<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Muy Loco Parentis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://kmareka.com/2008/05/03/muy-loco-parentis/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://kmareka.com/2008/05/03/muy-loco-parentis/</link>
	<description>Progressive Views from a Nurse and a Social Worker</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 03:33:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald Wolberg</title>
		<link>http://kmareka.com/2008/05/03/muy-loco-parentis/#comment-2830</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald Wolberg]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 May 2008 16:27:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmareka.com/?p=1807#comment-2830</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Excellent commentary, although i agree and I disagree (hmmm, is that political--I voted &quot;yes&quot; before I voted &quot;no&quot;). I do believe that although it is true that the level of political debate is really &quot;mush&quot; and those in the political life have little real respect for the &quot;great unwashed,&quot; voters, the cause really relects the lack of intellectual awareness of the politicians. My experience has been that much too many of those in the political life, are less than aware or intellectually curious about anything other than the superficial or what the polls indicate voters want to hear or what will get them elected. Next on the political wish list are donors, people or interests that will give them money, lots of money, so they can hire consultants who will tell them what to say to win, and what to say that will get them more money. And on and on it goes. If one were really jaded, one might even say with the right media campaign, and the right amount of money, a potted plant could be elected to office--perhaps that has already occurred. How would we know?

The level of political debate in our Nation is dismal. But I suggest the fault is ours. We tolerate candidates and political parties that patronize us, promise us bread and circuses, and limit our ability to support change. Politicians do reflect the voters, and the image is not a pretty one.

My disagreement (or diagreeable nature) enters the matter of energy issues. The causes of the current high fuel prices are several. Foremost is of course demand and limiting (not limited supply). Expanding oil (and other energy needs in expanding economic centers such as Brazil, India, China, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, etc., offer competitive markets for energy resources. Limits on production by the oil cartels, not &quot;oil companies&quot; result in higher prices. It still costs the Saudis less than $2 a barrel to pump oil. It will not matter if all Americans decide to stop driving cars or trucks, flying planes, or taking cruises. Any imagined slack will be picked up by the expanding economies elsewhere.  As long as production is limited and demand is high, prices will follow.

American energy costs are the result of short-sighted and timid Congressional lack of action or will to develop domestic resources. For example, the only drilling off of Florida, where oil resources exist, is by the Chinese via permits issued by Fidel Castro and the Cubans. American companies are not allowed to drill in American waters. Another example: there is more oil in American and Canadian tar sands and oil shales than all the combined oil reserves of all the Middle East, but we are not permitted to develop these. Another example: the Bakken Formation of the American midcontinent, is one of the largest oil reserves in he world and virtually undeveloped. Again, American companies are not permitted to drill. Finally, there is oil off the West Coast, the East Coast, elesewhere in the Gulf, and the American Arctic, and American companies are not allowed to drill. America has sufficient petroleum reserves for perhaps 600 years at current usuage if these were developed, and not one cent would need to go to foreign governments.

