It's amazing (and sad) to watch Carter talk about solar and renewables, the permanent energy shortage, and the need for conservation, THIRTY F*CKING YEARS AGO.
And yet we did nothing. NOTHING.
Why? Why did the US waste thirty years under Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush?
Because that's what the lobbyists and the Energy and Auto Industrial Complex wanted.
And now for America (and the world), it's too late. Now, we all pay the price of inaction.
The good news? We now have an energy emergency. The talk about a "Manhattan Project" for energy might become a reality (under a new president and Congress). And energy now floats (for the time being) to the very top of the list of issues impacting regular Americans' lives.
Here's five big EnergyPANIC ideas, what are yours?
1) Conservation (oh, if Bush would only say the word)
2) Solar/Wind/Nuclear/Non-Food Renewables Investment and Subsidies
3) Massive Mass Transit Development
4) Dramatic Fuel Efficiency Standard Improvement
5) Vote every incumbent out of office (except Ron Paul)
June 10, 2008
Here's Jimmy Carter (hold your laughter) in 1979 on the need for a national energy policy and conservation. Again, we've done nothing...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
72 comments:
A comment made by my significant other this past weekend:
"Americans won't change their habits until things start to hit them in the pocketbook."
And of course we need the government to do all that for us right Qweefie?
I am constantly amazed by your bi-polar personality.
You talk about Ron Paul then vote for his exact opposite Obama. You want limited government yet you want the government to tell you what you can and can't drive or how often you can drive. You are against bailouts, yet vote for Democrats which are 100% for a bailout. One day you talk about a stock market disaster then the next you talk about buying up everything you can. You talk about how only fools still support Bush and yet here you are praising Carter. Jimmy Carter, Keith. Think about that for a second.
Dude, seriously you need some help.
Obama = Jimmy Carter II
Ron paul would be fine except that I disagree entirely with his views on entitlements and socially related programs.In fact I think he is as wrong as wrong could be.Unfortunately the cards are not dealt evenly.Would the child of a single working class black woman living in Camden NJ have the same opportunity to succede as a similar white child growing up in Short Hills NJ. Perhaps. This is america after all.He seems like a good man and and I can't believe he is thinking "tough crap " to those born on the wrong side of the tracks. If Ron Paul can show me how he plans to unstack the deck I will vote for him.
Read this first:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/40360.html
Then this:
http://www.the-american-interest.com/ai2/article.cfm?Id=458&MId=20
then we can have a real conversation.
Go with mass transit development in our top 50 metro areas. It would solve multiple problems. We need a massive plan to build this out over the next 10 years. We need to get this done, or 10 years from now we are not going to be able to do it.
Folks, the days of happy, cheap motoring are coming to a close. You know, driving 10 miles (each way) to the store to pick up a $10 plastic bowl. What's difficult for most people is that it is happening so fast.
If we take the mass transit option, we'll still have cars, we just will not have as many, use them as much, and most will not be quite as big.
America, quit sleeping! Let's get behind mass transit options now.
My idea is for Uncle Scam to stay the f*ck out of it for once and do nothing.
Do you know what "energy policy" means? It means "central planning with respect to the energy sector of the economy."
When the power-grabbing politicians in Washington wring their hands and state with consternation that "we don't have an energy policy in this country," what they are saying is that the federal government does not yet have a stranglehold over this portion of America like they have over every other portion -- from housing, to education, to labor, to transportation infrastructure, to drugs and medicine, to firearms, to communications, to science, you name it, they exercise a considerable degree of control over it. This is not (yet) true of energy, and the politicians are bewildered that such an important aspect of America's life could have thus far escaped their power.
To them, nothing can work in America unless Congress manages it, directs it, regulates it, and subsidizes it.
Of course, all this does is create economic distortions because investments in new resources and technologies are directed by a committee of 487 politicians, most of whom know nothing about the economics of energy, by a process of compromise, and through the influence of special interests -- rather than through the marketplace where supply and demand determine when it becomes viable to invest in new resources and technologies, and which resources and technologies are the best to invest in, and in what proportions.
