Disjointed pieces
Aug. 24th, 2005 04:17 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
I walked to work this morning, knowing that I wouldn't make it to the gym with farm pickup afterward. It's not enough (I need more intensity, and more range of motion work, too), but better than nothing. A few notes from the walk:
Some politics: someone forced out of government for not whitewashing data (written up by Fairdice), and Hauntmeister's prediction for why we're in Iraq, version X (Bill Moyers had the right idea (Thanks to Hammercock, among others, for the link.)).
And the government is starting to address the issue of petrol use, given the skyrocketing prices. A campaign to encourage driving less, alternate-fuel cars, or buying smaller cars? No, requirements for the industry to make cars and light trucks (read: SUVs) more fuel efficient. Which makes me wonder why car makers wouldn't automatically make engines as efficient as possible without government requirements. And why people continue to buy gas-guzzlers. The connection doesn't seem to be made in people's heads, according to the poll cited at the end of the article: "A poll conducted earlier this month on behalf of the Associated Press and America Online found that only about 7 percent of those surveyed blamed motorists driving gas-guzzling vehicles for today's high energy prices. Instead, some 30 percent of those surveyed blamed oil companies greedy for profits." While I'm not assuming that the oil companies have my best interest at heart, I can't imagine how anyone could see doubling prices as only adding profits. Finite supply, infinite demand? War in oil-producing regions? Easily-extracted oil mostly gone? I suspect these have something to do with it...
- The drains on the outbound side of the pepperpot bridge were being snaked. I never thought about how they could become clogged, really.
- Overheard: one man saying to another, "The one reason a woman would..."
And just that bit was enough to raise my hackles. - Cloud reflections on the Hancock Tower in the morning, looking from the Public Garden, are pretty neat. I should bring a camera with me sometime.
Some politics: someone forced out of government for not whitewashing data (written up by Fairdice), and Hauntmeister's prediction for why we're in Iraq, version X (Bill Moyers had the right idea (Thanks to Hammercock, among others, for the link.)).
And the government is starting to address the issue of petrol use, given the skyrocketing prices. A campaign to encourage driving less, alternate-fuel cars, or buying smaller cars? No, requirements for the industry to make cars and light trucks (read: SUVs) more fuel efficient. Which makes me wonder why car makers wouldn't automatically make engines as efficient as possible without government requirements. And why people continue to buy gas-guzzlers. The connection doesn't seem to be made in people's heads, according to the poll cited at the end of the article: "A poll conducted earlier this month on behalf of the Associated Press and America Online found that only about 7 percent of those surveyed blamed motorists driving gas-guzzling vehicles for today's high energy prices. Instead, some 30 percent of those surveyed blamed oil companies greedy for profits." While I'm not assuming that the oil companies have my best interest at heart, I can't imagine how anyone could see doubling prices as only adding profits. Finite supply, infinite demand? War in oil-producing regions? Easily-extracted oil mostly gone? I suspect these have something to do with it...
no subject
Date: 2005-08-25 06:58 pm (UTC)