What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
83 Comments
- inactive, on 11/17/2008, -3/+25Step 2: Invest in alternative energy.
- d2002, on 11/17/2008, -8/+27Step 1: Reverse every single thing ordered by George Bush.
- tourettes1992, on 11/17/2008, -7/+24Step 3: Legalize medicinal Marijuana Federally.
- chrissku, on 11/17/2008, -3/+13Obama's to do list....
1. Fix the economy
2. Fix the economy
3. Fix the economy - Screwy1138, on 11/17/2008, -1/+9Holy cow that's a big government.
- speedk0re, on 11/17/2008, -0/+7Legalize Marijuana Federally. You didn't need one of those words there.
- pathouston22, on 11/17/2008, -3/+9Nuclear. Don't be an uneducated tree hugger thinking nuclear is bad. Please?
- captainbethany, on 11/17/2008, -1/+7FIX IT!
- Eddy1337, on 11/17/2008, -1/+6Wow.... I think that is the most uneducated response I have ever read. Penalizing someone just because they want to drive something that burns more gas than you is ignorant. You can't penalize someone because they want to drive something if they're willing to pay for the gas to do so. Why don't we just penalize someone for wanting to own a bigger house. Also, Nationalizing all energy companies? Can you say Communism? Holy crap you're in some serious need of some real world realization.
Taxing someone for owning a second vehicle? What if both members of the household work 2 separate jobs. Tax them and penalize them for going to work to pay taxes on their wages, and lets just tax them for breathing while we're at it.
You know what, ***** it, lets not avoid it, lets just parade in Communism and call it a day.
Seriously man, think before you speak. - cnot3, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3Let me guess.... change and hope?
- inactive, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3Assuming a constant number of drivers, more vehicles does not increase gas consuption, as the proper vehicle would be chosen for the proper task.
For example, a single commute down town might be a scooter.
A family trip may be a suburban.
But, hey, I forgot what liberalism is REALLY about is telling people how to live their lives. - LaunchArco, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3Tax breaks for alternative energy.
Incentives to install a smart power grid. - inactive, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3How about letting people make their own decisions.
If they want to pay for expensive gasoline, that's their problem. - ism70605, on 11/17/2008, -2/+5Hi my name is, Karlitzor. I believe 9/11 was an inside job despite evidence to the contrary. Despite the opinions of professionals in the fields pertaining to 9/11, I still believe the evidence in 'Loose Change'. Interestingly enough, if one were to browse my profile page, you would notice I scold christians for believing in Jesus. Although this is a similar belief to my belief that 9/11 was an inside job as there is no evidence for Jesus or 9/11 being an inside job, I still have FAITH 9/11 was an inside job.
I ***** rock!
Karlitzor
PS. FEMA deathcamps are truth! - grahamenglish, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3Maybe he has a couple extra apostrophes in there for you.
- Ryan2845, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3FWIW, a "gas guzzler" tax already exists
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/info.shtml#guzzler
but yeah, this guy is taking things a bit too far... - inactive, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3seriously, tell Biden to shove his pathetic Drug War up his ass and never bring that worthless chapter in history up ever again.
- ahoy, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3wait, what the ***** are you talking about?
- inactive, on 11/17/2008, -0/+355mph speed limit makes driving too painful to bother with.
maybe a line in there about giving us a train system that's not five times as expensive as driving? without that you can shove all your other suggestions. - ajwinder, on 11/17/2008, -0/+3Can I be an educated man who understands that from an economic standpoint that nuclear tech is flippin worthless? The tech of the future isn't going to be something that only turns a profit when the government subsidizes the crap out of it. Its all well and fine to subsidize emerging technologies, but when that solution can't turn a profit after decades of R&D, it's time to give it up ASAP.
