backtop


Print 198 comment(s) - last by Dan Banana.. on Mar 13 at 9:06 PM


  (Source: thaindian.com)
President Barack Obama has proposed to spend $3.7 billion toward new tax credits for electric vehicles, and another $1 billion to progress the deployment of advanced-technology vehicles

The Obama administration is looking to spend a total of $4.7 billion on new tax credits for electric vehicles (EVs) and for a speedier deployment of advanced-technology vehicles.

President Barack Obama has proposed to spend $3.7 billion toward new tax credits for electric vehicles, and another $1 billion to progress the deployment of advanced-technology vehicles in about 10 to 15 communities. EVs aren’t the only technology to get a boost -- the proposal aims to lump natural gas, electrification and other alternative fuels together in the same category.

To break it down further, Obama wants to spend $2 billion to increase the EV tax credit from $7,500 to $10,000 and to turn it into a point of sale rebate. The $10,000 would be applied to vehicles that are at least 25 percent efficient than government goals. Obama wants to expand the tax credit to other kinds of advanced vehicles and reform the credit for EVs so that it's no longer strictly based on the size of the battery. As for the other $1.7 billion, Obama wants to make a new credit for commercial truck buyers where they receive credit for half of the extra costs of an advanced-technology vehicle.

The $1 billion used for EV and advanced-technology vehicle progress in 10 to 15 communities will aim to boost EV adoption. Obama originally proposed a goal of putting 1 million plug-in and electric vehicles on U.S. roads by 2015, but that goal has been difficult to meet. Demand for and adoption of EVs has slowed considerably in recent months, and Obama is looking to increase that demand.

"To cities and towns all across the country, what we're going to say is, if you make a commitment to buy more advanced vehicles for your community -- whether they run on electricity or biofuels or natural gas -- we'll help you cut through the red tape and build fueling stations nearby," said Obama. "We're going to give communities across the country more of an incentive to make the shift to more energy-efficient cars."

The proposal also wants medium and heavy duty trucks to improve efficiency by 20 percent by 2018, which is expected to add about $8 billion to the cost of vehicles yet offer $49 billion in benefits.

"The economic recovery is not only working in the domestic auto industry," said Bob King, United Auto Workers (UAW) president. "It's in other areas as well, such as heavy truck assembly and parts."

The proposal will likely face some criticism, considering the fact that EVs have significantly slowed in demand and other alternative energy ventures have failed. Last year, General Motors experienced some trouble with its Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid electric vehicle, which experienced a series of battery fires through different National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) tests. The situation put a lot of bad light on the Volt, and sales dropped in early 2012. Just last week, GM announced that it would halt production of the Volt for five weeks because of decreased demand.

Other EV troubles include the failure of Indiana's Think City EV plant, which contains 100 unfinished Think City cars waiting to be completed but can't. Also, Fisker Automotive had battery issues and a recall last year on its Karma plug-in hybrids, and EV battery maker Ener1 filed for bankruptcy in January 2012 after receiving a $118 million Department of Energy grant in August 2009.

Sources: The Detroit News, The White House



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Liberal Logic In Action
By Arsynic on 3/8/2012 3:54:41 PM , Rating: 4
"Solyndra failed because we didn't throw enough money at them."

"The economy is sluggish because we didn't throw enough stimulus at it."

"Electric cars aren't taking off because we didn't throw enough money at GM, Fisker and Tesla."

Maybe when our cities are burning due to riots and we're sucking our neighbor's dicks like Greece for some bailout money.




RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Shig on 3/8/12, Rating: -1
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By jimbojimbo on 3/8/2012 4:08:42 PM , Rating: 2
I love it more than paying $10k+ more for a similar car and then not having any place to charge it at all, except at a garage a city block away.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By jdonkey123 on 3/10/2012 2:58:27 AM , Rating: 2
Most cars are owned by multi-vehicle households. For them, they can use their EV 99% of the time without ever having to charge it (except at home.) Take the gas guzzler for the other 1% of trips!


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Manch on 3/8/2012 4:52:49 PM , Rating: 4
Rather spend 4$ at the pump then have my tax money wasted on a 10k credit for someone elses car.
Also, there are other cars that get very close to the efficiency of hybrids, cost half as much w/o a tax credit, which only reinforces the point that this is a waste of tax payers money.

Plopping down a billion dollars so only a few cities can benefit is also moronic and a waste.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Amedean on 3/9/12, Rating: -1
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Dan Banana on 3/9/12, Rating: -1
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Amedean on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Boingo Twang on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Mint on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Amedean on 3/9/2012 3:29:06 PM , Rating: 1
Your math looks very good, not to mention the Volt is made in America and the electricity used is produced here. If we could somehow use natural gas we could completely become self reliant since we are the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.

I think the money the government is putting in our domestic energy programs are a safe bet but I am completely amazed by the kamakazi amateur opinionists who consistently voice the same rhetoric mirroring the exact propoganda from Fox News.

The same terms are consistently used by these polarized individuals - Marxist, communism, liberal elite, socialists, etc. It is sad that based on a few words posted I can use intuition to predict with amazing accuracy the range of positions on issues not relating to each other. Best thing I ever did intellectually was cancel my cable years ago.

Behold the power of psychology and mass media!


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Mint on 3/9/2012 4:14:27 PM , Rating: 2
Unfortunately, math is not good enough for the readers of this blog.

Natural gas is a possibility. In the long long term, we could even generate it from electricity, if it was cheap enough.

The problem is that the refueling infrastructure is very sparse. If we subsidized bifuel vehicles (gasoline/natural gas), they would be cheaper than regular cars and there's no guarantee that the miles would be on CNG. It's basically the same problem that predictably never let the hydrogen economy take off in the 10+ years of trying.

I think natural gas is better to hold onto for electricity generation (it's recently become cheaper than coal due to falling prices) and heating. I'd rather go nuclear, but it took forever for environmentalists to tone down the FUD, so all this renewable energy coming online will need gas backup.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By jdonkey123 on 3/10/2012 3:03:56 AM , Rating: 1
Why can't people get over this insane idea that they all drive 1,000 miles every day? When I'm in the market for my next car, I'm likely to get one powered by CNG and just spring for the home refueling station.

When I need to take a trip that's longer than the 200+ mile range of my tank, I'll take the gas guzzler, because like most families, we have more than one car!


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By weskurtz0081 on 3/9/2012 7:25:46 AM , Rating: 4
Didn't Obama's Secretary of Energy say that their goal was to have gas cost as much as it does in Europe so they could push alternative energy?


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By TSS on 3/9/2012 12:52:05 PM , Rating: 2
Gas is currently $9+ a gallon here in holland.

You've got a loooooong way to go my friend.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By weskurtz0081 on 3/9/2012 1:21:25 PM , Rating: 2
Of course gas is more expensive in Europe, the argument wasn't that we were in the same neighborhood as far as cost is concerned, it's that this administration has publicly stated the goal was to drive the cost of petrol up to European levels.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Boingo Twang on 3/9/2012 1:23:40 PM , Rating: 1
When and where was that stated? Please inform.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Rott3nHIppi3 on 3/9/2012 2:20:38 PM , Rating: 2
Does the power of Google escape you or do you intentionally play naive to curb your complete ignorance of everything around you?
quote:
Upon being named energy secretary, the former college professor said the administration's strategy would be to raise prices high enough to make expensive alternatives more competitive. "Somehow," Chu told the Wall Street Journal, "we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe."

http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/story/no-gas-pain...


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Mint on 3/9/2012 3:54:56 PM , Rating: 2
Chu can say what he wants, but it's not going to happen. Every US president knows that rising gas prices - especially intentional ones - are political suicide. That's why Obama gave up the carbon tax or cap-and-trade proposals without a fight, much to the dismay of liberals.

As for that awful article, maybe you should pay attention to the facts:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2012/0309/In...
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2012/0309/Ga...
(I hope that's a conservative enough site for you...)


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Boingo Twang on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Boingo Twang on 3/9/12, Rating: -1
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Rott3nHIppi3 on 3/9/2012 2:30:48 PM , Rating: 2
Good morning class.. .today we'll begin a short lesson how to use Google:

Step 1 -In the search box, type: "Steven Chu," "Raise Price of Gas"
Step 2 -Press Google Search button

It's just that simple. You should try it someday; really is an amazing search engine. Surprised you haven't heard of it yet or used it for that matter.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Boingo Twang on 3/9/12, Rating: -1
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Rott3nHIppi3 on 3/9/2012 3:01:22 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
I work for a living unlike most of you around here that have to sit on websites all day.
Yet, you took time out of your busy day to post this! Thank You. *facepalm.*

I work too... problem is, I'm so F'n efficient at what I do, I have more down-time to troll your posts!


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Spuke on 3/9/2012 5:19:07 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
I work too... problem is, I'm so F'n efficient at what I do, I have more down-time to troll your posts!
LMAO!!!


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By weskurtz0081 on 3/9/2012 3:36:51 PM , Rating: 2
I work for a living too... hence my lack of a response until now...

So, my response is, look it up it's not hard to find!


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Boingo Twang on 3/9/12, Rating: -1
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By weskurtz0081 on 3/10/2012 12:19:43 PM , Rating: 3
Meh, good try buddy, I just don't like doing work for people that are too lazy to do it for themselves.

Funny thing is, you aren't even bothering to dispute the claim, you are trying to create a red herring by simply attacking the credibility of the person that posted rather than the credibility of the post.... classic!


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By weskurtz0081 on 3/10/2012 12:34:28 PM , Rating: 3
You know, the funny thing about all this is:

-you have a President that WANTED cap/trade but couldn't get it passed so he gave it up (for now).

-he hired Chu, a guy that said we need to achieve gas prices like they have in Europe.

-we've been handing out funding left and right to just about any alternative energy company that we can regardless of the fiscal soundness of those companies (it obviously helps when you have connections to the ones handing out the money)

-refineries in Texas have been under direct assault by the EPA since 2008

-subsidies that are given to the oil industry in the form of tax breaks have been under attack while other companies with MUCH higher margins haven't received a bit of heat.

I could go on, but the point is, Obama wants higher gas prices to push people to alternatives, it should be obvious to anyone who pays any attention... but YOU attack my credibility rather than the message. Classic sign of someone not having a valid response to an statement.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Arsynic on 3/9/2012 8:31:40 AM , Rating: 4
$4.00 gas in my truck with NO PAYMENTS is cheaper than buying a Chevy Volt or a Tesla.


By Shadowmaster625 on 3/9/2012 8:39:33 AM , Rating: 2
HaHa gotta love it. This person actually thinks that we are spending $4 at the pump because the government isnt spending enough money!

It's not because the government keeps borrowing new money into existence, and that money goes straight into commodities? No, it couldnt be....


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/8/2012 4:11:15 PM , Rating: 3
Ya, its pretty sickening at this point.

You would think that after watching the previous 6 presidents throwing money away and winding up with crap economy, you would learn, but no. Throw even MORE money is the solution. Hope and change my a$$. Obama looks exactly like the previous 6 if you ask me. I like his foreign policy and social stances for teh most part, but god damn, the #1 thing is the economy and he is just retarded at it.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/8/2012 10:22:36 PM , Rating: 4
Liberals don't have a choice because they've built an entire party out of buying votes through Government spending. Obama's largest voting base, and Democrats in general, is comprised of people dependent on the Government to solve all the problems out there.

Seriously, when you have people actually saying Obama isn't spending enough, and isn't Liberal enough, it really makes you wonder how far the Democrat base wants us to go. It's scary.

I guess you're going to argue with that though and call me extremist or whatever, go ahead, I gotta tell it like it is no matter.

quote:
the #1 thing is the economy and he is just retarded at it.


Read his books and listen to his speeches. Believe it or not, I have. You're going to say I'm wrong I'm sure, and that's he's no different from the "previous 6", but I think Obama is truly unique in this aspect.

I think, for the first time in our history, we've appointed a President that fully and completely LOATHES our "free market" economy. He hates capitalism, utterly and completely. He's sickened by "American exceptionalism". Of course the economy isn't getting better and he's "retarded" at it. He absolutely does not WANT it to get better, and never has. In his heart of hearts, he's diametrically apposed to every principle which our economy is based on.

I don't think he's "retarded" about our economy at all. This is a very intelligent man. He simply is ideologically unable to do what must be done to fix it. It goes against EVERYTHING he believes in.

I could quote you passages from books and quotes from speeches all day long. Instead I'll ask you to find me quotes from him showing the opposite. He's NEVER stood up for capitalism. He's NEVER defended the free market. He's NEVER said anything about our economy that's not aimed toward it's destruction.

The only times he's ever said otherwise, was when he was speaking about a plan or bill of his that's net-effect would be the exact opposite of his rhetoric.

Folks, the jury is in, you put a straight up Marxist in the White House. No possible other conclusion can be made.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Amedean on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Manch on 3/9/2012 2:04:37 AM , Rating: 5
So Reclaimer77 is biased against Liberals? Shocker!!!

Well, while the Republicans battling it out in the primaries may be bigots, it doesnt change the fact that
Liberals hate capitalism, loaths the free market, and Obama is very much a Marxist.

Truth can be painful sometimes...


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 6:46:05 AM , Rating: 2
"So Reclaimer77 is biased against Liberals? Shocker!!!"

Yes and no... I think in his anger he has placed the label "liberal" on politicians. They all overspend and sell us out. Both Bush;s and Reagan did it too, as did the conservative republicans that dominated congress from 1994 to 2006 (and dems too).

He wants a word, a term, a side to blame and "liberal" is what he uses. If you take a close look at most of what he posts, and just replace the word "liberal" with "politician" (including all reps and dems in DC) and he is pretty spot on with his analysis.

The truth is that Reclaimer leans too far left... in the blame game, but the problem is the problem. Out leaders have sold us out.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 7:17:20 AM , Rating: 2
Reagan did not have the benefit of a friendly Congress. He tried to cut spending multiple times. But unlike Obama, he realized that a president can only propose a budget. Not pass it or circumvent it. He tried to eliminate the Department of Education multiple times as well. A department that has become focused on indoctrinating the young into the beliefs of the left. I see it here at work with a 17 year old intern we have. A smart kid but if you heard him speak about religion...kids are being trained to believe it is evil and stupid.

Even with the deficits Reagan ran, they were nothing like we're running now. Without Reagan, the economic prosperity of the 90s which Clinton got to sit over would not have happened. And how Clinton use it? To put the pieces in place that led to the housing collapse and to gut the military. All while getting his dick sucked and then lying about it.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By LRonaldHubbs on 3/9/2012 8:45:24 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
A department that has become focused on indoctrinating the young into the beliefs of the left. I see it here at work with a 17 year old intern we have. A smart kid but if you heard him speak about religion...kids are being trained to believe it is evil and stupid.

Oh no, someone has a different opinion than you. Sound the alarms! Those no-good liberal teachers must have gotten to him. Clearly your opinion is the correct one and it's impossible that anyone could arrive at a different opinion on their own. Liberal indoctrination must be to blame.

P.S. - You seem to have forgotten that 75% of this country is Christian, and another 10% identify themselves with various other religions. Most of the teachers who you claim are doing the indoctrinating are in fact religious. I always have to laugh when people like you throw the indoctrination card, because this idea of widespread liberal indoctrination is nothing more than a construct by conservative wingnuts to justify their own indoctrination of children. You create a false enemy, portray yourself as a victim of said enemy, and then feel better about yourself as some kind of moral crusader.

P.P.S. - If you truly value knowledge and facts, then religion, which requires belief in the absence of evidence, isn't an option. I won't use the word stupid as you did, but I will say that the mindset of believing things without question and without evidence is irresponsible at best and dangerous at worst. The idea of religion isn't inherently evil, but religous beliefs are frequently used to justify evil deeds.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Manch on 3/9/2012 9:45:12 AM , Rating: 4
I think its funny when an atheist tries to define religion for people. You're so hell bent against it you dont even relize your subscription to atheism has turned into a religion in its own right.

I can't prove to you that God exists nor more than you can prove that to me that he doesnt.

This is as you put it, your belief in the absence of evidence, so I will say that your mindset of notbelief without question and without evidence is irresponsible at best and dangerous at worst.

Also, I think these scientists would disagree with you.

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefa...

So yes, people have done some truly evil things in the name of their religion, you can say the same things about athiests. You can also say that a lot of good and great things have been done by religious and atheist alike so whats your point?


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Manch on 3/9/2012 10:51:21 AM , Rating: 2
I sure can my pasta diety worshipping friend!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Mons...


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 4:25:02 PM , Rating: 2
How is that proving its existence as the supreme being creator of the Universe?


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 11:29:58 AM , Rating: 2
Because people are allowed to have faith in different things. If you want to believe in the flying spaghetti monster, go ahead. It doesn't mean the rest of us have to. Same as how the vast majority of Christians do not hate you for not believing in God.

Atheism is the most intolerant religion of all.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Kurz on 3/9/2012 11:45:59 AM , Rating: 3
There is a difference between Militant Atheists and just regular Atheists.

I subscribe under the notion of the latter.
I don't believe in a God, but I am not going to go out of my way to bash your head into believing my way. As Libertarian I find personal freedoms are paramount and that goes with all things.

Do I find religion stupid for the most part, yes. Though there are morals and teachings that I believe everyone can benefit from.

There is intolerant people in all circles of faith, beliefs, and science.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 11:14:29 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
There is a difference between Militant Atheists and just regular Atheists.


Not on the Internet apparently lol.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Rukkian on 3/9/2012 11:52:18 AM , Rating: 2
I personally grew up catholic (even got confirmed) but have decided that I cannot blindly believe in something, and saw way too many hypocritical actions in most religious organizations.

I do not have any ill will towards anybody that wants to believe, as that is their right, however, where I do have a problem is when they want to force their beliefs on others.

I think too many people in this world are worried about what everybody else is doing and who they are doing it to, instead of introspect and dealing with their own shortcomings.

You may call me an atheist (sp?), but I don't really need a label. and generalizing that people of faith (or no faith) are this or that does not get us anywhere.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By TSS on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 11:40:42 AM , Rating: 2
Have you ever heard of faith? It's called having it. I bet $100 that at some point in your life, you've looked up or closed your eyes and said a silent prayer because something bad was happening/might happen and you hoped it worked out, or you wanted something to happen.

I'm fairly certain you'll say I'm wrong regardless of the truth though.

Personally I choose to believe that there is something better than man and greater than us all. That the universe didn't just pop into existence by chance. Even if the theory of the Big Bang is true (since it is just that, a theory), what caused it? Where did the matter come from? Did that just spontaneously happen? Maybe it came from a black hole in another universe or something. But where did that universe come from or the matter in it?

I don't have all the answers. And mankind never will. Regardless of how advanced we get. So I choose to have faith in something greater than myself and all of man.

You can call me and every other religious person in the world stupid all you want. But we vastly outnumber you. And personally, I find you to be the idiot. Because you claim to either know everything or think that we can. You choose to ignore the plethora of things that have happened in the world that cannot be explained.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Camikazi on 3/9/2012 1:28:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Have you ever heard of faith? It's called having it. I bet $100 that at some point in your life, you've looked up or closed your eyes and said a silent prayer because something bad was happening/might happen and you hoped it worked out, or you wanted something to happen.


Actually I don't remember ever doing that myself, I've never seen the point in it. I usually look to people around me or to myself to get things done or I learn to deal with what is happening myself. Did I do it when I was little and can't remember? It's possible considering the TV I have watched and how people around me do it (I might have asked for toys), but I don't remember ever doing when a serious or bad situation happens.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 11:50:58 AM , Rating: 2
I wouldn't say the department of education has failed because of indoctrination. We all know it goes on though, but I think we can find a far more tangible reason to say it's failed. Namely drop out rates and test scores. Which have NOT markedly improved since the DOE was formed to correct such problems in the first place.

