The government ruined the gas can...

[notbob]

Can't wait! Some young whippersnapper like you is gonna hafta wipe me.

nb

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Kurt Ullman:

Maybe somebody can comment on:

Understood that deficits/surpluses are technically different from debt as a percent of GDP.

My reading is that when Clinton left office in 2001, the US Debt was 32% of GDP. In the ensuing years, it went up, not down. Way up after the financial crisis... but always up post-Clinton.

Also, as I read it, the next closest to that 32% after Clinton was the

26% after Carter.

I'm assuming that "cbo.gov" is the Congressional Budget Office.

Is there room for differences of fact here?

[krw]

You can sit in your shit. You're already quite used to it, obviously.

[Kurt Ullman]

He cut military spending, that is what Dems do. That was the alleged post-Cold War "Peace Dividend". Two major problems with the assertion that he declared SS off-budget is that it happened in 1990, 2 years before he took office and Congress is the one with sole jurisdiction to make those decisions as part of the budget process. Anyone interested, there is a rather interesting history of the on/off budget shenanigans at:

[Frank]

Not quite but I did not say anything either. When I hear something so stupid, I don't try to teach them chemistry as obviously they have zero back ground knowledge. It was at a big table at a three day conference in Toronto on Canadian chemical regulations and the only day government officials came in for lunch with us.

All in all, at the time, a long time ago, I found Canadian regulations easier to work with than those in the US.

[Kurt Ullman]

Okay then, according to your own statements there was a surplus under the accounting processes legally in place at the time by the Congress. Otherwise, it is only your personal opinion that they were cooking the books (which I agree with BTW). However, Clinton was the beneficiary and not the instigator, which was the point before I allowed this other tangent to materialize.

[Danny D]

After reading this thread, I took a walk around the yard and gathered up a few of my Blitz gas cans, all relatively new.

I'll open a separate thread on just the engineering issues with the Blitz design, complete with detailed pictures ...

[Roy]

Why would one need nine gas cans on one's property?...unless one was a firebug? Or perhaps a collector of stuff people threw away "cause it was NO DAMNED GOOD. I hate these new vent-less cans...seems to me they tried to solve a problem that didn't exist or rarely existed. I've spilled more gas with these stupid things than enough.

[CRNG]

On Mon, 13 May 2013 13:51:53 -0700 (PDT), Roy wrote in Re Re: The government ruined the gas can...:

Welcome to the Nanny State.

[krw]

I never said Clinton was an "instigator", though he certainly was. I never said that Clinton was a liar, though he clearly was. I said that *you* were a liar, which you, and all who claim there was some "surplus", even a "relative surplus" during the Clinton administration. The lie is wrong on *so* many levels.

...and you defend the lie, then deny that you're a lefty.

[krw]

I don't mind the ventless cans. It's the damned valve that pisses me off.

[Danny D]

Simple. Because nine is the most I can fit in my trunk.

I wish I got them for free. They're all less than a year old. Bought them all at Lowes.

Me too.

They are designed to only half the problem, which is to hold the gas *in* the can; but they forgot the other half of the basic requirement which is to allow the gas to come *out*!

Me?

I remove the cap altogether and simply siphon the 5 gallon cans into a vehicle and pour the 2 gallon cans into a funnel for the lawn equipment. I have a 1 gallon can for the two-stroke tools.

All I need is a good flat one-piece gas cap for all of them. If only I could find it...

[Danny D]

+1

It's worse than useless!

This is what I do with the valve when I need to fill or pour some gas:

[Danny D]

I think the nanny state(s), with respect to gasoline containers, are all listed here:

Namely: - California - Connecticut - Washington, DC - Delaware - Maine - Maryland - Massachusetts - New Hampshire

[Danny D]

I opened this thread on just the Blitz USA design flaws and the quest for a plain Jane gasoline cap solution:

TITLE: The Blitz gasoline can - what went wrong - what needs to be fixed URL:

TINYURL:

[Danny D]

Interestingly, you can buy that vent (for water jugs only, wink wink) online, at the site that Steve W. recommended:

They even recommend a 1/2 inch blade-type (wood) drill bit over a spiral flute drill bit (they say the hole won't be round with a spiral bit).

Once you've added back the missing vent, then you can follow the YouTube video which shows how to modify the spout to allow the gas to flow again.

[Danny D]

Steve W suggests this:

[Danny D]

I agree. I don't use the spout except as a "cap", so, I'm on a quest for a dozen caps to fit.

Ideas welcome ...

[Harry K]

"new" and "old" caps do not interchange, thread size changed so that option is out.

Harry K

[Danny D]

I've been reading up on this.

The CARB/EPA apparently worked in cahoots with the gas can manufacturer (Blitz USA, in Chapter 11 currently, who advertises they sell 75% of all the gas cans in the USA, says so on their web page).

Together, they "designed" the gasoline to stay *in* the can. They did a wonderful job meeting that requirement!

The problem is that they never looked at the second half of the requirements equation ... i.e., that the gas comes *out*.

EPA/CARB = 2 points Consumer = 0 points