Oh but right, I have a different opinion than you, so disregard the above as a moron's rantings. Seriously, theres going to be different opinions on the path to take, but the only morons are the ones like you who feel dismissing well-formulated dissent is deconstructive. - Screwy1138, on 11/17/2008, -3/+6You do realize that when it comes to environmentalism, GW wasn't so bad. He created by far more marine preservations than ever before. Marine wildlife conservation is leaps and bounds ahead because of him.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=bush+marine+s ... - funk13, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2I find that 55mph is fine. Slow as *****, but where do I really need to be on time anyway, though the difference between 55 and 75 would only be around 5 minutes for my commute. I see it as time where I really don't need to be in a rush. But, then again, I do work for myself so I really don't need those 5 minutes.
- rrife, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2I'm fairly conservative on my energy thinking, but I'm all for the smart power grid.
- radiofrequency, on 11/17/2008, -1/+3Not with the money collected from my tax payments, and I can only accept "alternative energy" if it is priced LOWER than existing energy sources.
- inactive, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2when I drive too slow, my mind wanders, and i become more dangerous, not safer. at my comfortable speed, which is around 75 or 80, i am fully engaged, and not distracted in the slightest.
- Screwy1138, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2Funny since your userID is *****
- Godlike, on 11/17/2008, -1/+3Step 3: Profit!
(and legal weed woot) - BlakeEM, on 11/17/2008, -1/+3It took Obama and congress years to realize ethanol was a bad idea when it was known all along it would likely do more harm than good. They get swept up in trying to get peoples support by throwing money into *****. Congress is far too stupid to make any worthwhile energy investments. Most don't even understand the currently technology let alone future tech.
- JasonsLan, on 11/17/2008, -3/+5"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it." - Barack Obama
- shorterthanrich, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2Can you really expect to see lower taxes with a massive government deficit, and a whole array of new government programs? Lower taxes would be great...but you can't ask for these two things at once. HEY FIX EVERYTHING (which tends to cost money..) and oh hey can I uhhh, pay less while you fix all this broken stuff? That'd be great...
There's a point of diminishing returns. Lower taxes means people have more to spend, yes, but it also means the government has less to spend on the programs being asked for. - shorterthanrich, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2Hm. Truth be told all of those things would probably get the job done, but that's a miserable way of getting there.
That's too big of a government. "Nationalizing" has a beautiful history of also "de-optimizing..." you know...killing efficiency.
Those are all band aids. I don't see how much benefit "Nationalizing" anything will do. The market will exist for better technology. The need is real. Where there is a business opportunity...there will be business. What makes you think government can do it any better?
Gas guzzler taxes already exist...as do taxes for the larger your house is...etc...and they have a minimal impact, but still it's something. Again though, its a band-aid. I don't see nationalizing anything as the answer.
Tax incentives, yes. Investment in technology, yes. Pushing an end to coal/oil, yes. - DanBoodro, on 11/17/2008, -1/+3I don't see what the problem is about other countries wanting to see us rebuild this country. Whether they donate or just support us as an Allie/friend.
- theaceoffire, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2Other nations have made some significant advancements in Nuclear technology since they haven't been as harsh on it as we have.
For example, someone figured out that if you used spheres of material instead of rods, you could keep the reaction barely running, significantly reducing the amount of shielding, coolent, etc, and making it shut off when it goes "nuclear". We are talking about "Fit on a table" small, etc, etc.
So if we encouraged research into Nuclear power, it doesn't necessarily mean that it is pointless, or not-profitable, etc... of course, that is *my* different opinion. - radiofrequency, on 11/17/2008, -0/+2There's nothing wrong with the economy except for the massive bailouts and calls to "manage" it. Asset prices (consumer goods, real estate, stocks) have been inflated/disconnected from wages for almost a decade and they need to fall. Companies/employees that are underperforming need to go bust.
- ajwinder, on 11/17/2008, -1/+3When over 50% of a group (scientists) think something is true, thats called a majority.
When over 90% of scientists agree that Global Warming is man-made, and an even greater percentage think that we can curtail the trend regardless of the cause, thats not even a majority anymore. Thats called "You're delusional to disagree". But hey, we can't even teach evolution in school without wingnutters flipping out, so go figure theres going to be people who cover their eyes and scream that the earth is flat.