So basically the money going into the department has risen exponentially higher for absolutely NO improvements to student drop out rates, standardized testing scores, or student quality of life for that matter.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Cerin218 on 3/11/2012 5:50:44 AM , Rating: 2
Same as after 30 years and billions of dollars the Department of Energy has failed to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

Mostly because liberal believe that a government agency and boat loads of money will solve problems, even though they can't actually understand the root causes of a problem and formulate solutions that address those issues.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 12:37:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Most of the teachers who you claim are doing the indoctrinating are in fact religious.


Which means absolutely nothing.

My mother is a devout Catholic. She's also been a public school teacher for 30+ years. Even if she wanted to, she couldn't go around filling her students heads full of religion for one very simple reason.

100% of the curriculum teachers use is decided by the Federal Government and the state school board. So the teachers personal beliefs are really a non-issue.

Besides I don't even see Fit going after the teachers themselves. They aren't the problem. They are mostly good, honest, hard working people who really care about the kids. It's just this bloody system that's such a mess.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 3:09:25 PM , Rating: 2
Most teachers are religious. And they're banned from even wearing a cross around their neck at school in many areas because god forbid they even show devotion to a religion. But the one's who aren't who preach liberalism are allowed to do so without punishment unless it makes the news. Even then they're not punished. They keep their job and keep doing it.

Now at the college level its absolutely indoctrination. There are articles where professors brag about it.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 4:00:41 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Most teachers are religious. And they're banned from even wearing a cross around their neck at school in many areas because god forbid they even show devotion to a religion.

And that's how it should be. I'll make sure any teacher who wants to poison my kid's brain with religion will never be able to teach again. Either lawfully or else.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Cerin218 on 3/10/2012 5:59:45 PM , Rating: 2
Do some research smarty. Understand collectivism in this country. Learn about the flawed philosophy and epistemology of collectivism of which Democrat/liberal/progressive/communist/marxist/fasc ist/socialist are all different flavors of the same fundamentally flawed ideology. I see all of collectivism as dangerous to humanity. And yes, the whole point for the Department of Education was because the leftist Dewey decided that he was tired of having to lobby individual states and counties to enact global education change. Do some research and look up Ben Franklin's explanation of state level education as "Incubators of Democracy". The liberals of this country have been changing the school system from one of education to that of social engineering. Thus spreading their flawed ideology to the impressionable young. Why do you think Churchill said "If you are young and not liberal, you have no heart. If you are old and not conservative you have no brain". Bush was a progressive, Clinton was a progressive and Obama is a progressive. And consistent with progressive ideas, they result in massive debt and massive unemployment.

My problem here as with all site is the the people that preach collectivism are willfully ignorant of how flawed their ideology is. as you can see by several "liberal" posts. Obama's campaign slogan should have simply been "From each according to ability, to each according to need". It's in his words, his policies, his associations. That's why we say liberalism is a mental disorder. And no, this didn't just happen, it's been going on since the early 1900's. Obama isn't even original, he's channeling FDR. FDR did the same crap as Obama and ended up with massive debt, and massive unemployment and even managed to prolong the Great Depression. So our current depression is longer due to poor economic policies. Yet the liberal mindset is that spending is the new saving. And if you speak out against the moronic spending, they immediately blame the Republicans. Like that's even a viable answer.

So in the end, this country will crash. Because many of can't even grasp the concept of sustainability. Which is where we get liberal ideas like Ethanol from. Yeah great idea, use your food stores as fuel where it takes more energy to create then you get in return. Like electric cars. They cost more then you save and we still pollute by creating the energy it takes to power them, but it's "green" and that's "cool" right?

Collectivism is stupid and causes great harm. Just ask Greece. Or ask Spain how their "green" conversion went. Look at what Merkel did for Germany. They had the same economic crash as we did, yet spent less, and focused on BUSINESS which also in turn allowed them to cut their trade deficit. So they were out a long while back and have been able to bail out the others around. Obama has been destroying business as much as possible. Working people pay taxes. Non working people consume resources. Usually of the other productive. So obviously as strong economy is important. Even Clinton knew that. Of course he also set up the dominoes for the housing and financial crisis which the left REFUSES to take ANY blame for. I mean it's just not fair that people WORK for a house. Again "To those according to need"...

At least have the nuts to admit that if you support Obama you are ignorantly destroying this country. All because you feel guilty and hate humanity.

LRonaldHubbs, the conspiracy theory actually exists because you are doing it. Tells us we are crazy for calling you out on it is a defense mechanism. Because you aren't even intellectual enough to understand you are wrong.

I am neither an Republican or Democrat. I am more of an Objectivist. And Yes, the Republicans are bad too, just not quite as bad as Democrats.

Just like Obama is a worse Bush, Mitt Romney is a worse Obama. So don't expert things to improve any time soon. Liberals have had to many GENERATIONS pass on their stupidity so unless we can change the ideology of an entire future generation, this country is a lost cause. It pretty much is falling exactly how the founding fathers figured it would someday. They were smart enough to understand the destruction of this country wasn't an "if", but a "when". And that we would destroy ourselves. Study the Roman Empire and you'll see our future.

"We've given you a Republic... If you can keep it." -Ben Franklin

As far as religion, liberals LOVE religion. It's a way to control the masses by having them believe in something simply because they are told to. Religion is beginning to fail simply because people like me realize we don't need it. That's right, I said it. What does religion DO for me? Believe in something that I am told to believe in simply because? You don't need religion to teach you how to be a good person. Your family can do that. Religion isn't even earth shattering. The 10 Commandments are brain surgery? Religion exists to control people and has been traditionally been created to take advantage of superstitions people ever since the days a "sheet was pulled over the sky with hole poked in it to crate night".

Those of us based in logic have no use for religion. Why do you think Christianity calls you a Flock of Sheep? That's like your Democrat leadership telling you the rich are your problem. They ARE the rich and they ARE your problem.

I would say wake up, but back to that mental disorder thing.

So go forth and multiply ignorance collectivists.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 10:00:33 AM , Rating: 1
"Reagan did not have the benefit of a friendly Congress."

Neither did Clinton... but everything good that happened under Reagen was because of Reagen, and everything good that happened under Clinton was because of the reps in congress right? Yes, I have met you before Fit.

The fact is that it isnt a left v right issue, becasue they are ALL full of shit and selling us out. Reagen and Bush are no different than Obama and Clinton. The Rep controlled congress of 1994-2006 isnt any better than the current crop . They are all robbing us blind while feeding us this left v right crap. Then they get us angry, and we elect a new crop of the same crap. You need to start seeing past that and realize its not the libs or the cons, its not the reps or the dems, not the left v the right. Its pretty much all politicans in DC that are sellign us out and wasting our vast fortune on rediculous crap, corporate favors and personal gain.

"kids are being trained to believe it is evil and stupid."

No, they arent. Kids are bing educated, and coming to that obvious conclusion on thier own. If you want to believe that silly book of lies called the Bible then you are a fool.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
By HoosierEngineer5 on 3/9/2012 11:21:17 AM , Rating: 2
There wouldn't be a USA without the influence of religion. I guess that supports your point?


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 11:27:21 AM , Rating: 2
Where the hell do you think all modern laws regarding right vs. wrong come from?

The US is founded on the idea that our rights come from a higher power. Our founders believed that and that because of that, those rights cannot be taken away. To believe only in man means that those rights can be taken away. Maybe you want to live in that world, but I don't.

Just because some in the past and in the present use religion as an instrument of war, doesn't make all religion bad. I find it funny though how only the Christian religion is referenced this way by liberals yet Islam to a liberal like Obama is full of peace and understanding. Horseshit.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 11:53:11 AM , Rating: 2
I'll also say that the only religion atheists are successfully degrading is Christianity. When Christianity is not the religion you should fear.

Islam is not just a religion, it is a complete way of life and government. Go try to be an atheist in a predominantly Muslim country. See how well it works out for you. Look at the reactions in Afghanistan to some Korans being burned. Calls for death across the Muslim world. When last year there were Bibles burned in Afghanistan, while the church was upset, they did not call for their followers to kill those responsible.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 12:00:28 PM , Rating: 2
Religion in itself isnt bad... But, as the founding fathers clearly laid out, it has no place in govt, or schools. No questions, no exceptions.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 12:24:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
But, as the founding fathers clearly laid out, it has no place in govt, or schools. No questions, no exceptions.


It's pretty hard to back this position up, but I would like to see you try. Not saying you are wrong. But the founders CLEARLY did not empower the Federal Government to oversee all schooling in this nation. They were clearly apposed to a federal Department of Education.

The Founders would have left things like religion in schools up to the states. So I don't see how you can make this statement.

Before you cite "separation of church and state", I'm sure you're aware this is one of the most misinterpreted clauses in the Constitution. That was clearly a Federal level mandate. Prohibiting the Government of the United States from forming a state-run church or having an official religion. Like the "Church of England" in England. So that doesn't apply to the school situation at all.

To put plainly, Federal rulings on school prayer etc etc, clearly a states rights issue, would make the Founders turn in their graves. I can think of few cases where such a clear cut and gross abuse of Federal power has taken place.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 12:40:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There are certain things that should not be left up to the states.


That can be a very slippery slope indeed.

quote:
In your ideal view of a country with states rights, states like Oklahoma would be no different than Iran


Oh really? That's..that's interesting. That would be MY view huh?


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 12:40:07 PM , Rating: 1
The founding fathers got it right from the start 100% correct, and accounted for all the developments that would happen in all the centuries that would come after them then?

I guess that explains why we did not have a civil war or a need for constitutional amendments? Oh Wait...

I'm fine with your system though. I'd certainly appreciate my state keeping all the federal tax dollars it's sending to backwards-ass red states and those southerners needing a passport to come to my state.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 12:58:22 PM , Rating: 2
The States were clearly made sovereign in the Constitution, but united under a common but minimalist and limited Government. Your statements are stupid, based in ignorance, and have nothing to do with reality. It would take literally ALL DAY to hack this post up and counter all these problems. And you still wouldn't get it anyway.

You're full of such hate and bitterness it feels like it's coming through the screen every time you post.


