<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Total Surface Area Required to Fuel the World (until 2030)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://rizzio.net/home/archives/surface-area-to-fuel-the-world/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://rizzio.net/home/archives/surface-area-to-fuel-the-world/</link>
	<description>The online portfolio and ramblings of the one Dave Rizzio.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 04:29:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://rizzio.net/home/archives/surface-area-to-fuel-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-30</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 13:56:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rizzio.net/home/?p=584#comment-30</guid>
		<description>Well... I don&#039;t think I&#039;ve ever been in the closet about anything! But as for being a socialist? Defining what that means in today&#039;s world is a pretty big discussion. I would go so far as to say I don&#039;t think it&#039;s a bad word like FOX likes to lambaste. In controlled doses, it seems that it can be useful in protecting our citizens. In creating safety nets so no group falls so low as to create social unrest. I&#039;d say that Communism is obviously a failed concept, and I&#039;m certainly not a supporter of completely unfettered capitalism either... a quick look at the financial news of the last couple years is reason enough for that. Big corporations are obviously not concerned with the well being of even their own employees most of the time, (see Enron) let alone their customers or the American citizenry at large. All most public corporations care about are the 24-hour news cycle, their stock prices, and how to spin problems or scandals into promotion using their PR teams. Is that who we want protecting our children and our future? Faceless corporations?

I mean, in my mind, part of the government&#039;s purpose is to institute basic protections for it&#039;s citizens from being exploited or harmed... whether it&#039;s from a fire breaking out in their home, a drug addict breaking into their house to steal things to feed their addiction, a corporation using mercury to process it&#039;s high-fructose corn syrup, or other countries zooming ahead of us in vital energy technologies.

If we can send over 30,000 of our soldiers over to die in Iraq to protect the illusion of semi-stable oil prices, and we can subsidize agribusiness&#039; corn production for ethanol, why can&#039;t we give American solar-panel producers some help in R&amp;D&#039;ing cheaper production methods? Don&#039;t we want to get off our oil addiction? Is a little socialistic help such a bad thing to level the playing ground with Germany and China?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well&#8230; I don&#8217;t think I&#8217;ve ever been in the closet about anything! But as for being a socialist? Defining what that means in today&#8217;s world is a pretty big discussion. I would go so far as to say I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s a bad word like FOX likes to lambaste. In controlled doses, it seems that it can be useful in protecting our citizens. In creating safety nets so no group falls so low as to create social unrest. I&#8217;d say that Communism is obviously a failed concept, and I&#8217;m certainly not a supporter of completely unfettered capitalism either&#8230; a quick look at the financial news of the last couple years is reason enough for that. Big corporations are obviously not concerned with the well being of even their own employees most of the time, (see Enron) let alone their customers or the American citizenry at large. All most public corporations care about are the 24-hour news cycle, their stock prices, and how to spin problems or scandals into promotion using their PR teams. Is that who we want protecting our children and our future? Faceless corporations?</p>
<p>I mean, in my mind, part of the government&#8217;s purpose is to institute basic protections for it&#8217;s citizens from being exploited or harmed&#8230; whether it&#8217;s from a fire breaking out in their home, a drug addict breaking into their house to steal things to feed their addiction, a corporation using mercury to process it&#8217;s high-fructose corn syrup, or other countries zooming ahead of us in vital energy technologies.</p>
<p>If we can send over 30,000 of our soldiers over to die in Iraq to protect the illusion of semi-stable oil prices, and we can subsidize agribusiness&#8217; corn production for ethanol, why can&#8217;t we give American solar-panel producers some help in R&#038;D&#8217;ing cheaper production methods? Don&#8217;t we want to get off our oil addiction? Is a little socialistic help such a bad thing to level the playing ground with Germany and China?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig Schlanser</title>
		<link>http://rizzio.net/home/archives/surface-area-to-fuel-the-world/comment-page-1/#comment-29</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig Schlanser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 05:07:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://rizzio.net/home/?p=584#comment-29</guid>
		<description>I always knew you were a closet socialist!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I always knew you were a closet socialist!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

