Tweet
But go ahead, continue your baseless ad hominem attacks. I'll just sit back and laugh at your idiocy.
You go ahead and accuse him of attacking you personally, but then you personally attack him in your next sentence.
-
Another hypocritical sentence by Sava.
You go ahead and accuse him of attacking you personally, but then you personally attack him in your next sentence.For there is [another] kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions -- indifference, inaction, and decay. This is the violence that afflicts the poor, that poisons relations between men because their skin has different colors. - Bobby Kennedy (Mindless Menance of Violence) -
I never profess to be better than anyone.To us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
I'm not defending Sava, I think his point in this thread about oil profits is a red herring. The real issues of profiteering still exists though, so I thought I would raise some relevant points about comments made.One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
My ad hominem against you is not baseless. You really do have the faults that I talk about. Now, one might say that it is dirty pool to bring it up. But it's not baseless.Originally posted by Sava
Sure GP, so I must be wrong that the subsidies are lowering prices. 
The study I quoted was from 1981 to 1995. The Exxon/Mobil situation just caught my eye since it is related to the subsidies issue. But go ahead, continue your baseless ad hominem attacks. I'll just sit back and laugh at your idiocy.Comment
-
Finally someone gets it.Originally posted by Big Crunch
I'm not defending Sava, I think his point in this thread about oil profits is a red herring.
To us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
Personally, I think the governments of both Canada and the US should jack up gasoline taxes, but only with the provision that every last cent be used for improving public transportation. I'm not privy to what goes on in the US, but here in Canada, IIRC, gas taxes just go into the general revenue account, ostensibly for public transit, but not necessarily used for such.
You could even have a system whereby people in rural areas received a rebate since public transit would be unlikely to be of any use to them."The French caused the war [Persian Gulf war, 1991]" - Ned
"you people who bash Bush have no appreciation for one of the great presidents in our history." - Ned
"I wish I had gay sex in the boy scouts" - DissidentComment
-
It is baseless because instead of responding to my assertions, you attack me. I actually feel sorry for you. You don't have any relevant points, so you resort to attacks. I can understand my own situation. I never have any relevant points. But I mistakenly hold you to a higher standard then myself. Anyways, please don't post anymore unless it's on topic. As Ming says:Originally posted by GP
My ad hominem against you is not baseless. You really do have the faults that I talk about. Now, one might say that it is dirty pool to bring it up. But it's not baseless.
Discuss the topic, not the people.To us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
This is where you were wrong. The subsidy calculates out to 7.3 cents a gallon. But the price difference is about $3.Originally posted by Sava
Actually Fez, the US government has a very anti-capitalistic practice. Gasoline would be about what Europe pays but the US government gives billions in subsidies to the oil companies.
3 > .073
CAPICHE???
BTW, everybody buttslammed you for saying that.Comment
-
They may or may not exist. So far no evidence for collusion has been presented. All we got was the earnings announcement angst.Originally posted by Big Crunch
I'm not defending Sava, I think his point in this thread about oil profits is a red herring. The real issues of profiteering still exists though, so I thought I would raise some relevant points about comments made.Comment
-
Actually, they showed I was wrong without calling me "clueless, numbnuts, dumbsh1t" or anyother insult you've directed at me.To us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
1. It is fun to beat on you.Originally posted by Sava
It is baseless because instead of responding to my assertions, you attack me. I actually feel sorry for you. You don't have any relevant points, so you resort to attacks. I can understand my own situation. I never have any relevant points. But I mistakenly hold you to a higher standard then myself. Anyways, please don't post anymore unless it's on topic. As Ming says:
Discuss the topic, not the people.
2. I think "unfair" or "irrelevant" would be more appropriate than "baseless". Baseless implies the insults are not true.Comment
-
What do you call OPEC then?Originally posted by GP
They may or may not exist. So far no evidence for collusion has been presented. All we got was the earnings announcement angst.
One day Canada will rule the world, and then we'll all be sorry.Comment
-
They aren't if I'm purposely being stupid.baseless implies the insults aren't trueTo us, it is the BEAST.Comment
-
yeah. I just add those so you can enjoy the correction.Originally posted by Sava
Actually, they showed I was wrong without calling me "clueless, numbnuts, dumbsh1t" or anyother insult you've directed at me.
Comment
-
I'm not privy to what goes on in the US
Mainly, it goes toward road construction/repair. Some is supposed to go to mass transit, but in actual fact, mass transit gets many fewer dollars.
One thing to note is that, like Canada, much of the US can't be served very well by mass transit. So it's not without reason that this money doesn't go to mass transit.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
Comment