Rather than riding to the rescue with a Soviet-style central energy plan, congress should let the scientists, innovators, inventors, entrepenures, and energy companies tackle the problem.
If clowngress really wants to do anything to help our energy situation, they should start by taking the issuing power back from the Federal Reserve.
HP = HOUSING PANIC
NOT
Bash incompetent Presidents page.
Get it togther, please.
There is a massive multi-country project going on now called ITER, it's combination of US, Russia, EU, China, and a few other countries. The proposal is to get Nuclear Fussion up and running, but it's still decades away from being operational. The U.S. has been late in paying it's due at times and may back out of it. We need to not only pay up, but double triple, quadrouple our investment and get this running.
Anon 1:14 said . . .
"If Ron Paul can show me how he plans to unstack the deck I will vote for him."
------------------------------
Dude, life is not fair. Some people are born with a leg up on others, and that's just the way it is -- always has been, always will be. The government can't do squat about it.
That said, there are a lot of things that the government does do to build barriers to success for poor people, and to keep inequalities in place. These include:
(1) Inflating the currency via a central bank, so that poor people's savings are eroded and they do not have a fair opportunity to advance through hard work and savings;
(2) subsidizing housing so that poor people have to go into an exhorbitant amount of debt in order to buy a house in a decent neighborhood;
(3) subsidizing education so that poor people have to go into an exhorbitant amount of debt to get a decent education;
(4) regulating the snot out of healthcare, making it so expensive that poor people become dependant upon the government to supply it to them;
(5) enforcing draconian drug laws that break up families, take people out of the workforce and put them in prison, make people felons so they can't get jobs, and turn neighborhoods into war zones;
(6) instituting minimum wage laws that make it difficult for business to hire low-skilled or unskilled young people, and that lower the cost of racial discrimination in hiring;
(7) forcing poor families to send their children to pathetic public schools; and
(8) destrying poor families by replacing the father with welfare, i.e., "your child has you; you have WIC."
These are just examples. To answer your question, I believe that RP is not so much for instituting affirmative government programs to "level the playing field" as he is for getting rid of some of the barriers that the government has put in front of poor people who might be able to better their OWN lives if the government didn't keep getting in the way.
Only the Japanese car makers were listening to Carter in 1979.
The Big 3 car makers in Detroit got kick-backs from the republican party to keep producing 6 and 8-cylinder gas guzzlers.
Hell, you can still by a BRAND NEW gas guzzler today in 2008! But they are just rotting on the new and used car lots and GM just shut down several more SUV/Truck plants last week.
If Jimmy's plan was NOT corrupted by the GOP, we would have saved over 1.2 trillion barrels of oil and its polution over the last 25 years. Only 2, 3 and 4 cylinder engines (would have) should be sold in family passenger cars and trucks, unless you have a business, hauling, racing or farm land permit.
But remember, that would just reduce the oil company profits. Bush and the GOP and Military/War Machine Manufactures and contractors is all about oil profits, greed and reckless humanity management!
THE BUSH/GOP THEME: KILL, LIE and INJURE OTHERS FOR PROFIT! Dont give them the right for a trial! No lawyers allowed! No rights! No freedoms!
No wonder why Ted Nugent moved to Crawford.
Carter refered to this nation of ours in his talk as an "industrial country". Well that's gone now. Now we produce porn, derivatives, and entertainment.
Jimmy C. also de regulated the airlines, and low and behold they are all but gone too.
Lastly Carter made no mention of increasing the production of nuclear power plants.
keith,
Carter gave this "lets enjoy the pain together" talk in 1977.
Why is this so hard to understand? People will drill for more oil and look for alternatives once they see that it is profitable. And stop listing government people, it won't be them who do this but private businessman. When will it be profitable? I don't know, $200/ba maybe? I thought you would understand this. Read J.Paul Getty's autobiography, he talks about this.
