You quote this- I quote this-1755 Samuel Johnson Dictionary of the English Language. This is what was used for pretty much every legal writing in that time. Second Amendment was written in 1791. 1- To adjust by Rule 2- To Direct And what you see is me misquoting 1. To adjust by rule or method. 2. To direct. You see why nobody can take you serious right? The entire conversation is you saying the Marine in the video doesn't know what he is talking about and this is what you put forth? Really? It seems the only reason you even know what those two words mean at all is because i told you. The only reason you even know what the Samuel Johnson's dictionary is is because i showed you. You can run as far and as fast as you want it all comes back to you being wrong again and not being able to simply admit to being wrong and not owning your issues. Absolutely Live in your wrongness and hide behind all your mud. You have lost all respect because you can't even have an honest conversation.
Misquoting isn't a good thing. How you can read that definition and not get how it related to the examples I provided simply proves you're actively trying not to. Care to explain what government agency or law ran all well regulated clocks in the 1700s thru 1900s?
Using land which could be used to grow food (during a food shortage) to grow fuel instead. Which will not make a difference in fuel availability or price, and will likely negatively impact vehicles fuel mileage. It's just a move to make it look like he's doing something. It's a hallow gesture.
Hmmm? https://www.usda.gov/coronavirus/food-supply-chain Q: Will there be food shortages? A: There are currently no nationwide shortages of food, although in some cases the inventory of certain foods at your grocery store might be temporarily low before stores can restock. Food production and manufacturing are widely dispersed throughout the U.S. and there are currently no wide-spread disruptions reported in the supply chain. USDA and the Food and Drug Administration are closely monitoring the food supply chain for any shortages in collaboration with industry and our federal and state partners. We are in regular contact with food manufacturers and grocery stores. Hmmm? https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/ethanol_benefits.html Energy Security The United States became a net exporter of petroleum in 2020 with exports surpassing imports, although imports of 7.86 million barrels per day remained an important part of balancing supply and demand for domestic and international markets. Overall, the transportation sector accounts for approximately 30% of total U.S. energy needs and 70% of U.S. petroleum consumption. Using ethanol and other alternative fuels and advanced technologies to reduce fuel consumption continues to strengthen national security and reduce transportation energy costs for businesses and consumers. Fuel Economy and Performance The impact to fuel economy varies depending on the energy difference in the blend used. For example, E85 that contains 83% ethanol content has about 27% less energy per gallon than gasoline (the impact to fuel economy lessens as ethanol content decreases). Engines in gasoline vehicles, including flexible-fuel vehicles (FFVs), are optimized for gasoline. If they were optimized to run on higher ethanol blends, fuel economy would likely increase as a result of increased engine efficiency. Ethanol also has a higher octane number than gasoline, which provides increased power and performance. For example, Indianapolis 500 drivers often fuel their race cars with E98 because of its high octane. Several projects currently under way, including the Co-Optimization of Fuels and Engines initiative, seek to understand the potential for improving engine efficiency through the use of ethanol blends and other high-octane biofuels. Job Impacts Ethanol production creates jobs in rural areas where employment opportunities are needed. According to the Renewable Fuels Association, ethanol production in 2020 accounted for more than 62,000 direct jobs across the country, $35 billion to the gross domestic product, and $19 billion in household income. (See the Pocket Guide to Ethanol 2021(PDF).) Now there was a movement about 6-8 years ago against Ethanol. The thoughts were that it would effect the corn industry and raise prices of corn. Here is a Yale story on that. Yes that research was funded by Big Oil and is still being presented but the 70,000 Jobs this product is currently providing has the other Big Money looking at it differently as has been provided by WSJ. The Journal has a Paywall so I'm not going to post that here. You can pay for it or take my word. https://e360.yale.edu/features/the_case_against_ethanol_bad_for_environment However the most recent data says otherwise and has debunked this entire line of thinking. The biggest issue is the types of synthetic Fertilizers and Herbicides they are using to grow it. Those however are being regulated now and with the revolving of the land used to grow these crops it is much less an issue. https://www.fleetpoint.org/fuel/gre...ce lower,fewer gas emissions from evaporation. Seems the overall Pro's far outweigh the Con's on this issue if Ethanol is used as Joe Biden suggested "In Moderation and with other Energy resources". I hope maybe you are educated enough now on the matter to make a better judgement? Also did you actually read the story linked to the tweet? You do understand these increases are to offset the decreases that were made due to the Covid Pandemic? The decreases that were made two years ago needed to be offset or you would have been paying as much as 17 cents more a gallon in the next 6-9 months.
