kumquatq3

I just thought it was a comical follow up to a discussion we had that ended well and was rationally discussed.

self serving bureaucracies do not help the environment. remember, WE are part of the environment, too. stifling economic growth is tantamount to forcing poverty on us. You implied, without these measures, that the economy would be stifiled and poverty would be forced apon us. Which would be false. Why else add "stifling economic growth is tantamount to forcing poverty on us" to that blip? You also implied that by forcing poverty on us, we would be hurting the enviroment. As "WE" are part of the enviroment. Which doesn't take into account what other species would "gain". If you didn't mean to say either of those, you need to spend more time thinking about want you say and then typing it out clearly. I'm not sure anyone, even yourself, really knows exactly what you said. self serving bureaucracies do not help the environment. remember, WE are part of the environment, too. stifling economic growth is tantamount to forcing poverty on us. If you didn't mean to imply that why the hell did you post any of this? That is the only connecting factor in the above three sentances as soon as you learn them, I'd love to hear all about it The money national forest generate in tourism increases every year. Not to meantion other industries that get hurt by this, such as the salmon industry, as thier wild stocks decrease every year. Plus the reduced jobs for park rangers and enviromental anylasts, as these apparently detailed reports are no longer needed. There is NEVER just one economic line of effect of an action. It's a ripple in a pond, not a row of dominos. Surprised you didn't know that. Plus, since we are using "econimic" terms, there is lots of "Good Will", if I may, to be had from these species and areas. Meaning, not all gains are monetary. As well as, I assume this means nothing to you, the benifit of Biodiversity. Then of course you know of supply and demand, if you want to talk in basic terms, if the logging companies have access to more and cheaper wood, the prices of wood goes down, the logging companies make less per plank. This would mean they have more jobs, but likely pay these workers less. The gain isn't as incredible as you tried to make it appear. Specially after foreign markets react. Then of course, you have the possibl ecosts of enviroment clean up, and the cost of fighting lawsuits to establish their new claims, etc etc. Very little actually. Thats my point.......... You zealot! Are you saying it's ok to wipe out species to make a buck? Whos the fanatic now? Now lets talk reality: I wouldn't mind open more areas to logging nessasarily, but I don't want the needs of a species thats about to be wiped off the earth to be equal to how much money a logging company can make because: 1. Thats what this bill does. Endangered species are no longer considered a factor. It's the overall "health" of the forest that matters. Meaning, if the logging company can "prove" that the forest can get along without Mr. Spotty owl, they can go ahead and log. And there isn't any evidence to support Mr. Spotty Owl anymore, because the bill make such reports optional at best. The data would almost all most likely come from the logging company, which I have to assume, may not be the most unbiased source. 2. Without this measure, I assure you, our general standard of living would NOT decrease nor would the general strength of the economy. You won't feel much of a gain from this action either, besides logging companies getting a small stock jump On the news: Pacific Lumber Co/Maxxam (one of the bigger loggers in the US) "jumped" .62% on the news. You want to bet the effect of the bill is likely more or less now taken into account in the stock price? The "juice" isn't worth the squeeze. If it is, I'm scared to think what you view as "ok" for a company to do to make a dollar. Reduced FDA standards maybe? So, by not looking into how an action will effect the enviroment anymore, you now are looking at everyone interests? Funny that sounds to me like you are just looking into the loggers interests exclusively, as it only removed "bureaucracy" for them. Of course you call it bureaucracy, I call it protection. By not counting endangered species when decideding whether or not to open an area for loggin, thats fair? Thats balance? Nice try. I never once said or implied I take ELFs word over this guys. Both are extremists. Please only post actual points. Made up ones wastes everyone time. Now, if you read the article instead assuming to know what it says, a Rep. from NM (a state that would be effected) is very much apposed to this. My point is the only guy who wants this was the logging representative. I hope what you want me to re-evalute isn't based of your spotty info.

use the old HDs to move data around

You would be right......if the rabbits were the cause of said "poverty". But their not. We would be the cause of our own poverty in this case. Plus, to even suggest that leaving Clinton envirmental protections in place would somehow drive us all into poverty is foolish and shortsighted. Not that the National Park Service is all that great (most of their budget goes to building roads.....), but these measures are not helping to lessen the red tape for anything but logging companies.

thanks as always

So what your saying is, we have to get nature before it gets us? I knew those rabbits were acting smug

Branching off the other thread Considering their hardest stretch of schedule is behind them and their only 2.5 gmes back of a playoff spot ::knock on wood:: they got a shot at the playoffs in the East. Their beating good teams, and not "good" East teams, but Western conference teams. Ben Gordon is a machine and they got ROBBED at theend in that Dallas game btw.

HA! I wish they could come up with a better name than ELF tho

took you long enough

Bush pushes through new rules for national forests Link to the story Choice cuts: But one guy says it's not all that bad: Hey, sounds pretty good. I guess there isn't anything to wor.....hey, waiddaminute... who is this guy???? DAMN IT!

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...as_vs__festivus

I'll do that

The game is getting some VERY mixed reactions. It's become clear that it's a "you need to play it to understand" type of thing Anyways, I think it will be a early Feb release, as Rep Commando is early early March. Plus February 8, 2005 is the date the online stores have almost all been showing recently @ $49.99. A reduced price, like lots of pc version of games get, would have been nice tho.

Congrats! I like how you called it geek love

*sniff* Hades and Vol? Still you mention them after my valiant attack on this subject of KotOR III-MMORPG?....that truly hurts <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm a traditionalist

Where is Hades and Vol when you need them?

do we even have an offical release date? I doubt we have offical specs till we get that

He makes up for it with the best impersonation of a person going through a tunnel with a mobile phone that I have ever heard.

Don't be shy, you can tell us that you bought a X-box to play KotOR 2

Congrats to you and your bride. On a side note: How cool would a inflatable chapel be?

well, I plan on uping the difficulty the first time through, by the sound of it

Yea, but do you just go out and buy new metallic sand, or do just buy a new Etch-A-Sketch all together? I was looking at one of those key chain ones, but I'm not sure it has the power that I......I killed the joke, didn't I?

never the same feeling of danger/evenly matched to me

Vaughen was supposed to die after the 1st season, iirc, when he got captured. Another person I'd like to se eback is syds nemisis from season one, the chick that went on to become Zoey on "Firefly/Serenity". Remember that? BTW, did Will kill both your dogs or something

I know, I think the sister thing is a horrible addition. Maybe she will turn out to be Will in disguise! That would be sweet! Or Francie. Or Irina. Cuz frankly, Victor Garber is the only good reason to watch the show untill they show me something. Sark needs to become a badass again instead of a cowardly pretty boy who gets caught by someone every other episode. Vaughen needs to die, he was supposed to, but fan reaction and all that. Bring back Willllllllage! The Will-nation is waiting! I'd like her original husband to still be alive, that might be interesting.