Comments on: Why in good conscience, I can not vote for McCain or Clinton http://www.shatteredcube.com/107/why-in-good-conscience-i-can-not-vote-for-mccain-or-clinton/ When outside the box isn't enough. Thu, 01 Jul 2010 01:49:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: G Baby http://www.shatteredcube.com/107/why-in-good-conscience-i-can-not-vote-for-mccain-or-clinton/comment-page-1/#comment-407 G Baby Fri, 14 Aug 2009 01:49:58 +0000 http://www.shatteredcube.com/?p=107#comment-407 Richard, You've come a long way. I'm proud of you. Love, Greg Richard,

You’ve come a long way. I’m proud of you.

Love,

Greg

]]> By: Richard http://www.shatteredcube.com/107/why-in-good-conscience-i-can-not-vote-for-mccain-or-clinton/comment-page-1/#comment-292 Richard Fri, 23 May 2008 01:21:20 +0000 http://www.shatteredcube.com/?p=107#comment-292 Thanks for the comment. I feel that for towing vehicles to tow recreational vehicles, Diesel engines provide a decent balance at present. Diesel engines are known to have better low end torque. They also provide the opportunity to use biodiesel. If you follow renewable resources, you will know that biodiesel is far more efficient and creates a much smaller footprint in preparation when compared to ethanol. It's not the end all solution but it is a step in the right direction. Thanks for the comment. I feel that for towing vehicles to tow recreational vehicles, Diesel engines provide a decent balance at present. Diesel engines are known to have better low end torque. They also provide the opportunity to use biodiesel. If you follow renewable resources, you will know that biodiesel is far more efficient and creates a much smaller footprint in preparation when compared to ethanol. It’s not the end all solution but it is a step in the right direction.

]]> By: Dad http://www.shatteredcube.com/107/why-in-good-conscience-i-can-not-vote-for-mccain-or-clinton/comment-page-1/#comment-291 Dad Thu, 22 May 2008 22:08:46 +0000 http://www.shatteredcube.com/?p=107#comment-291 If only it were that simple. Unfortunately in the rush to blame users of inefficient vehicles for wanting them, everyone seems to leave the manufacturer of these vehicles off the hook. 1. If you penalize user of low efficiency vehicles, you penalize everyone who owns a boat or a trailer. You threaten the recreational boat and RV industry. Given a choice I would never drive a poor efficiency vehicle, but it is hard to find a high efficiency vehicle that can pull our boat. The first gas shortage hit us in 1973. Since then poor efficiency vehicles should have been able to be improved by the manufacturers - wouldn't you think? 2. Public transportation - although probably a good idea, the real answer is to reduce the number of miles a person drives. A. Car pooling is easy and could be done by many, but until the impact on the wallet is big enough - people will fly solo. Decades of habit are hard to overcome without incentive. B. Buses and light rail - although conceptually good, look at cities with good mass transit and look at their rush hour traffic. Although mass transit must be helping - it certainly does not seem to be the answer. In New York City there are many a story where you can get to where you want to go on foot faster than on a bus. 3. Stop war mongering - always a good idea. 4. Alternative fuel - get away from internal combustion altogether is probably the best idea. We should have started on that 40 years ago - but the economic incentive was never there. 5. Change our thinking. Do we really need to drive into the office every morning. Working from home 1 day a week would cut an individuals gas consumption by up 15-20%. Decentralize the work force. Create satellite office buildings where companies who can - can set up suburban offices close to pockets of their employees. Man companies could use a single building with a site manager handling computer resources. The unused office space downtown as a result of this decentralization could be converted into condo space for more people who can't work in a sattellite building to move into. The influx of higher income (?) into these spaces could revitalize the deteriorating school situation in the inner city and minimize the Urban sprawl. I think it is encouraging that young people actually think about these things and have their own opinions. It's your world to fix - sorry we left in such a mess... If only it were that simple. Unfortunately in the rush to blame users of inefficient vehicles for wanting them, everyone seems to leave the manufacturer of these vehicles off the hook.

1. If you penalize user of low efficiency vehicles, you penalize everyone who owns a boat or a trailer. You threaten the recreational boat and RV industry. Given a choice I would never drive a poor efficiency vehicle, but it is hard to find a high efficiency vehicle that can pull our boat. The first gas shortage hit us in 1973. Since then poor efficiency vehicles should have been able to be improved by the manufacturers – wouldn’t you think?

2. Public transportation – although probably a good idea, the real answer is to reduce the number of miles a person drives. A. Car pooling is easy and could be done by many, but until the impact on the wallet is big enough – people will fly solo. Decades of habit are hard to overcome without incentive. B. Buses and light rail – although conceptually good, look at cities with good mass transit and look at their rush hour traffic. Although mass transit must be helping – it certainly does not seem to be the answer. In New York City there are many a story where you can get to where you want to go on foot faster than on a bus.

3. Stop war mongering – always a good idea.

4. Alternative fuel – get away from internal combustion altogether is probably the best idea. We should have started on that 40 years ago – but the economic incentive was never there.

5. Change our thinking. Do we really need to drive into the office every morning. Working from home 1 day a week would cut an individuals gas consumption by up 15-20%. Decentralize the work force. Create satellite office buildings where companies who can – can set up suburban offices close to pockets of their employees. Man companies could use a single building with a site manager handling computer resources. The unused office space downtown as a result of this decentralization could be converted into condo space for more people who can’t work in a sattellite building to move into. The influx of higher income (?) into these spaces could revitalize the deteriorating school situation in the inner city and minimize the Urban sprawl.

I think it is encouraging that young people actually think about these things and have their own opinions. It’s your world to fix – sorry we left in such a mess…

]]>