Print 130 comment(s) - last by energie.. on May 8 at 4:51 PM

Robert Bryce accuses neoconservatives of spreading disinformation about oil and pushing America to embrace electric vehicles prematurely. EVs rely heavily on rare-earth metals, which he points out are currently controlled by China. A switch to electric would be far more dangerous to U.S. security than remaining on oil he believes.  (Source:

The Toyota Prius is packed full of expensive rare-earth metals. Rare-earth metals are almost entirely produced in China.  (Source:
Is the Prius supporting an oppressive communist regime?

A switch to electric may be far more dangerous to U.S. security than remaining on foreign oil, argued one expert at a recent summit.

The electric vehicle movement may move mankind away from relying on one scarce resource, but into relying on another, believes Robert Bryce, author of "Power Hungry: The Myths of 'Green' Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future" (PublicAffairs; 2010).  Bryce addressed journalists at the 2010 Toyota Sustainable Mobility Seminar in La Jolla, California detailing the industry's growing addiction to rare earth metals.

Most electric vehicles and hybrids heavily rely on a series of elements called the lanthanides, which rarely occur on Earth, and thus are aptly nicknamed "rare-earth metals".  The Toyota Prius, the world's most popular hybrid, for example, uses 2.2 pounds of neodymium and about 22 pounds of lanthanum, in addition to cerium, yttrium, and zirconium.

Early fears about the electric vehicle industry focused on its reliance on lithium.  Fortunately, recent surveys have indicated lithium stocks to be more extensive than previously thought.  However, rare-earth metals are fast emerging as a more serious concern.

Competition is tight for the rare compounds.  Neodymium is used heavily in wind turbine magnets, and other rare earth elements are used in solar panels and computers.

One headache for the U.S. is not only that the elements are so scarce, but where they primarily come from.  According to an April 1 report, China by the Government Accounting Office, entitled "Rare Earth Materials in the Defense Supply Chain", states, "Most rare earth material processing now occurs in China. In 2009, China produced about 97 percent of rare earth oxides."

When it comes to production sources, there is some hope in the near future, says Bryce.  The U.S. does have substantial rare-earth reserves of its own, but it just hasn't exploited them.  The GAO believes that by 2014 the U.S. will be heavily mining these deposits.  Bryce isn't so convinced.  He states, "At the moment, the only hope for the United States when it comes to domestic lanthanide production appears to be Molycorp Minerals, which owns America's only operable rare-earths mine."

That mine has switched ownership several times, making its future seem in doubt.  Meanwhile, other deposits would require new mines, a massive investment, and which would damage the environment -- a concern for those advocating EVs from a "green" perspective.  

Meanwhile China is doing its best to remain in control of this increasingly valuable resource.  It's focusing its academic efforts on the field of rare-earth metal processing.  It also has banned foreign investment in rare-earth metal mining and has raised taxes on rare-earth metal exports.

Bryce accuses "neoconservatives" of spreading alarmism about petroleum.  He states, "Though it's true that the Saudis are influential, they only control about 10 percent of daily world oil production.  These same neoconservatives hate OPEC - but OPEC only controls about one-third of world oil production."

He points out that the U.S.'s top three foreign oil sources in January were Canada (1.882 million barrels per day), Mexico (1.033 million barrels per day), and Nigeria (0.996 million barrels per day).  Of these nations, only Nigeria is a member of OPEC.

He says that there may be enough rare-earth metals to eventually sustain a switch to electric vehicles, but that the world economy currently isn't ready for it.  And a premature switch could hand even greater world dominance to a growing nation whose human rights violations and lawlessness are considered by many to be a serious threat, he says.

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By HotFoot on 4/19/2010 11:47:14 AM , Rating: 3
How significant is this concern compared to the vast sums of money going to China because consumers are too cheap to pay American (or other developed countries') wages?

RE: Walmart
By spread on 4/19/2010 11:54:11 AM , Rating: 1
Consumers don't set the wages, the companies do.

It's also shameful that as a corporation you can get a tax break for outsourcing.

RE: Walmart
By Motoman on 4/19/2010 12:29:32 PM , Rating: 5
Actually, consumers do set the wages - by choosing to shop at Wal-Mart or wherever the lowest possible price is found.

If everyone was fine shopping at, say, Macy's, then we'd probably have a lot more menial production jobs left in the States.

Problem is, consumers tend not to want to pay any more than the absolute lowest price for anything. Hence, Wal-Mart. Because of Wal-Mart, US consumer goods manufacturing has all but ceased to exist.

You can blame Wal-Mart if you want to - but if no one shopped there, they'd never have gotten off the ground, let alone become the world's largest retailer.

RE: Walmart
By Mr Perfect on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By Motoman on 4/19/2010 1:14:43 PM , Rating: 5
Well, they do, it's just that they think they should make enough income from them to support a family of 4.

RE: Walmart
By Micronite on 4/19/2010 2:12:39 PM , Rating: 5
And by support you mean:

Leasing two nice cars
Owning a flat-screen TV
Paying monthly for the full satellite HDTV package
Maintaing the pool for those hot summer days
Buying nice furniture for the Mrs.
Living in a house that is nice as someone who has lived twice as long and worked twice as hard.
Private school for the kids.

RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/19/2010 2:24:34 PM , Rating: 5
Exactly right,

and by "support" you mean tax the hell out of the educated and hard working population so that the lazy and useless degenerates can:

1. sit on their asses
2. make babies
3. collect increasingly larger welfare checks
4. teach their children how to repeat the cycle

Have we left anything out?

RE: Walmart
By dgingeri on 4/19/2010 4:27:22 PM , Rating: 5
I've been arguing with my nephew about these type for the last couple weeks. He seems to think that these guys should get this money just because they are human beings, and doesn't care where the money comes from.

He's 19, but he'll learn as soon as he's working in the real world and has someone else claiming credit for his work and blaming him for their inability to get stuff done. Then I'll remind him that is exactly what welfare is.

RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/19/2010 5:30:40 PM , Rating: 5
Coming from from someone who is 21 years old, he will learn soon.

I'll tell you the trick to break him from this liberal brainwashed state: Convince his parents to make him get a job at a grocery store. Not an exclusive rich neighborhood store; I mean a store surrounded by the lower and mid-lower class.

I worked the latter mentioned grocery store for quite a while and here is a truncated list of things I have seen/done:

I loaded more $400 worth of groceries (which included 2 cases of beer, 2 cartons of cigarettes, prime cut meats, fresh produce) into a brand new Dodge Charger . They paid with an EBT card. And no, I'm neither joking nor exaggerating.

I saw an elderly (white) couple drive up on an older car, go in and get a very small amount of food. They paid with an EBT card. The card had a $15 limit PER MONTH on it. They bought bread,milk,canned food, etc.

I even saw people pay for beer and cigarettes with EBT cards (yes I know, it's not supposed to go through, but it did)

One man, (middle eastern decent) who owned a local store came in a bought a back of gum with his EBT card just to see how much he had on it. The remainder left was $1,400. Yes, that number is correct, he gets $1,400 a month from the government.

I have also seen countless mothers come in with several infants and spend $500 (with EBT) on groceries AND and extra $200 with WIC checks. They drove away in brand new Escalades, Range Rovers etc.

I am telling 100 percent truth on all of the above. Feel free to print this, show it to your nephew, then make him get a job at one of these stores.

