Topic: America: Home of the Free, The Brave and the Profligate?

[MG]

In today's op ed piece in the NY Times, columnist and general gadfly Thomas Freedman argues that the spill in the Gulf of Mexico is a wakeup call to America to change its profligate ways. Before it is too late!!!!   

In it, he quotes from a friend who has this to say:

“I’d like to join in on the blame game that has come to define our national approach to the ongoing environmental disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. This isn’t BP’s or Transocean’s fault. It’s not the government’s fault. It’s my fault. I’m the one to blame and I’m sorry. It’s my fault because I haven’t digested the world’s in-your-face hints that maybe I ought to think about the future and change the unsustainable way I live my life. If the geopolitical, economic, and technological shifts of the 1990s didn’t do it; if the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11 didn’t do it; if the current economic crisis didn’t do it; perhaps this oil spill will be the catalyst for me, as a citizen, to wean myself off of my petroleum-based lifestyle. ‘Citizen’ is the key word. It’s what we do as individuals that count. For those on the left, government regulation will not solve this problem. Government’s role should be to create an environment of opportunity that taps into the innovation and entrepreneurialism that define us as Americans. For those on the right, if you want less government and taxes, then decide what you’ll give up and what you’ll contribute. Here’s the bottom line: If we want to end our oil addiction, we, as citizens, need to pony up: bike to work, plant a garden, do something. So again, the oil spill is my fault. I’m sorry. I haven’t done my part. Now I have to convince my wife to give up her S.U.V. Mark Mykleby.”

Freedman goes on to suggest that it is time for a sea change (you should pardon the pun) in America's thinking about its future. To which I respond:

Don't hold your breath, Tom. Americans are far too narcissistic to ever change their ways voluntarily.

Now that I have given OP yet another opportunity to bash me (when will I ever learn?), what do the rest of you guys think?

[Otto Puzzell]

I'd posit it's time to stop forcing drilling in mile deep-waters, ostensibly to 'protect the environment' from the ravages of near-shore and onshore drilling.

[MG]

Ah, you see? People CAN learn from their mistakes!     At least SOME people can......

[DeAutogids.nl]

I'd posit it's time to stop forcing drilling in mile deep-waters, ostensibly to 'protect the environment' from the ravages of near-shore and onshore drilling.

Interestingly, the writer above said something that government should not make new rules. He called that being left. See how quick you are put in a box?

[Otto Puzzell]

I'd posit it's time to stop forcing drilling in mile deep-waters, ostensibly to 'protect the environment' from the ravages of near-shore and onshore drilling.

Interestingly, the writer above said something that government should not make new rules. He called that being left. See how quick you are put in a box?

Wrong. I'm pointing out that a government-imposed rule had the opposite of the intended effect. How is that the same as asking for a new rule?

You made the box, and then you crawled in.

[DeAutogids.nl]

I'd posit it's time to stop forcing drilling in mile deep-waters, ostensibly to 'protect the environment' from the ravages of near-shore and onshore drilling.

Interestingly, the writer above said something that government should not make new rules. He called that being left. See how quick you are put in a box?

Wrong. I'm pointing out that a government-imposed rule had the opposite of the intended effect. How is that the same as asking for a new rule?

You made the box, and then you crawled in.

Apparently, from reading your answer, you see it as an insult or negative.

You say that deep water drilling should not happen. If not allowed, then that is a new rule.

[Ultra]

You say that deep water drilling should not happen. If not allowed, then that is a new rule.

He doesn't say it "should not happen."  He says it shouldn't be forced on companies as one of limited options.  Distinctions make all the difference.  You should take more care in how you make yours.  To not force deep water drilling isn't the same thing as banning it.

[MG]

a government-imposed rule had the opposite of the intended effect.

How often that happens. Rule makers seldom look beyond the end of next week to see what impacts their lovely new rule might have in the future. Bureaucracy is so often blind to the consequences of what they do.

And let's not be too hard on our Dutch friend. He is far better at English than I am at Dutch. Or any other language, for that matter.  The odds of me posting on a forum in a language that is foreign to me are about the same as the odds of Michael Schumacher turning into a genuinely nice guy!   

[DeAutogids.nl]

the odds of Michael Schumacher turning into a genuinely nice guy!   

Apparently, he and Mika liked to drink a beer after the race. On the track he has one thing in mind, but apparantly can be pleasant off-track.

[DeAutogids.nl]

To not force deep water drilling isn't the same thing as banning it.

Let's agree not to agree on this point then.

[Ultra]

To not force deep water drilling isn't the same thing as banning it.

Let's agree not to agree on this point then.

No.  Let's not.  The distinction is EXTREMELY clear.   The government can let you drill anywhere you want and you can choose to drill in deep water or it can force you to drill in deep water only.  To not differentiate between the two is to deal in intellectual dishonesty.  I'll pass.

[DeAutogids.nl]

I will pass too.

[MG]

but apparantly can be pleasant off-track.

I find that hard to believe. Maybe someday I will find out. Until then, my distaste for the man knows no bounds!!!!   

[Ultra]

Apparently, he and Mika liked to drink a beer after the race. On the track he has one thing in mind, but apparantly can be pleasant off-track.

I tend to think that says more about MH than MS but I have never met him and would enjoy the opportunity to go on a motorcycle ride with him on his Harley and me on the Magna. 

[DeAutogids.nl]

Apparently, the Michael has high praise for Mika, commenting - for example on Top Gear - that he enjoyed battling with him the best.

Apparently, according to the Finnish them selves, they do not seem to be very social creatures. Kimi Raikonen is a good example. Do I do think Mika is quite a nice chap in real life.

Teh again, I have never met them either.

[MG]

My wife had a wicked crush on Mika.    He seems like he would be fun to hang with. And they say Kimi is quite a fun chap too. Once he gets 5 or 6 vodkas into him!   

[DeAutogids.nl]

My wife had a wicked crush on Mika.    He seems like he would be fun to hang with. And they say Kimi is quite a fun chap too. Once he gets 5 or 6 vodkas into him!   

Most people seem to be fun then, though

[MG]

Hmmmm.......     You may have a point!