| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:25 pm Post subject: McCain calls for energy independence |
 |
|
| Quote: |
The next president must be willing to break completely with the energy policies not just of the Bush administration, but the administrations that preceded his, and lead a great national campaign to put us on a course to energy independence," McCain said to applause.
The administration preceding Bush was that of Democrat Bill Clinton.
"No problem is more urgent today than America's dependence on foreign oil," he said, adding that the problem threatened the U.S. economy, its security and the environment. |
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080604/ts_nm/usa_politics_mccain_dc |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bigfeet
Joined: 29 May 2008
Location: Grrrrr.....
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Only way it'll happen is if we dot the country with nuclear power plants. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Science is working on a solution. Despite well documented issues in regards to nuclear power, I am in favor of a dramatic increase in nuclear plant building and research into improved batteries. However it might be the case that even better solutions are on the way.
| Quote: |
| Worried about greenhouse gas emissions? Have faith. Solar power may look terribly uneconomical at the moment, but with the exponential progress being made in nanoengineering, Dr. Kurzweil calculates that it�ll be cost-competitive with fossil fuels in just five years, and that within 20 years all our energy will come from clean sources. |
http://tinyurl.com/66cp3g (from the NYT)
Science got us into this mess, and science will get us out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, it almost seems as if McCain's solution to this might be more radical than Obama's. Having a Manhattan project for alternative fuels + nuclear energy development is a strong platform.
Anyway, this is certainly one issue on which I think McCain has a lot of credibility. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What are Obama's? Surely he has some policy ideas on the subject? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| What are Obama's? Surely he has some policy ideas on the subject? |
He does. In fact, Obama and Clinton's environmental proposals were nearly identical. Both plans had an investment of $150 billion over 10 years.
Here's an article on McCain's proposal.
| Quote: |
"By the year 2012, we will seek a return to 2005 levels of emission, by 2020, a return to 1990 levels, and so on until we have achieved at least a reduction of 60% below 1990 levels by the year 2050," McCain said.
McCain proposed expanded use of nuclear power, and said the federal government should encourage development of motor vehicles that run on alternative energy sources.
His cap-and-trade proposal is similar to those advanced previously by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, although the two Democrats called for a greater reduction - 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. |
It'll be really hard to evaluate McCain's plan without some reference to numbers of $$s for investment. Note how even the 80% cap on 1990 emissions levels was shared by Obama and Clinton! McCain's past record on the issue, however, seems mixed at best.
I just want to note, that both parties' candidates for President are trying to sell their approach to the environment as being the most aggressive apporach. That's an accomplishment in itself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bigfeet
Joined: 29 May 2008
Location: Grrrrr.....
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Green power like solar, wind, wave, etc. are good as ancillary sources but aren't dependable enough to act as main sources of power. I think nuclear is still the best and most dependable way to go. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 3:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| "No problem is more urgent today than America's dependence on foreign oil," he said, adding that the problem threatened the U.S. economy, its security and the environment. |
It's nice that McCain has caught up with Jimmy Carter who said the same thing back in the late 70's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| McCain has publically admitted that he knows "nothing" about economics, and this proposal adds proof to his assertion. Catching up to Jimmy Carter's level of economics expertise has to be one of the funniest concepts around ... can zero really catch up to zero? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ontheway wrote: |
| McCain has publically admitted that he knows "nothing" about economics, and this proposal adds proof to his assertion. Catching up to Jimmy Carter's level of economics expertise has to be one of the funniest concepts around ... can zero really catch up to zero? |
I take it you like paying taxes? Hello 28% cap gains taxes and ever increasing marginal tax rates; 40% will be just the beginning. How can the economy function if Barrack and Co. just suck all the capital of the economy? Whatever your opinion is of J. McCain, at least he has better instincts when it comes to taxes, regulations and spending. I guess you support the liberal-socialist agenda more than anyone thought. Yes, I will now assume you like paying higher taxes for the ever expanding welfare state. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ontheway
Joined: 24 Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere under the rainbow...
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 10:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pluto wrote: |
| ontheway wrote: |
| McCain has publically admitted that he knows "nothing" about economics, and this proposal adds proof to his assertion. Catching up to Jimmy Carter's level of economics expertise has to be one of the funniest concepts around ... can zero really catch up to zero? |
I take it you like paying taxes? Hello 28% cap gains taxes and ever increasing marginal tax rates; 40% will be just the beginning. How can the economy function if Barrack and Co. just suck all the capital of the economy? Whatever your opinion is of J. McCain, at least he has better instincts when it comes to taxes, regulations and spending. I guess you support the liberal-socialist agenda more than anyone thought. Yes, I will now assume you like paying higher taxes for the ever expanding welfare state. |
McCain will spend more and tax more than Obama. He is a "maverick." This means he can spend and tax more, claim to be doing what's "good for America," all the while devastating the economy.
Obama, elected as a more "liberal" and therefore "socialistically" oriented President will be under great pressure to prove that a black Democrat can be a serious President and represent the whole nation. His hands will be more tied than McCain's in terms of economic policy.
Just nominating McCain will cause serious damage to the Republican party. A McCain victory will cause serious damage to the nation, but on the bright side, it would ensure the end of the Republican party. If the Rs want to rebuild their party, they need to lose this year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ontheway wrote: |
| McCain will spend more and tax more than Obama. |
 Good One! John McCain supports making the 2002 tax cuts permanent, lowering the corporate tax rate to 25% and completely doing away with the inheritance tax. Obama favors more taxes on corporations, rescinding the 2002 tax cuts while not ruling out further increases in marginal tax rates, an increase in the payroll tax and uncapping limits for social security.
What are you talking about, ontheway? Like I said, you must like paying taxes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Taxes are going up Pluto. I share your dislike of taxes and your support for classical liberalism but at this point the country has no choice but to raise taxes. The entitlements are trillions and trillions. The wars have no end in sight. It is going to be a one way street with tax policy.
But, taxes can be made more efficient and less harmful to the economy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bigfeet
Joined: 29 May 2008
Location: Grrrrr.....
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 12:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
Taxes are going up Pluto. I share your dislike of taxes and your support for classical liberalism but at this point the country has no choice but to raise taxes. The entitlements are trillions and trillions. The wars have no end in sight. It is going to be a one way street with tax policy.
But, taxes can be made more efficient and less harmful to the economy. |
Yep, I agree with this. Taxes will have to go up to pay for SS and Medicare for the baby boomers. Plus they will be voting themselves more entitlements as they're the biggest voting block and they want their retirement to be cushy. So prepare to pay up and to pay up big. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| they're the biggest voting block |
However, us Boomers are up against you Me Generation folks. From what I can tell, we're into the third generation of the Me Generation...The Me! Me! Me! Generation if you will.
Did anyone else notice how ontheway deftly changed the 'dependence on foreign oil' topic to 'economics'?
Congress seriously dropped the ball when it failed to impose war taxes when we went into Afghanistan, then Iraq. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
