• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Thousands of Gallons of Crude Oil Spills in Ohio Nature Preserve

danielpalos said:
I believe it is only laziness which prevents the private sector from going to the moon.
Click to expand...

No, it's government - not only that but lack of funds.

Going to the moon is easy, yet getting to the moon both safely and affordable is the problem....
 
danielpalos said:
Socialism already went there and back due to a "work ethic" not a profit motive.
Click to expand...

You mean collapsed right?

Oh there was motive and profit there with the Russians.... Go read about the missing cosmonauts - the USSR used pilots as fodder.

You see - what you don't know is that 75% of the Russian space program defected to the United States because they weren't acknowledged - that - and if they didnt tow the line of the "fatherland (ov) they would be crushed like bugs....

To this day Russia has never released the identities of those involved in their space program...
 
Last edited:
solletica said:
No, it's not the govt's responsibility to encourage job creation in the private sector.

The proper role of govt. is to stay out of the private sector, and never make laws or enact policies that favor one industry/private entity over another. THE END.
Click to expand...

Right, that's one way to encourage job creation.
 
solletica said:
No, it's not the govt's responsibility to encourage job creation in the private sector.

The proper role of govt. is to stay out of the private sector, and never make laws or enact policies that favor one industry/private entity over another. THE END.
Click to expand...

Free market capitalism instead of a dictated economy.....

Don't tell progressives this because they believe everything should be dictated by humans, and assume everything is.
 
danielpalos said:
I believe fusion can provide for the scale economies, so vital for more developed political-economies.
Click to expand...
AWesome. Im all about better cleaner energy sources. In the meantime...
 
Mr.Nick said:
You mean collapsed right?

Oh there was motive and profit there with the Russians.... Go read about the missing cosmonauts - the USSR used pilots as fodder.

You see - what you don't know is that 75% of the Russian space program defected to the United States because they weren't acknowledged - that - and if they didnt tow the line of the "fatherland (ov) they would be crushed like bugs....

To this day Russia has never released the identities of those involved in their space program...
Click to expand...

Only truer forms of communism have collapsed. Socialism is alive and well as any more developed, mixed-market economy can attest.
 
danielpalos said:
In the mean time, why waste resources on fossil fuels instead of energies with a future?
Click to expand...
So...you are NOT utilizing fossil fuels today...right?

Look...the simple fact is that we are working on different types and means of producing energy. Until those become a realistic part of our energy picture...we are and will continue to use fossil fuels. Its inevitable AND necessary.
 
VanceMack said:
So...you are NOT utilizing fossil fuels today...right?

Look...the simple fact is that we are working on different types and means of producing energy. Until those become a realistic part of our energy picture...we are and will continue to use fossil fuels. Its inevitable AND necessary.
Click to expand...

I mean, why give subsidies to fossil fuels instead of energies with a more promising future?
 
danielpalos said:
I mean, why give subsidies to fossil fuels instead of energies with a more promising future?
Click to expand...
Because there are no more promising futures than the development of current technologies and systems we depend on universally. There are fossil fuel stores for hundreds of years. When and if better source become viable...great...happy days. Look at how much we can earn selling those resources to others instead of just using them ourselves. In the meantime...I assume you ARENT living in a tent and running your computer off of solar batteries...right?
 
VanceMack said:
Because there are no more promising futures than the development of current technologies and systems we depend on universally. There are fossil fuel stores for hundreds of years. When and if better source become viable...great...happy days. Look at how much we can earn selling those resources to others instead of just using them ourselves. In the meantime...I assume you ARENT living in a tent and running your computer off of solar batteries...right?
Click to expand...

I agree to disagree. Simply appealing to ignorance doesn't mean much. Fission didn't have much of future until Socialism bailed it out.
 
danielpalos said:
I am not sure what you mean; they are only limited by the social Powers
delegated;
Click to expand...

I am not sure how to continue to discuss this with someone that has such a fundamental lack of understanding of the Constitution.
 
j-mac said:
I am not sure how to continue to discuss this with someone that has such a fundamental lack of understanding of the Constitution.
Click to expand...