"Unfortunately the cards are not dealt evenly.Would the child of a single working class black woman living in Camden NJ have the same opportunity to succede as a similar white child growing up in Short Hills NJ. ... If Ron Paul can show me how he plans to unstack the deck I will vote for him.
"
--- I think they tried to unstack the decks in Communist Russia...didn't really work. Life is unfair and it always will be. It's better that way. Do the best you can with what you have and you will be happy.
Keith,
I work at an energy lab, and I can tell you straight up we got nothing. All we have is hype and spin. Our entire scientific infrastructure, which might be able to respond to a major push on energy alternatives has been gutted by gross incompetence and privatization. Recently, DOE announced the new petaflop supercomputer "roadrunner". Supposedly, this represents a "new surge in American supercomputing". In reality, it is a cheap publicity stunt. No software able to solve real world problems can run on this machine. Its just more desperate window dressing. The DOE complex is a Potemkin village. We have propped up our energy labs and Universities with foreign labor. These folks are starting to repatriate. PhD Americans being laid off from weapons labs are starting to think about leaving the complex and going to work for China, India, Russia etc, any where that doesn't pay dollars and where science is still valued. The only thing stemming the tide is that they can't sell their houses yet.
Americans are crybabies. Carter told us we would have to abandon our profligate ways, and was derided as a wimp for telling the truth.
hey, it is your congressmen that suck, mine is awesome. you guys need to get busy and vote your bums out.
Unfortunately the cards are not dealt evenly.Would the child of a single working class black woman living in Camden NJ have the same opportunity to succede as a similar white child growing up in Short Hills NJ.
------------------------------
don't you understand that it is the government trying to help those in Camden that helps keep them there? the government doesn't the right things and what it does do right it doesn't do enough of.
1. Traitor Bush did sign the 35mpg CAFE fleet average into law.
2. Solar power may never be cost effective. Nuclear is the cheapest and cleanest forms of energy, but the irrational leftists won't allow it. Wind will never be cost effective.
3. Yes, we need subways in places like LA, Chicago, and Seattle.
4. See #1
5. Ron Paul needs to leave as well. He's been in there for too long.
One thing that would go a long way towards conservation, traffic, and ultimately price, would be telecommuting. The technology is there and the majority of jobs don't need people to come into offices.
If we could get 50% of the population to telecommute, there would be no more rush hour traffic jams. Time and energy would not be wasted sitting in traffic.
That would probably give us a 50% decrease in fuel consumption. Add in 50mpg hybrids and diesels and you get a 80% reduction in fuel consumption.
Nuclear is the answer. France has it right on this one. It is also does not pollute the environment like most of the other energy sources.
I wish Andrew Hac had given
this talk on energy policy.
We might have gained a clue
about the fearsome future.
Andy: Please use your vicious
prose to shock us about the
American public schools.
(for free; we owe 9 trillion.)
What's up with the Mr. Rogers sweater by the fireplace?
Keith,
It's all about the cost of energy. For the past 30 years energy prices were ridiculously cheap and all the talk of conversation and hoarding commodities went into dormancy until now.....
-BC
Our Government's Creed -
"The greed and comfort of the few outways the well-being of the masses."
The 2000 election was a choice between using our national resources to move our country into the next century/millenia or continuing to apply 19th Century solutions to our problems.
50% of you are dipshits.
Yes, let us not forget Carter. He almost destroyed the pension industry. Told us to tighten our belts when faced with an energy crunch and boy did those interest rates take a ride!
A friend paid 21 percent interest at the high tide of housing in that era. Banks were paying for your money in a CD. Early on in the 80s saw 17 plus percent easily.
Gas lines, riots in one case (Levittown PA) and a host of closings and unemployment.