By HoosierEngineer5 on 3/9/2012 11:41:48 PM , Rating: 2
I dare say that the Founding Fathers had a great deal of experience and knew what they were talking about. Remember, those folks put at risk their livelihoods, possessions, and their lives. They knew what bad government and seriously wanted to change it. I suspect human nature is fairly constant, and without heeding the warnings implied in the constitution, it is too easy to fall back. I doubt we are as evolved as we would like to think.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Cerin218 on 3/11/2012 5:48:14 AM , Rating: 2
No, actually the founding fathers DIDN'T get it 100% perfect right from the start. The perfection of what they created with the acknowledgement of it's imperfection and mechanisms that they put in place to be able to correct the deficiencies. Which is where we get the "living document" idea from. They built the system the best they could given all the systems they had to choose from. They saw the danger in a single central entity which is what many of them escaped from when they left England. This is why the Federal gov was PURPOSELY created with limited abilities. They say the Fed's role as diplomacy, infrastructure, and defense. Both political parties have extended the reach of the Fed for decades. Because it is easier to rule all with one central powerful entity. Apparently lazy intellect people like yourself WANT a central entity because you aren't bright enough to see the brilliance of the Republic. So we get STUPID ideas like Universal Health Care, the Department of Energy, Dep of Ed, EPA, etc, that actually undermine the brilliance of the system.

As far as liberals and conservatives living apart, I whole heartedly believe that should be the case. And the conservatives can laugh as the liberals legislate and tax themselves out of existence.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 12:47:51 PM , Rating: 2
"before you cite "separation of church and state", I'm sure you're aware this is one of the most misinterpreted clauses in the Constitution. That was clearly a Federal level mandate. "

Misinterpreted by who? It's pretty clear to me. Govt should not be involved with religion. To me that includes state govt. Religion is not something that should be taught by the govt or schools. You want that, go to Iran and see how it works for ya.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 1:05:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Govt should not be involved with religion. To me that includes state govt.


There is not a single time in the Constitution where the word "Government" is assumed to refer to a State government by default unless explicitly spelled out. It's like you don't even understand the basics about the Constitution. The mandate power of the Federal government, things the Fed can mandate on the states, is CLEARLY spelled out regardless. The Founders NEVER envisioned a country where all our rights and freedoms disseminated from the Federal Government! That's the exact opposite of what this country was based on.

And don't pull that silly card with me. I'm not advocating for Religion in schools. But using stupid arguments and pretending something is a Federal power, when it's clearly not, is abhorrent. If this is your idea of being "pretty clear", I would hate to see cloudy.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 1:27:46 PM , Rating: 2
How is state govt teaching my kids about their version of religion in schools acceptable on any level and how is that allowed in the constitution?

The way I read it, its very clear that no govt entity has the right to impose its version of religion on anyone, nor should it teach to school children. That is the whole premise of separation of church and state and one of the basic premises our country was founded on.

Whatever. You say you arent for religion in schools either... We argue an awful lot on things we agree about LOL


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 3:06:26 PM , Rating: 2
Are you even reading what I'm writing? I'm just saying it's NOT a Federal issue. That doesn't mean, however, the States can do whatever they want. That's why we have state courts, state supreme courts, and if needed THE Supreme Court. Which this issue has certainly visited more than a few times.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 3:25:20 PM , Rating: 2
I am. It was my understanding that with regards to things that fall under states rights, it is up to the state unless the issue is superceded by federal. For example, if Texas's lawmakers decided it were legal to lock up news reporters for being too vocal against the govt, it would not be allowed becasue the higher authority (the federal govt) has the whole freedom of speech thing.

Likewise, if a state were to decide it would teach Hinduism in jr high schools it would be shot down because the federal mandate for separation of church and state overwrites the states wishes.

I realize you are not in agreement, but I have never heard anyone make the claim that you are. If you show me where it says state rights overwrith federal on issues that federal has specific guidelines on I will stand corrected.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/11/2012 9:25:11 AM , Rating: 2
Retro there is no clearly spelled out "separation of church and state" in the Constitution. That's all I'm saying here. All it says is that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

Again, I'm not arguing for religion in schools. I just strongly disagree that it's a Federal issue, and that States rights do not apply here. You say things like there's a "federal mandate for separation", but that clearly only applies to Congress and the Federal Government.

quote:
If you show me where it says state rights overwrith federal on issues that federal has specific guidelines on I will stand corrected.


What specific guideline? That's really the question here.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/11/2012 7:11:30 PM , Rating: 2
"Retro there is no clearly spelled out "separation of church and state" in the Constitution. "

I finally had a few mins. Searched the text online myself - You are right. Its really not specifically in there. Where the hell did "separation of church and state" come from? I totally agree with it, just thought it was part of the Constitution.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/12/2012 12:28:21 PM , Rating: 2
I'm glad to have helped your enlightenment. No, that wasn't sarcasm or condescension. When you hear something repeated a million times, you take it as fact. I know I did years ago.

That's why I said it's one of the most twisted, and misinterpreted, clauses in the Constitution. It's vague enough, but people have seen fit to interpret this is a clear "Federal mandate" when none such mandate power was spelled out except at the Congressional level.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/12/2012 12:40:36 PM , Rating: 2
State constitutions cannot go against the US constitution, and the first amendment effectively means that the states cannot establish a religion either. It has been proven this way in pretty much every supreme court decision.


By HoosierEngineer5 on 3/9/2012 11:53:25 PM , Rating: 2
Careful. The wording is "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof". That does not say religion must be exorcised from the government. It does seem to have been carefully crafted to say 1) make no laws illegalizing the right to worship, and 2)make no laws to establish a religion of the government. I don't see the words "separation of church and state" anywhere in the Bill of Rights. In fact, I think that if a few bankers and congressmen had paid a little more attention in Sunday School, we could have avoided a lot of serious harm, no matter how legal their actions may have been.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Rukkian on 3/9/2012 2:40:41 PM , Rating: 2
I think states should be given alot of power back and the federal government should be cut quite a bit, however I don't feel we can use the excuse that it is because that is what the framers wanted, as none of them are alive and there is no way to know what they would feel with the difference in the world today and how much commerce there is between states, and the world.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 3:19:50 PM , Rating: 2
At the time of the founding fathers religion was taught in public schools(which were run by the states). Kids learned to read from biblical texts. Kids learned to write from biblical texts.

State's had religious requirements for even living there or holding office. Mass was hold held in the halls of Congress. Much of this did not change for decades. Heck religious requirements existed into the 20th century. The notion of separation of church and state wasn't implemented until a KKK member who disliked the Catholic church because of the power it had brought it up in federal court.

Yup, clearly wanted no religion in public schools or government.

What the founders did not want was a theocracy. They had no desire for a god-less society that only worshiped its own accomplishments and greatness. A school teaching religion does not establish a federally backed religion.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 3:34:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They had no desire for a god-less society that only worshiped its own accomplishments and greatness.

This part is absolute BS. They certainly did not want bible thumpers you to abuse governmental power to force your beliefs through though.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 8:26:57 PM , Rating: 2
Nor did I say they did.

I said they did not want a god-less society. They wanted to prevent a state run religion like in England. What states did though they did not put limits on.

You can argue your case all you want. But the Constitution in no way says that states cannot teach religion in schools. How does that force beliefs on anyone? Does teaching kids about communism or socialism advocate that kids have to believe in them? No its teaching about the beliefs of a religion. I am perfectly fine with schools teaching the beliefs of all religions. As long as they're not lying about what those beliefs are. Like teaching that Islam is tolerant towards other religions or promotes the independence of women. Or that Christianity promotes racism.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/10/2012 12:33:10 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
As long as they're not lying about what those beliefs are. Like teaching that Islam is tolerant towards other religions or promotes the independence of women. Or that Christianity promotes racism.

What about teaching FACTS at our schools? FACTS such as all organized religion is made up, there is zero proof about the existence of a god, and that the best explanations for the universe have ALWAYS come from science, and just because science is not yet advanced enough to explain everything doesn't mean you should believe in fairy tales about them.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By talikarni on 3/10/2012 11:12:18 AM , Rating: 2
Every item you mentioned is opinions, not FACTS.

Facts are based on initial belief in something, proven through various means. Your so called "facts" are nothing more than opinions and unproven theories. You choose to ignore the FACT that God is real to a vast majority of the world.

Real scientists (NOT these so called "experts" that cherry pick others data to claim man made global warming or Al Gore moron types) that realize they really know very little have been increasingly turning to religion with the understanding that everything was created BY DESIGN, not just random chance.

The more science explains, the more people realize that there is a higher power explaining the design of our universe, from the smallest single cell microbes to the ultimate design of the galaxy and universe around us.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/10/2012 2:15:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You choose to ignore the FACT that God is real to a vast majority of the world.

Argumentum ad populum fallacy. The FACT that the earth was flat was also real for the vast majority of the world at one time.

quote:
Real scientists (NOT these so called "experts" that cherry pick others data to claim man made global warming or Al Gore moron types) that realize they really know very little have been increasingly turning to religion with the understanding that everything was created BY DESIGN, not just random chance.

Baseless assertion with ZERO proof. However I have proof that Scientists have been increasingly turning AWAY from religion:
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.h...

So go spew your creationist BS elsewhere, you intellectually inferior DT poster.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By FITCamaro on 3/12/12, Rating: 0
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/12/2012 3:28:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Evolution is no more fact than creationism is. It is a THEORY. It has not been proven.

Spoken like the true closed minded creationist ignoramus you are. You really need to read some more.

Gravity and relativity are also THEORIES, the difference between them and BS like creationism is that they can be verified through experimentation and observation that is peer reviewed. That's why SCIENCE advances society whereas RELIGION retards it.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 12:09:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Where the hell do you think all modern laws regarding right vs. wrong come from?

Our morals come naturally from our evolution and social contracts. Religion takes these and adds some fiction to help enforce them.

quote:
I find it funny though how only the Christian religion is referenced this way by liberals yet Islam to a liberal like Obama is full of peace and understanding.

I know that all religions are unequivocally bad and full of BS, but Obama's just trying not to inflame the Muslims since that would be detrimental to foreign relations.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 12:13:27 PM , Rating: 1
Keeir already proved you were flat out lying about the "Republican power majority" in this country and here you are at it again, but I digress.

