Of course any small delta is a positive number, but if it doesn't affect the actual price in any noticeable way, exactly what is the point of making a scene over it?
Pelosi made the point to prevent the vote. If it doesn't matter, then why spend so much effort opposing it? Why not just let it happen and say "see, it didn't help" when it doesn't help?
The answer is because it actually will help.
The reality is that this is simple political theater combined with a desire to make a payoff to the oil industry.
Again, the translation: "We won't help poor people with their fuel bills -- not even a tiny, insignificant little bit -- because some oil company might make some money. We don't care about people."
If there's no oil there, how do (the people you hate who work at) the oil companies make any money anyway?
Who says that drilling and research are mutually exclusive activities?
People who just recite talking-points and play political theatre say that -- they imply it anyway. This is just a performance to them and they're just reading the script. They don't actually believe any of it.
It's not about oil to these people. It's about power and about how they feel about themselves. The actual real-life consequences aren't the point at all.
Except in 10 years, the same argument can still be made. And 10 years after that.
So one generation is supposed to deprive itself so that the next generation can also deprive itself. And on and on forever with no hope of improvement.
It's called "conservation". People who believe this stuff have no faith in humanity or the future.
Translation: "We won't lower the price to help poor people -- not even a little tiny insignificant bit -- because some corporation might make some money."
Even your silly 0.2% increase number is a positive number. A positive number is a better number. Even by your silly estimation, doing something is better than the nothing that the other side has to offer.
It's like not picking up a $5 bill you find on the ground because it's such a small fraction of your yearly pay.
(And other people say it's a lot more than $5 though. But you won't even let them look.)
More drilling in the US will provide a relatively small amount of oil which will delay our energy problems for months, maybe a few years at best.
So even you admit it would be an improvement then. Good. It seems clear that we should do it for a small benefit, a medium benefit, or a large benefit.
but getting their drilling won't solve our energy problems.
Nothing will "solve" our energy problems. There is no magic energy source or magic solution to rid people of the need for energy. Why not do something to make things a little (or a lot) better?
It's because you don't care about people. The opponents of oil drilling simply don't care about people.
Moderators don't like the line about 20 or 30 cats. I got modded down using it before. It fits these people perfectly though. They're a bunch of crazy old schoolmarms who really, really know how everyone needs to live their lives. It keeps them up at night that someone is making choices differently than they would.
Even if the offshore drilling is allowed it will be many years before we see any benefit from it...
And you guys have been saying that for many years. That's why we couldn't fix the problem back then too. Now, many years later, it is not fixed.
More corporate welfare from the Repubs.
Translation: "Americans can't have cheaper gas because some corporation might make some money. It's worth it to have poor people suffer just so you can stick it to those nasty corporations."
That's why they formed a union. They got their work conditions improved without the heavy hand of government getting involved.
You're basically saying it's bad for accidents to happen so we're going to send guys with guns (police) to force people to do things a certain way. And if they don't comply and are too effective in maintaining their freedom, shoot them. To avoid accidents.
1. I think you are lying. Anti-smoking people lie as a rule. They make up statistics and exaggerate. There is HUGE money in it for them from the tobacco lawsuits and other government money. And you are clearly a fanatic. Fanatics lie.
Show me the death certificate that says that cause of death was second-hand smoke.
2. Being in a particular business is 100% voluntary. If it's too smoky for you, then go away.
Please stop trying to be everyone's mom. We're all grown up now. We can walk out of a place when we don't like it there. We don't need or want your input. Go buy a small house and get 20 or 30 cats to live with you and leave the rest of us to live our lives freely, without your oversight.
And you are so extremely afraid of the news media that you'll allow them to censor other media preemptively. I'm not willing to give them that power over my life or our society. Why are you?
I'm not sure what the problem is with the tone. Maybe the part about it being too late someday...
About half the population clearly wants to pass laws based on the "If I was your mom, I would prohibit that. Therefore, we'll just have the cops arrest you". They know how you should live your life and want to relieve you of the burden of making any choices yourself -- you might choose wrong if you do.