Coming soon to a neighborhood near you with Obamanomics
Anon 12:39
The government doesn't have to tell us what to do--they can stop fighting oil wars and fixing the roads, we'll all fall in line real quick! The "freedom" to drive only exists because it costs you $1,000/month for a car and only $100/month for a train pass.
The fact is we could have made some sweet upgrades (granite ticket-counter tops?) to our railsystem with our Iraq money. Of course, that would have provided millions of jobs and built critical infrastructure.
1) Conservation (oh, if Bush would only say the word)
_______
Funny how a "CONSERVative" won't say CONSERVation.
As Ron Paul has often said, old-fashioned conservative ideas are no longer recognized as true conservatism.
@anon-1:14
The biggest problem with Ron Paul is you really have to want to "see it" and he talks in "interconnectedness" - more specifically that policies in one area of government affect other areas of government that may, at a glance, have only a tertiary link.
I'll try and speak directly to your example. First, I think you need to look at your question for a large part of the answer. Specifically, the black kid and white kids likely need very different things from their schools and community - so, lets give them the exact same homogenized federal education. It makes absolutely no sense to me.
Additionally, and this is where I have a hard time understanding a lot of liberals (though, you seem to be willing to hear opposing argument so you're alright), they may not have the same opportunity but they both have an opportunity - and that is all society can provide. Parents, community leaders/elders, older siblings, role models all play a MUCH more important role in determining what kids do with their opportunities than schools do. Schools are effectively day-care where students can take advantage of the learning offered and work for what they want. If people surrounding a student (by fear or loving support) are able to sufficiently motivate them - they will do well (just try and stop them) regardless of their life circumstances.
The "interconnectedness" comes in down the road and is where the real problem lies. Since we're using "prototypical" families here I'll work with that. Say the black child works hard and becomes successful. What then? What is his motivation to give back to his specific community? He's now busting hump to keep 50-60% of his labors just to get by with his family.
The hard reality is that not everyone is going to make it. But there is absolutely no way the government can ever ensure that everyone does. We've had massive entitlements in this country for more than 50 years and even in much more socialist Europe the deck is not evenly stacked. The only way to even the deck is to allow those who work hard and make good decisions keep the fruits of the hard work and good decisions.
To your point, though. I do not presume to speak for Dr. Paul. Should I be so lucky to live 5 lifetimes, I don't think I would be able to enjoy the political and economic thoughtfulness that I thin k the man possesses.
If Ron Paul can show me how he plans to unstack the deck I will vote for him.
_______
This point of view stinks because most of the measures taken to get victims out of victimhood have only pushed them deeper into victimhood.
If we're going to unstack the deck, Ron Paul has one of the best ideas for doing just that: abolish the Federal Reserve, which is in the business of heavily stacking the deck in favor of Big Banking.
If you don't understand how this victimizes the rest of us, you have your head up your @$$.
I won't pay the price. I rent a small apartment next to my workplace. Gas prices could go to $20/gallon and it wouldn't bother me personally that much.
Yet another reason not to buy a home...
Keith, you are right! Talk is cheap.
I even tapped my made in China Easy Button from Staples for that one:
#5
Voting every incumbant out of office will not work. In the NJ Senate election, our 84 year old senator (who is against drilling for oil in Alaska and off the coast of NJ) is runing against a former LOBBYIST. Great idea, let's vote for a lobbyist. What could possibly go wrong?
And I am also surprised that Keith is supporting Obama. He is far more pro bail out than McCain... and let's not forget about his relationship with Jim Johnson, who is basically in bed with Countrywide, just like Cheney is in bed with defense contractors and oil companies.
You need to do your homework: Energy efficiency has gone up nearly three-fold since the 70's. The by-product, pollution, from using energy has dropped by over 80% since 1969. Some from regulation, CAFE, Energy Star, etc, most from technology improvements and free competition (ex: Honda, Siemens). My first car, a 1972 Mercury Cougar planet killer got 9 miles per gallon. And that was typical. Powerplants have more than tripled electric output for a given source of input. And that was after the Clean Air and Water act!
