Wake up and smell the carbon dioxide, cordite.
National Wildlife Federation has a big push on to support a shift in focus in the nation’s energy policy.
“On January 18, the House is expected to vote to roll back billions of dollars in oil industry tax breaks and invest the money in a renewable energy fund.”
GOP benefactors Exxon-Mobil-Shell-BP etc. are getting tax breaks that reward them with record profits for selling a product that causes war and fouls the air.
Aren’t “tax breaks” a function of a percentage of revenue? As gas prices fall, “tax breaks” will shrink. My understanding is that “tax breaks” have a direct correlation to jobs. A lot of these “tax breaks” fund blue collar, middle class jobs. If these funds are shifted to R&D, it will be used for highly skilled, upper-middle class jobs, yes? Seems that this will be a net loss of lower and middle class jobs and income. Also, based on my personal experience with federal grants, the ROI will be much lower than industry’s ROI on private investment capital.
Again using the evolution model wouldn’t that simply mean the creation of a new niche(altenative fuels) and thus no loss in jobs and income? C’mon you conservatives love using evolution as a model for the economy.
How naive am I?
Seems a common enough thread to me.. from the conservative side that is: “..saving jobs and keeping costs down..“. What altruism!
Viva productivity! Hurray the status quo.
Crappola, I say.
Crappola, I say.
It is crappola since it assumes the existence of only one industry. I guess as long as you do business in a bubble your fine.
I dunno from whom I’m borrowing this, but it made sense to me at the time:
What we need is a full-scale “Manhatten Project“-level national energy commitment, the goal of which is to get as close to -zero- as possible, our dependence on Mid-East oil.
Then, “they” can do whatever “they” want with the sand. “Pound-it”.. would be a good start.
I support the Manhattan Project approach to energy independence (and cardiovascular disease therapies) provided there are clearly defined objectives that, if met, sustain funding or, if not, kill the project. I am not interested in another NIH black hole program. The problem with funding the project is that it wil take lots of capital and business is the most efficient creator of capital and business still needs lots of fossil fuels to run and, hence, create the capital. The laws of natural adaptation might apply if it weren’t for the unions penchant for unnatural acts that allow the weak to survive, even thrive.
You’re blaming it on the unions? What a joke.
jhc,
re: “..unnatural acts that allow the weak to survive, even thrive.”
Are you saying that in a non-union context, the weak would (or should) accomodate the strong by simply passing into oblivion en-masse – in some wretched [unnatural] condition?
How then would you choose to define civilization?
Actually unionization is seen in nature. Cooperative behavior etc. IN fact as you know even in bacteria. One of the current strategies in antimicrobial agents are ones that disrupt the ability of bacteria to ‘communicate’ because cooperitive behaviour is required to establish infection.
Anyone the observations come first then the models reflect those observations. you don’t try to make your model fit the facts, by desperately trying to call some facts unnatural. That is not science. YOu should try using your education in science some time it might help.
BTW you are still talking Survival of the fittest. ” allow the weak to survive, even thrive” Remember that was rejected by the scientific community. Try using a selectionist argument and maybe you can get yourself back in the realm of science.
Just to take you through basic biology again since you need a refresher. Darwins theory was accepted since he compared the Artificial selection of animal and plant breeders to the selective pressure of the environment. Herbert Spencer’s “survival of the fittest” was rejected since Fitness ( Weak and strong in your words) cannot be defined autonomously of survival. thus you have a tautology. And as you know you cannot test or make predictions from a tautology. HOwever Ayn Rand and Herbert spencer Both champions of the conservative movement used this same survival of the fittest tautology as the basis of the modern conservative ideology. Yes a simple statement rejected as non scientific is now the economic theory of modern conservatives
I am saying that unions, like most socialist strategies, throttle efficiency and optimization. Especially when it comes to industry and commerce. Just look at the “job for life” clause in the UAW contract that is killing the US auto industry. Likewise, ALPA contracts that pay pilots up to $300,000 annually for a 3-day work week. Union contracts are all extorted agreements, by the way. Unions, and socialism in general, enable inefficiency and, ultimately, failure. (The liberals “war on poverty” is a great example of a failed social program. Just look at the lower ninth ward where more federal handouts per capita have been doled-out for decades. Then there’s Cuba, the USSR, etc.)
JP, your comment is so laughably full of out-of-context crap that it doesn’t deserve a response. But since you insist on positing this crap, I’ll bite. Cancer cells and pathogens demonstrate intercellular communication and cooperation. Of course cancer kills its host. Unions are like cancer. Yeah, thanks for making my point.
Hey, Dan, if you don’t want my opinion, just say so. This “awaiting moderation” status is for the birds.
Wow! Someone obviously spewed out some conservative family values!
You’ve gone from putting my comments into “awaiting moderation” to deleting them entirely?
Pathetic, Dan.
yet amazingly your comments are still posted. I will have to assume this is your latest game, not unlike when you were posting under my name.
Pathetic JHC
Post the comments Dan…What’s going on?
Can you imagine how huge the industry that replaces fossil fuels will be? I hope the United States will lead that gravy train.
One more time with feeling:
I am saying that unions, like most socialist strategies, throttle efficiency and optimization. Especially when it comes to industry and commerce. Just look at the “job for life” clause in the UAW contract that is killing the US auto industry. Likewise, ALPA contracts that pay pilots up to $300,000 annually for a 3-day work week. Union contracts are all extorted agreements, by the way. Unions, and socialism in general, enable inefficiency and, ultimately, failure. (The liberals “war on poverty” is a great example of a failed social program. Just look at the lower ninth ward where more federal handouts per capita have been doled-out for decades. Then there’s Cuba, the USSR, etc.)
JP, your comment is so laughably full of out-of-context crap that it doesn’t deserve a response. But since you insist on positing this crap, I’ll bite. Cancer cells and pathogens demonstrate intercellular communication and cooperation. Of course cancer kills its host. Unions are like cancer. Yeah, thanks for making my point.
I am saying that unions, like most socialist strategies, throttle efficiency and optimization. Especially when it comes to industry and commerce. Just look at the “job for life” clause in the UAW contract that is killing the US auto industry. Likewise, ALPA contracts that pay pilots up to $300,000 annually for a 3-day work week. Union contracts are all extorted agreements, by the way. Unions, and socialism in general, enable inefficiency and, ultimately, failure. (The liberals “war on poverty” is a great example of a failed social program. Just look at the lower ninth ward where more federal handouts per capita have been doled-out for decades. Then there’s Cuba, the USSR, etc.)
JP, your comment is so laughably full of out-of-context crap that it doesn’t deserve a response. But since you insist on positing this crap, I’ll bite. Cancer cells and pathogens demonstrate intercellular communication and cooperation. Of course cancer kills its host. Unions are like cancer. Yeah, thanks for making my point.
Actually if you were to make your point you would ask, as most scientist do, is it conserved in nature and yes there are plenty of examples of altruistic and cooperative behaviour that exist (non pathogenic in particular). That demonstrates that, if you are to make a selectionist argument that they must have been selected for and not against. If you beleive in Neutral theory and random genetic drift, then the argument becomes simply that that is what became prevalent, however for it to be prevalent in so many species simultaneoulsy would tend to rule that one out.
Normally I would laugh at your comments but in your case since you claim to be a scientist I find it rather embarrassing.
I think the community colleges still offer basic biology as a night course.
the cancer is almost gone along with the middle class….happy days are here again..
Hooooeeee, where are my boots? The genetics poopy is getting deep in here.
Lo, it’s going to be easier to segment society: the achievers and the non-achievers.
Hey this “genetics poopy” is what you conservatives incorrectly call social darwinism which you extend to somehow being you’re economic theory.
But hey I at least figured if you actually are a scientist you would create a scientific argument.
I guess that’s something your not capable of.
Therefore I still feel embarrassed for you.
It really is sad, shocking actually, that you can’t defend yourself beyond ‘poopy’ talk. Maybe you can find a web site where you can cut and paste arguments. I am sure that is more your level of scientific reasoning.
I thought I was an achiever when I worked my way through college as a teamster.
First my kids and now you. Both embarrassed for me. Must be a generational thing.
Ah Party of personal responsibitlity excuse #54 BLame it on a generation.
Where does conservative hypocrisy end?
Now if we could get all the teamsters to go to college, we would really have something.
Seriously, let’s get everyone to college..
Wow but the reality here is that Republicans are against funding education
D’OH
Didn’t W have the largest increase in federal education funding? And, at a time when many wanted to close down the Department of Education.
Want a college education paid for? Move to Georgia and graduate from High School with a B average. Their Hope Scholarship pays for everything but room and board as long as you maintain a B average. Thanks to that great Democrat, Zell Miller.
Didn’t Bush also Propose the largest Cut in education spending in history. as well as short changed programs like no child left behind.
Hooray Zell Miller way to use money you get from the blue states.
No.
No, Congress appropriates funding of programs and Kennedy was W’s floor leader in Congress. Also, Ed Randell admitted that most states were unprepared to move forward on NCLB and missed funding windows. If you have a problem with NCLB funding, take it up with Teddy.
Georgia’s Hope Scholarship is funded completely by the state lottery system.
Hope is apllicable only to PUBLIC Schools in georgia. Those PUBLIC schools are still payed for BY BLUE MONEY.
It is possible to go to Private colleges within georgia but the reward is 3,000 PER YEAR. in other words the Public education system is paying the rest of the bill via waiver and most likely that is coming form federal and state taxes. (SHIFT FUNDS)
Its current status is questionable since revenues of Lotto aren’t holding up and they are discussing alternatives.
Nice try
education should not be a partisan issue…..but everything is anymore.too bad.
Not true, again. Hope is very solvent. Funding of Hope is not questionable. The only question about Hope was whether or not it might have to be modified because of its overwhelming success resulting in more students staying in-state. The last incoming class at the University of Georgia had an SAT average score of 1350 (old scale), equal to many Ivy League metrics. Hope is available for both public and private education. Hope pays for the state’s pre-K program, also. Hope is not a co-pay program. Any other state a federal funding at the college level goes to support non-qualifying students, e.g., Pell Grants.
Georgia ranks 41st in per capita federal spending and 25th in per capita tax burden. They get less back than they pay.
Lousy try.
Wrong again. Hope depends on the cost of Public schools being held low by FEDERAL AND STATE TAXES.
I don’t mind giving a little help for education in the red states. Seems like the Christian thing to do.
Hope depends on the lottery. No lottery, no Hope. No pun intended.
I’ll start buying tickets….Keep hope alive.
I was searching for Blogs about federal college grants and found this site. I am interested in your content and appreciate sites like this.