Don't you ever let anyone out there tell you that this s**t isn't happening. It is, and in great number too.

RE: Walmart
By philmax on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/19/2010 6:11:31 PM , Rating: 5
Oh look everyone, it's an idiot running his mouth that have not a clue what he's talking about. Yes, they did in fact buy cigarettes and alcohol with an EBT card. The transaction DID go through. It was probably a fluke/error in the transaction system. You have no ground to say if it did or did not happen.... f**king moron...

RE: Walmart
By eegake on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By philmax on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By philmax on 4/19/10, Rating: 0
RE: Walmart
By AssBall on 4/19/2010 6:52:59 PM , Rating: 4
I have to laugh; your posts are so ignorant. You definitely never have worked in a run-of-the-mill grocery chain. People constantly abuse the government financed systems and there is dickall you or your management can do about it.

RE: Walmart
By chick0n on 4/19/2010 11:05:10 PM , Rating: 4
I believe you RandallMoore.

Cuz its happening in NYC too. Yep, New York City.

There is nothing we can do about it, the transaction went through. We can't stop them from buying it because, we gonna get sued. Yep, it happened to us. That guy even called Cops, the beloved NYPD came and said there is nothing they can do about it, its not their job to handle these stuff. but if the transaction went thru. It is OUR responsibility to give them the paid goods. Any complaints/Question we should go ask the agency ourselves.

So dont worry about the other morons comments RandallMoore. Cuz obviously they dont know what the real world is like.

RE: Walmart
By mcnabney on 4/20/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By ekv on 4/20/2010 4:28:20 AM , Rating: 2
Wasn't "them" the other responders writing in this thread?

The only person using the N word is you. If I may politely make a suggestion ... Knock it the hell off.

The only thing of color I got from this thread was of the rainbow kind. I don't think you know what "disturbed" is till your boss puts his hand on your knee the first day on the job. If you catch my drift.

RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/20/2010 8:33:36 AM , Rating: 4
First, I love how you pull race out of thin air in this thread. Second, why does it have to be a black and white thing? There were just as many whites degenerates doing what I described as there were blacks (and mexicans).

Just an FYI, if you want my honest opinion; The term "nigger" does not have a color associated with it. There are white nigs, black nigs, tan nigs, albino nigs, etc. You are what you are no matter what skin you have. Color doesn't come into the picture until a racist liberal brings it up :)

But thanks for assuming that I am a racist anyway! Y'all come back now, ya hear!

RE: Walmart
By lamerz4391 on 4/20/2010 1:11:18 PM , Rating: 1
You arethe one that projected racism into his comment when he was only talking about other commenters. It seems you are the one with the problem. So why dont you GTFO you stupid tool?

RE: Walmart
By cerx on 4/20/2010 12:14:38 PM , Rating: 1
Phil, you're right. As a store employee you have every right to tell them "no". And there is nothing the customer can do about it (as long as you didn't discriminate based on race, religion, etc.); sure they can get mad and scream but they won't win a court case against you. And if you're state/city is that messed up why aren't you doing something about it (other than trolling on DT)? Or if your store's computer is letting that stuff through why aren't you telling a manager to fix it?
I've worked those grocery stores, too, and we forced people to buy their cigarettes, fried chicken, beer, etc., with their own money. In the end they still get it, but its a small consolation that its not on the card.
Maybe things are different in Nebraska but I'd imagine its the same everywhere.

RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/20/2010 7:12:50 PM , Rating: 3
As a store employee you have every right to tell them "no".

Nope, you are wrong. We can only refuse if they don't have proper I.D. (when needed) or if they appear drunk (selling alcohol)
And there is nothing the customer can do about it (as long as you didn't discriminate based on race , religion, etc.);

The bold word should hint as to why. "He refused to sell me that product just because I am <insert race>.
And if you're state/city is that messed up why aren't you doing something about it (other than trolling o
n DT)?

Since you didn't read the entire conversation before jumping in, I'll say again: We did report it, they did not give a s**t
Or if your store's computer is letting that stuff through why aren't you telling a manager to fix it?

Since you don't have the slightest idea how the system works, I'll tell you. It's linked to state owned and managed servers. We have no control over the process.
I've worked those grocery stores, too, and we forced people to buy their cigarettes, fried chicken, beer, etc., with their own money.

I wish we could have done the same, trust me. We would have been sued had we refused service. NC is a different world when it comes to people pulling the race card.

RE: Walmart
By mindless1 on 4/25/2010 11:20:58 PM , Rating: 3
You are wrong. A business can reserve the right not to sell anything to anyone so long as it is not discrimination based on the short list.

It does not matter if the customer says it is because they have the burden of proof when you are the only one with any proof - that what they are trying to buy is disallowed.

Merely printing out the rule that states that is THE ONLY THING YOU NEED.

Perhaps someone misinformed you, but that doesn't make it correct info. You don't have to report it to have the option of not making a sale and unlike a judgment call (since you have no blood test results to go by) about someone being drunk, you have clear fact based evidence when denying disallowed purchases.

OF COURSE people are going to complain, but you can't have it both ways taking the easy/excuse way out and then come back telling it as if your hands were tied because they were not.

Perhaps your management simply preferred the increase in business or to not have incidents resulting from refusal to sell certain items, and knowingly turned a blind eye to it all then repeated lies to back it up.

You do have control when you are an employee of the seller. You tell the customer they can't do it and they will have to pay cash. There is no such thing as they disagree because you are accepting or declining their payment until they put the item back or else they are stealing it because it is not their property if you simply state "I do not accept payment for that". Then if the customer becomes threatening or steals the item, you call the police.

I can't even believe you had to be told all of the above. "The customer is always right" is a policy of some businesses but it never undermines the basic requirement of a two party contract when anything is bought or sold, one that both parties agree to with the exception mentioned above about discrimination based on the short list.

RE: Walmart
By AssBall on 4/19/2010 6:01:19 PM , Rating: 5
Keep trying dgingeri. He'll come around. Here's some more rhetoric.

How exactly can people justify welfare/unemployment/food stamps/federal healthcare/tax breaks for having 19 kids/etc. I could include pretty much every government program that redistributes MY money to someone else's perceived entitlement(s). Why do I have to care if someone thinks that they deserve something that is free to them , and costs me something I already have earned? Especially when I don't know them and probably don't like them.

I don't mind paying for roads and schools and power and water and research. All are good for society, and I support taxes that go to those programs.

If folks want to help the poor and stupid and hungry, that is great, they are more than welcome to do that. It's what they want to do and its for a fine cause.
I just wish they would leave me and my money out of it. Yet I'm effectively forced to help buy the poor, hungry, and stupid a happy meal. It's not fair. It's not what laws and tax were supposed to be for.

Give me one reason why I should have to pay for your dying grandmother's surgery. Maybe I have my own dying father whom I'd be much more happy to give that money to. Maybe I don't, but that's none of your business, so why would you or your grandmother be any of my business either?

If we spent all the money we spent on welfare on education, we sure would have a lot less people who need welfare...

RE: Walmart
By cerx on 4/20/2010 12:21:40 PM , Rating: 2
In theory because if we each pay a little now, we won't have to pay more later. Paying a little now (in theory again) should lower the crime rate, etc. Plus, the hope is the person that gets this money is going to use it to get back on their feet, and eventually support themselves, and then pay their own taxes into the system. Just like investments, we pay a little now in the hopes that we'll get a bigger return (in their tax money, the products they produce, the services they render, the innovation they provide). That's how it's supposed to work at least.