High energy prices will be good for America. It will force conservation and changes to lifestyle choices (Hummer, McMansion), stimulate alternative energy sources, cut traffic, and reduce dependency on foreign energy sources.
Become Amish.
The buggy and horse life isn't looking so bad these days.
Oh, and vote everyone of these idiots out of office (except Ron Paul).
Conservation is a waste of time. A barrel of oil has gone up over 400% in the not to distant past. Does any method of conservation make us 400% more effecient. No, not even close, maybe 3-5% or at best 15%. Not getting us there. We need to stop using Oil, or alternatives that just mimic oil, i.e., biofuels, liquid coal, shale oil, tar sands. These are not solving the problem.
Stagflation, attacked by a rabbit, hostages, gas lines, boycotted the 1980 Olympics to teach the Russians a lesson (shudder) for invading Afganistan, blame America first philosophy, hugg your enemies foreign affairs, and fist banging the table on TV to make you believe he really was tough. Oh, yes, "the energy crisis is real...". Carter spoke of hope, and change from Tricky Dick Nixon and Football Fumbling Ford, and he showed himself to be an Ivory Tower Intellectual. Obama is not only a Carter Carbon Copy but also a reverse discrimination racist. In an ideal world, we would have all those things Jimmy Carter talked about, but he produced nothing but talk and misery. Oil is the lifeblood of the USA, without Oil the USA's economy collapses overnight. We have no choice but to be there militarilly. Solar powered cars and nuclear powered cities did not occur because oil was $15 a barrel ten years ago. Economics dictate change. Obama is not the kind of cange we need. The world will not like us because we put a Baboon in office, for we already have a Jackass. Hillary would have been the better choice, tough on Iran, strong on the economy.
The sweater is quite funny isn't it?
Anyone see McCain's great line now - that Obama will complete Carter's second term?
Damn, I wish I had written that one. It truly is a great line.
Some people on this blog have some serious control issues. I'd suggest, solve those first, then come back to HousingPanic.
we did nothing because the energy crisis went into hibernation. and will stay in hibernation until prices are higher than they are today.
You doubt energy crisis is still in hibernation? Well, obama is now saying he would take the revenue for a "windfall profit" tax on oil companies and redistribute it to those americans that are struggling to pay for their energy consumption.
Carter gave this "lets enjoy the pain together" talk in 1977.
---------------------------
and what did he accomplish in those 3 remaining years in office to address energy? Other than install solar water heaters in the white house. 3 years is long enough to set in motion a NASA to the moon type of energy initiative.
Conservation is a waste of time. A barrel of oil has gone up over 400% in the not to distant past. Does any method of conservation make us 400% more effecient. No, not even close, maybe 3-5% or at best 15%. Not getting us there. We need to stop using Oil, or alternatives that just mimic oil, i.e., biofuels, liquid coal, shale oil, tar sands. These are not solving the problem.
-------------------------------
oh man. you know, the statement "better to keep one's mouth shut than to open it and remove all doubt" comes to mind.
go back and take a math class sparky. and while you are at it, econ101. your 400% analogy is so far off it is not even funny. consumption does not need to go up 400% in order for the price to go up 400%. And yes, increasing efficiency by just 5% would make a huge difference. if cars could magically be made 40% more efficient (i may the percentage wrong but it is close) we would be oil independent!
alternatives that mimic oil? what is that suppose to mean? if bio fuel was more efficient it would be a great solution (assuming we could also still feed ourselves) as you can grow it year after year, it is RENEWABLE.
"Americans won't change their habits until things start to hit them in the pocketbook."
-----------------------------
It is not just americans. I think europe would be right there with us if they had cheap gas too.
Only the Japanese car makers were listening to Carter in 1979.
