Well if the market were locked up in some kind of commie system, it would make sense.
The Whistler - 10:05am on 05/11/2008
However, government investment in technologies that reduce our CO2 footprint (until such time as we may decide we need to increase it) is an intelligent choice here, and will inevitably lead to free market
choices that further reduce our CO2 emissions.
I can argue that this is working because the United States has actually been reducing its CO2 emissions via this interaction between government sponsored R&D and our free market system, as opposed to the socialistic approach taken by Europe, where CO2 emissions continue to increase.
An interesting point of view, although I disagree with it on a fundamental level. We don’t have the space here for a full-blown refutation of your position, so I will have to settle for stating that we are succeeding in spite of govt interference in the market, and that the degree of socialization of the US economy has not reached the harmful levels present in Europe.
Also, the govt doesn’t invest, it spends. There is a difference. The govt isn’t financially responsible for the consequences of its spending, unlike private individuals, so it’s just spending, without the accountability that would be characteristic of actual investing.
robert108 - 11:05am on 05/11/2008
Check out Public Eye blog!
Zsa Zsa - 12:05pm on 05/11/2008
Whistler:
Yes, by mostly developing our own sources of energy, which McCain opposed.
Enlighten me.
I was of the information that Bush wanted to drill for Oil in Alaska, until met by Democratic opposition…
I can argue that this is working because the United States has actually been reducing its CO2 emissions via this interaction between government sponsored R&D and our free market system
Whether we like it or not. That’s happening. Companies like Toyota have benefited A LOT by making their company “green”. There is an obvious demand for it.
Buy a green car??? Those democrats allay their conscience in the oddest ways ; )
dirl126 - 02:05pm on 05/11/2008
Larry Hagman has one of the coolest greenest homes I have ever seen!
Zsa Zsa - 02:05pm on 05/11/2008
But frankly since he’s using the same rhetoric as Algore there’s something to be feared here.
Indeed. BUT he is no Al Gore. He’s supported strict constructionists and he is for the war. What are you going to do
I think Halatbis makes a good case in defending any Republican’s support for Global Warming. I don’t want to speculate too much, but McCain may be attempting to be
in the game.
As a politician, we might have to expect something like this out of him in a country where the democrats are more and more frighteningly taking over.
Halatbis says, “The Republicans and Conservatives ignore or downplay this phenomenon at their peril--peril being the loss of seats in government, and as a result will not be a player at the table as “remedies” are proposed and enacted. We can be a part of future remedies and we can keep the craziness of the Left/Enviro-nuts in check---but, we must be in the game.”
dirl126 - 02:05pm on 05/11/2008
but McCain may be attempting to be
in the game.
What are you talking about, HE INTRODUCED the first legislation. He doesn’t want in the game, he wants to push the fraud down our throats.
I was of the information that Bush wanted to drill for Oil in Alaska, until met by Democratic opposition…
And how did McCain vote? HMM?
Whether we like it or not. That’s happening. Companies like Toyota have benefited A LOT by making their company “green”. There is an obvious demand for it.
That would be the point wouldn’t it. We don’t need the government screwing it up (as with ethanol) when the market’s going to do a better job.
Who’s kept more non-emitting nuclear plants from being built? The government.
The Whistler - 02:05pm on 05/11/2008
Companies like Toyota have benefited A LOT by making their company “green”.
Only due to subsidies. Translation: your tax money.
Toyota was doing just fine before the subsidies, by making cars people wanted.
robert108 - 03:05pm on 05/11/2008
Whistler, you seem a little hostile, calm down. I’m not attacking you. I want sources.
I asked you to enlighten me, instead you responded with “And how did McCain vote? HMM?”
That was my question. Your answer could have been a bit more graceful.
That would be the point wouldn’t it.
I was actually responding to Carrick’s statement.
Do you have a source for his voting record against Bush’s push to drill for Oil in Alaska, and the legislation he first introduced? Thanks.
dirl126 - 03:05pm on 05/11/2008
...but, we must be in the game.
The game of denying the truth for political expediency?
Well if the market were locked up in some kind of commie system, it would make sense.
An interesting point of view, although I disagree with it on a fundamental level. We don’t have the space here for a full-blown refutation of your position, so I will have to settle for stating that we are succeeding in spite of govt interference in the market, and that the degree of socialization of the US economy has not reached the harmful levels present in Europe.
Also, the govt doesn’t invest, it spends. There is a difference. The govt isn’t financially responsible for the consequences of its spending, unlike private individuals, so it’s just spending, without the accountability that would be characteristic of actual investing.
Check out Public Eye blog!
Whistler:
Enlighten me.
I was of the information that Bush wanted to drill for Oil in Alaska, until met by Democratic opposition…
Whether we like it or not. That’s happening. Companies like Toyota have benefited A LOT by making their company “green”. There is an obvious demand for it.
Buy a green car??? Those democrats allay their conscience in the oddest ways ; )
Larry Hagman has one of the coolest greenest homes I have ever seen!
Indeed. BUT he is no Al Gore. He’s supported strict constructionists and he is for the war. What are you going to do
I think Halatbis makes a good case in defending any Republican’s support for Global Warming. I don’t want to speculate too much, but McCain may be attempting to be
As a politician, we might have to expect something like this out of him in a country where the democrats are more and more frighteningly taking over.
Halatbis says, “The Republicans and Conservatives ignore or downplay this phenomenon at their peril--peril being the loss of seats in government, and as a result will not be a player at the table as “remedies” are proposed and enacted. We can be a part of future remedies and we can keep the craziness of the Left/Enviro-nuts in check---but, we must be in the game.”
What are you talking about, HE INTRODUCED the first legislation. He doesn’t want in the game, he wants to push the fraud down our throats.
And how did McCain vote? HMM?
That would be the point wouldn’t it. We don’t need the government screwing it up (as with ethanol) when the market’s going to do a better job.
Who’s kept more non-emitting nuclear plants from being built? The government.
Only due to subsidies. Translation: your tax money.
Toyota was doing just fine before the subsidies, by making cars people wanted.
Whistler, you seem a little hostile, calm down. I’m not attacking you. I want sources.
I asked you to enlighten me, instead you responded with “And how did McCain vote? HMM?”
That was my question. Your answer could have been a bit more graceful.
I was actually responding to Carrick’s statement.
Do you have a source for his voting record against Bush’s push to drill for Oil in Alaska, and the legislation he first introduced? Thanks.
The game of denying the truth for political expediency?