Do me a favor and stop talking about "reclaimer" like I'm not here. You claim you respect me, but you're doing nothing but attacking my character with this amateur analysis post. This is an ad-homenium attack and nothing more. You just want to blow off all my posts and opinions as one big liberal conspiracy theory or something so you don't have to prove me wrong. Attacking the person is so much easier than the message, isn't it?

Liberalism, regardless of party, is what I'm apposed to. You are correct that both sides go to the left at times. But you're absolutely in denial if you're telling me the Democrat party in this country hasn't completely and wholly EMBRACED it.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 1:06:45 PM , Rating: 2
I am not talking about you as if you arent "here" none of us are "here" its the internet man. I didnt say anything that I dont say directly to you, I was just replying to him.

I stand behind what I said. I agree with pretty much everything that makes you angry. I just dont see it as the "liberals" did it all. And there is no disproving any of the fact that when Obama took office in 2009 the economy was in freefall unseen since the 1920's. At that time the whitehouse was owned for 20 of the previous 28 years by the republicans. At that time Congress was controlled for 12 of the previous 14 years by republicans.

All I was ever saying is that in modern times, the republicans have had hte majority of power. it cant ALL be the dems fault. I know you hate that argument, because there is no defense for it - its just true. You want to draw a line and take sides as if the republicans arent as much to blame for this as the dems. Whatever, it means nothing to me.

Here is the bottom line fact. Our govt has spent its way into a major problem over the past 50 years. It has been controlled by reps and dems roguhly equally, but in recent history, more by reps.

Who really cares which side did which because BOTH have sold us out. BOTH waste our money on thier corporate buddies, and ridiculous un-needed laws, statutes and bureaucratic quagmires. Its not an "us vs them" thing. They are working together. They keep us arguing and blaming while they both rob us blind. Its called divide and conquer and you have fallen for it 100%.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Keeir on 3/9/2012 3:25:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Here is the bottom line fact. Our govt has spent its way into a major problem over the past 50 years. It has been controlled by reps and dems roguhly equally, but in recent history, more by reps.


Sadly no.

Over the past 50 years (1961-2011)-

Democratic House: 38/50 years - 76%
Democratic Senate: 38/50 years - 76%
Democratic White House: 22/50 years - 44%

I am not sure why cutting at 1961, but hey, whatever. I'd say Democrats have had a commanding lead in National Politics over the past 50 years.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 5:34:13 PM , Rating: 2
ok, it changes that point none... "Our govt has spent its way into a major problem over the past 50 years." - round # BTW.

All I am saying is that both parties are blowing it. Its not some great liberal conspiracy. Reagen had record deficits with a dem congress, Bush1 had record deficits, Bush 2 had record deficits with a rep congress and Obama has record deficits with a dem congress and a 50/50 congress...

Is it so hard to grasp that its not a rep or dem issue, its an "all of the above" issue. Our govt is selling the rug out from under us. Thats all Im saying.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 11:02:39 PM , Rating: 2
Then please stop repeating it over and over again. It's NOT correct. It's a lie. There has not been a "majority of Republican power" in this country since the 1940's, yet you keep insisting there is.

I can only assume it's because you feel you can say it and most people won't call you on it.

quote:
Is it so hard to grasp that its not a rep or dem issue, its an "all of the above" issue. Our govt is selling the rug out from under us. Thats all Im saying.


Doesn't change that fact that Republicans are the lesser of two evils, if you MUST view it this way. Frankly I think you're just being an apologist for Democrats. If you didn't have something personally invested in this, you wouldn't spend so much time trying to make the Republicans look equally crappy. Which they are not.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/10/2012 7:46:51 AM , Rating: 2
" It's NOT correct. It's a lie. There has not been a "majority of Republican power" in this country since the 1940's, yet you keep insisting there is."

No, I was saying its been republican majority in more recent history - but whatever, you cant get past that so I will...
Fine, you wanna say the reps are the lesser of 2 evils? OK. I'll buy that. When the choices are like Hussein and Khadaffi you spend WAY too much time on which one is the worst instead of realizing that the choices are rigged by the same entity.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Keeir on 3/10/2012 1:24:50 AM , Rating: 2
Let examine what a Variety of President's terms brought us, with the Assumption that effects lag by 2 years.

Nixon/Ford Term 2: 16% GDP Growth
Carter Term 1: 3% GDP Growth
Reagan Term 1: 20% GDP Growth (4% GDP Deficit)
Reagan Term 2: 13% GDP Growth
Bush Term 1: 10% GDP Growth
Clinton Term 1: 16% GDP Growth
Clinton Term 2: 12% GDP Growth
Bush Term 1: 12% GDP Growth
Bush Term 2: 1% GDP Growth
Obama Term 1: 9% GDP Growth* (8% GDP Deficit)

Projected Based on US BEA.

Now, I am fully aware Reagan increased Deficit's significantly. He also had a period of rapid economic growth.

Obama has taken US Deficit spending to unheard of heights... and his promise? Half the economic growth of Reagan.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/10/2012 7:42:29 AM , Rating: 2
What is your point? Obama is worse than Reagan? OK, fine. This changes anything how? The problem is pretty much every financial decision congress and the oval office has made/voted on in modern history. WTF is the point of blaming it ALL on liberals. Clearly its a Washington issue. All of them should be jailed.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Keeir on 3/10/2012 10:41:59 AM , Rating: 2
In reality, there is nothing wrong with deficit spending.

The business cycle, a pattern that has existed for hundreds of years, says that sometimes the economy will boom and other times it will falter.

The question is, what does the Deficit spending buy "us" the country.

Reagan faced with a Downturn, cut taxes while keeping spending similar. The result was 20+ years of economic gains, which ended in Government actually running a "surplus".

Obama's proposal is just the opposite. He plans to keep taxes the same or raise them while drastically increasing spending. His own government suggests that the result will be mediocre Economic Growth.

So far, Obama has been spending at TWICE the rate of Reagan. And many Liberal Commentators think this is not -enough-. Yet the effects are 1/2 as much!

I'd be scared of what the policies these liberal commentators would accomplish! As a note, most "liberals" policies will lower short term suffering, at the expense of long term prosperity.

(Krugman is one of my favorites. As I see the Greek Debt Swap where they have significantly reduced the Greek Debt, I think back to his column where he advocated inflating currency to reduce the debt rather than "austerity". In the end, it appears attempting to follow austerity, has resulted in significantly lower Greek Debt at the expense of the rich/investors while allowing middle class and lower class to maintain the value of their savings, wage scales, benefits, etc)


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Cerin218 on 3/11/2012 6:17:11 AM , Rating: 2
Because of the fundamental misunderstanding of Keynesian economics which is that when the government has a surplus, it should SAVE that money so that when the economy falters, the savings can be used to artificially prop up the economy until the private sector can realign and recover. If there is no surplus, the government spending becomes debt.

And yes, the Keynesians believe that we haven't spent enough to recover the economy and get out of debt. The flaw is the belief that we can spend ourselves into prosperity.

Problem with this is that to control debt from the spending we either need to cut spending or increase taxes (which means it costs workers more money to work) or both. If you raise taxes, less people have discretionary resources to purchase things other then necessities. If consumers don't consume, there is no demand, if there is no demand, there is no need to employ people to increase supply. Hence employers don't need to employ. Unemployed consume collective resources which means the government spends more money to supplement the unemployed thereby needing to collect more from those that do work to subsidize those that don't.

Basically the Obama administration has NO CLUE how economics works, or they are purposely doing the opposite which is why the recovery is taking so long.

As far as Krugman, he is an ABSOLUTE MORON and it shows me how sad our world is that he got a Nobel. But then I guess Obama got one for being the "Great Uniter" and he's actually turned out to be one of the most divisive president's in modern history.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/11/2012 7:04:55 PM , Rating: 2
Keeir, you type alot, you need to read more though. You are arguing against a point no-one is making. I agree, Obama is horrendous when it comes to the economy.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Keeir on 3/12/2012 3:15:32 PM , Rating: 2
And here I thought we were talking about Converatives versus Liberals.

Reagan, the most conservative president since WWII, versus Obama, the most liberal president since WWII.

Reagan increased Government debt (versus GDP) from 40% to 50%, while expanding the economy by 20%. In his first 4 years.

Obama has increased Government debt from 70% to 120%, while promising to expand the economy by 9%. Projected to be sure, but projected by the Federal Government.

Maybe we can say: When Republicans espouse or compromise on liberal outcomes, such as housing for the poor, they harm the economy. When Democrats espouse or compromise on conservative outcomes, such as welfare reform and lower tax rates, they help the economy.

In that sense, you point is correct. But that wasn't the "original" point of this thread.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/13/2012 9:26:05 AM , Rating: 2
"And here I thought we were talking about Converatives versus Liberals."

Nope... Again you type alot, you need to read more.

"In that sense, you point is correct. But that wasn't the "original" point of this thread."

It was kind of hijacked into liv v con, but that wasnt the original point. The point was that Obama is not "change" he is more of the same, if not worse. He did inherit the worst economy since the 1920's , so some leeway there, but he certainly isnt changing anything and certainly isnt worried about deficit spending.

As for your other point, correct deficit spending in itself is not a problem. Deficit spending for 30 years straight without paying any of it off is a nightmare.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Cerin218 on 3/11/2012 6:04:59 AM , Rating: 2
"And there is no disproving any of the fact that when Obama took office in 2009 the economy was in freefall unseen since the 1920's."

Yes it was. And if you did any research as to WHY this happened you would see progressive liberal paving the way with poor policy. Republicans part was that they did little to stop it and what little was done was blocked by Democrats. Basically if the liberals hadn't subscribed that all people are entitled to an equal share of everything regardless of effort, this wouldn't have been a problem in the first place. ALL the politicians went along because the economy was booming. Until the artificial reasons that it boomed for collapsed.

We aren't saying the the Republicans bear no blame, but I can't find a SINGLE Democrat that is willing to admit ANY responsibility for the collapse and especially not willing to acknowledge the Democrats initiated the events to begin with. And the fact that you blame Republicans for the majority of the issues shows your bias. Progressivism has been the definition of the last three presidents. Bush WAS NOT a conservative as his spending attests to. The last two presidents have accounted for nearly two thirds of the current deficit. If you take a look at the cause of the worst spending in the history of this country, much of it was done under a Democrat controlled Congress. They aren't called "Tax and Spend Democrats" for no reason.