-----------------------------------
oh, sure, give me a break. They were making small POS cars before carter. and yes, the cars were sh*ty back then. Made in Japan back in the 60s and 70s meant what made in China means today. cheap stuff that won't last. Then Korea became the source of cheap Cr*p that didn't last. Now it is china. Next will be?????
they make smaller cars so that more can be packed into the container ships plus smaller cars are less expensive to build so will sell for less and increase volume.
I won't pay the price. I rent a small apartment next to my workplace. Gas prices could go to $20/gallon and it wouldn't bother me personally that much.
Yet another reason not to buy a home...
--------------------------------
which is why I have bought several apartment complexes near mass trans and areas of commerce(not just retail). if times get tough, I will fire my management company and move my family into one of the 3 bedroom apartments and manage them myself.
My vacancy rate is extremely low and I have been increasing rents over the past two years. I have seen "churn" increase in the last 6 months and I write that off to people being more willing to move close to where they work.
Anyone see McCain's great line now - that Obama will complete Carter's second term?
I did and he's absolutely right. Im no Bush fan but Carter's era of double digit inflation, astronomical taxes, and gas shortages are way worse than anything Bush has done to screw us.
Ultimate irony is that this guy commanded a Nuclear Submarine when he was in the navy.
Those guys can run 100 years on one fuel up and have never had a nuclear accident.
You would think he of all people would have recognized the need to go nuclear.
France is 70%.
Bush need only impose the 55 mph speed limit on hiways and it's a quick 10% saving on all vehicles, per published studies going back to the 70's. I saw the difference.. The Republicans are scared or too tied in to the Arabs. Reducing the speed would offset the China consumption immediatly and give us time to come up with alternative energy. OPEC was humbled by the drop in oil imports after 1979. With the increased mileage of cars in the 80's, prices dropped to 70 cents per gallon at the gas pump.
The evil oil companies lowered the price of oil...and KEPT IT LOW FOR 25 YEARS!! Damn them!! That's why the efficiency drive halted. Cheap oil.
Carter said we had 4 years of natural gas left and then "that's it". Evil Reagan repealed price controls and let natural gas companies charge whatever they WANT. You guessed it!! Natural gas prices FELL and were low for about 25 years.
How can we get people to conserve when the evil oil companies keep prices so low for so long? Sacrificing their own profits just to screw us over in the long run.
"Unfortunately the cards are not dealt evenly.Would the child of a single working class black woman living in Camden NJ have the same opportunity to succede as a similar white child growing up in Short Hills NJ."
that's true but giving the power of solving problems locally is important too. that's because once social guarantees are made, those who stand to collect them need policing in order to ensure that they don't goof off.
in the UK, I've talked to doctors who are sick and tired of working long days and becoming nothing more than production line workers;
that's why there's something true about the statement: "you can't throw money at the problem."
Bush has said: "technology will solve the problem" and that's probably true because efficiency through technology is what allows the masses to multiple and live high quality lives.
at least that's my opinion about globalization that, hopefully, people can freely organize themselves in ways that produce efficient economies and that wealth "trickles down."
Obama is a racist? What does he do, make himself ride in the back of the bus half of the time?
Go huff some more glue and let the grownups talk!
>Li surfer Conservation is a waste of time. A barrel of oil has gone up over 400% in the not to distant past. Does any method of conservation make us 400% more effecient. No, not even close, maybe 3-5% or at best 15%. Not getting us there. We need to stop using Oil, or alternatives that just mimic oil, i.e., biofuels, liquid coal, shale oil, tar sands. These are not solving the problem.
Actually this is pretty easy to do. Just get four people to ride in your car when you used to drive alone.