A lot of Americans didn't want to spend 700 Billion on a bailout package for Wall St just because Financial Institutions failed the bedrock test of capitalism (Don't Be ***** Moronic), and a lot of Americans didn't want to spend nearly 600 Billion in Iraq just because a bunch of crooks wanted to dick around in the Middle East without due cause. But ***** happens, elections have consequences, and I'm damn glad we're going to put the research into this tech. And of course its not going to cost a grand a month, thats just retarded, even now I think the premium per mWh is around a buck over the traditional coal / nuclear costs, and thats because its boutique right now. - shorterthanrich, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1one word..
SCIENCE.
you failed it. - hiPpymIck, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1im nonUS but..
id say there should be less greenwash all round
by companies selling stuff
but also by green indusries trying to sound good
eg those megawatt ratings of wind farms are hopelessly optimistic
if everyone including your president is going to make good decisions - youll need good straight info - theaceoffire, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1Fix it good!
- shorterthanrich, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1Reasonable, and indeed that is the plan. I still find it unlikely that anyone will see significant tax cuts without doing more damage to the federal budget or reaching an increasingly unfair tax on those in the upper 5%.
I agree with everything in your statement, though, for sure. There is a lot of logic there. - Aadain, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1@shorterthanrich That's why he also wants to raise taxes a bit on the upper 5%. Cut taxes on the the consumers who will pump it into the economy and cover the loss in tax revenue with a bit more on those that can easily afford the increased taxes. Won't fix everything, but it will help.
- shorterthanrich, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1He didn't start talking about it until it was a major position of Obama and gaining Obama a lead. I didn't hear ANYTHING about it until the end of his campaign. Remember "Drill, baby, Drill?" That's not really good for the environment the last time I checked.
- rthakidn, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1@shorter. You'll have to do better than link a editorial (opinion) piece from the NYT. Half there "reporting" leaves much to be desired. Aside from that, how is an "oil administration" defined? What proof do you have that W's admin is an "oil administration"? When you mention "parks" what types of parks are you referring to? What is an acceptable level of hydrocarbons? How does the US compare to other developed and 3rd world countries? And to that end, what have you done to green the planet. Do you bike to work? Have you given up beef (since I guess steer contribute to our carbon footprint). Are you completely flourescent in you home? Solar, wind, anything? How much is enough for you? Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.
- ism70605, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1You do realize there is a ***** reply button?
- aserer511, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1probably at lot from the environmental lobbies.
- aserer511, on 11/17/2008, -1/+2including the fact that bush has registered the most national parks of any executive thus far, and supported legislation calling for automaker MPG minimums? do your homework first, buddy.
- inactive, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1The Iraq war being about oil is more than just speculation when people with as much inside information as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan straight out say it:
“I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/articl ... - sealink, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1Green the urban landscape! We already know that plants make people happier and more productive, and that their use in rooftop gardens significantly reduces the amount of energy spent to cool a building. Vertical gardening, grass roofing and targeted xeriscaping can not only reduce the amount of heat a city collects, but it cleans the air and reduces CO2 emissions!
Once you're done with all that economy stuff, that is. - Taiyoryu, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1I love how each group skews their suggestions to that group's benefit. :-P
What really stands out are the silly objectives of the American Farmland Trust. Nowhere did I see remove government subsidies from crops that contribute to the detriment of the nation's health, e.g. corn. If they want to promote the availability of fresh, local foods, then fresh, local foods need to be cheaper and/or provide better quality than what's shipped in without sacrificing convenience. Not every community is lucky enough to have a farmers' market and even those that do, they're not always convenient to go to. It's why produce delivery services which buy local produce wholesale and deliver direct to the home are attractive. Unfortunately some of those services sacrifice choice and selection and those services are only available in select markets. One of the benefits of high fuel costs is the fact that domestic products are price competitive to imported products where overseas labor tends to be cheaper. - EvansHall, on 11/18/2008, -0/+1PERPETUAL MOTION MACHINE!
- monoa, on 11/17/2008, -0/+1http://www.marklynas.org/2008/11/14/nuclear-power- ...
-
Show 51 - 86 of 86 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is