RE: Walmart
By lennylim on 4/19/2010 2:44:25 PM , Rating: 3
Rats. 0 out of 8. I feel deprived. Where's my welfare check?

RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/19/10, Rating: 0
RE: Walmart
By AssBall on 4/19/2010 6:07:37 PM , Rating: 3
If you can't read or understand the questions you get a bonus on the check.

RE: Walmart
By philmax on 4/19/10, Rating: 0
RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/19/2010 6:16:37 PM , Rating: 3
Awe, does the truth hurt? Let me guess, you are one of the liberal hippie tree huggers that thinks everyone is ENTITLED to free stuff...

If you aren't going to explain, then why bother rating and making comments? Go ahead, break it down and explain. I'll be right here waiting...

RE: Walmart
By philmax on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By philmax on 4/19/2010 6:50:43 PM , Rating: 1
If you would like to nitpick, then I hate both the Democratic party and the Republican party...more clear :-)

Please give me the information/link/phone number/whatever to one person that believes they are entitled to all of this free stuff you mention. Don't fall under the illusion that just because people accept free things means they truly feel they deserve them.

I said you had to be nice for me to reply ;-)

RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By chick0n on 4/19/2010 11:12:09 PM , Rating: 1

Let me try to answer them.

1. Yes, I wanted to. but ... so is this a No ?
2. No, thats why I can't work hard.
3. No, cuz I think its full of shit.
4. I did not vote. Its a waste of time.
5. No. haha
6. No.
7. I do.
8. No.
9. No.
10. No.
11. Sometimes. lol
12. YES.

Damn ! so I will never be able to FREE LEECH ! ARGH ! SHIT !

RE: Walmart
By mcnabney on 4/20/2010 1:47:48 AM , Rating: 3
4. I did not vote. Its a waste of time.

I think I see the problem here. I could go down the path of mentioning how how many true Americans died for that right which you so freely disregard, but I will instead bow to your greater wisdom because you clearly are so much smarter than everyone else.

RE: Walmart
By RandallMoore on 4/20/2010 8:37:57 AM , Rating: 1
You think the US Constitution is full of shit? I hope you are being sarcastic in some way...


Then why don't you move to Cambodia? I hear they have nice weather there!

RE: Walmart
By room200 on 4/21/2010 6:08:23 PM , Rating: 1
And the guy accused him of racism, he denied it, and it come out in THIS post. LOL

RE: Walmart
By bubbastrangelove on 4/19/2010 1:46:28 PM , Rating: 5
Define "menial jobs" please.

Because where I live there are Americans doing jobs like janitors, hotel maids, nannys, fast food service, garbage men, door men and ever other "menial job" you can imagine everywhere I look.

Not only do I see Americans doing these jobs but I see them standing in line for these jobs because of the economy being so bad.

Or by menial jobs do you mean landscaping, roofing, carpentry, plumbing, electricians and construction.

Because if where you live you're having a hard time finding Americans to do the above jobs. By all means reply to me as to the location and I assure you I can find many, many AMERICANS looking for the work.

RE: Walmart
By Motoman on 4/19/10, Rating: 0
RE: Walmart
By BBeltrami on 4/19/2010 2:47:17 PM , Rating: 1
I don't consider a single occupation you mentioned "menial". And in fact, the tradesmen with skills you listed probably would not appreciate your use of their career as a rhetorical talking point.

Shockingly, many of the occupations you listed are unionized and receive union or prevailing wage plus benefits. How can you compare that to China? In 2006, the average two-person household in America made $52,072. According to the World Bank, the average Chinese family made $2,025. Last year my wife lost her job and she made that much in unemployment in 6 weeks.

I appreciate the "Hard working Americans" thing. I work hard for my money and I appreciate my career, and I'm especially thankful for the freedom to spend my income the way I choose. More so, I'm thankful that I recognize the high standard of living I enjoy as a result of that freedom.

So here's menial: Take your carpenter or electrician and reduce him to hot-glue assembling refrigerator magnets or applying the "Made in the USA" sticker to the bottom of statuette replicas for 10 hours a day for 50 bucks a week. Can you assure me you'll find many, many Americans for that work?

RE: Walmart
By dgingeri on 4/19/2010 4:52:58 PM , Rating: 3
I haven't seen an english speaking person doing any of these jobs in over 10 years around here in Denver, except for nanny.

The jobs are out there. There are jobs here in Denver all over the place. Heck, McDonalds is paying $12/hour because they have a hard time finding people around here.

If people aren't finding work, its because they aren't looking. You have to look further than the local 5 block radius.

RE: Walmart
By mcnabney on 4/20/2010 1:52:02 AM , Rating: 2
I have a hard time believing what you are saying. The employment section of the paper here in Kansas city is about a page long. Mostly medical, 'home employment (scam), or temp. It used to be a couple dozen pages. The last opening I had to fill turned into a nightmare. Over a thousand resumes submitted for a sales job...

RE: Walmart
By whiskerwill on 4/20/2010 9:39:48 AM , Rating: 2
The employment section of the paper here in Kansas city is about a page long. Mostly medical
The what? The NEWSPAPER? They still print those things?

Buy a clue. Almost no one advertises jobs in the newspaper any more. All the professional jobs are online, and all the low end jobs don't advertise at all, they just hang a sign on the door. Newspapers carry a few in the middle.

RE: Walmart
By Machinegear on 4/19/2010 1:47:51 PM , Rating: 3
Companies tell their American employees to keep working, but for less than a living wage, or their job will be outsourced to a slave worker in a foreign country and then you believe the political spin for this behavior of "Americans don't want to do menial" jobs?

You F'n kidding me?

Americans have proven to be the hardest working nation in the world. That is how we became the richest. All this wealth didn't just show up with Columbus's arrival.

RE: Walmart
By Xavi3n on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By callmeroy on 4/19/2010 3:01:38 PM , Rating: 1
1. "Working Hard" is probably the most mis-used and mis-understood term in the world of employment. What you want to be isn't really "hard working"...but SMART working and efficient working. Just because someone is breaking a sweat or putting in tons of hours doesn't mean they are doing a good job. That's a peeve to tell someone in this country that Bob works 70 hours a week, Joe works 50 hours a week -- who is working harder? I betch you 90% of everyone will say Bob is....of course he has to be right 70 hours a week is a lot of working!

2. War economies always see an up tick in GDP because of the manufacturing going on. WWII actually saw Russia as the largest producer of weapons, not the US. At the start of the war Germany also produced FAR more war machines than any other single nation.

Further more, Germany - despite the atrocities they committed, were leaps and bounds ahead in technology in both tanks and airplanes. If you look at the history of the war -- Germany's greatest flub was taking too long to develope its technologies. If they realized what their engineers and scientists were creating sooner and took their work more seriously -- there's a great chance that we would have NOT won WWII.

It wasn't until near the end of the War that the US and allies finally caught up technology wise. Ultimately, in the end, we just outproduced Germany.

