• 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!

Is Congress quietly set for a jobs compromise?

Most of Europe already had high population densities, makes it easy to implement useful mass transit services.
On the other hand, we have been dispersed, with exceptions.

For the second time, I am not talking about transportation, I am talking about our energy inefficiency in our residential, commercial, and industrial uses of energy?
 
They built their infrastructure later than we did.

Do you think that is going to be a disadvantage for our economy that we haven't upgraded to more efficient uses of energy as prices continue to rise? That is my point.
 
For the second time, I am not talking about transportation, I am talking about our energy inefficiency in our residential, commercial, and industrial uses of energy?

Transportation is a commercial and industrial usage of energy. :shrug:

There are lots of potential solutions, but focusing on single things and thinking they can apply everywhere won't cut it.
We have to examine the many different situations that people live in and apply the appropriate energy solution to that.

If it makes you feel any better, I use CFL's because it saves me money long term.
 
Do you think that is going to be a disadvantage for our economy that we haven't upgraded to more efficient uses of energy as prices continue to rise? That is my point.

I think no one is willing to invest in completely redesigning the energy distribution until the cost of nothing doing so becomes prohibitive. Obama wanted to create a smart energy grind, but he attached it to things the repubs couldn't stand so it got voted down.
 
Transportation is a commercial and industrial usage of energy. :shrug:

There are lots of potential solutions, but focusing on single things and thinking they can apply everywhere won't cut it.
We have to examine the many different situations that people live in and apply the appropriate energy solution to that.

If it makes you feel any better, I use CFL's because it saves me money long term.

I am not talking about single things. I am talking about the energy efficiency rating for the whole country. If we are 35th in energy efficiency in the world that means no matter what energy source we use we are going to be spending much, much more that the other industrialized world for energy, which is going to handicap our ability to have a strong economy as compared with the rest of the industrialized world that has much higher efficiencies.
 
I am not talking about single things. I am talking about the energy efficiency rating for the whole country. If we are 35th in energy efficiency in the world that means no matter what energy source we use we are going to be spending much, much more that the other industrialized world for energy, which is going to handicap our ability to have a strong economy as compared with the rest of the industrialized world that has much higher efficiencies.

In some circumstances we can afford to be more energy inefficient, in other we can't.

Increasing national energy efficiency requires that application of single things.
It doesn't materialize from fiat.

There has to be a reason for a nation to be more energy efficient though.
Sometimes cost isn't enough reason for most people, sometimes it is.
Depends on each situation and "single thing."
 
I think no one is willing to invest in completely redesigning the energy distribution until the cost of nothing doing so becomes prohibitive. Obama wanted to create a smart energy grind, but he attached it to things the repubs couldn't stand so it got voted down.

We had a plan 3 decades ago to start building energy efficient designs into our residential, commercial and industrial, and it was working, until we elected the oil president and it was all scrapped. This is not all new technology either. Passive solar design was used in colonial times when energy was not readily available, there is so much we could do that we are not doing that is only going to make it harder on ourselves in the future. That's all I'm saying.

There was funding for power grid upgrades in the stimulus ~

Stimulus Funds To Help Modernize the National Power Grid

And you say there were funds in addition to that that got voted down?
 
Stimulus Funds To Help Modernize the National Power Grid

And you say there were funds in addition to that that got voted down?

AFIK, in Obama's Energy legislation there was to be a massive investment in modernizing the national energy grid to a "smart grind" system that basically directs power to were it needs to go instead of just pumping it out like what happens now. Included in that legislation, IRRC was things repubs couldn't stand like Cap and Trade maybe.
 
We had a plan 3 decades ago to start building energy efficient designs into our residential, commercial and industrial, and it was working, until we elected the oil president and it was all scrapped. This is not all new technology either. Passive solar design was used in colonial times when energy was not readily available, there is so much we could do that we are not doing that is only going to make it harder on ourselves in the future. That's all I'm saying.

There was funding for power grid upgrades in the stimulus ~

Stimulus Funds To Help Modernize the National Power Grid

And you say there were funds in addition to that that got voted down?

You're too focused on top down planning, that's the problem.

We don't need presidents and congresses proposing national plans.
Not every region in the nation needs all of these things.

Would you create a national plan to install solar panels on all houses when many of them, wouldn't have the same cost benefit as others?
No that's dumb, but that tends to be the case with government plans.
 
AFIK, in Obama's Energy legislation there was to be a massive investment in modernizing the national energy grid to a "smart grind" system that basically directs power to were it needs to go instead of just pumping it out like what happens now. Included in that legislation, IRRC was things repubs couldn't stand like Cap and Trade maybe.

Wouldn't it be better to find a way to make it a competitive market, instead of perpetuating the current government granted monopoly?
 
In some circumstances we can afford to be more energy inefficient, in other we can't.

Not if we are thinking long term.

Increasing national energy efficiency requires that application of single things.
It doesn't materialize from fiat.

