Readers' Comments

I agree with you the water should be free to all human being but think back then maybe we are paying for the services to the company who provide the water because they try to keep the clean water to our house =) we are not pay for the water but we pay for the service I guest.Peace =)

best regard
sql server hosting

I corrected the error in the piece.

Anne Landman

Anne,

Thanks. The CAI report is here http://www.stopcorporateabuse.org/sites/default/files/Getting-States-Off-the-Bottle-2nd-ed.pdf and says:

The production of bottled water is much more energy-intensive than the production of public drinking water. On a national level, it is estimated that producing and transporting bottles for the U.S. bottled water market requires the energy equivalent of as much as 54 million barrels of oil each year. This is enough oil to fuel roughly three million U.S. cars for a year and is as much as 2000 times the energy it takes to produce and distribute tap water.

This references the detailed report at http://www.iop.org/EJ/article/1748-9326/4/1/014009/erl91014009.pdf

Anne,

There should have been quantative data obtained by the research which was used to produce the dumbed-down analogy. I don't think it is inappropriate to expect your site to produce quantative data, and for you to expect your audience to question sources of data. RIAA have produced hand-waving data for years on music copying, for example, that evaporates when examined.

You didn't comment about the use of "up to" figures either.

Regards,
Tim

Now the votes and the views of Democratic centrists once again take center stage.
I would re-write this to say
Now the votes and the views of Democratic Corporatists once again take stage Right.

Why do we citizens have no power? Are the politicians going to let the big corporations kill us all? Why don't they see what happening?

Evey time you get mail from AARP, be sure to mail something back in their "no-postage necessary" envelop. I generally add a comment to let them know that I am replying to them specifically to waste their money and time. If we all did this, it would add up to some real money - not to mention the time it would take their employees to open the envelop and read our comments.

You can do better than including nonsense like "up to 40 percent", which, of course, includes 0% and therefore makes no case. Also, we're grown-ups here: "..uses enough oil to fuel a million cars for a year" is meaningless (is the car an H2? Or a Prius?). Oil is measured in barrels.

Perhaps Michelle Bachmann should include Dick Armey in her list of those to be investigated for having un-American views.

Lady Gaga is very professional artist. I'm fanatic of her. I love her voice and the way she fashionate her self perfect! ... But I want you to know that if you are impersonator of her... be sure that you deserve it!

I really don't understand how Lady Gaga's product placement in her music videos can be represented as 'spin'.

She is a commercial recording artist. Her aim is to make money and sell records.

She has never pretended to be a voice of disenfranchised youth or have 'artistic integrity'.

You are essentially criticising a pop artist for being a pop artist.

This is a world away from, say, an artist that writes songs about or protests against climate change having a large carbon footprint when they are touring or having phoney claims about carbon offsets on their website.

CMD should be about spin - on the left or right - not taste. Just as there is no accounting for taste, there's no accountability either.

your article its really good given a very knowledgeable information good work.