urban909

i know there are similiar "establishments" along the baffalo bayou and there's that one guy by westpark dr/610 where you can get on/off the HOV lane who has got a fairly large box shelter going...

and it also depends on where that ethanol is coming from. it cost more and takes more energy to produce ethanol from corn (my sister-in-law likes to call it a "cornopoly") than from sugarcane which produces a higher yeild of energy thats cleaner. im also interested in all these "flex-fuel cars" that i see on the road, but again it begs the question. where/how is the person getting the ethanol and where is it coming from?

well thankfully HAS isn't planning on a runway crossing 1960. it borders the property to the north and northeast, unless if they bury FM 1960 I-285 like KATL did with their fifth runway 10/28.

although i would love the routes that you have mentioned, CO won't order the 772LR; its more expensive ranging from 31-56 million dollars more per plane than the 200ER. they are focusing more on replacing/expanding with the 787-8/9.

or red flashing lights in the ground like on some of the streets crossing the light rail line, just as a reminder that red means stop for those that don't get it... *sarcasm*

growing up overseas and in other large cities, honking just seems a way of life...living in houston, it just seems/ed odd when i moved here...

i can't understand why people don't get the centre reverse lane on w. alabama. i have almost gotten in near accidents driving in the centre lane because some do not know a what red X/no left or right turn sign means; then get mad when i start honking/flashing lights at them to get out of the way, at the same time creating a mess behind me as people try to get around....oh and speaking of honking horn, i have never been in a large/major city where people get so upset when you honk at them. i had one guy cut me off without a signal on 288 south, i honked and he STOPPED in the middle of 5 o'clock traffic and tried to get out of his car to come back and yell at me then continued to slam on his brakes so i would run in to him.

one could only hope

here's another link. carriers seem to be interested in adding houston to their network. the houston-lagos market would be a goldmine. virgin nigeria seems wants this route, but again there is issue with foreign ownership, etc. http://www.fly2houston.com/0/471920/0/1906/

yup. thats pretty...obvious. har har. and their other video is on the battleship texas. lame music by the way, trying a little to hard at electrocore/synthpop and falling short.

its Newark International Airport, CO second largest hub after houston. codeshare means you can use CO miles to buy tickets, etc on Amtrack and visa versa...

well, i do know that CO has codeshare agreement with Amtrack from EWR to Philadelphia, Stamford, New Haven, Boston, Wilmington, Washington, D.C. leaving from New York Penn Station...

yeah that camera is sweeet...

i HATE the westbound exit to get onto the N. beltway. what an absolute mess and mistake. ugh...

yes, this the A380 was a make or break for airbus, in the sense of timing. i remember watching a program about 2 years ago, when they were reporting how it was designed, built and so forth; airbus said it had to have everything in place for the first plane to roll out for (SIA) in late 2005. interesting plane and wouldn't mind hoping a ride on it, but the 787 and hopefully they 747-8I is what i am looking forward to!

sweet. any would be nice but i partically like the proposed first and second planned tower; although some renderings would be nice too...

dissolving or rather a larger gap has grown between the wealthy and the middle class, resulting in an increase of those barely or below the average mean income in the US. the richest 20 percent or so own around 84 percent of the countries wealth. the wealthiest 5 percent own 60 percent of private property (i am not going or against owning of private property) the 1 percent posses about 40 percent of the nations privately held resources (again not against private holdings, just stating facts). if you take financial assest that are balanced against debts, the lowest 40 percent have virtually no wealth at all. now, this is pretty rough i believe, i am trying to remember off the top of my head from a class awhile back so excuse me if i am wrong ha! nice..."stereotype= an exaggerated description applied to every person in some category". sociology 101

What I meant was, as someone "pointed out" earlier, was that America was/is the greatest contribution to mankind or something like that. Well, at the time of these empires, before their fall, they were/was the greatest contribution to mankind. And to say Rome or egypt never focused on technological development...wow. now, china was, whilst exploring, found the rest of the world as below them for lack of better wording. then that is true in your statement. "Oh its their fault their poor. They should just get out and find a job." pssh. Its a common problem, that we tend to think so egocentrically that it overshadows the responsibilities of a government to provide the means to get out of such situations. not through training program. Offer free education at state universities and free medical care and that solves some of this dilemma. people complain about taxes, but then in turn complain about those "lazy" poor people that just won't go find a job because it raises taxes for a solution. now if you are referring to some that abuse the welfare program, that truly are capable of finding a job, I am totally in favor of a cutoff after a certain amount of time. Materialism isn't just a middle class problem. i am a capitalist, in a sense, but with proper social (not socialist) systems in place. (i.e. England) And I don't go out buying things that I cannot afford. And yes there is a dissolving middle-class The Bolsheviks were a break away faction of the second party congress at the turn of the century in Russia. They, as I stated before, were anything but communist. Lenin twisted the early writings of Marx into a doctrine that lead to a dictatorship. And as I stated in a previous post, social change means to me societal change. As you stated, better education and medical care; social systems in place not some communist uprising. and i dislike those that say "we need some kind of communistishlike society". wrong, just a bunch of neo-hippies. And I said communism failed, not socialism. if you care to look, there is a difference. but it also depends on where you look. Hegel? Leon Trotsky? Early marx? (Economic and Philosphic Manuscripts of 1844) Later marx? (Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy) i didn't say obligated, i mean't felt nessecary. they reason iraq has failed would take several books, so that won't be touched upon. Umm, where/why would you say such a thing? facts? proof? No, as I said, the leaders of such countries doing "western" things usually evoke the reaction that their western. That is a complete falsification. I am not "scaremongering", I am just stating my own theories on American life, politics, etc. oh and yes, off topic. as i stated earlier, lets move it to a new section!!! cheers