We waited because oil became cheap again. Now that it's once again expensive, it's time to do something. Short term, we have to start developing ANWR and build refineries. Long term, we have to come up with alternative sources. No brainer.
when people tried to build an electric car, the car companies made it illegal to own em. Too many people were making money back then on oil, as well as now. Fast foward 25 years, and now the car companies are screaming about fuel efficiency. They want hybrids, when they had a chance they could have cared less. Now they are almost out of business it's real hard to be sympathetic. If they had been more innovative and not so protective of the oil companies we would not be in this mess now and Honda and Toyota would not have overtaken the American car manufacturing base. After this last nickle last farthing sqeeze going on now betcha in 5 years you'll be able to plug a car in and commute in it and screw the oil companies. They are now being allowed to steal legally who wants to keep pumping money into their pockets every week. The only side effect is the 1000 dollar power bill each month. LOL
My job could be 90% telecommuted. Yet I'm expected to be in my cubical often. Gas prices today were at $4.31 at Costco. The road is still crowded.
"Unfortunately the cards are not dealt evenly.Would the child of a single working class black woman living in Camden NJ have the same opportunity to succede as a similar white child growing up in Short Hills NJ."
The Camden kid would have had a much better chance in the America before the socialist programs introduced in the mid-20th century. Most of the well known millionairs of the late 19th and early 20th century were self-made men with very humble origins, whereas today most of the well known Forbes-listed American names were born to already wealthy families. Social mobility is drasticly reduced when advancement requires paper qualifications; wealthy parents are far more likely to give their children a better education than poor ones. A society that emphasizes education ironicly endorses one of the chief mechanisms for hereditory hierarchy. After all, education was invented by wealthy parents to give their own kids a leg up on other kids without the vagaries of the market place.
li sailer,
If you want stupendous waste of money and get something that doesn't work, joint international government research would be the ticket. For crying out loud, after tens of billions of dollars and a decade and half, the International Space Station still can't keep a toilet in working order.
High energy prices will be good for America. It will force conservation and changes to lifestyle choices (Hummer, McMansion),
Great, now we'll have to live like the stinky Europeans, in those POS tiny studios without A/C and driving those POS Fiats or Smarts. Wow, that movie Idiocracy must have been written by Nostradamus.
"Only 2, 3 and 4 cylinder engines (would have) should be sold in family passenger cars and trucks, unless you have a business, hauling, racing or farm land permit."
No, only bicycles should be sold to the peons. Only government officials of a certain rank or higher can have cars . . . that and their hanger-ons and "girlfriends."
I did and he's absolutely right. Im no Bush fan but Carter's era of double digit inflation, astronomical taxes, and gas shortages are way worse than anything Bush has done to screw us.
Don't forget that Carter had the brilliant idea of bringing 130,000 Cubans overnight into Miami, helping Castro to empty his prisons out of thugs. Check "Mariel" on Wikipedia. Another Carter classic. Immediately after that, crime rates in FL skyrocketed and then came the cocaine drug wars. With Hussein will be different though, he'll bring half the population of the African continent instead. It's on the 20 points of Trinity Church: "Unconditional Devotion To Africa" Prepare the wallet because it's gonna rain welfare, just like in FL.
"Recently, DOE announced the new petaflop supercomputer "roadrunner". Supposedly, this represents a "new surge in American supercomputing". In reality, it is a cheap publicity stunt. No software able to solve real world problems can run on this machine. Its just more desperate window dressing."
That's just par for the course for government research. Without the market pricing mechanism, the government doesn't know what problem needs solving first. So it's petaflops for petaflops' sake . . . just like Stalin's big projects for big projects' sake, and Mao's millions of tons of pig iron for pig iron's sake (The Great Leap Backward).
"PhD Americans being laid off from weapons labs are starting to think about leaving the complex and going to work for China, India, Russia etc,"
Good riddence. They will soon find out that government research is just as bad anywhere in the world. Some of them may even catch a bullet in the back of the head.
"Oil is the lifeblood of the USA, without Oil the USA's economy collapses overnight. We have no choice but to be there militarilly."
Agree with most of the rest of your post; agree with the first setence quoted above . . . however the second setence does not logically follow. The middleast countries have to sell oil to someone. Even Ayatollah Khomeini, as anti-west as they come, still sold oil to the West. It was Carter who banned oil from Iran; Iran was perfectly willing to sell to Mark Rich's "Swiss company" for trans-shipping to the US.