Energy hungry India and China open a new coal fired power plant every week--it takes 9 years to get a coal/electricity plant operational in the U.S. India, France, Norway, Sweden, Japan, China, Russia, and on and on, are putting nuclear plants on line. America is not. America has sufficient easy coal reserves for perhaps 500 years and with deeper coal, perhaps another 400 years--that&#039;s almost 1000 years of energy supply. Coal is also a useful starter for other energy (methanol, natural gas), fertilizers, chemicals, plastics, etc. America has sufficient uranium reserves to power scores of nuclear plants that are clean, efficient, and produce cheap electricity for the next 5000 years or more without breeder reactors--with them, the enrgy potential is limitless. There is no reason other than political or uninformed, for high fuel prices, growing corn for fuel instead of food, or for sending American dollars to not so friendly places.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent commentary, although i agree and I disagree (hmmm, is that political&#8211;I voted &#8220;yes&#8221; before I voted &#8220;no&#8221;). I do believe that although it is true that the level of political debate is really &#8220;mush&#8221; and those in the political life have little real respect for the &#8220;great unwashed,&#8221; voters, the cause really relects the lack of intellectual awareness of the politicians. My experience has been that much too many of those in the political life, are less than aware or intellectually curious about anything other than the superficial or what the polls indicate voters want to hear or what will get them elected. Next on the political wish list are donors, people or interests that will give them money, lots of money, so they can hire consultants who will tell them what to say to win, and what to say that will get them more money. And on and on it goes. If one were really jaded, one might even say with the right media campaign, and the right amount of money, a potted plant could be elected to office&#8211;perhaps that has already occurred. How would we know?</p>
<p>The level of political debate in our Nation is dismal. But I suggest the fault is ours. We tolerate candidates and political parties that patronize us, promise us bread and circuses, and limit our ability to support change. Politicians do reflect the voters, and the image is not a pretty one.</p>
<p>My disagreement (or diagreeable nature) enters the matter of energy issues. The causes of the current high fuel prices are several. Foremost is of course demand and limiting (not limited supply). Expanding oil (and other energy needs in expanding economic centers such as Brazil, India, China, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, etc., offer competitive markets for energy resources. Limits on production by the oil cartels, not &#8220;oil companies&#8221; result in higher prices. It still costs the Saudis less than $2 a barrel to pump oil. It will not matter if all Americans decide to stop driving cars or trucks, flying planes, or taking cruises. Any imagined slack will be picked up by the expanding economies elsewhere.  As long as production is limited and demand is high, prices will follow.</p>
<p>American energy costs are the result of short-sighted and timid Congressional lack of action or will to develop domestic resources. For example, the only drilling off of Florida, where oil resources exist, is by the Chinese via permits issued by Fidel Castro and the Cubans. American companies are not allowed to drill in American waters. Another example: there is more oil in American and Canadian tar sands and oil shales than all the combined oil reserves of all the Middle East, but we are not permitted to develop these. Another example: the Bakken Formation of the American midcontinent, is one of the largest oil reserves in he world and virtually undeveloped. Again, American companies are not permitted to drill. Finally, there is oil off the West Coast, the East Coast, elesewhere in the Gulf, and the American Arctic, and American companies are not allowed to drill. America has sufficient petroleum reserves for perhaps 600 years at current usuage if these were developed, and not one cent would need to go to foreign governments.</p>
<p>Energy hungry India and China open a new coal fired power plant every week&#8211;it takes 9 years to get a coal/electricity plant operational in the U.S. India, France, Norway, Sweden, Japan, China, Russia, and on and on, are putting nuclear plants on line. America is not. America has sufficient easy coal reserves for perhaps 500 years and with deeper coal, perhaps another 400 years&#8211;that&#8217;s almost 1000 years of energy supply. Coal is also a useful starter for other energy (methanol, natural gas), fertilizers, chemicals, plastics, etc. America has sufficient uranium reserves to power scores of nuclear plants that are clean, efficient, and produce cheap electricity for the next 5000 years or more without breeder reactors&#8211;with them, the enrgy potential is limitless. There is no reason other than political or uninformed, for high fuel prices, growing corn for fuel instead of food, or for sending American dollars to not so friendly places.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nancy Green</title>
		<link>http://kmareka.com/2008/05/03/muy-loco-parentis/#comment-2831</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nancy Green]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 May 2008 19:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kmareka.com/?p=1807#comment-2831</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[excellent post. while bush throws us a few dollars of funny money, clinton and mccain will toss us some change to make us happy. how much will the oil companies raise the price of gas if the tax is removed? about $.18 would you say?
 personally, i use my car for work and i wouldn&#039;t save enough in a week for an extra cup of coffee.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>excellent post. while bush throws us a few dollars of funny money, clinton and mccain will toss us some change to make us happy. how much will the oil companies raise the price of gas if the tax is removed? about $.18 would you say?<br />
 personally, i use my car for work and i wouldn&#8217;t save enough in a week for an extra cup of coffee.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

