McCain... ahead?

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

Crazy hasn't stopped you from believing things before, why start now?

I did lol, but seriously, there's nothing crazy about thinking people spend X amount of money year and they eventually spend the rest.

And Amele does it say anywhere why that would be the case? We can prevent oil spills from oil rigs from a cat 4/5 hurricane, but we can't increase drilling by more than 200k over 13 years. Something ain't right.

"Yea, it's your head." There, now you don't need to troll this post aurik.

Edit: you responded before I hit reply

[Amele]

I'm a bit fuzzy on it (which is why I like to defer to the DOE) but offshore drilling involves long pipes and requires a lot of lift (which means pressure in the well) any given well only has so much pressure - means it can only pump so fast regardless of how many holes you put in it.

[aurik]

I did lol, but seriously, there's nothing crazy about thinking people spend X amount of money year and they eventually spend the rest.

So if that's the case, you'd be ok with raising the estate tax to 100%?

[Charla]

200,000 barrels per day is a lot. According to my trust Windows calculator, that rate would completely drain the reservoir in approximately 1178 years if it continued indefinitely (ignoring the issues with lithostatic pressure that would stop production well before that). How quickly do you think we should be able to drain an underwater oil reservoir? 400 years? 350 years? Respectively, those retrieval rates would equate to a production of approximately 589,000 and 673,000 barrels per day, respectively. While much higher numbers, these are both the same order of magnitude as the actual estimate, and more importantly neither one is significant compared to our estimated average daily consumption, which is several orders of magnitude greater.

Now, if you're suggesting that all of these numbers are off by at least one order of magnitude, that's another matter. But even without easy access to the productivity data for any given oilfield in general, I have a feeling that would require the offshore fields in question to be significantly more productive than any previously tapped.

edit: now now Aurik, there's no need to get a catch 22 involved. Clearly, any money left unspent upon one's death is simply what one had planned to spend in the near future had their untimely demise not interfered.

[SwampdonkeyPLD]

So if that's the case, you'd be ok with raising the estate tax to 100%?

Nope, no taxation without respiration. Whoever it is left to eventually spends it though aurik.

[aurik]

Nope, no taxation without respiration. Whoever it is left to eventually spends it though aurik.

In other countries, where none of it is taxed, sure.

[Charla]

Whoever it is left to eventually spends it though aurik.

Not if they leave it to someone too. Don't worry though, I'm sure you have a perfectly reasonable and well though-out way of resolving the logical contradiction that individuals "eventually" spend their entire income while still leaving inheritances. Perhaps due to an accident involving a contraceptive and a time machine!

[Beckwin]

So apparently, Dick Cheney is not welcome to the Republican National Convention. McCain team cited wanting to move on to a new era being the reason why. Looks like Cheney is gonna be the Oliver North of the Bush admin meanwhile McCain will still follow in W's footsteps but gets to pretend criticisms of those footsteps can be directed towards Cheney, who he apparently is not following.

oh the lulz

[Beckwin]

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-...8061200193.gif

guyz obama teh soshulizt is gonna raise mah taxes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*disclaimer: I'm filthy fucking rich

[pohibaba]

If we combined the top 5 groups in McCain's plan with the bottom 4 in Obama's plan we would have someone to get behind.

[Beckwin]

and yet the person who would be paying the most taxes (warren buffet) supports obama and serves as an economic adviser.

shouldn't you follow the lead of the most successful businessmen?

also why are Harey Karey, Frau Farbissna, and Hitler on your rushmore?

[pohibaba]

It's actually Freidrich Hayek, Isabel Paterson, Ayn Rand, and Murray Rothbard.

[pohibaba]

I actually would have picked Mises, Rand, Freidman, and Hayek but I didn't make it, I just stole it.

[Beckwin]

by those names you really meant Susan B. Anthony, Martin Luther King Jr., Howard Zinn, and Noam Chomsky, right?

[Kuya]

Didn't Rand hate libertarianism?

[Amele]

by those names you really meant Susan B. Anthony, Martin Luther King Jr., Howard Zinn, and Noam Chomsky, right?

don't forget FDR!

[pohibaba]

Didn't Rand hate libertarianism?

Yes she did.

[Zigma]

I have to provide a link to back up what I say? I don't reply to you libs fast enough and get called names? I'm tired, good night.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIh-KecdD3E

[Charla]

I'm sorry, I don't remember calling you anything. And I honestly believed you had no intention of posting in this thread, based on your statement of "I choose to step aside". Feel free to return to the argument tomorrow, though. I promise to try not to call anyone names.

And nobody has to provide a link to back up something, you could have mentioned the name of where you heard it, or just said "as I understand". And you have to admit, the issue of motivation for medical research is complex.

[Kuya]

Yes she did.

I have to provide a link to back up what I say? I don't reply to you libs fast enough and get called names? I'm tired, good night.

Damn those libs for getting me to try and cite my sources! Will they not stop till the whole world is China!?