Well let's do as many as we can. No reason to handicap ourslelves for the future.

There has to be a reason for a nation to be more energy efficient though.

There is a reason, cost! We waste more of the energy than any other country in the world, and that keeps getting more an more expensive, which has a severe negative effect on our economy. Its already hurting our economy. Its one of the reasons we are so slow in recovering from the recession.

Sometimes cost isn't enough reason for most people, sometimes it is.
Depends on each situation and "single thing."

So probably better to just wait till we get to depression mode before we act?
 
You're too focused on top down planning, that's the problem.

We don't need presidents and congresses proposing national plans.
Not every region in the nation needs all of these things.

Would you create a national plan to install solar panels on all houses when many of them, wouldn't have the same cost benefit as others?
No that's dumb, but that tends to be the case with government plans.

No, but building wind farms in the Midwest is something the fed gov can do since it is infrastructure. The only reason its not being done is because wind would be too cheap and too plentiful in the Midwest to give a high enough profit. Or putting breakers on the grind that does things like I said above.
 
No, but building wind farms in the Midwest is something the fed gov can do since it is infrastructure. The only reason its not being done is because wind would be too cheap and too plentiful in the Midwest to give a high enough profit. Or putting breakers on the grind that does things like I said above.

Wind is intermittent.
Things like that and solar require the use of some kind of storage system, like a battery, capacitor, or fly wheel type device.

None of which are practical enough to implement yet.
 
Wind is intermittent.
Things like that and solar require the use of some kind of storage system, like a battery, capacitor, or fly wheel type device.

None of which are practical enough to implement yet.

Wind is intermediate on the cost, its practically constant in the Midwest, which is why its not as profitable in the midwest thus why more wind farms are being built on both coast. Indiana is building a few wind-farms, but not enough IMO. If I had the funds, or the contacts, I'd start my own wind farms throughout the Midwest, but I don't :(
 
AFIK, in Obama's Energy legislation there was to be a massive investment in modernizing the national energy grid to a "smart grind" system that basically directs power to were it needs to go instead of just pumping it out like what happens now. Included in that legislation, IRRC was things repubs couldn't stand like Cap and Trade maybe.

About $4.2 billion was funded for the power grid as part of the Recovery Act.
Department of Energy - OE Recovery Act - Funding Opportunities

Do you have a link to the funding bill you were speaking of that got voted down?
 
Not if we are thinking long term.

Some people can waste energy.
It falls right in line with the subjective theory of value.

Well let's do as many as we can. No reason to handicap ourslelves for the future.

That's stupid because you lump in the inefficient with the efficient.
Let people decide what is most efficient for themselves.

There is a reason, cost! We waste more of the energy than any other country in the world, and that keeps getting more an more expensive, which has a severe negative effect on our economy. Its already hurting our economy. Its one of the reasons we are so slow in recovering from the recession.

And many people do not mind the cost.
Usage will decline, if people can't afford it.

That is how these things work.

So probably better to just wait till we get to depression mode before we act?

No but this is yet another problem I have with you.
It's either all or nothing in your estimation.

Things don't work like that in the real world.
 
Wind is intermediate on the cost, its practically constant in the Midwest, which is why its not as profitable in the midwest thus why more wind farms are being built on both coast. Indiana is building a few wind-farms, but not enough IMO. If I had the funds, or the contacts, I'd start my own wind farms throughout the Midwest, but I don't :(

Wind is not consistent, not even in the Midwest.
If it were free and consistently reliable, it wouldn't be ignored.

The problem stems from that there is no practical storage device for when the wind isn't blowing hard enough.
 
You're too focused on top down planning, that's the problem.

Top down is where the leadership has to come from, private corps are only interested in profits. Peak oil is upon us and the private market didn't come through. Why should they, they are making the most profit anyone has ever made in history of the planey while our economy is going down the tubes.
Would you create a national plan to install solar panels on all houses when many of them, wouldn't have the same cost benefit as others?
No that's dumb, but that tends to be the case with government plans

No, I would provide substantial tax credits for those that built energy efficiencty into their construction projects or retrogrades, and put alot more money into R&D. That is how it was working in the 70's, before it was scrapped.
 
Top down is where the leadership has to come from, private corps are only interested in profits. Peak oil is upon us and the private market didn't come through. Why should they, they are making the most profit anyone has ever made in history of the planey while our economy is going down the tubes.

Top down makes tons of mistakes at the cost to taxpayers, who may have better ideas.
Top down is corporate welfare, which you usually don't support.

Leadership comes from those who see problems and find their own individual way to alleviate them, through innovation and experimentation.

Part 2 of this problem is that oil is still cheap enough and most people are fine with it for now.
There are other developments in process, you're just being too impatient.
Plus this isn't about transportation. :)

You said our economy was recovering, now it's going down the tubes? :confused:


No, I would provide substantial tax credits for those that built energy efficiencty into their construction projects or retrogrades, and put alot more money into R&D. That is how it was working in the 70's, before it was scrapped.