RE: Walmart
By porkpie on 4/19/2010 3:33:54 PM , Rating: 5
If they realized what their engineers and scientists were creating sooner and took their work more seriously -- there's a great chance that we would have NOT won WWII.
Or had they just taken Vizzini's advice to "never get involved in a land war in Asia!"

Attacking their Russian ally was probably their largest mistake in the war.

RE: Walmart
By Anoxanmore on 4/19/2010 5:04:45 PM , Rating: 2
That is patent infringement, I want my monies porkypie. :P

RE: Walmart
By UNHchabo on 4/19/2010 3:37:27 PM , Rating: 2
Oh yeah, getting rich off all that war materiel we sold to Britain, that they didn't pay for until 2006. We gave Britain all that as a way to help in the war, without declaring war on Germany.

The reason our economy recovered through the war was due in great part to the fact that we were one of the only industrialized nations at the end of the war that hadn't had huge amounts of damage done to it.

RE: Walmart
By Motoman on 4/19/2010 2:10:46 PM , Rating: 3
Americans have proven to be the hardest working nation in the world.

Really? Huh. Seems me me that I see lots of us sitting around on our fat asses (yes, I mean the ones with jobs). Especially union jobs. I'm pretty sure that if you looked at how "hard" a given society worked, the US wouldn't be ranked very high.

That being said, "working hard" doesn't necessarily lead to wealth either. Poor people around the world work their fingers to the bone every day, and barely earn enough to survive. And I'd be willing to guess that people in North Korea work their asses off...and I'd be further willing to guess that their personal wealth is rather small.

RE: Walmart
By dgingeri on 4/19/2010 5:01:20 PM , Rating: 2
Speaking of union jobs, I just had to replace my brake pads on my 2005 Monte Carlo because someone on that union assembly line hadn't done his job right and didn't lube the brake caliper pins. One caliper stuck and wore the inside pad down to the metal without hardly any of the outside pad getting used.

funny thing was that the brakes still worked well thanks to the other 3 wheels, and that is one of only 2 problems I've had with this car in the last 5 years. Good engineering and bad assembly. That's American work for you.

RE: Walmart
By Motoman on 4/19/2010 2:12:50 PM , Rating: 1
And by the way, it's not that the "companies" are telling their American employees to work for less than a living wage. It's a function of the market economy - they product can't be sold at a profit when you factor in American labor.

So the company can either move production overseas, or they can go bankrupt.

Maybe some companies refuse to outsource, and they go bankrupt. Hooray for their patriotism. The fact of the matter remains that those American workers still lost their jobs.

RE: Walmart
By callmeroy on 4/19/2010 3:16:32 PM , Rating: 2
Sad but true.

We (americans) are really a selfish people if you think about it.

Just like state (NJ) one of the worse financial situations out there ..maybe 8 other states have it worse right now financially speaking. So now the Gov is cutting pentions, property tax rebates, education funding, etc. people are screaming mad at him.....

We want all the good in this country and none of the bad, or none of the sacrifices. Real life isn't a book or a hollywood movie. You can't look at a HUGE debt and go "boom" its all gone now. Cuts have to come from somewhere..and cutting the CHEAP(er) expenses doesn't work.

Same deal with outsourcing -- we get upset (I admit sometimes I do too) at outsourced jobs....but honestly...WTF do we expect? Our cost of living is much higher than many other countries we can't have a decent home, car, etc. for $5/hr. doesn't work that way. So we demand higher wages for the same jobs others will do in foreign countries for that $5/hr. If you are a business owner, patriotism aside -- you have a work force that can cost you $30/hr per person or you can pay $8/hr per person...its hard to argue with the business sense of wanting to spend LESS.

We often forget right now today 2010....there are many nations where what people make in a YEAR is equal to what a great deal of Americans make in a single paycheck or month.

RE: Walmart
By gamerk2 on 4/19/2010 3:29:53 PM , Rating: 2
Agree 100%, and thats why the current cost is unsustainable. In realality, theres only two ways to deal with the wage problem: Remove the minimum wage, or go full-bore Socalism. A worker making $10/hr is not a sustainable formula for a strong economy, as its too much to make companies stay in the country, but too low to make a decent living.

RE: Walmart
By porkpie on 4/19/2010 3:38:18 PM , Rating: 3
A worker making $10/hr is not a sustainable formula for a strong economy, as its too much to make companies stay in the country...
Untrue. It's too high for entirely unskilled labor on low profit margin goods. For highly skilled labor in other markets, even $100/hour may not be too high.

The solution? Have people acquire skills. But why go through all that bother, when the government is telling you you're entitled to free food, housing, clothing, and health care?

"...but too low to make a decent living."
$10 an hour to too low to raise a family on. Which means people making that salary should either not have kids, or acquire better job skills.

RE: Walmart
By HotFoot on 4/19/2010 4:25:23 PM , Rating: 2
Is $10/hour going to leave enough time or money (assuming you have to work 2 jobs to make ends meet) to pay for skills training? It used to be you could start at the bottom of a company and work your way up, so $10/hour for a year or two at the start was just a way of proving your stuff. These days the equation is completely different and people make the biggest career moves changing companies, not moving up one tree.

I say this all hypothetically. I was fortunate enough to have a family that could help me out when I was young. I had to earn the degree, but if I try to figure out how to put 60+ hours/week into studying engineering on top of putting in enough hours at $10/hour to pay tuition and room and board - it just doesn't add up.

It would be interesting to see someone put out a plan for how someone making $10/hour (even single) is supposed to get ahead without a helping hand. And don't tell me government-subsidized education or you're a socialist.

RE: Walmart
By porkpie on 4/19/2010 4:51:33 PM , Rating: 2
Is $10/hour going to pay for skills training?

a) Self-taught
b) On-the job training
c) Student loans

Three separate paths, all of which can be taken, regardless of how poor you are.

Seriously, take off the blinders. People who spend their lives in minimum wage positions don't WANT to expend the effort to move up.

RE: Walmart
By AssBall on 4/19/2010 6:47:47 PM , Rating: 1
I Couldn't agree with you more on these posts, Porkpie. I make 11$ an hour and am pretty satisfied with my job and my living conditions. My wife makes similar wages, and we own a nice enough house.

Then again we are not fat drug addicted spend-$65+-eating-out-every-day retards with 8 and half kids. We do pretty well, and are a perfect example of what you mean.

You know what would help alot of people who think they need tax money to get by? Learn to cook, get off your worthless cellphone you can't afford, stop buying a new car every 4 years, learn how to use a few basic tools. Stop using your credit card, or learn how to do something very simple more cost effectively. Kids don't need designer clothes and 100$ toys they grow out of in 2 months just because you suck at saying no (disciplining). There is so much people can just educate themselves easily concerning ways to save money.


Money isn't the real problem, it is a poor excuse too many people use who are self deserving and don't give a crap about learning or earning.

RE: Walmart
By chick0n on 4/19/2010 11:21:14 PM , Rating: 1

wow. Im not even gonna bother to try to correct your stupidness.

Richest in the world? how many trillion debt again? WOW. talk about FAILED.

RE: Walmart
By teldar on 4/19/2010 1:12:46 PM , Rating: 2
Actually, the US still produces more in terms of dollar value than China does. Look at all the heavy industry and farming equipment which is only made in the US and is shipped all over the world. John Deere and Caterpillar come to mind.

But you're right about the quantity of manufacturing which has ceased to exist in the US. It should cause some concern.