You can't pick sides and then say you aren't picking sides.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/13/2012 9:33:32 AM , Rating: 2
"You can't pick sides and then say you aren't picking sides."

Both sides suck. The whole "sides" thing is a lie. They are all feeding the same coffers.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 2:55:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Have you seen the Republican primaries compete for who is the most conservative?


I fail to see how this is equal, unless you're strictly being a moral relativist. This country was founded on Conservatism. Our Founding documents are most certainly Conservative in nature. And, furthermore, Conservatism never hurt anybody, took away rights/freedoms, or bloated the hell out of budgets and tanked economies. Conservatism works and is good, Liberalism doesn't work and is bad. Simple enough for you?

Furthermore the Republican base is Conservative. How in the hell is energizing your base for a primary "bigoted" in any way at face value? Do you know what bigoted means?

quote:
Liberals, hates capitalism, loaths free market, Marxist...etc. You often abuse these words in most of your posts which makes me wonder if you have enough self awareness to understand that you are a polarized emotional individual.


I would like to see you disprove my "emotional" statements with facts, but you cannot do that so you have to settle for attacking me. Pretending that this administration hasn't moved us dangerously Left in a dramatically short time is just stupid talk.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Manch on 3/9/2012 3:11:14 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I fail to see how this is equal, unless you're strictly being a moral relativist.


THat's the classic liberal attack/rebuttal. If they cant defend their stance they immediately resort to it.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Paj on 3/9/12, Rating: -1
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Boingo Twang on 3/9/2012 2:41:50 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Tell the people of Iran or Pakistan that conservatism is working out great for them - let me know what they say. Are you actually saying that conservative policies never restrict freedoms or rights? Like the woman's right to choose?


Great points that conservatives opposing your viewpoint can't respond to but will ding your rating for.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Rott3nHIppi3 on 3/9/2012 2:52:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Are you actually saying that conservative policies never restrict freedoms or rights? Like the woman's right to choose?

Liberals cry.. "government shouldn't intervene with my womanly rights!" Conservatives agree! That's why we support leaving it up to the woman, and not the government, to fund whatever her decision may be. Mexican Abortion, Stab your vagina, punch yourself in the stomach, fall down a set of stairs... hey, whatever it takes to get the job done! And its free to us!!!

You guys act as though if Roe Vs Wade was overturned, Abortions would cease and the world would fall rampant with parent-less children. Conservatives like to think if access to abortion clinics was little harder to obtain (and more costly), responsibility may actually become the new trend. Imagine that? Oh wait.. you can't.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 10:11:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
And, furthermore, Conservatism never hurt anybody, took away rights/freedoms, or bloated the hell out of budgets and tanked economies.

Evolution?
Gay Marriage?
Women's rights?

Unless you're saying that's not conservatism, I don't see how you could possibly be right. If we're strictly talking from a libertarian point of view, then I can see your point. However currently republican = religious and that's MUCH worse than what Obama can do. I'd rather be broke and secular.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Kurz on 3/9/2012 11:59:01 AM , Rating: 2
The founding documents didn't say anything against any group of people and their beliefs.

Don't group up Conservatives with witch hunting bigots.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 12:06:33 PM , Rating: 2
First off Obama is deeply religious and has been his entire life. He was raised Muslim as a child. He converted to Christianity as a young man and has been one throughout his entire adult life. I and others have posted tons of evidence on this, including the man himself saying he's Christian, and you refuse to believe it.

Secondly, are you an idiot? NONE of those things are "Conservative" beliefs. Conservatism, in a political discussion such as this, has nothing to do with social issues. And good grief, "evolution"? What in the hell does Conservatism have to do with evolution!? Conservatism has nothing to do with Creationism.

Women's rights? Maybe you're not paying attention, but Obama and the Left recently waged a campaign to set women back decades. If I was a woman I would be VERY offended at what they were doing, especially with that Sandra Fluke fiasco.

Ironically the party that championed the feminist movement now seeks to undermine everything that movement stood for. Women's rights indeed. I don't know any true feminist that would be comfortable with the Government making the decisions about her body.

quote:
However currently republican = religious


I love this universe you've created where only Republicans are religious, Obama is atheist, and NO Democrats have issues with gay marriage or are Christian themselves, but I'm sorry. It's impossible to buy into your vision of this country. No two groups of human beings can be THAT polarized and have that massive of a disconnect with common ideology.

Sorry but it's time to face reality and stop posting this divisive hate speech on a daily basis. There are Democrats who are religious, Obama is a Christian, and the Republicans aren't out to force you to be non secular.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 12:03:06 PM , Rating: 2
You are right, but what he is referring to is the religious right that sort of took over the conservative republican party. You know, Palin, Santorum and the like.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 12:52:29 PM , Rating: 2
He's not referring to anything. Cord is a proven bigoted individual who says, frankly, unacceptable things in this day and age about religious people. When he posts, it's hate speech and nothing more.

If he said similar things about ANY other group or race, he would be shouted down and attacked.

I'm not a religious person, but I will stand up and defend them. Because it's the right thing to do. Because this is America. And because people have the right to worship as they will. Cord's opinions are his right, but the manner in which he expresses them is offensive and shouldn't be tolerated.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 12:21:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Women's rights? Maybe you're not paying attention, but Obama and the Left recently waged a campaign to set women back decades. If I was a woman I would be VERY offended at what they were doing, especially with that Sandra Fluke fiasco.

Please tell me how Obama and the Left waged a campaign to set women back for years? The only Fiasco about Fluke was that fat bastard losing advertisers.

quote:
I love this universe you've created where only Republicans are religious, Obama is atheist, and NO Democrats have issues with gay marriage or are Christian themselves, but I'm sorry.

Democrats aren't introducing anti-abortion legislation
Democrats aren't pushing for Intelligent Design being taught in schools
Democrats aren't blocking gay marriage, it's Republicans, like that other fat bastard Chris Christie who are blocking it.

Sorry, you are way wrong on that one. Republican is religion and religion is something that should be destroyed with extreme prejudice.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 12:42:30 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry that in the name of a religion, extremely stupid people tore your native country apart and caused you so much personal pain cord. I truly am.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 12:48:06 PM , Rating: 2
While I thank you for your sympathy, could you please answer why is it always the republicans who want to make laws based on religious grounds and not democrats, if both are just as religious?

Look, I flat out hate some of Obama's economic policies, just like this one in the article, but I'll still take it over the possibility of any threat to secularism.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 1:10:23 PM , Rating: 1
There is NO threat to "secularism". In fact, regardless of who's been in office, I would say this country has become less religious as time has gone on. We're at the point now where you can't even say "Merry Christmas" or put up a nativity scene at malls and stuff.

I really don't see what you're always in such a panic about. Every day, religion this, religion that. What's the deal with you.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 2:04:03 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is NO threat to "secularism".

Why is gay marriage outlawed in many states as well as in the eyes of the federal government?
Why did republicans in VA try to pass legislation that would forcefully insert a large probe into a woman's vagina before an abortion could be performed?
Why did Oklahoma pass a personhood law?
Why did Bush veto stem cell research?

I can go on and on, but you can see that the threat is always there, no quarter should be given to religion and any influence in government should be quashed with extreme prejudice.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 3:02:23 PM , Rating: 2
LOL okay dude, how many of those States are ran by Democrats? If gay marriage was just a Republican issue, over half the states would have allowed it decades ago. And who exactly stopped Obama from making it a Federal mandate when he had unopposed power from 2008-2010?

quote:
Why did Bush veto stem cell research?


Because he didn't? He veto'd Federal funding for certain types of cells. He didn't veto the RESEARCH. Nobody, not a single researcher, was forced to no longer research stem cells. By the way, having your research federally funded is NOT an inherent right.

quote:
Why did Oklahoma pass a personhood law?


Because they are fully within their right to? Life isn't a religious aspect, it's a scientific one. We know that life starts are insemination, that's a fact. Just because a baby isn't fully formed doesn't mean it's not alive. I learned in school that life began on this planet from single-celled organisms and evolved beyond. Right?

But I fail to see how people having an issue with the legalized killing of the unborn is somehow an inherently religious issue. I think some of the wording on the bill is....questionable. But if that's what they felt they had to do to outlaw abortions in their state, and it passed legally with a vote, that's Democracy in action.

By the way, several Oklahoma Democrats voted for the bill too. But hey, let's not let facts get in the way. Abortion is trumped up as some big religious issue, but it's just not.

You seem to have no faith, or knowledge, of what Democracy is or how it works. As if because bills are proposed, the entire fabric of your belief system is under threat. These issues are how we grow and evolve as a country! The sky isn't falling dude.

Some of these bills will pass, some will be overturned when the other party takes over, and some will go to the Supreme Court and be ruled on. It's all part of the process. But to say that you've been personally had your beliefs threatened and the country has moved away from "secularism" is just panicky fear-mongering. RELAX. This is the one place on the planet that secularism, if you so choose it, is PROTECTED speech by law.

quote:
no quarter should be given to religion and any influence in government should be quashed with extreme prejudice.


Well I guess you should move somewhere else because I honestly don't see that happening here. Religion isn't just going to be terminated with "Extreme prejudice" anytime soon, if at all. And people who believe in their various religions aren't just going to conveniently shut up and go away because you don't like them. They have rights too.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 3:53:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
LOL okay dude, how many of those States are ran by Democrats? If gay marriage was just a Republican issue, over half the states would have allowed it decades ago. And who exactly stopped Obama from making it a Federal mandate when he had unopposed power from 2008-2010?

The economy had a much higher priority, and not all democrats are non-religious either, but the ratio is certainly much better than republicans.

quote:
Because he didn't? He veto'd Federal funding for certain types of cells.

Why is he discriminating certain types of cells?

quote:
Because they are fully within their right to? Life isn't a religious aspect, it's a scientific one.

Just because something is alive does not mean it's a person or has conscience yet, the bill is called personhood. For example, dogs have lives too, yet they're regarded as property in the eyes of the law. Also, how about the "personhood" of the mother? However this goes against what's in the Bible, so you see stuff like this in the bible belt and not in the best states of the Union.

quote:
But if that's what they felt they had to do to outlaw abortions in their state, and it passed legally with a vote, that's Democracy in action.

Hitler and Hamas were both democratically elected, so you think that's OK? If Oklahoma was a different religion, we'd be talking about sending troops in there now.
Benefits of abortion to society are another proven issue, and anyone who's against it is an idiot.

quote:
Well I guess you should move somewhere else because I honestly don't see that happening here

Ameica is beoming much less religious as time passes. It's only a matter of time until religious people find their true place at the bottom of the social ladder, next to KKK and Nazis.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 11:10:19 PM , Rating: 2
I'm tired of your constant excuses when I bust you on the fact that Democrats are responsible too. The economy had a much higher priority? Okay, whatever.

So when Clinton handled gays in the military with that oh-so tactful "don't ask don't tell" rule, was that the economies fault too? Open your eyes!

I should have known better than to try to have a rational discussion with someone who willingly blinds himself to the truth in order to hold onto his hate for some group of people.

quote:
Ameica is beoming much less religious as time passes (awesome spelling)


Uhh this is what I just said and you argued with me with examples of how "secularism" is more threatened today than ever. Which is it? Are we getting more religious or less?

Oh and good job keeping with your pattern of never posting without a Hitler or Nazi or KKK reference whether it makes sense or not.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/10/2012 12:39:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'm tired of your constant excuses when I bust you on the fact that Democrats are responsible too. The economy had a much higher priority? Okay, whatever.

Democrats are much less responsible, and being gay was a lot less acceptable 20 years ago compared to today. It's called progress.

quote:
Uhh this is what I just said and you argued with me with examples of how "secularism" is more threatened today than ever. Which is it? Are we getting more religious or less?

First of all, my c key apparently got stuck. Second, America in general is becoming less religious, but it's not all in the clear and someone like Santorum would set us back at least 20 years if he were to be elected.

Thankfully we're not THAT stupid to elect that moron, but local versions of him are already blocking progress in states like Oklahoma. That's the kind of danger that I'm willing to do anything to eliminate.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/11/2012 9:28:38 AM , Rating: 2
And 20 years from now, being gay will be even more "acceptable". Yet, I seriously doubt you'll afford Republicans the same leeway on gay rights as you just did for Clinton. Yet another double standard and proof of bias.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/11/2012 11:34:09 AM , Rating: 2
When Clinton was saying DADT, republicans were saying that being gay should be a crime.

When Obama will inevitably say that Gay marriage is OK with him in his second term, republicans will say the opposite.

Same thing goes with many other things. Republicans are always going to be more religious than democrats, with outdated social policies. Do I think the democrats also have outdated social policies? OF COURSE THEY DO, but they're further advanced than republicans.

I'll tend to pick the party that's further away from religion, and that'll always be Democrats. They got the first black president elected, and I have no doubt they'll be the first to get an atheist president elected too.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 12:53:56 PM , Rating: 2
"Democrats aren't introducing anti-abortion legislation
Democrats aren't pushing for Intelligent Design being taught in schools
Democrats aren't blocking gay marriage, it's Republicans, like that other fat bastard Chris Christie who are blocking it."


I see what you mean, but its not that cut and dry. Sort of 50/50 on this. The traditional republican party doctrine is low taxes, small govt, business friendly, and govt. out of people lives. Nothing wrong with that, it sounds good to me. But the republican party was taken over by the nutty religious right, that isnt conservative, and doesnt beleive in the constitional separation of church and state and CERTAINLY doesnt beleive in small govt, or govt out of people lives. That is the split in the GOP today. The traditionals vs. the religious nutjobs like Palin and Santorum.

It sounds to me like you are more angry with the religious right that took over 1/2 the party than the actual normal republicans. I dont blame you. These religious nutjobs are really at the low end of our gene pool.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/9/2012 1:17:49 PM , Rating: 2
Angry? He calls Republicans Nazi's. He basically says if you're religious, you should be killed and thrown in a hole somewhere. That you're an inferior human being. That's not anger, it's HATE. Not even I feel these things toward Democrats, not even close.

But go ahead and be chums with him Retro. Looks like you agree with him on a few levels, isn't that nice.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 1:21:18 PM , Rating: 2
"He calls Republicans Nazi's. He basically says if you're religious, you should be killed and thrown in a hole somewhere. That you're an inferior human being. That's not anger, it's HATE. Not even I feel these things toward Democrats, not even close."

I dont agree with any of that either, especially the hate. I was pointing out to him that "republicans" arent what is the problem. He blames everything on republicans the same way you blame it all on liberals. Its just not that simple. Nice parallel though =)

Chummy? No, I do agree that the religious right that took over the republican party is aweful and has no place in modern society or govt. I dont wish them any harm, I just wish they would stay in church and out of politics, out of womens vajajays. And FFS! I agree, evangelicals shouldnt marry gay men. But why do they care if gay men do? LOL


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By HoosierEngineer5 on 3/10/2012 12:29:24 AM , Rating: 2
"no quarter should be given to religion and any influence in government should be quashed with extreme prejudice. "

I know some religions that say that about other religions. Hmmm...


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/10/2012 12:40:38 AM , Rating: 2
Religion is unsubstantiated BS, so what they say is equally BS. However what is a known and proven quantity is the overall bad influence of religion in societies.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 1:47:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
He basically says if you're religious, you should be killed and thrown in a hole somewhere.

Show me where I said that, I'd bet you $10K Romney-style that I haven't.

It's true that religious people are intellectually inferior though.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By corduroygt on 3/9/2012 2:05:37 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
It sounds to me like you are more angry with the religious right that took over 1/2 the party than the actual normal republicans. I dont blame you. These religious nutjobs are really at the low end of our gene pool.

The "actual normal republicans," which really means liberterians, vote for Ron Paul and make up about 10-15% of the republican party. The majority are religious bigoted idiots.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Cerin218 on 3/11/2012 6:21:34 AM , Rating: 2
If you only understood the difference between conservatism and Republican.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 7:00:16 AM , Rating: 2
" think, for the first time in our history, we've appointed a President that fully and completely LOATHES our "free market" economy. He hates capitalism, utterly and completely. He's sickened by "American exceptionalism"."

"Folks, the jury is in, you put a straight up Marxist in the White House. No possible other conclusion can be made."

Wow... Right when I start thinking that you actually make sense... Then you jump off the deep end of the sane train. Now you are just sounding like a right wing radio nutjob.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Breathless on 3/9/2012 9:29:55 AM , Rating: 2
and you sound like a typical leftist... unable to actually prove anything to the contrary, you simply resort to an insult.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/9/2012 9:43:56 AM , Rating: 2
Typical leftist?

Lets see, I believe in small govt, lower taxes, govt non-interference in personal lives, I hate Pelosi, I think Obama is doing a crap job, I am pro gun, pro death penalty (in fact, we should dramatically expand it).

Just because I dont believe the right wing radio psycho-paranoid crap about everyone that disagrees is a freegin socialist and hates America doesnt make me a typical leftist. I agree with most of what Reclaimer complains about, everything that pisses him off pissed me off too. I just dont think its 100% caused by "liberals" If it is, then Washington is run by 100% liberals, and Carter, Reagen, Bush, Bush2 were all "liberals" as is pretty much every single dem and rep that has been through congress in the past 50 years. They are all robbing us blind. I just think its not a "liberal/Conservative" issue - its a political/criminal issue that all reps and dems in washington are a part of.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Boingo Twang on 3/9/2012 2:33:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
" think, for the first time in our history, we've appointed a President that fully and completely LOATHES our "free market" economy. He hates capitalism, utterly and completely. He's sickened by "American exceptionalism"." "Folks, the jury is in, you put a straight up Marxist in the White House. No possible other conclusion can be made."

Wow... Right when I start thinking that you actually make sense... Then you jump off the deep end of the sane train. Now you are just sounding like a right wing radio nutjob.


Maybe he's confusing Obama with the president that was actually appointed instead of elected. What is the source of this website anyway? Did it spin off from www.angryinsaneconservative.com or what? There seems to be a bumper crop of right wing radio nut jobs around here.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Reclaimer77 on 3/11/2012 9:36:15 AM , Rating: 1
Ah yes Retro, there we go. A Conservative can't have an opinion on anything, if we express one, we've just been brainwashed by Fox News or "right wing radio".

Thanks again for throwing me under the bus. One would think if I've jumped off the "sane train" it would be really easy to disprove what I've said. Instead you just resort to more insults.

How, by any sane measure, does Obama NOT hate the free market? Please, educate me. And don't hand me that "both parties" crap again. I want specifics.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By retrospooty on 3/13/2012 9:47:28 AM , Rating: 2
"Thanks again for throwing me under the bus."

Hey man, that was a nutty comment, plain and simple. You jumped under that bus, I just pointed it out and said, "hey look at that dood under the bus"

You have made a wildly out of the bounds of reality comment. It isnt up to me to prove he isnt a a commy that hates the free market. That is preposterous. If you make a crazy comment like that, its for you to back up, not for me to disprove.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Boingo Twang on 3/9/2012 1:10:22 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Liberals don't have a choice because they've built an entire party out of buying votes through Government spending. Obama's largest voting base, and Democrats in general, is comprised of people dependent on the Government to solve all the problems out there.


Do you actually believe all this tired old Rush Limbaugh styled nonsense? I vote mostly for Demos but no one has "bought my vote through government spending". They obtained my vote by making the most sense for the nation as a whole. Frankly that's not very hard these days when you compare the Dems to the raving, hateful maniacs like you on the GOP side.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Rott3nHIppi3 on 3/9/2012 2:12:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
They obtained my vote by making the most sense for the nation as a whole.
I have seen your 'most sense for the nation' (THINK, Solyndra, Evergreen Solar, GREEN Vehicle, National Renewable Energy Lab(NREL), Beacon Power, Ener1, Amonix, and now GM and Fisker) and its dead on delivery. Might want to pick a different direction moving forward that not only makes sense... but gets a return too.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By BZDTemp on 3/8/12, Rating: -1
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By ebakke on 3/8/2012 5:29:40 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Maybe you prefer the US car makers falling behind even more so that eventually no one will buy cars from US companies.
Do you really have that little faith in the people working for US auto companies? Do you honestly believe that without the gracious hand of govt there to help them out that they'll just fail miserably, confused as to how they could even begin to compete with foreign companies? Give them some credit. And, if they do suck as much as you seem to think they do, is that really a company you want to subsidize?? I just don't follow your logic.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Hakuryu on 3/8/12, Rating: -1
RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Manch on 3/8/2012 6:16:14 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah it was "paid back" in the same way people use credit cards to pay off other credit cards. Plus GMs debt was largely written off and absorbed by the taxpayers. GM has not and never will pay back the full cost to the taxpayers.