Food shortages haven't even started yet. They are coming. Africa and the Middle East specifically will have millions starving in the next year due to the war in Ukraine, and it will be a long term problem. It doesn't matter if it provides jobs (which aren't needed right now in the US anyway). We'd be better off paying them not to do ethenol than doing it the way we do here in the US. It's worse for the environment than gasoline. https://www.reuters.com/business/en...climate-than-gasoline-study-finds-2022-02-14/ Again, this is stupid. Saving a few cents on gas using US ethenol is stupid. If we want to save on gas we can just stop exporting oil. Then we'll save dollars on gas. No, the overall pros do not outweigh the cons. It's not even close.
Thats the answer imo, stop importing so much when we don't need too. Joe is going to lose the next time around if he doesn't do something and the mid terms wont go well. People know that fuel can be much cheaper the it is and the increased cost effects everything a truck, ship, train touch. The direct effect on inflation is crazy.
Did you read your own link? I have to admit i don't like Reuters that much because they do this. "Geoff Cooper, president and CEO of the Renewable Fuels Association, the ethanol trade lobby, called the study "completely fictional and erroneous," arguing the authors used "worst-case assumptions [and] cherry-picked data." "A 2019 study from the USDA, which has been broadly cited by the biofuel industry, found that ethanol’s carbon intensity was 39% lower than gasoline, in part because of carbon sequestration associated with planting new cropland." They always do that But, But, But stuff. My bet is the farmers making money off this would disagree with you wholeheartedly but if you say we don't need the jobs that must be the way you feel. Getting Big Oil to stop exporting is a great way to lower prices. Lets hope they cut their profits as well.
It's not worse just because of carbon, it's worse because of the the increased water usage, expansion of farm land, increased usage of fertilizer (again, of which we're in a shortage thanks to the war in Ukraine). Further, none of this is necessary, as we could extract ethenol from feed corn before feeding it to cattle, and produce far more ethenol than we ever have. But that's not what Biden's "partners" want, because that wouldn't put money in their pockets. Not many Americans work in farming anymore. Large corporation do most of the work with machines. Eliminating exports of oil can be done with a signature from Joe Biden. It can't be blocked.
Actually Sugarcane is a better option. Or at least that is what I'm reading? Also the feed corn from Ethanol extraction is just a supplemental food additive for grain. Read this about an Oil export ban. Sure Joe can sign an executive order but is that really the right move? https://www.dallasfed.org/research/economics/2022/0104 "One important point this proposal overlooks is that the prices of gasoline and diesel in the United States are determined by their prices in global markets since the U.S. trades diesel and gasoline. Because a cessation of U.S. crude oil exports would lower the supply of oil in global markets and raise its price, one would expect global fuel prices, if anything, to increase as a result. Refiners can always sell these fuels abroad at their global price, so it makes no sense for them to sell for less in the domestic market." "The short-run bonanza for U.S. refiners specialized in refining light sweet crude, however, would not last. As the price of domestically produced crude oil declines and storage fills, it would not be long before some domestic oil producers become unprofitable and cease operations." I guess the US doesn't need the 70,000 jobs that exist from the ethanol arena but maybe they need the 500,000 jobs created by Oil Exports? https://www.aspeninstitute.org/wp-c...load/FINAL_Lifting_Crude_Oil_Export_Ban_0.pdf No easy answers My Man.