RE: Walmart
By Motoman on 4/19/2010 1:16:50 PM , Rating: 2
I was thinking more about consumer products than heavy equipment. China doesn't do much in that area, but Japan does (Komatsu and Hitachi, for starters).

RE: Walmart
By MadMan007 on 4/20/2010 12:31:21 AM , Rating: 3
Yes, the problem is we don't make what we use or consume. High value products are fine and all but what happens is someone buys them overseas, uses them to produce actual value-add goods, then sells them back to us. So they are making a business investment rather than 'consuming.'

Henry Ford knew something about paying worker's wages: people have to reasonably afford the products they make to create demand. Manufacturing heavy equipment to send overseas where they are used to value-add and make stuff isn't sustainable.

RE: Walmart
By Reclaimer77 on 4/20/2010 3:07:59 AM , Rating: 2
Problem is, consumers tend not to want to pay any more than the absolute lowest price for anything. Hence, Wal-Mart. Because of Wal-Mart, US consumer goods manufacturing has all but ceased to exist.

Which is why America's number 1 selling flat screen TV is the American Made Vizio ? Which is cheap, low quality, and also sells at Wal-Mart.

Claiming Wal-Mart killed US manufacturing is lunacy, even for you Moto. US Manufacturing was on it's last leg before Wal-Mart even got in the game.

Oh and does Wal-Mart sell cars too, or are they somehow to blame for the near collapse of US based auto companies as well?

Face it, we have huge problems in this country. And places like Wal-Mart aren't the problem, they are the symptom.

RE: Walmart
By MadMan007 on 4/20/2010 5:01:19 AM , Rating: 2
It's really not as simple as 'blame Wal-Mart' or 'Wal-Mart is the symptom.' Why must everything be so simplified :/ While you just say, hand-wavingly, that Wal-Mart is a 'symptom' there are facts that show Wal-Mart has been directly complicit in 'destroying US manufacturing' because it benefits their bottom line. They were on the side of Chinese TV makers in a price-dumping case brought by one of the last actual US TV manufacturers. (Does Vizio actually *make* their TVs in the US?)

btw Wal-Mart has been around since 1962 so, yeah...although of course it didn't go lowlowprices squeeze the hell out of suppliers until well after that.

RE: Walmart
By kerpwnt on 4/20/2010 1:46:44 PM , Rating: 2
Vizio's TVs are designed in California and they claim to be assembled in the USA, but I can't find any assembly plant info. Like just about any other TV, their components are manufactured overseas. With that being the case, is buying a USA designed/assembled Vizio at Wal-Mart better for our economy than buying a Korean/other made Samsung/LG/Sony at a less than giant retailer? I'm genuinely curious, so no BS answers please.

RE: Walmart
By Reclaimer77 on 4/20/2010 4:33:54 PM , Rating: 1
Wrong. The US Government is complicit in destroying US manufacturing by cluttering up the country with so many goddamn regulations, taxes, tarrifs and unions that nobody can get a fucking thing done without 20 middlemen and big government screaming for a slice of the pie.

Did you know you can't even buy a hamburger in this country without it going through FOUR THOUSAND federal and state regulations ?? Think about it please !

RE: Walmart
By lamerz4391 on 4/20/2010 1:06:54 PM , Rating: 2
Because everything at Macy's is made in the US? Umm, no. They get just as much of their clothes and crap from Taiwan or other countries as anyone else. Even "American" automakers like Ford are building many cars elsewhere due to skyrocketing union labor, healthcare, retirement, and other costs that make it impossible to sell cars at a profit.

RE: Walmart
By Motoman on 4/20/2010 1:42:35 PM , Rating: 2
You missed the point, which was that stuff sold at Macy's sells at a high margin. Stuff sold at Wal-Mart sells at razor-thin margins. Hence, the price to the consumer is as low as it can possibly be.

RE: Walmart
By wuZheng on 4/19/10, Rating: 0
RE: Walmart
By MrBlastman on 4/19/2010 12:44:32 PM , Rating: 3
misplaced sense of patriotism/nationalism

You lost me there. Since when is it _bad_ to be patriotic towards your nation--or nationalistic towards it? That is, as long as your country is good to you and provides a better standard of living. Our Free Market system in America does just that. It is in _our_ best interests to do everything in our power to keep our own economy strong, our own citizens strong and, in the end, our own country strong.

That is, until our government starts treating us poorly. When they do that, it is time for us all to rise up and demand it be corrected.

RE: Walmart
By Motoman on 4/19/2010 12:49:30 PM , Rating: 4, you're currently seeking out only American-made products and paying significantly more for them than foreign-made equivalents?

I sincerely doubt it. Especially if you ever shop someplace like Wal-Mart or Target.

It can also be kind of hard to tell. Reminds me of the time that I pulled into a parking lot in my Dodge truck, and parked near a couple guys having a mildly heated discussion.

As I got out of my truck, one of the guys points at me and says something like "see, that guy gets it! He's an AMERICAN driving an AMERICAN truck!"

...other guy, apparently fully American, looks at me with a confused look on his face.

First guy says to me "Am I right?"

I glance back at my truck, look at the Honda they're standing next to, and say to him "Well, my Dodge was made in Mexico City, and his Honda was made in Ohio. So you tell me."

RE: Walmart
By MrBlastman on 4/19/2010 1:29:55 PM , Rating: 3
quote:, you're currently seeking out only American-made products and paying significantly more for them than foreign-made equivalents?

Actively? No. Though, if I'm presented with several choices and determine the American good is superior in function and quality than the foreign good, I will consider it.

I won't buy American just to do it. This is why I drive a Japanese car--at the time, in 2004, I could find no American car that would fit the bill in both quality and performance that bested the Subaru, so the Subaru won.

However, there is nothing _wrong_ with buying goods produced by your own country. If I saw two goods, equal in every way with the only difference being one is American and one is Chinese, I'd pick the American good the majority of the time. The quality has to be there though to earn my dollar.

This is the thing Americans need to learn if they want to support their own products. The people involved in the domestic manufacture have to be committed to the cause and strive for that higher standard that we do not get from overseas. I think this could be the differentiating factor that might help these goods come back to popularity.

RE: Walmart
By sinful on 4/19/2010 1:58:28 PM , Rating: 1
I think this could be the differentiating factor that might help these goods come back to popularity.

I doubt it. Brand name? Maybe. Quality? Nope.
The Chinese got their foot in the door by making cheap, low quality goods.

Plus, higher quality means lasting longer... not "shiny & new".

Seriously, how many people would want a lawnmower that lasts 10 years but looks old?
You would be suprised, most people try to "keep up with the Jones'", and can't let someone else one up with them a fancy new xxxxxx.

Most Americans have a "it's gotta be shiny & new".
That flies in the face of high quality & what Americans have always done...

... So I doubt Americans can compete on quality.

RE: Walmart
By MrBlastman on 4/19/2010 2:08:51 PM , Rating: 2
Most Americans have a "it's gotta be shiny & new".

I'm willing to bet that this attitude will change slightly after our recession ends. Many people are figuring out that they can make due with less--including older things.

Just because it is "shiny and new" doesn't mean it is better. I have a 24-year old synthesizer hooked up to my PC at home. I can't get something new that can replace what it can do--and, even if I could, I wouldn't want to.