it what this thread is mostly about; the TTC being part of a larger movement for lack of a better word. the N.A.U is the North American Union, which Canada, US and Mexico are ultimately trying to succeed in doing. which went to my original thoughts on why such a union would be created in the first place and ultimately led to off topic conversation. but if you want, discussion of internal/external policies, politics, and all that good stuff, it should be moved to a seperate category. just trying to get the back to the original topic.

When I mean social change, I mean societal change, not a social/communist revolution. The thing about communism is 1) there never was or is a country that is communist. 2) Communism doesn't work, seeing that there is one common thread: human tendencies. Look at what happened to Russia. Yes there was an uprising, several times in fact, but that was because different reasons that lead to a dictatorship of the proletariat. Huh? I never said anything about Iraq. The situation that is currently happening in Iraq is absolutely inconsequential to what i am talking about. Completely different, but goes back to my original point of expecting other societal structures to adhere through some social-conflict approach. So what are your theories on the N.A.U? I don

the chinese empires, indian, egyptian, greek, roman, and muslim nations, etc. were just as influencial in their own sense, and look where that lead them. we are able to be the dominant "empire" today because of these previous civilizations who contribitued much more than just what was mentioned. i don't beleive we have been a "leader" as so much as the others; we have just been dominant in technologies in the last 50-60 years or so. its not about what "territory" we have in the traditional sense, but what technological advantages we have. and yes, the lowest income people in the US are far better off than the rest of the world. however, in the last 35 years the 12 percent of the wealthiest of the wealthiest have grown in assests, or in numbers (slightly) while the middle class has been almost intereliy disolved and the poorer income population has grown. it will soon come to a point of huge social conflict and hopefully social change. americans tend to be more independent in the their thinking than other "western societies" i.e. europe. this has lead us, as a nation, to feel must direct the world into some sort of doctrinal understanding that others must follow. for example, if one was to see some wealthy person from the U.A.E sitting on a yaught, drinking champagne and going through the "motions of westernism", would they be considered western by our standards? absolutely not seeing its a parochial socitey. and sorry for getting OFF topic again. unless i didnt see if someone started a thread somewhere else...

as far as Russia goes, i believe the key dispute and main problem is their grip on Georgia, which if i think is mostly oil, and on some of the other minor/former U.S.S.R states. sure they have a problem with the Ukraine, as that country decided or is leaning to join with the EU rather than the CIS...but then again Russia still has the wonderful country of Belarus as part of the CIS as well as Armenia, Moldova, Azerbijan,etc . with the exception of Belarus, most want or are joining the EU. anyways, Russia still has the largest reserve of natural gas, many of which have not been tapped into. so the concern would be, in my opinion, that since they are constructing one of the largest natural gas facilities in the world in eastern Russia, that the export trade will continue to rise and they can sell to whomever they want. not just small eastern european countries. as far as i remember, and this is from a year or two ago, the united states only exports to three countries; Mexico, Japan and Canada. so i don't believe it will continue to stay a petty conflict. however, the US is on the rise in export over the last 5-10 years, especially with the building of more LNG ships. underestimating Russia can be a tight rope of a walk. as a side note the US should and must increase cooperation with Russia, not condemn them on certain actions taken by their government, especially with this "war on terror" but back to topic, anyone else have a theory about the N.A.U???

most definitely!

that actually was suppost to be "france, etc haven't lost their identity". didn't proofread. anyways, i don't have a problem with china growing economically or even militarily. they are going to be a very dominant power in the region. however, they way they handle business, like where and who they buy their oil from, lack of environmental actions/enforcement, and the horrible conditions of their own workforce concerns me. now as a broader perspective, i believe some in the political arena here in the US feel threatened. the reason i said that a unified N. America is being created would be why the EU was created. again, just an thought or theory, nothing more...

they only reason i would think that a north american union is being created is because of the threat of china's economy. the rate at which it is growing, it is going to overtake japan in 5-10 years and the US in about 15-20. and i don't believe, seeing that there have been meetings between Canada, US, and Mexico's leaders, that this is very real. and, as a side note, i don't believe any EU countries (just focusing on the original ones) have lost any of their identity or real sovereignty. then again i don't know the politics of the EU that well. the whole reason the EU was created was to compete globally with the US. now that china and even india pose a real threat, N.America might be feeling the pressure to do the same. just my two cents...