posted
Oh, and for the record: I do not think the Bush Administration's stance on the environment or on fossil-fuel companies is a good one. It is dismissive and smug on the first, and much too bankrolled by the second.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Then why didn't you consider these factors when you enrolled in that college, took those jobs, and lived in your current place?
Okay, I live with my mother. I don't know how you'd expect me to get around that. Make her move? I don't know how I could force her to move out of this house she has lived in for 30 years, but I suppose I could have guilted her into it, yeah. Second, there is exactly one college closer than Oakland University to me, it's Oakland Community College, which doesn't offer a teaching program. My job, alright, I'll give you that, I suppose I could have gotten a job closer to where I live, but nothing close by pays very much.
Regardless, I don't think you're giving me much credit there. Low income families don't have many options when it comes to these kinds of things, as you yourself may or may not know.
quote: And ask yourself if you're being fair about who 'needs' an SUV or who doesn't-and then ask yourself at what point it became acceptable for us to decide what other people 'need'?
I never posted any of my feelings on who does and doesn't need an SUV, so I don't get how you can question me on that. I'd define someone who needs an SUV as a person who does construction work, has a moderate to large sized family, has a handicapped person in the family, etc with things similar to that. That is how I define need. Someone who has one because they think it looks nice, but never needs it for its capabilities, that is who I was referring to when I said disgraceful.
Also, according to you, I should shut up and not even try. I guess I can't change the world, and maybe there isn't a point in trying, but I still will. I don't understand why you personally are taking so much offense to what I'm saying. The difference between me and people like Rush and Moore is that they genuinely hate the people they are castigating. I don't hate many people, but I certainly have the right to be angry at them. And I certainly have the right to criticize anyone I want who I believe is screwing up my environment, it's mine, it's yours, it's everyone's. And when the wastefulness of others infringes on my right to a clean environment, I have every right in the world to criticize and castigate anyone who is doing the infringing.
I still disagree with you about renewability. The reason it is called renewable is because it never runs out, it has nothing to do with cost. Fossil Fuels are called that because of they are, not because of cheap they are. If oil skyrocketed to 200 dollars a barrel would it stop being a fossil fuel? You're talking about the FEASIBILITY of renewable energy, not the definition.
I understand what you are saying, my lifestyle doesn't match what I preach 100%. So I should either change my lifestyle, which I can't, or shut up. Well, sorry, but I'm not going to shut up. People who can change their lifestyle might need to hear some of what I have to say. When I'm older, and when I am able to, I'll live my life perfectly in sync with what I preach. Until then I'll just have to put up with people who try and shut me down.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |