Agree with charlie on the red herrings. The real solution is to cap non-comm vehicle weight, then lower the cap over the next 30 years to about 350 lbs.
farm subsidies...does that include tobacco farmers....? just curious what crops you have to farm to be included. besides, isn't a lot of our grains used to make bourbon and the like...seems like a "not so vital" part fo the industry to give them subsidies.
pigsteak wrote:..., isn't a lot of our grains used to make bourbon and the like...seems like a "not so vital" part fo the industry to give them subsidies...
ANWR can never be repaired or replaced while eventually the price of gas will mandate more efficient cars. On the other hand, global warming will thaw the permafrost up there anyway, releasing a phenomenal amount of methane... it's all bad. Too bad we didn't listen to the scientists 15 years ago when they started suggesting we drasticly reduce greenhouse gas emmissions. Oh well. My vote has no effect and my voice is as good as silent in the grand scheme of things so I'll just do my best to survive as the condition of the world's ecosystem wobbles towards collapse.
[size=75]You are as bad as Alan, and even he hits the mark sometimes. -charlie
"Not all conservatives are stupid, but most stupid people are conservative." - John Stuart Mill[/size]
How about prohibiting interstate trucking and use the rail system that is already in place and underutilized? It would save gas, prevent highway crashes/fatalities, and still protect local trucking industries?
Hauling a big ego up a route adds at least a full grade.
even expand rail transit, perhaps even going out of the way to incorporate polluted sites that could be restored while the transit system was being constructed, a series of terminals where tractors could be coordinated with trailers, eliminating a lot of cross country hywy mileage,
