and instead there are hundreds, seeing as how I am studying to be a doctor.

And did you just say why would anyone cure cancer when millions are thrown into cancer research? Seriously?
...
...Because millions are put into cancer research every year. Same with AIDS. Millions are also sponsored to our government every year in order to continue the search for these cures. Our govern,ent seems quite happy with the money it is getting, somehow I doupt they would give up their profits for something as small as "the common good" or "people's lives".
Honestly, some people are far too naive....

 

[drmario]

A cure for a virus would be as simple as stopping it from entering the cells in the first place, I am quite away of the fact that there is no one same cold and instead there are hundreds, seeing as how I am studying to be a doctor.

And did you just say why would anyone cure cancer when millions are thrown into cancer research? Seriously?
...
...Because millions are put into cancer research every year. Same with AIDS. Millions are also sponsored to our government every year in order to continue the search for these cures. Our govern,ent seems quite happy with the money it is getting, somehow I doupt they would give up their profits for something as small as "the common good" or "people's lives".
Honestly, some people are far too naive....

I can say it again. Some people are far to cynical. And if coming up with a cure for the common cold is so simple, then please by all means figure out HOW to stop the virus from entering cells.

 

[V_For_Vendetta]

I can say it again. Some people are far to cynical. And if coming up with a cure for the common cold is so simple, then please by all means figure out HOW to stop the virus from entering cells.

Too has two o's in it. Don't feel bad about messing that up, I made the same error and edited my post when I realized it.

And it is highly amusing to me that you ignored all my other points, and simply made a demand that I figure out how to do it, when I already stated that I am "studying" to be a doctor, thus I would be unaware as to the exact methods to prevent such an entry.

My medical teacher, however, is not. He used to work for the FDA researching methods to prevent viral infiltration into the cells, thus stopping the cold from infecting the host (aka us), and stopping it from bieng able to spread in general. At a lecture he gave us, we were informed that a member of the team he was working with made a critical break through in this field. His superiors were notified, and a week later the entire project was canceled, and all of the staff, including my professor, fired for "embezzeling" the money they were given.

Interestingly enough, if this were true, he would have faced criminal charges and been indicted, most likely resulting in criminal persecution. Yet he was simply fired, and the entire team's research confinscated and classified. Strange isn't it. Cynical? I think more on the lines of realistic and informed.

And once again, some people are far too naive for thigns they know nothing about or understand.

 

[drmario]

Too has two o's in it. Don't feel bad about messing that up, I made the same error and edited my post when I realized it.

And it is highly amusing to me that you ignored all my other points, and simply made a demand that I figure out how to do it, when I already stated that I am "studying" to be a doctor, thus I would be unaware as to the exact methods to prevent such an entry.

My medical teacher, however, is not. He used to work for the FDA researching methods to prevent viral infiltration into the cells, thus stopping the cold from infecting the host (aka us), and stopping it from bieng able to spread in general. At a lecture he gave us, we were informed that a member of the team he was working with made a critical break through in this field. His superiors were notified, and a week later the entire project was canceled, and all of the staff, including my professor, fired for "embezzeling" the money they were given.

Interestingly enough, if this were true, he would have faced criminal charges and been indicted, most likely resulting in criminal persecution. Yet he was simply fired, and the entire team's research confinscated and classified. Strange isn't it. Cynical? I think more on the lines of realistic and informed.

And once again, some people are far too naive for thigns they know nothing about or understand.

And an ellipsis has 3 periods not 4 (see post number 109). Seems like your running out of things to argue if your resorting to critiquing my grammar. Four words in your last post alone are spelled wrong. See if you can find them.

Exactly how is your opinion "realistic and informed"? We all know that we have freedom of the press and freedom of speech. If things like this happened all the time we would hear about it. I'm not saying your professor is a liar, however his story sounds far more like a "poor me I got fired from my job and now I'm bitter about it, so I'm going to spread nasty rumors about the government." Some people believe only bad things about their governments. You would appear to be one of them.

 

[V_For_Vendetta]

And an ellipsis has 3 periods not 4 (see post number 109). Seems like your running out of things to argue if your resorting to critiquing my grammar. Four words in your last post alone are spelled wrong. See if you can find them.

An ellipsis at the end of a sentance has 4 periods. And I hardly argued about your grammar, you made a typing mistake that I was pointing out to you, I even went as far as to say "do not worry, I just did it myself" to make sure it didn't seem like I was grammar monitoring you. Your paranoia seems to be getting the better of you.

Exactly how is your opinion "realistic and informed"? We all know that we have freedom of the press and freedom of speech. If things like this happened all the time we would hear about it. I'm not saying your professor is a liar, however his story sounds far more like a "poor me I got fired from my job and now I'm bitter about it, so I'm going to spread nasty rumors about the government."

Naturally you interpret a point that destroyes your entire arguement the wrong way. Based on what I have seen of you, I would be amazed if you would admit you were wrong, even when you provide far less than an adequate arguement and your best point stems from accusing people of paranoia and "he's lying" as an arguement. Douptlessly you will try to continue this arguement with even less satifactory points, and your arguement will slowly fall apart, leading you to become hostile.

Some people believe only bad things about their governments. You would appear to be one of them.

When I see a politician behaving in a way that provides them with little to no benefit and helps the people out, I will happily accept that our government is run by good men and women. Until such time, I see corrupt politics, waste of tax money, and greed abound throughout our entire inferstructure.
When I see otherwise, I will happily mend my ways.

 

[drmario]

An ellipsis at the end of a sentance has 4 periods. And I hardly argued about your grammar, you made a typing mistake that I was pointing out to you, I even went as far as to say "do not worry, I just did it myself" to make sure it didn't seem like I was grammar monitoring you. Your paranoia seems to be getting the better of you.



Naturally you interpret a point that destroyes your entire arguement the wrong way. Based on what I have seen of you, I would be amazed if you would admit you were wrong, even when you provide far less than an adequate arguement and your best point stems from accusing people of paranoia and "he's lying" as an arguement. Douptlessly you will try to continue this arguement with even less satifactory points, and your arguement will slowly fall apart, leading you to become hostile.



When I see a politician behaving in a way that provides them with little to no benefit and helps the people out, I will happily accept that our government is run by good men and women. Until such time, I see corrupt politics, waste of tax money, and greed abound throughout our entire inferstructure.
When I see otherwise, I will happily mend my ways.

So why even point out the typing mistake? It accomplished nothing. I am aware of the correct usages of words. Should I point out that you made more spelling errors?

The point does not destroy my entire argument. This entire discussion is becoming foolish. Are all politicians trying to help the country? No? However you prefer to simply ignore any good that may be happening and focus completely on the negative. You have yet to make a valid point. I have my opinion you have yours. Anything that I say you will simply ignore or interpret in whatever why furthers your argument.The only thing we can accomplish further in this thread is getting it locked and infraction points being issued.

 

[V_For_Vendetta]

I agree. I have enjoyed this debate we had, let us move on.

Here is something interesting.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/05/23/earlyshow/main2841028.shtml
The governer of Florida decided to challenge the high prices of gar with several other governors.

 

[Adv1sor]

Well, not like I'm going to read five pages of posts on this but, as long as I see lines at the gas stations I think to myself that they're obviously not charging too much for gas. When they start charging too much people will stop buying and the price will come down.

My own prediction is that the US economy will not stand for $5 a gallon. Once they break this price people will buy less and it will come back down to settle at around $4.50.

Am I angry about this? No. I'm not happy at having to give up other things for gas, but I'm not angry. This is a free market economy. Now, if the Government steps in and tries to "fix" things, then I'd be angry.

I said the same thing here http://www.socyberty.com/Economics/Pain-at-the-Pump-Why-are-Gas-Prices-So-High.113814 last month.

 

[Azure Kite]

Well, not like I'm going to read five pages of posts on this but, as long as I see lines at the gas stations I think to myself that they're obviously not charging too much for gas. When they start charging too much people will stop buying and the price will come down.

My own prediction is that the US economy will not stand for $5 a gallon. Once they break this price people will buy less and it will come back down to settle at around $4.50.

Am I angry about this? No. I'm not happy at having to give up other things for gas, but I'm not angry. This is a free market economy. Now, if the Government steps in and tries to "fix" things, then I'd be angry.

I said the same thing here http://www.socyberty.com/Economics/Pain-at-the-Pump-Why-are-Gas-Prices-So-High.113814 last month.

People are not standing for it now. But as stated in earlier discussions in this thread, with other situations people had a choice. We cannot stop buying gasoline. And the gas companies know this. Not buying fuel for our cars kills our very way of life, and for a lot of people in suburban areas who have no buses, taxies, or other public means of transportation, there is no way we can live without buying gasoline for our cars. It seems so simple to stop buying, and then the prices will go down. But try it. See how hard it is for a normal person to go around living but not being able to leave the house. I realize its not that you cannot leave your house, but thats what it will seem like.

 

[DarthPika]

^ You do realize that they ARE chargeing to much for the gas? Same thing with medical stuff, you can't get it anywhere else so they can charge as much as they want. It's extreem greed for them to charge that much for gas, and it is makeing the price of EVERYTHING else go up to. What they are doing is just plain wrong and you SHOULD be angry about it. Did you happen to read how much Exon makes in a DAY!???

 

[Chairman Kaga]

Okay, to those who panned the dot-com analogy -- just because oil is a commodity doesn't mean it can't undergo similar pricing trends.

Oil prices are being inflated well beyond actual value. Supply and demand is not the issue, because demand is down -- the current high prices have caused many Americans to dump the SUVs and alter vacation plans, which is pushing things toward a surplus. The instability of the Middle East is one frequently-cited issue, but that's always an issue thanks to the extreme concentration of crazy over there.

No, the primary cause for the high oil rates is the US economic slump, which is causing speculators to invest in oil as a hedge against the falling dollar, and thus artificially inflating the value. But once the US signals that it's done cutting interest rates and the dollar stabilizes, you'll see a mass oil sell-off as investors seek to bail out at maximum value.

 

[Adv1sor]

If you were selling something, wouldn't you want to get as much as you could for your product? What would a fair price be? I say, the market itself determines the fair price of any object or commodity.

Yes, it will represent a significant change in my way of life if I can no longer afford gas. I’ll have to find another way to work, or a job closer to home, or a home closer to work where I could walk or ride a bike, or maybe a job working from home. Maybe we will see a rise in the all electric car? Maybe these changes won’t even be for the worse?

No. As long we are buying they are not charging too much.