[extropy-chat] Re: peak oil debate framed from a game theory standpoint ?

[Mike Lorrey]

--- Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:

> Er. Disregard my last message, then. I was dumping straight from
> /dev/ass
> 
> (What next? We should actually know about what we post? I thought
> this was  the list for ad hominems and non-sequiturs...).

Don't forget all the other latin phrases (ad absurdum, non pariel, etc,
et al, you name it). What next? Send a Digicash quarter to Hal and
Robin, each, for the education. Then follow Suze Ormon's advice of
paying yourself first, and put $10 a week into oil futures, betting
whichever way you think the Peak Oil debate is going to play out.

I see that Canada, in a fit of generosity, has released all production
limits on its Alberta fields, to help keep the US supplied. Rather than
worrying so much about Saudi oil, we should pay more attention to our
good friends north of the border. They are, in fact, our largest oil
suppliers, and given the price situation, and a little encouragement,
they could become much larger with faster expansion of the tar sands
deposits.

On a related subject, smart strategists in the US gov't, or private
groups concerned about US energy security, should be supporting efforts
by existing groups in the western provinces to legislatively break
Canada up and become states of the US.....

Mike Lorrey
Vice-Chair, 2nd District, Libertarian Party of NH
Founder, Constitution Park Foundation:
http://constitutionpark.blogspot.com
Personal/political blog: http://intlib.blogspot.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com