My grandmother many years ago had a lawnmower that was 30 years old. It still worked. It was rusty and crusty--but we still used it.

But, I see your point. A lot of Americans have been afflicted by this shiny mentality for the last few years, fueled by our fake credit driven economy.

RE: Walmart
By JediJeb on 4/20/2010 2:45:19 PM , Rating: 2
I guess I am really strange then, My truck is 14 years old, my TV is 15 years old, my computer was originally running Windows 95 but I it upgraded to and Athlon ( yea Athlon, not X2 or 64bit or any of that) Newest thing I had was my 2004 model lawn mower until it got stolen now I use an old Craftsman I got from my dad who got it from my uncle. I even pack a pocket watch that is 121 years old and it keeps as good of time as my cellphone does. Cellphone is a 2004 model black Moto V3 that still works fine. I am of the opinion that if it still works you are stupid to get rid of it. Anyone who throws things out and buys new just because it is new and shiny really don't have any sense.

I also have a house on 3 acres of ground that I bought in 2005 for $42K, nice little log cabin that is plenty good enough for me. The most expensive house within 5 miles of me would sell for maybe $200k. It really isn't that people need so much money to live well, but that in many places insane lust for bigger and better and making a killer profit have driven prices on things like houses through the roof. Why should a house cost 5x as much just because it is in California instead of Kentucky? People thinking they should be able to buy a house for $100k and sell it six months later for $150-200K are part of the reason this economy is in the shape it is in.

Used to be people worked hard, saved their money then bought the things they wanted. Now everyone just buys what they want, when they want it not bothering to check if they will ever be able to pay for it. Limit consumer credit to major purchases like housing and cars and make everything else pay as you go and you will see a very resilient economy, maybe not a strongly growing one but one that can weather ups and downs much better.

RE: Walmart
By Hieyeck on 4/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: Walmart
By HotFoot on 4/19/2010 1:51:39 PM , Rating: 2
From Japan, sure (though maybe 50 years ago I'd have said something different).

I'll be avoiding buying children's toys from China. Lead paint + toddlers is a bad combination IMHO. I'd also not be flying in a plane built in China. Maybe down the road, but they have a lot of lessons to learn.

Sending back a few beautifully-made engineering samples of a product is one thing. But when the first batch of a couple hundred units is delivered and you pull one apart and the wiring is obviously scavenged from a junk yard rather than new material - this is a problem. Things have to make code not just for the sake of checking the box.

RE: Walmart
By bhougha10 on 4/19/2010 2:03:03 PM , Rating: 3
Another non American spreading propaganda. China, Quality ?????? Come on
If the US manufactured Drywall that destroys houses, you think they would allow us to sell anything after that. China continous to send this type of stuff over here and nothing is done about it. We just keep buying it.
We need to kill free trade with China. Money manipulation and slave labor should exclude China from a free trade agreement with a 1st world country. Wake up America.

RE: Walmart
By Hieyeck on 4/19/2010 4:01:43 PM , Rating: 2
Whomever rated me down is a hypocrite. Refund your keyboard. It was made in China. And mouse. And half the compenents in your computer.

Thanks for not posting and rating anymore.

Oh wait! I have this new headset that's proudly made in America! No... it's BROKEN AND I'M USING MY YEARS OLD CHINESE MADE ONE.

RE: Walmart
By bhougha10 on 4/20/2010 11:22:06 AM , Rating: 2
Dude, you are just making up stuff. There are no head sets made in America. Your propagnada needs to stop. Slave labor in China can't make quality products.

RE: Walmart
By Wulf145 on 4/20/2010 2:53:06 PM , Rating: 1
Worst rated European car companies: All French, whose cars are worse than the trash we get and coincidentally, have stronger labor unions.

You obviously have never heard of Fiat or Yugo? The French Cars are a dream compared to them.

Oil lobbying at its finest
By Shig on 4/19/10, Rating: 0
RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By AstroCreep on 4/19/2010 12:18:45 PM , Rating: 2
'Neo-Conservatives' - lol yup, all the people who want to be able to buy an electric car are pure evil, right!

Yeah, really. I always thought it was the neo-cons who proudly chanted the benefits of fossil fuels, not "Alternative" fuels.
...or did I miss something here?

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By tdawg on 4/19/2010 12:55:24 PM , Rating: 2
I think the comment is more in line with the fact that after 9/11, there was a movement aimed at growing domestic oil drilling/production and to move away from purchasing foreign oil by spreading fear of supporting terrorism. This position didn't have anything to do with the search for sustainable alternative fuels.

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By glennforum on 4/19/10, Rating: 0
RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By Motoman on 4/19/2010 12:51:46 PM , Rating: 3
...and a nuke plant in every neighborhood to power the hydrogen generators.

Love how people never think past the socket on the wall, or it's equivalent.

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By Harinezumi on 4/19/2010 5:20:43 PM , Rating: 2
I'm OK with that.

The sooner we, as a society, can move past our collective fear of all things nuclear, the better off we'll be. Go ahead, build one in my backyard, the local economy could use the jobs.

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By Motoman on 4/20/2010 1:44:34 PM , Rating: 2
I actually have one in my back yard.

...sort of. We're so close to a nuke plant that we get a special calendar from them every year, that includes instructions on what to do if we see a strange green glow over there...

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By MadMan007 on 4/19/2010 1:10:39 PM , Rating: 2
Energy independence on a near-individual basis is possibly the greatest nightmare for energy companies. So if anything like that even approaches the light of day expect it to be fought tooth and nail or be buried somehow.

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By porkpie on 4/19/2010 4:52:30 PM , Rating: 3
Tinfoil hat on a little too tight today?

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By MadMan007 on 4/19/2010 5:55:47 PM , Rating: 2
Not at all, because nothing I said was 'tinfoil het-ish.' 'Fought tooth and nail' = lobbied against and so on. 'buried' could mean lots of things that don't have to be conspiratorial at all, it could mean something as simple as buying out companies to keep the technology and associated patents buried.

Why did you reply to my post just to make a personal attack? I am positive you've posted before that those are no good..hmm.

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By MadMan007 on 4/19/2010 5:57:17 PM , Rating: 2
In any case, putting the meaningless personal attack aside, do you have anything substantive or interesting to say about this:
Energy independence on a near-individual basis is possibly the greatest nightmare for energy companies.

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By porkpie on 4/19/2010 6:02:35 PM , Rating: 3
There are no magical, mystical "hidden patents" that will cheaply turn sunlight into energy, allow your car to get 120 mpg, have water run uphill, or anything else similar.

"Personal energy independence" doesn't exist because the technology doesn't. Anyone who didn't fail high school physics understands that.

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By sinful on 4/19/2010 7:19:15 PM , Rating: 1
There are no magical, mystical "hidden patents" that will cheaply turn sunlight into energy, allow your car to get 120 mpg, have water run uphill, or anything else similar.

Perhaps, but I think you miss the point that some problems are an engineering problem, and others are an ECONOMIC problem -- and some degree of the economics are because of manipulation.

Given a huge amount of money, could someone build a 120mpg car?

Why hasn't it been done? Because it's too expensive.

Maybe it's expensive for legitimate reasons, but you're naive if you don't think competitors and those with a vested interest aren't trying to make those alternatives as expensive as possible.

What, you think Saudi oil barons are just going to sit back while the US develops alternative energy?


RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By MadMan007 on 4/19/2010 8:26:08 PM , Rating: 2
Well it's nice to see you exercising your patent on rediculous hyperbole. (I'm sure you know doing so is a fallacious argument, yet another thing you've pointed out to others in the past but are doing yourself...hmm..)

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By AssBall on 4/19/10, Rating: 0
RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By MadMan007 on 4/19/2010 11:08:52 PM , Rating: 1
You're welcome.

I must inform you however that your implication is wrong, I did not consult any sources outside my own brain when writing that post. The only time I do that is to look up facts not to look up words. Judging by your post I can see how it might be hard for you to understand that there are people with brains and an intellect with a vocabulary beyond Jane and Dick. So I forgive you for assuming that everyone has the intellect and vocabulary of a 6th grader as you do, I know it's hard to step out of one's own experience especially when one's has had education limited to the TV babysitter.

RE: Oil lobbying at its finest
By MadMan007 on 4/20/2010 12:32:25 AM , Rating: 2
*one in the last sentence. Typo when changing sentences ftw!

By Thats Mr Gopher to you on 4/19/2010 12:16:10 PM , Rating: 1
Quickly everybody, get on the scare tactic bandwagon!

We need to get around the ridiculous politically charged nonsense so we can actually get around to solving some problems. I say we just kill all the politicians and replace them with artificial neural-net learning computers... oh wait... then we'll need more batteries :P

RE: Xenophobia
By bhougha10 on 4/19/2010 1:49:32 PM , Rating: 2
Whatever it takes to wake America up. Probably someone from another country trying to calmn American's down wrote this post.
Just calm down while China takes everything away from your grand kids without so much as a fight. Just give it away.
You should be very scared, they are laughing at us hard over in China.

RE: Xenophobia
By ekv on 4/20/2010 6:37:07 AM , Rating: 2
Whatever it takes to wake America up.
Or we could elect a criminally-naive person as president, who could raise taxes in the middle of a recession, nationalize entire industries (e.g. student loans), quietly brief Muslims on the side, trash-talk our allies and appease/bow to our enemies, actually increase regulations on an over-burdened energy industry, and then gut our manned space program....

RE: Xenophobia
By bhougha10 on 4/20/2010 11:30:12 AM , Rating: 3
I will have to say I agree with most of this. We are in serious trouble. We just need to wake up and realise free trade with a slave labor, wage manipulating country is not good for the US. China is not winning this battle because of quality, we all no that. When China entered the WTO the US thought it would help the trade def. Well guess what, 10 years later it is 10 times worse.
Wake up people.

Click the Picture
By Sahrin on 4/19/2010 12:21:26 PM , Rating: 2
If that picture came from the "experts'" presentation I have no respect for his opinion.

UV Glass? Because only Hybrids have windshields?
Headlights? New innovation, petrol cars use gas-lamps of course.
Electric Motors? The only way to get to 25 is to include things like fuel pumps, window regulators, optical drive motors...these Hybrids are starting to sound a lot more convenient if regular gas cars don't have all this stuff...
Catalytic Converter Good thing they're not required on gas-only cars. wait...

And my personal favorite:
Diesel Fuel Additive ... Seriously? On a GAS car?

RE: Click the Picture
By Jedi2155 on 4/19/2010 9:15:44 PM , Rating: 1
Jeebus.....they're just picking EVERYTHING they can now aren't they?

Might as well mention all the poisonous substances on the passenger as well...

RE: Click the Picture
By Belard on 4/19/2010 11:24:40 PM , Rating: 2

What a load of crock, in that respect.

Yes, there are problems with going to electric cars. I think the IDEAL thing is that ALL homes in the USA have solar power & storage to power the home and re-charge the car.

The other CHEAP alternative is AIR-CAR... look it up on you tube. Such cards run on compressed AIR. Takes about 2 min to refill the tanks... costing pennies.

RE: Click the Picture
By cjk on 4/21/2010 12:57:04 AM , Rating: 2
That's not the worst of it. The only main components that are unique to an EV that could possibly use rare-earth materials are the motor and the batteries.

What they don't tell you is that AC traction/induction motors don't use rare-earth materials. If they did, our manufacturing industries would have been in a lot of trouble before now. I've done a lot of research into motors for EV use, and AC induction is probably the best motor technology available for this application.

Quote from Wikipedia

While permanent magnet motors, favored in hybrids such as those made by Toyota, often use rare earth materials in their magnets, AC traction motors used in production electric vehicles such as the GM EV1, Toyota RAV4 EV and Tesla Roadster do not use permanent magnets or the associated rare earth materials. AC motors typically use conventional copper wire for their stator coils and copper or aluminum rods or bars for their rotor. AC motors do not significantly use rare earth materials.

By ekv on 4/20/2010 6:20:50 AM , Rating: 1
The caption for Robert Bryce's picture at the podium mentions "Robert Bryce accuses neoconservatives of spreading disinformation..."

However, when I go to the link you gave it says
Bryce wrapped up his remarks by stating that while environmentalists and others in the U.S. and other countries are yearning for a hybrid/electric, no-carbon future, the reality is that that vision depends mightily on the lathanides. That means mining, he said, and China controls nearly all of the world's existing mines that produce lanthanides.
Environmentalists, yes. Neo-cons, no. Are we being a smidge sensationalist, J? or perhaps that was in Bryce's actual talk?

Of course, it doesn't make sense because most neo-cons are saying something like "Drill, baby, drill."

RE: "neoconservatives"?!
By shin0bi272 on 4/20/2010 10:15:06 AM , Rating: 1
Just fyi, a neo-con is a person who was a democrat but voted for reagan and/or became conservative during the 80's. Please use the term correctly.

Most people saying "drill baby drill" are not old democrats sick of their part but people who have always been conservatives.

RE: "neoconservatives"?!
By porkpie on 4/20/2010 11:01:39 AM , Rating: 3
Lol, what? The term "neoconservative" has been used since the 1970s, well before Reagan was even elected. In fact, it's not a label attached to a person at all, its a political philosophy.

RE: "neoconservatives"?!
By ekv on 4/20/2010 4:29:38 PM , Rating: 2
My point was that nowhere in the link is "neoconservatives" mentioned, however it was used in the caption under Bryce's picture. Unless Bryce used that word in his talk [and then was not explicitly used in the article], my question then becomes, what the sam-hell is Jason Mick -- which I abbreviated as "J" -- doing by using "neoconservatives" in the caption?

And another thing, who rated me down for asking the question?

My question is valid. 1) Either Jason Mick is being sensationalist -- gee, no chance of that, heh? or 2) Bryce is being sensationalist. I say that because most conservatives, neo-con or otherwise, are saying SOMETHING to the effect of "drill, baby, drill".

Perhaps somebody does not like the phrase "drill, baby, drill"? If so, get a life. As a phrase it captures succinctly the concept that the USA has resources that are not being tapped and that could be quite easily except for certain political forces (extreme enviro-wacko or otherwise). If we tap these resources, in a wise manner, it would go a long ways toward weening us from foreign oil. I think we are all agreed sending money to the Middle East is just D.U.M.B. We ought to being investing in nuclear, etc.

By nflduser on 4/19/2010 6:03:50 PM , Rating: 2
To correct one point near the end of the article. Canada is indeed a member of OPEC. That is one point many Canadians don't agree with. We own more oil on Canadian soil than Saudi Arabia but yet have to pay such high prices for gasoline at the pumps.