Our imperial policy in the middleast is contributing to the high oil price. Ultimately, it costs more money to have our guys and gals standing guard at the well head with an under-armored Humvee than leaving it to some local thug to do the job. Print less money, and the oil price will come down.
Corn, soybeans and wheat are all produced in the US for export, yet their prices have gone just as much as oil in the last 10 months since the FED turned loose the monetary spigot. So, I don't think domestic production of alternative energy source would solve what is fundamentally a monetary problem.
"if cars could magically be made 40% more efficient (i may the percentage wrong but it is close) we would be oil independent!"
No we wouldn't. If total US oil consumption is cut in half, domestic production will be cut more than in half. Oil from overseas is cheaper, and that's why we import oil. That's also why we import all the stuff from India and China. There is no peak oil, or peak t-shirt, or peak- plastic toys. Commodity production looks for the lowest cost producer. And for oil, that's not Pennsylvania or Texas for the last half century.
"Anon:Made in Japan back in the 60s and 70s meant what made in China means today. cheap stuff that won't last. "
You are smoking crack, the Datsun 510 was probably the best car ever built for the price.
Funny story, when GM shut down what was to become the NUMMI plant in Fremont, the workers held a picnic. At the end they took an old beater Datsun 510, started it up in neutral and put a brick on the accelerator. Engine red-lined and ran for a while. And ran for a while longer, and then kept running and running. After half an hour it started smoking a bit. Then someone took a sledge hammer to the radiator. Another five minutes with a busted radiator did it in.
Carter was a bad President? Why 'cuz he didn't invade a foreign country so that our retarded white males could feel dominant over brown people again?
Energy policy, low-debt government, middle east peace, boycotting the Communist Olympics?
I think America has been sold a bill of goods about Jimmy Carter (a true Christian I might add)
Don't forget that the microchip debuted under Carter, not Reagan.
Afterthought,
The problem with Carter was that he was unlucky and ineffectual.
He set out to reduce government staffing, but ending up creating Department of Education and Department of Energy, neither of which has any real function.
He set out to reduce taxes, but ending up not only not cutting income tax but also dramaticly increased payroll taxes.
He set out to reduce pork barrel projects, but ended up only straining his relationship with a Democrat-dominated congress.
His unluckiness as president is quite legendary:
Special forces sent to rescue hostages in Iran ended up colliding with each other in the desert;
He was the only president who served at a full four-year term without appointing any supreme court judges;
He was even attacked by a rabbit during the 1980 campaign!
Carter did put energy on top of his priorities. You can see what happens when you go up against the richest, most powerful industry on earth. Even the US President is laughable in comparison.
Let me remind people that the US is the 3rd largest producer of oil in the world. That means that it is not ANWAR nor OPEC that is to blame. We produce more than Mexico and Canada.
Energy Stats
It is not a production problem -- it is consumption problem. Carter was right to emphasize conservation.
Deregulation? Government downsizing? Carter?
There must be some mistake. Everybody knows that there was no history before Ronald Reagan changed everything. And Kennedy never cut taxes.
Carter was a bad President? Why 'cuz he didn't invade a foreign country so that our retarded white males could feel dominant over brown people again?
Nope, Carter let Cuba invade the US by bringing 130,000 Cubans overnight who were conmen and thugs in Castro's prisons. Carter is a genius!
It wasn't Carter's fault that after the nationwide 55 mph speed limit, gas consumption fell 12%.
All the energy savings programs were scuttled when gas fell to under $1. per gallon. It didn;t trade and the reason was OPEC left the supply loose so that energy savings didn't make any sense.
This time OPEC cannot open supply and althoughthey are making ungodly profits, they are scared since the energy projects will survive this time.
However it is interesting that the Bush administration is reluctant to start any major inititaves. Guess he has to protect is turbaned buddies.
Post a Comment