Republican National Convention (Sept. 1-4)

[Bond]

*cough*Trickle-down economics.*cough*

I wish I had time to watch this convention... too bad school started.

[The Germanator]

Originally Posted by Bond

*cough*Trickle-down economics.*cough*

I wish I had time to watch this convention... too bad school started.

*cough Trickle-down economics don't work. It's a tired theory. *cough*

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/bu...erland&emc=rss

[Professor S]

Germ, I wouldn't use the Huffington Post as a reliable source. That would be like me citing Rush Limbaugh as a reliable source.

Also, your numbers reflect an "average tax bill". Do those numbers include the new Social Security liabilities? Do they include increases in pretty much every marginal tax rate? No, I almost guarantee they don;t. Obama's plan HIDES tax raises in careful language and in areas that are not considered "income taxes". Essentially raising the tax burden for most small business owners from about 35% to well over 50%.

Also, I find it hilarious that Obama's "tax breaks" for the poor, are really give aways disguised as tax credits.

http://www.wsj.com/article/SB1219103...st_emailed_day

Also, your obvious hatred of the wealthy doesn't lend your argument much credibility. The fact is rich people pay our bills. Without them, no one would have a job, and one day I hope to become a rich person. "Contempt for wealth is a trick the rich play on the poor to ensure they never have it."

You claim trickle down economics doesn't work... except it DOES, and in places like Bermuda and recently saving Ireland's economy from its near collapse in the 80's and early 90's, and they are now a economic power in Europe, called the "Celtic Tiger". In theory, trickle down doesn't work. In reality? Its a different story. The exact opposite of socialism and communism.

http://www.heritage.org/Index/country.cfm?id=Ireland

http://www.theodora.com/wfbcurrent/i...d_economy.html

http://www.bermuda-online.org/economy.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Bermuda

[Professor S]

For the record, when it comes to energy I am a fan of the Pickens Plan in philosphy, which is building an energy bridge to the future. I'm not convinced over the viability of wind energy because of the real estate and logistics of such an endeavor being prohibitive, but I love the fact that the plan is multi-faceted involving both carbon and alternative sources. We need a comprehensive plan.

http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/

[KillerGremlin]

Wind...nuclear...solar; all viable, long-term solutions for electricity.

Electric cars? Ding ding ding!

One can only dream. The direction of car technology seems to be a green one, so we can only hope for the best.

[Professor S]

Well, wind and solar have a host of issues

Wind - The sheer number of wind urbines and the amount of high tension wire needed to make this viable. The technology we have now isn't going to cut it.

Solar - Photo-voltaic cells are a mess. They are only 40% efficient, expensive, big, heavy and worst of all... FRAGILE. The maintenance and replacement costs alone make it prohibitive.

Solar does have a future right now, but it isn't photo-voltaic... its steam. Redirect the rays into piped water and let the steam produce the energy. An excellent option for the southwest. Honestly, beyond nuclear most alternative fuels are regional at best (wind in the midwest, solar in the southwest, etc.)

I'm all for alternative energy, bu the hard fact is we are much further away than ten years from having carbon fuel replacements. Even if we had viable solutions now, there would still be millions of gas burning cars on the road and oil/natural gas burning heaters in America's homes. We need usable energy NOW and we need a plan that uses ALL the options at our disposal, and also give us options to move away from carbon over time in a way that won't cripple our nation.

1) Exploit out narutal resources, including oil, shale, natural gas, and regional wind and solar (where it makes sense).

2) Give tax breaks to companies that invest in alternative fuels and grants to companies to set up nuclear power (the start up costs of nuclear are astronomical).

3) As viable carbon alternatives for home and auto emerge, offer tax breaks to individuals who are early adopters and take the risk of switching.

Coming from a standpoint of complete ignorance, I imagine it will take 30 years to make these changes if each administration carried the torch, and thats a huge if, especially if oil prices plummet and cheap gas becomes attractive again.

[KillerGremlin]

I'm hoping that with some innovations regarding nanotechnology that we will see solar cells that become MUCH more efficient. I think solar power will be most useful in powering the electricity in your house. Solar panels on the roof? Seems logical enough to me.

I look forward to the transition to green...I hope I can witness it in my lifetime.