By porkpie on 4/19/2010 8:22:40 PM , Rating: 2
Heh, what? Canada is not a member of OPEC. It's a cartel of a dozen-odd nations...but not every oil-producing state is a member.

fears that u dont control everything?
By Romion on 4/20/2010 2:11:37 AM , Rating: 2
U should live in other countrys and see from outside how americans think that they should have and control everything. Everything on this world is about u an china.
Maybe is a reason for Canada not beeing an OPEC member, right?
But of course this may be only my opinion.

By ianweck on 4/20/2010 2:51:59 PM , Rating: 2

Guy is a little nuts
By epobirs on 4/21/2010 3:04:42 AM , Rating: 2
He uses the term 'neoconservative' but seems to have no idea what such people want to do in regard to petroleum. Most people I've ever known who would ever have called themselves a neocon are concerned about foreign petroleum reliance but generally want the US to fully develop its own ample resources to negate the issue while still developing new technologies to hopefully better address future needs.

Hint: It isn't neoconservatives that stand in the way of petroleum exploration and development in this country.

RE: Guy is a little nuts
By YashBudini on 4/21/2010 5:09:39 PM , Rating: 2
What is neocon is to have a massive oil spill from a single hull vessel, where no decent regulations were either created or enforced, and then think that the process of capitalism will fix it. Oh, and with lawsuit limits. And while paying oil firms BIG subsidies to drill during years of record profits.

Did I miss anything?

By MozeeToby on 4/19/2010 12:18:31 PM , Rating: 1
The whole damn report reads like someone trolling, just trying to get a rise out of people. He assumes that it is impossible to build an electric vehicle without these materials. I would also take issue with a report written by someone that doesn't understand what the word 'Fungible' means.
Most oil production, he points that the U.S.'s top three foreign oil sources in January were Canada (1.882 million barrels per day), Mexico (1.033 million barrels per day), and Nigeria (0.996 million barrels per day).
In case you're wondering, fungible means that it doesn't matter where you buy your oil from, because oil is a commodity. Buying it from one supplier helps all the suppliers by increasing the demand.

RE: Troll
By Mr Perfect on 4/19/2010 1:19:17 PM , Rating: 2
Also see: 1973 OPEC Oil Embargo.

Nigeria in OPEC?
By bissimo on 4/19/2010 12:19:08 PM , Rating: 3
Most oil production, he points that the U.S.'s top three foreign oil sources in January were Canada (1.882 million barrels per day), Mexico (1.033 million barrels per day), and Nigeria (0.996 million barrels per day).

Beyond being a confusing sentence just from a grammatical point of view, it makes is seem as if Nigeria wasn't in OPEC. They have been since '71.

Supply and Demand and Innovation
By drycrust3 on 4/19/2010 1:07:22 PM , Rating: 2
Competition is tight for the rare compounds. Neodymium is used heavily in wind turbine magnets, and other rare earth elements are used in solar panels and computers.

If the competition for natural resources is high and supply is low, then prices will go up. If the prices go up, then people will look for other ways to make the same devices without the high priced components. That is called innovation.

The U.S. does have substantial rare-earth reserves of its own, but it just hasn't exploited them.

Well, excuse me for saying so, but as far as I can tell there isn't any scientific evidence to suggest the world will end in the foreseeable future. When the demand for rare-earth metals makes it economical to mine these reserves, then barring legislation or such like, they will be mined. Until the economics make it viable, the only reason for mining would be political interest, and that will mean tax payers somewhere will fund it.

No surprise
By whiskerwill on 4/19/2010 3:30:58 PM , Rating: 2
The U.S. does have substantial rare-earth reserves of its own, but it just hasn't exploited them.
Can you imagine how the environuts would squeal if someone actually suggested a new mine anywhere in America?

Fat chance of this happening.

By ianweck on 4/19/2010 7:23:30 PM , Rating: 2
OPEC influences the price of oil. Whether we buy ours directly from OPEC or not is irrelevant.

The obvious solution
By DukeN on 4/20/2010 9:12:57 AM , Rating: 2
Just goto pandora!

Step 1 - Appease James Cameron's ego.
Step 2 - ???
Step 3 - Profit!

Hey guys....
By shin0bi272 on 4/20/2010 10:10:44 AM , Rating: 2
Hybrids, EVs More Dangerous to U.S. Security Than Foreign Oil, Says Expert

Then right below that
GM Readying "Volt" Crossover, VW Shows Electric Taxi Concept

Thats Classic!

By owyheewine on 4/20/2010 10:17:30 AM , Rating: 2
An unexplored topic is the possibility of actually mining rare earth metals in the US. We likely have commercial deposits available, but it's not cheap Chinese labor that is keeping us from finding and developing thses resources. It's our radical antimining bureaucracy, and legislature. By the time a company goes through the regulatory morass to develop a mine, we'll all probably be driving Jetson's flying cars, and only peace and goodwill will exist on the earth..

Were to exploit
By noonie on 4/21/2010 5:09:14 PM , Rating: 2
The US has rare earth metals, just check the USGS web site. It’s more a matter of what land to exploit. The Chinese get things done, in the US the NIMBY movement, among many movements, stops things from getting done. Everyone has to have a say and there’s no way to make everyone happy so things don’t get done. So the work goes to the folks that actually get things done.

rare earth shortage
By energie on 5/8/2010 4:51:19 PM , Rating: 2
There is no real shortage of "rare earths". Refer to the publication by L. H. Aller, "The abundance of elements",1961. The rare earths in use today in magnets etc are mainly Neodymium,Samarium, and Lanthanum. All these are 100 to 1500 times as plentiful as Mercury, Cadmium, and Antimony. In addition Boron and Cobalt are important and are even more abundant, about 1/2 that of Zinc or Copper. The rareness label is probably due more to lack of demand than anything else.
Lithium is more abundant than Chlorine, and widely dispersed. Like Magnesium, it may be refined from sea water in the future, when we run out of dried lake beds.

By AssBall on 4/19/2010 4:57:37 PM , Rating: 1
I don't know what a neoconservative is supposed to be, but I don't really get why this is some kind of breaking news.

We don't import oil because we are running out of it, we are importing it because other countries that don't have 3,000,000 retarded regulations can and do happily drill it for 1/2 of the price and sell it to us for half the cost and still make twice the profit that our domestic oil companies can do it for in the U.S.

I don't understand how foreign oil is somehow "evil...dangerous, whatever" to so many people. It's just economic common sense. Why drill your own oil when its so much cheaper to use other people's oil? Everyone wins. It's called economics. Why is using oil or any resource have to always be such a goddamned distress to the people that do it.

It's just like those silly bitches in Iran who keep killing people in earthquakes by having sex. That must be the problem with San Fransico too. Supid whores wearing their scarf too far back on their head. Deplorable.

Okay that was somewhat off topic, but the news story reminded me of something this one did, that thing being idiots. Sorry.

Now if you could drill your own oil for a profit, it would be a totally different story. But government lobbyists have been making that increasingly impossible for decades.

"If you can find a PS3 anywhere in North America that's been on shelves for more than five minutes, I'll give you 1,200 bucks for it." -- SCEA President Jack Tretton

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki