EU planning on fining Intel for abousing monopoly situation.

That's not much really, we pay 1.50 euro's for a liter, and 3.7 gallons are 1 liter. Combine that with the rates :O

Originally Posted by Magus

That's not much really, we pay 1.50 euro's for a liter, and 3.7 gallons are 1 liter. Combine that with the rates :O

Oil prices would drop globally if Slay and his fellow Americans paid a little more per liter. That is, most would choose for different cars then SUVs and pick-up trucks then :P. Lower consumption, lower oil price per barrel, thus dropping prices. That the Americans have to pay a bit more is something they simply should accept (they wouldn't notice much difference btw when driving more economical cars).

Originally Posted by Richard_Rahl

Oil prices would drop globally if Slay and his fellow Americans paid a little more per liter. That is, most would choose for different cars then SUVs and pick-up trucks then :P. Lower consumption, lower oil price per barrel, thus dropping prices. That the Americans have to pay a bit more is something they simply should except (they wouldn't notice much difference btw when driving more economical cars).

Soo... if prices go up... prices will go down?

Interesting economics there, slick.

No, what Richard meant was that higher prices would be compensated by the use of vehicles that threat fuel usage more economical. American cars in general aren't known for their fuel efficiency.

Originally Posted by Bucky

Soo... if prices go up... prices will go down?

Interesting economics there, slick.

If in the US prices go up for a certain period, people will switch to more economical cars. Thus the demand for oil will drop, which will make the global prices for oil lower. Sorry for being unclear.

Richard lives in Fantasy Land! A place where the terrorists attack with fluffy pillows, true Muslims are peace loving people and the American policy tells their military where to go.

Interesting how there have been 11,178 terrorist attacks in the world since 9/11/01 and NONE have happened in the U.S. Yet, the Europeans would rather play the appeaser than actually fight them.

Several European country's have soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan and are rather successful there. All have great control over their respective areas, if you really look at the numbers you'd see that the only nation struck by a high death rate by bombs and bullets are the Americans.


I often wonder how this will end, the war in Afghanistan for example has been lost by nations such as Russia before where they booked initial successes at first and then had some long years in which they completely lost grip on the situation and the Afghan people turned on them. A situation that seems to be repeating itself right now with more and more regions becoming hostile fast. The war in Iraq has already been lost and with Saddam gone ever bigger evils arise all the time there. The death rate amongst soldiers and innocent civilians (often the fault of soldiers btw) are franticly on the rise.

Originally Posted by BuffaloChips

Richard lives in Fantasy Land! A place where the terrorists attack with fluffy pillows, true Muslims are peace loving people and the American policy tells their military where to go.

Interesting how there have been 11,178 terrorist attacks in the world since 9/11/01 and NONE have happened in the U.S. Yet, the Europeans would rather play the appeaser than actually fight them.

Buffalo, I am saying it again, I do not think what extremists do is right. To say it in fool-proof english: extremists (terrorists) are wrong, the regular muslims are not. Is it now finally clear or do I have to send you some brains?

@ Gazz: I agree with that. I wonder how Afghanistan would look like if the Americans hadn't given initial support to the Taliban to fight the communists there in the 80's. It seems that their (i.e. the Americans' ) good intentions brought us actually more trouble in the end then that it has had advantages.

I wonder how Afghanistan would look like if the Americans hadn't given initial support to the Taliban to fight the communists there in the 80's.

The US did NOT support the Taliban, who didn't even exist anywhere in the world when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. The CIA smuggled arms into the tribal fighters. These were the very same guys who the US supported to bring the Taliban down recently.

Originally Posted by Bucky

The US did NOT support the Taliban, who didn't even exist anywhere in the world when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan. The CIA smuggled arms into the tribal fighters. These were the very same guys who the US supported to bring the Taliban down recently.

I read in a Dutch magazine (a sort of Discovery Channel on paper) something about this. I think that "support" was a bad wordchoice of mine. Though they seemed to do it in a more indirect manner (as you seem to confirm).
BTW, it is not meant as an offense. I just "reproduced" something I read in a reliable source. But if you want, I can try to verify it.