Regardless of why we waged the war in Iraq, it has certainly not resulted in cheaper oil. Quite to the contrary it seems, especially with the "security premium" that supposedly adds an additional $30 to each barrel's price. Also isn't it true that the Iraq government government is running a $50 billion surplus....isn't that money supposed to go to reconstruction?

Okay, here's my attempt at getting this thread back on track...sort of. Does anyone expect that people will willingly change they're lifestyle on a massive enough scale that core cities (not just metropolitan areas, but the actual cities) will start to grow in population again?

__________________
"What's up Pops!" - Lebron James to Bush 41.

It's a little more complicated than that. Philadelphia (between South and Arch streets and the rivers) was laid out in a grid, which was atypical of European cities. (Penn patterned it after army garrisons like Belfast.) Most old European cities were not planned. They simply grew along rivers and whatever roads were there.

American towns closest to the model you describe, EC, are in New England where settlers were expected to live in town and walk out of the village to work their plots every day. Penn wanted settlement here to follow a similar model, but his early settlers were country people who preferred to live on their land and skip the walk. Usually, they sold off their town lots. In the South, the pattern was more feudal; the plantation served as a mini-village in which everyone worked for massa.

__________________
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected." G.K. Chesterton

Americans have changed their lifestyles before. Once, we farmed; now, we mostly don't. Lots of examples. We'll change if we have to.

__________________
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected." G.K. Chesterton

Well yeah, that change took decades if not centuries. I'm thinking something slightly more immediate.

__________________
"What's up Pops!" - Lebron James to Bush 41.

The change from farming to city living? Not as long as centuries. There was a big movement from the rural South to the industrial North in the 1920s. There was also a big move from the cities into the new suburbs in the decade after WWII.

Most likely, the transition will be more pronounced in some places than others. Upside, it may make the spread-out Sunbelt less attractive and the "real" United States (states north of the Potomac and east of Pittsburgh) more attractive. I've got a hunch that the Dixon Estate -- located about a mile from the R5 -- will appreciate as the value of mass transit is better understood.

__________________
"The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected." G.K. Chesterton

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mars Straight from the horse's ass...which you love to kiss.

Vulgarity, I knew it! The last bastion of those who've been vanquished at their own hands resulting from inherent stupidity.
Mars? Have you ever wondered why when you pull into the Lukoil, you never see a Bradley Fighting Vehicle filling up or a C-130 Gunship topping off?
Just read the summary, Mars, it's not that long. It provides fuel for the military, which uses it. I know those rumbly trucks and tanks sound sinister, but it's currently the only way we know how to move them around.

__________________
The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? - Psalm 27:1

and Patriotism is the refuge of scoundrals such as yourself...

But I thought we're over there to establish democracy are we not..? Oh yeah, your a proponent of gunpoint diplomacy. Besides, those rumbly tanks and trucks are going to be running on fumes and the army is going to crumble under it's own weight at the current rate.

Boy we're just doing a "bang up" job securing our national security related programs...

Pentagon study says oil reliance strains military

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/wa...ains_military/

"The US military will have to be even more energy intense, locate in more regions of the world, employ new technologies, and manage a more complex logistics system," according to the report. "Simply put, more miles will be traveled, both by combat units and the supply units that sustain them, which will result in increased energy consumption."

The costs of relying on oil to power the military are consuming an increasing share of the military's budget, the report asserts. Energy costs have doubled since the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, it says, and the cost of conducting operations could become so expensive in the future that the military will not be able to pay for some of its new weapon systems.

http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5097

Excerpts:

The Pentagon needs two things to survive: war and oil. And it can’t make the first if it doesn’t have the second. In fact, the Pentagon’s methods of mass destruction -- fighters, bombers, tanks, Humvees, and other vehicles -- burn 75 percent of the fuel used by the DoD. For example, B-52 bombers consume 47,000 gallons per mission over Afghanistan. But don’t expect big oil (or even smaller petroplayers) to turn off the tap for peace. Such corporations are just as wedded to war as their most loyal junkie. After all, every time an F-16 fighter “kicks in its afterburners and blasts through the sound barrier,” it burns through $300 worth of fuel a minute, while each of those B-52 missions means a $100,000 tax-funded payout.

According to retired lieutenant general Lawrence P. Farrell Jr., the president of the National Defense Industrial Association (“America’s leading Defense Industry association promoting National Security”), the Pentagon is “the single largest consumer of petroleum fuels in the United States.” In fact, it’s the world’s largest energy consumer, according to Shachtman. That, alone, guarantees the military-petroleum complex isn’t going anywhere, anytime soon – just some fuel for thought next time you head out to a Shell, BP, Exxon, or Mobil station to fill ’er up.

I'm a Patriot, you're a vulgarian. That seems pretty self evident.

Uhmm... one other thing, going forward, don't try to back up your accusations with opinion pieces from far left websites like: http://www.fpif.org/
It makes you look out of touch with reality.

__________________
The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid? - Psalm 27:1

You engage in false patriotism....your ultra-right references are not exactly based in reality. However, I find it funny how you conveniently leave out any reference of the Pentagon's own study. You truly show your transparency and bias...