R&D does not need government money.
There are a ton of things on the horizon you don't know about that haven't arisen because of government money.

Stop being so impatient.
You can not see everything in development in the world.
These things take time.
 
Some people can waste energy.

Obviously, we are the most wasteful in the world!

It falls right in line with the subjective theory of value.

You tell me how wasting energy helps consumers or economy that has to pay more for the energy to produce and transport goods, except the companies making more profit than anyone in the history of the planet?


That's stupid because you lump in the inefficient with the efficient.

No, we only do what's efficient.

Let people decide what is most efficient for themselves.

If that approach would have worked we wouldn't be facing an energy crisis now with an the most inefficient systems in the industrialized world, now would we?

It time for leadership in our energy program.



And many people do not mind the cost.

What are you talking about, everyone is complaing about high energy costs!


Usage will decline, if people can't afford it.

So once we are reduced to a nation of poor people, prices will go down. All we need is another Depression and we'll be all set!

That is how these things work.

I see you are a man with a plan! :sun
 
Last edited:
Obviously, we are the most wasteful in the world!

Ok, but that doesn't mean we should jump the shark and go crazy with government spending on solutions.
That to is wasteful.


You tell me how wasting energy helps consumers or economy that has to pay more for the energy to produce and transport goods, except the companies making more profit than anyone in the history of the planet?

Leisure.
People waste money and energy for convenience all the time.
That is how some people like to live, I don't tell others how to spend their money.


No, we only do what's efficient.

There is no clear answer to what is efficient yet.
That's why your proposing massive spending on R&D which is wasteful.

Businesses can spend their own money researching what is the best way to create better energy efficiency.

If that approach would have worked we wouldn't be facing an energy crisis now with an the most inefficient systems in the industrialized world, now would we?

It time for leadership in our energy program.

But it didn't work.
You can blame Reagan et all, but if it were such a great plan, the nation would of rioted when it was cut.



What are you talking about, everyone is complaing about high energy costs!

I'm not complaining, I know how to ration my own resources to the point of enjoying my life just fine and I'm not rich.

Besides, why should the government do stuff just because people complain.
People complain about a ton of dumb crap, much of which is their own doing.

So once we are reduced to a nation of poor people, prices will go down. All we need is another Depression and we'll be all set!

I see you are a man with a plan! :sun

There you go again, all or nothing.

There is no reasoning with you.
I do like independent energy things, but you turd up what could be an interesting discussion, with your political love fest, with whatever your favorite politician wants to do.
 
Ok, but that doesn't mean we should jump the shark and go crazy with government spending on solutions.
That to is wasteful.

No, sure, we should just continue to let the economy decline and more and more people get poor and then the prices will go down.




Leisure.
People waste money and energy for convenience all the time.
That is how some people like to live, I don't tell others how to spend their money.

Of couse not, a recession is so much more rewarding.


There is no clear answer to what is efficient yet.

We've known for a hundred years how to be more efficient than we are now!


That's why your proposing massive spending on R&D which is wasteful.

Right, I forgot, we don't act until we are in another Great Depression. Brilliant!


Businesses can spend their own money researching what is the best way to create better energy efficiency.

Yeah the energy companies have so much incentive to provide cheap sources of energy when they are making the most profit in history, how could I have forgotten that.

But it didn't work.

It was working until it was scrapped. But you are correct, once it was scrapped by Reagan, it didn't work worth a darn!

You can blame Reagan et all, but if it were such a great plan, the nation would of rioted when it was cut.

Nation was acting under the leadership of an actor, who scrapped the energy plan and took the solar panels off the whitehouse and told people to party like it was 1959!




I'm not complaining, I know how to ration my own resources to the point of enjoying my life just fine and I'm not rich.

I am glad you are happy our country is in a recession and 1 in 7 Americans live in poverty. I suppose you will be ecstatic when gas prices are $6 a gallon and your electric bill is $500 a month. Good times!

Besides, why should the government do stuff just because people complain.
People complain about a ton of dumb crap, much of which is their own doing.

The country should do it because it is in the best long term interest of our country. That is why China has moved ahead of us in energy efficiency and in alternative energy, they think long-term. It is why we have to go to them for money to keep us afloat.

There you go again, all or nothing. There is no reasoning with you.
I do like independent energy things, but you turd up what could be an interesting discussion, with your political love fest, with whatever your favorite politician wants to do.

You haven't tried reason yet, that is the problem. You are thinking in terms of what is best for you personally in the short-term. I saw the need for energy conservation before you were born and before the president was a grownup. :"sun
 
Last edited:
Streamlining the tax code, good.

Supporting institutional R&D and further incentivising commuter rail (I think that's what it means), bad.
Are you talking about the tax credit for R&D?
 
Back
Top Bottom