It needs to stop because it's wrong to force people to do (or not do) things against their will. MADD and the stop-smoking people and all the rest of these groups need to be opposed.
Don't forget what this topic is about -- they're censoring a beer pong video game.
Just wait. Soon bars won't be allowed in games. If there's a bar (or worse, smoking) the game will get rated (AO) adults only.
The new prohibition movement has already gotten smoking banned in bars and the "legally drunk" alcohol level has been changed from "actually drunk" to "imperfectly sober". They've done this even though the lower alcohol levels are not associated with a high risk of crashes. They can seize your car and sell it to fund their agencies though.
The media war has already begun. PG-rated movies can't have smoking in them.
A lot of people want the government to be your mom and make your choices for you. People vote for it because they think they're in the ruling class. When they find out they're actually "little people", it will be too late.
Trying to gin up hatred and envy towards drug companies who develop disease cures is clearly evil. But people can advance their political agendas, so they do it.
This is just another huge money grab for big pharmaceutical companies. Why should you guys get to make any money off of this? All you did was cure Alzheimer's disease. Why should rich people get to avoid dementia when the poorest can't afford it? Shouldn't everyone get dementia equally?
When are we going to stop these big rich drug companies from making these obscene profits for merely curing diseases and plagues?
[Evil socialism off]
I actually hope you guys succeed and make billions. If I get Alzheimer's disease someday, it's nice to know there might be a cure, even if I have to pay you for your effort to find it.
Slashdot Mirror
It will be sold on the open market, and other countries, who will be far richer than America by that time at the current rate, will buy it.
Translation: "America sucks. And I hate people in other countries and want them to have worse lives."
That money will go directly into the pockets of the oil company...
Yeay. The trifecta of negativity, anti-corporate hatred and jingoism.
Of course any small delta is a positive number, but if it doesn't affect the actual price in any noticeable way, exactly what is the point of making a scene over it?
Pelosi made the point to prevent the vote. If it doesn't matter, then why spend so much effort opposing it? Why not just let it happen and say "see, it didn't help" when it doesn't help?
The answer is because it actually will help.
The reality is that this is simple political theater combined with a desire to make a payoff to the oil industry.
Again, the translation: "We won't help poor people with their fuel bills -- not even a tiny, insignificant little bit -- because some oil company might make some money. We don't care about people."
If there's no oil there, how do (the people you hate who work at) the oil companies make any money anyway?
Who says that drilling and research are mutually exclusive activities?
People who just recite talking-points and play political theatre say that -- they imply it anyway. This is just a performance to them and they're just reading the script. They don't actually believe any of it.
It's not about oil to these people. It's about power and about how they feel about themselves. The actual real-life consequences aren't the point at all.
Except in 10 years, the same argument can still be made. And 10 years after that.
So one generation is supposed to deprive itself so that the next generation can also deprive itself. And on and on forever with no hope of improvement.
It's called "conservation". People who believe this stuff have no faith in humanity or the future.
Translation: "We won't lower the price to help poor people -- not even a little tiny insignificant bit -- because some corporation might make some money."
Even your silly 0.2% increase number is a positive number. A positive number is a better number. Even by your silly estimation, doing something is better than the nothing that the other side has to offer.
It's like not picking up a $5 bill you find on the ground because it's such a small fraction of your yearly pay.
(And other people say it's a lot more than $5 though. But you won't even let them look.)
More drilling in the US will provide a relatively small amount of oil which will delay our energy problems for months, maybe a few years at best.
So even you admit it would be an improvement then. Good. It seems clear that we should do it for a small benefit, a medium benefit, or a large benefit.
but getting their drilling won't solve our energy problems.
Nothing will "solve" our energy problems. There is no magic energy source or magic solution to rid people of the need for energy. Why not do something to make things a little (or a lot) better?
It's because you don't care about people. The opponents of oil drilling simply don't care about people.
Moderators don't like the line about 20 or 30 cats. I got modded down using it before. It fits these people perfectly though. They're a bunch of crazy old schoolmarms who really, really know how everyone needs to live their lives. It keeps them up at night that someone is making choices differently than they would.
They won't be holding the vote in a few weeks. Pelosi doesn't intend to ever have the vote.
Even if the offshore drilling is allowed it will be many years before we see any benefit from it...
And you guys have been saying that for many years. That's why we couldn't fix the problem back then too. Now, many years later, it is not fixed.
More corporate welfare from the Repubs.
Translation: "Americans can't have cheaper gas because some corporation might make some money. It's worth it to have poor people suffer just so you can stick it to those nasty corporations."
That's why they formed a union. They got their work conditions improved without the heavy hand of government getting involved.
You're basically saying it's bad for accidents to happen so we're going to send guys with guns (police) to force people to do things a certain way. And if they don't comply and are too effective in maintaining their freedom, shoot them. To avoid accidents.
Why do you go outside and not breathe smoke?
1. I think you are lying. Anti-smoking people lie as a rule. They make up statistics and exaggerate. There is HUGE money in it for them from the tobacco lawsuits and other government money. And you are clearly a fanatic. Fanatics lie.
Show me the death certificate that says that cause of death was second-hand smoke.
2. Being in a particular business is 100% voluntary. If it's too smoky for you, then go away.
Please stop trying to be everyone's mom. We're all grown up now. We can walk out of a place when we don't like it there. We don't need or want your input. Go buy a small house and get 20 or 30 cats to live with you and leave the rest of us to live our lives freely, without your oversight.
And you are so extremely afraid of the news media that you'll allow them to censor other media preemptively. I'm not willing to give them that power over my life or our society. Why are you?
I'm not sure what the problem is with the tone. Maybe the part about it being too late someday...
About half the population clearly wants to pass laws based on the "If I was your mom, I would prohibit that. Therefore, we'll just have the cops arrest you". They know how you should live your life and want to relieve you of the burden of making any choices yourself -- you might choose wrong if you do.
It needs to stop because it's wrong to force people to do (or not do) things against their will. MADD and the stop-smoking people and all the rest of these groups need to be opposed.
Don't forget what this topic is about -- they're censoring a beer pong video game.
No there are no black choppers.
The new prohibitionists and censors are real. That's why this story is on Slashdot. Because they are censoring a beer pong video game.
Just wait. Soon bars won't be allowed in games. If there's a bar (or worse, smoking) the game will get rated (AO) adults only.
The new prohibition movement has already gotten smoking banned in bars and the "legally drunk" alcohol level has been changed from "actually drunk" to "imperfectly sober". They've done this even though the lower alcohol levels are not associated with a high risk of crashes. They can seize your car and sell it to fund their agencies though.
The media war has already begun. PG-rated movies can't have smoking in them.
A lot of people want the government to be your mom and make your choices for you. People vote for it because they think they're in the ruling class. When they find out they're actually "little people", it will be too late.
That's not a gadget. He's just happy to see you.
This thing has boondoggle written all over it.
Here's your socialized medicine in action.
Oregon says: "We won't pay for your cancer drugs, but have you considered assisted suicide? We'll pay for that."
How could anyone describe something like that as evil?
So what? Paper doesn't stop bullets or missiles or rockets. Treaties are only in effect until they aren't any more.
Trying to gin up hatred and envy towards drug companies who develop disease cures is clearly evil. But people can advance their political agendas, so they do it.
This is just another huge money grab for big pharmaceutical companies. Why should you guys get to make any money off of this? All you did was cure Alzheimer's disease. Why should rich people get to avoid dementia when the poorest can't afford it? Shouldn't everyone get dementia equally?
When are we going to stop these big rich drug companies from making these obscene profits for merely curing diseases and plagues?
[Evil socialism off]
I actually hope you guys succeed and make billions. If I get Alzheimer's disease someday, it's nice to know there might be a cure, even if I have to pay you for your effort to find it.
Can someone post a link that describes the benefits of a quantum architecture and how software can be written to take advantage of them?
And by "benefits", I don't mean hype.
This is just like any protest. You'll get tons of people defending "freedom" of protesters to deny freedom to other people.
If your software is really FREE, then why shouldn't Apple be FREE to say no to it without any consequences?