They could solve simple poverty in the federal districts by a simple voice vote and the delegated social Power to legislate, "in all cases whatsoever", in the federal districts.
 
danielpalos said:
They could solve simple poverty in the federal districts by a simple voice vote and the delegated social Power to legislate, "in all cases whatsoever", in the federal districts.
Click to expand...

I don't know why someone hasn't thought of that before.
 
iguanaman said:
The only way that could happen is if we stop using gasoline and diesel in our cars and trucks. Oil is priced on a world market and the middle east has a lot of oil. Are you ready to go 100% electric or natural gas in all our vehicles?
Click to expand...

Yeah, and not even then. We use oil quite a bit for other things. Not to mention, the refining centers will still be located where they are located and won't be going away.
 
danielpalos said:
I agree to disagree. Simply appealing to ignorance doesn't mean much. Fission didn't have much of future until Socialism bailed it out.
Click to expand...

It still doesn't. You keep prattling on about fission despite the many times you've been shown your fantasy is just that - a fantasy. It's hilarious that you bow before centralized power as an answer considering your political bent.
 
clownboy said:
It still doesn't. You keep prattling on about fission despite the many times you've been shown your fantasy is just that - a fantasy. It's hilarious that you bow before centralized power as an answer considering your political bent.
Click to expand...

The point is about how Socialism can bailout Capitalism with a social "work ethic" for free, with an official Mint at our disposal. We got into fission in under eight years. I believe we can accomplish something similar with fusion in under eight years, but, it may require the capital intensiveness of a Manhattan Project.
 
danielpalos said:
The point is about how Socialism can bailout Capitalism with a social "work ethic" for free, with an official Mint at our disposal. We got into fission in under eight years. I believe we can accomplish something similar with fusion in under eight years, but, it may require the capital intensiveness of a Manhattan Project.
Click to expand...

Yes, and Susan Rice can be put in charge.
 
danielpalos said:
The point is about how Socialism can bailout Capitalism with a social "work ethic" for free, with an official Mint at our disposal. We got into fission in under eight years. I believe we can accomplish something similar with fusion in under eight years, but, it may require the capital intensiveness of a Manhattan Project.
Click to expand...

Your first point is sheer fantasy. The illusion of money requires strict adherence or it dispels rather quickly and we all go back to trading shiny stones. Printing money isn't going to help you get to your Walden Pond. The second point is an uneducated fiction. We did not get "into fission in under eight years", we are not there now and not even close. And AGAIN, even if some miracle happenned and we had a working system - it would be highly centralized power. You do know that's how Stalin brought his country to heel, right? GE even helped him do it. Centralize the power and you have iron control over the populace.

For all your reference to the Manhattan Project, it's becoming clear you only have a passing familiarity with it. The consequences to some of our greatest minds involved in the MP should be bar enough to make us rethink ever doing anything similar.

AND AGAIN, there is no need. Generation of electricity is NOT the pressing problem with our current system. It's storage, and to a lesser extent transmission/distribution (the latter is even worse on centralized generation like you propose).
 
clownboy said:
Your first point is sheer fantasy. The illusion of money requires strict adherence or it dispels rather quickly and we all go back to trading shiny stones. Printing money isn't going to help you get to your Walden Pond. The second point is an uneducated fiction. We did not get "into fission in under eight years", we are not there now and not even close. And AGAIN, even if some miracle happenned and we had a working system - it would be highly centralized power. You do know that's how Stalin brought his country to heel, right? GE even helped him do it. Centralize the power and you have iron control over the populace.

For all your reference to the Manhattan Project, it's becoming clear you only have a passing familiarity with it. The consequences to some of our greatest minds involved in the MP should be bar enough to make us rethink ever doing anything similar.

AND AGAIN, there is no need. Generation of electricity is NOT the pressing problem with our current system. It's storage, and to a lesser extent transmission/distribution (the latter is even worse on centralized generation like you propose).
Click to expand...

The Manhattan Project is a clear example of what can be accomplished when Socialism has an official Mint at its disposal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom