They are also examples that worked, so as usual you only show all how wrong you are, there is no problem with that as the point is to show others the current state of affairs of what passes for “intellectual” positions for the Republicans in congress. For me and others that look at the evidence it means less votes for them in the future.
Well, the result was questioned, by Typo Knig in post #1881.
And if you’re going to claim that private enterprise solves problems, then it does matter whether they were trying to solve this one. I have no faith that they will continue to decrease pollution and CO[sub]2[/sub] emissions, because that is incidental to their intention. If there is more money to be made by polluting, that’s what they’ll do.
Yes they will. However, the trend is towards cleaner energy and has been for over a century. The government’s record of betting on the winners is piss poor and often counterproductive, such as with ethanol. Then there’s the fact that unlike the market, the government works at cross purposes with itself. It subsidizes ethanol, but bans import of the far superior sugar ethanol. That’s how politics works. We want solar panels, but not Chinese solar panels. I guess if Americans don’t make them, we’d rather have the planet heat up. Politics.
In the case of sugar ethanol and imported green technologies, the US is actually getting in the way of progress, not helping it along. Because the primary purpose isn’t to save the planet, it’s to reward political contributors. It’s not worth doing if there’s no graft to be had.
Not what is happening in practice, solar panels are dropping in prices, but once again, as Ingus would tell you, lack of support from the government just translate in slower change that is not the recommended way to go.
Even Gore agrees that Ethanol subsidies are not a good idea nowadays, but good luck on finding Republican candidates to come against them in an election.
The point from the previous link on Inglis still applies, you are still clueless about the levels that are still needed of change outside government alone, and as pointed before, guys like Cuccinelly will never be for the recommended changes as there is no problem for them. Inaction is not what Republicans that look at the issue recommend:
I agree with Inglis about a carbon tax. And his advice that everything has a tradeoff is well taken. Democrats tend to believe that everything is a false dilemma. Free lunches abound.
And that shows that you are even ignorant of what the current Republicans are offering, once again, people like Cuccinelli do not agree with you, remember, people like Cuccinelli are indeed just talking nonsense and it is silly to pretend moderate voters will never notice.
As for your last ridiculous point, the false dilemma is with the Republicans as pointed before, you do not magically turn this around just because you say so.
I think you’re being way too optimistic about the salience of global warming on elections. It’s a low priority issue, and even the bigtime believers treat it as a lower priority issue. That’s why Obama won’t let us buy Chinese solar panels. Got campaign contributors to give money too, global warming comes a distant second.
Cooch engaged in a political vendetta against an innocent man, for political gain and at state expense. Among much other wingnuttery. A person like Cooch should have zero political power, not more. It’s too bad for Va that the Dems nominated “the next guy” instead of a good candidate who’s wiling to campaign for office - but that’s another thread.
The climate change sidebar yet another case where GOP leadership has shown their reaction to truth or to mildly difficult news is to stick their fingers in their ears and yell “no no! No!! NOOO!!!”, beyond the point where a two year old child would say “Dude, chill out and move on”.
If the GOP wants to take climate change off the table as an issue, they need a plan to deal with it in some way instead of denying reality. Ditto for Obamacare, the national debt, the slow economy, and the lower-than-hoped percentages of certain voter groups who vote for them. Instead they tantrum and curse. Reagan said it was morning in America. Clinton felt our pain. Obama offered hope. The current GOP is offering inaction denial and offense. What is the GOP’s plan to get a majority of voters to support them and their POTUS candidate, as opposed to 5 of the last 6 presidential elections?
The Presidency is one office. The GOP has had no problem winning the states and Congress. Which says either that the GOP’s problem has been candidate weakness, or the Democrats have a lot of followers who only vote for President.
It’s like all those discussions about gerrymandering never happened.
Ethanol- A lot of this has to do with Mike Johanns, former governor of Nebraska who became W. Bush’s secretary of Agriculture (and was one of Bush’s March for Jesus buddies). Long story short, it is the Halliburton of corn. It is the dumbest thing adaher could raise- it isn’t government that doesn’t work, it is another example that Republicans do stupid, crooked things.
Chinese solar panels- Again, a really dumb thing for adaher to employ considering what he’s ostensibly arguing for. The Chinese government is providing billions in subsidies to their solar companies such that they dump their products at below-cost prices, which destroys free-market enterprises elsewhere. If you want government to promote/not interfere with the free market, you don’t bring up Chinese solar panels as an example.
Climate deniers in politics- I’d rather vote for a genital self-portraitist than a climate change denier, were I forced to choose. One* looks* stupid, but the other clearly suffers from the too-common GOP disability wrt reasoning and math generally.
Anyway, I am starting to look forward to the GOP dashing themselves against the rocks of the debt ceiling, awful as it is that one of our political parties is willing to resort to blackmail when the voters, Congress, the President, Supreme Court and their own presidential candidate’s policies as governor all decide against them.
More ignorance shows, this is not a belief, scientists report it is a serious matter. And as for the solar issue, as usual, you need a cite to show that Chinese solar panels are banned as you imply because it is clear to me that once again you are up to your ***discredited ***peculiar definitions, in this case: what “not letting us” means.
I think he is talking about the price floor the Europeans set on Chinese panels, and the tariffs that were threatened if they kept dumping. Americans can still buy Chinese panels.
… and that dumping by China is what drove Solyndra out of business, which is somehow Obama’s fault. Anyway, he shouldn’t have been trying to keep growth-industry jobs in America, 'cause gummint is bad or something.
It’s as if all the discussions about the natural GOP advantage in both the House and the Senate never happened.
The Democrats have increased their support in raw numbers, but they are getting more and more concentrated in urban areas. If you draw fair districts, then you’re going to get a lot of 80%+ Democratic districts and even more 60%+ Republican districts.
Is the primary goal to save the planet, or American jobs? Tradeoffs matter, and adults consider tradeoffs when making policy. Children talk about “false dilemmas” and having it all.
Or he actually does understand the tradeoffs, but considers giving money to his political contributors to be the real top priority.
Both. No tradeoff is necessary.
That’s even more imaginative than usual for you.
They did. You lost them.
But that contradicts your point about Democratic turnout and Democrats not voting for Congress:
Or - the point supported by actual numbers - that the Congressional districts are disproportionately gerrymandered in favor of the Republicans.
Depends on who gets to define “fair”, doesn’t it?
False. The tradeoff has been demonstrated. We can import better green technologies today, but we choose not to. Carbon emissions are higher than they otherwise would be because the jobs are considered a higher priority.
Hardly. Most of these companies gave to the Obama campaign. You may choose to believe that a politicians’ motives are pure if you wish.