The issue with solyndra was that its technology wasn't sound or commercially viable, and its loan was pushed thru so they could have a nice "green" backdrop for a speech.

I always think its funny when the same people that think the rich should pay for them also don't think wasting a $h!7 load of money isnt a big deal. Still I understand why you're that way. People with soft lives, that have never earned for a living have no appreciation or comprehension of value.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Hakuryu on 3/9/2012 2:06:32 AM , Rating: 2
You misunderstand me.

Politicians and people that work for the goverment are just people. They will make mistakes, and calling Solyndra a loan just to validate a speech is silly (ie. Fox talk). More likely it was fast talking execs and favors being paid back (but by Obama? doubt it).

If Obama let the auto and banking industry fall apart, and didn't try steps to start the economy, then everyone would be all over him for letting those industries fail and for high unemployment (thats alot of jobs).

Just like we'd moan in 20 years if all our electric cars came from Asian countries, about the idiot president that didn't invest in our future. Mistakes will be made... if you can do better, try and get elected.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Manch on 3/9/2012 2:29:38 AM , Rating: 2
I didnt misunderstand you. You're just incorrect. You cant defend you're arguement so now you're trying deflect to something else. I'll engage this nonsense more in a bit after I go fix a couple computers and drop a dook. This mornins coffee is brutal!


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By BZDTemp on 3/9/2012 11:27:46 AM , Rating: 2
I think there are a lot of great and very skilled people is the US car industry but something is not working right and it hasn't for a long time. Look at what cars are being sold around the globe and you'll see what I mean.

Outside North America the sales figures of US cars is limited which is contrast to how non-US automakers are selling plenty of cars in the US. Now GM and Ford have local brands/local cars being sold outside the US but we don' see them conduct successful introduction of US cars abroad in fact it's the other way around with them taking European models and selling them in the US.

Now for sure North America is a big part of the worlds car market, but it's a market divided between all the worlds major car makers essentially the US car makers is having to fight on their back foot for the home market rather than being on the offense abroad. This is why I think the government helping to go forward with new tech is important + of course I think it will bring better cars and be good for the oil dependency and the environment.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Manch on 3/8/2012 5:47:27 PM , Rating: 3
So 1 survey of 612 people is why you hate Fox News. Yeah... You're not biased at all. Very fair and balanced of you.

US car companies like any other should innovate or go the way of the dodo. Not allowing 10k tax breaks for battery powered econo boxes will not destroy them.They all already make small cars with very high mpg without the use of heavy, expensive, and just as bad for the environment batteries. People are buying them w/o taxpayer assistance. Also, US car companies make most of there money from trucks. Hybrids dont pull in a lot of dough.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By BZDTemp on 3/9/2012 11:30:26 AM , Rating: 2
I never said "hate" and in fact I find Fox News rather entertaining and absurd. Just their motto is worth a big laugh when you consider how they cover what goes on in the world.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By KCjoker on 3/8/2012 5:47:22 PM , Rating: 2
It's not because of Fox news I know that Obama sucks on handling the economy...same as I knew Bush sucked and not because of NBC, CBS, etc....I know it because I see and feel it everyday. Not only is gas up but so are all goods such as milk, bread, etc....


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Ringold on 3/8/2012 7:01:27 PM , Rating: 2
Peak oil, really? We'll hit peak oil like we hit peak whale oil. Global oil consumption peaked in 2007. With battery tech advancing the way it seems to be (assuming any of these impressive things in the lab start hitting production lines), don't be shocked if we end up leaving vast amounts of oil in the ground simply because we've moved on, like society has several times before. In the mean time, there's parts of the world we've barely explored so far.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By Ringold on 3/8/2012 7:08:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Maybe when our cities are burning due to riots and we're sucking our neighbor's dicks like Greece for some bailout money.


Cities may burn, but we'll never beg like the Greeks did. We'll wish that we could, but Greece was an economic minnow; no country or group of countries could possibly bailout the US if it suffered a similar crisis. It'd be business as usual one week, chaotic sovereign default next week. Maybe, maybe if China, India, Germany and a couple others jumped in immediately there'd be a chance, but the volumes of debt we have to roll over is immense.


RE: Liberal Logic In Action
By jdonkey123 on 3/10/2012 2:49:28 AM , Rating: 2
When the price of oil goes up just $1 per bbl, it costs U.S. governments, businesses, and taxpayers an extra $8.7 billion /yr!

Subsidizing technologies based on the hope that they will prove to be market-winners in the future is generally a bad idea, but we're going to spend $370 billion more on oil this year than we did last year! (No amount of new drilling can keep demand from outpacing supply!)

Sp let's just send 99% of this additional treasure to Iran, Russia and Exxon Mobil, and divert 1% to domestic technologies. IF we can speed up the adoption of a viable alternative to oil, it will pop the speculative oil bubble and could save the U.S. economy trillions of dollars.


Robin Hood or just hoodlums?
By OneArmedScissorB on 3/8/2012 5:01:21 PM , Rating: 2
$4.7 billion doesn't sound like much of a $4 trillion budget.

...except it's greater than the total amount of federal income tax that everyone making $20,000 or less paid in 2009, and yet, they are still burdened by a system that holds their money hostage and forces them to file returns.

Mostly people who make six figures will buy these cars.

So much for the take from the rich, give to the poor schtick. Cronyism wins again.




RE: Robin Hood or just hoodlums?
By Manch on 3/8/2012 5:58:51 PM , Rating: 2
And everyone making 20k got all of it back. You can adjust your W2 so there are no withholdings throughout the year. If you knew that you'd probably be making more than that and wouldn't be complaining about it.

People who make 6 figures are more likely to buy upscale cars, not volts, priuses, or fits.

Sorry, your not getting the free money that other people earned. Guess you'll need to move up and out of the world of fast food and into something more lucrative.


RE: Robin Hood or just hoodlums?
By Ringold on 3/8/2012 7:11:56 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
People who make 6 figures are more likely to buy upscale cars, not volts, priuses, or fits.


Didn't GM report the average income for a Volt buyer at 153k? Or thereabouts? Which only makes sense, being that they're so expensive. So while the rich may be more likely to buy upscale cars, they almost the only ones buying these as well.


RE: Robin Hood or just hoodlums?
By Manch on 3/9/2012 1:45:07 AM , Rating: 2
fair enough. Wouldnt the Volt the exception to the rule tho? Other hybrids arent nearly as expensive and some dont even qualify since it's currently based on battery size, etc


By FITCamaro on 3/8/2012 7:14:01 PM , Rating: 3
Actually most people making $20k either got it all back or got it all back + thousands of dollars they didn't even pay.


RE: Robin Hood or just hoodlums?
By OneArmedScissorB on 3/8/2012 7:08:54 PM , Rating: 2
Wow. Kindly come down from your ivory tower and read my post before commenting. Nowhere did I say that I make less than $20,000 and that I want someone's hand outs.

That was money PAID in taxes, after credits, that I was referring to, not money withheld.

This very site has had several article pointing out that the average income of people buying the Chevy Volt is $170,000.

Six figures starts at $100,000. That's definitely $30,000 to $50,000 car range - which encompasses virtually every hybrid, including cars with lots of upscale options like the hybrid Honda Accord Hybrid and Toyota Highlander Hybrid.

I was just trying to point out an often overlooked aspect of how backwards and manipulative the tax system is. Thanks for not knowing what you're talking about and being a part of the problem instead of the solution!


RE: Robin Hood or just hoodlums?
By teeitlong on 3/9/2012 12:55:12 AM , Rating: 5
What is exactly wrong with making 100K? I am sick and tired of idiots wanting to play Robin Hood with peoples money. My kids will probably crush the 100K barrier with ease and may very well be a "1" percenter... BUT the difference is this... They have spent nearly 10 years of their lives getting educated (with all of the requisite hard work) and will owe hundreds of thousands of dollars that they will REPAY for their journey to "financial freedom".

What we get from the other side of the isle is this...

They are not paying their "fair share". Are you people retarded? No way in hell did the person who "needs" help ever worked 1/10th of what my kids will go through - and yet they will get raped because we have turned a Republic into a Democracy.

If they want a VOLT or whatever - what the heck is it to you? Manipulative TAX system my a$$.

Liberals are morons.


RE: Robin Hood or just hoodlums?
By TSS on 3/9/2012 1:28:38 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it's safe to say you're an oligarchy by now.

And you know how they achieved it?

quote:
Liberals are morons.


Divide and Conquer. You can't help but react violently to his accusations, can you?

His point is still solid. These tax credits shouldn't be given out because most people who buy volts can afford to without the tax credits. And he's right.

But he's been indoctrinated as well to reject all oppinions, his justification being "cronysm", just like yours is "liberalism". Why can't you simply disprove his point, without resorting to labels? Why can't he set you straight without insults and probably assuming you belong to the opposite side.

And as long as you are fighting eachother, you're not fighting the tax credits, whill will make sure you continue to fight eachother.

Divide et impera.


By HoosierEngineer5 on 3/9/2012 11:29:47 AM , Rating: 2
I don't understand your point. People making >$100k pay most of the taxes. Most of the $4.7 billion benefit those making >$100k. What did I miss?


RE: Robin Hood or just hoodlums?
By TSS on 3/9/2012 1:10:38 PM , Rating: 2
That's because it isn't.

In 1.3 days you will have borrowed that amount. You borrow ~5 times that in a single week.

And since it's also more money then what the bottom 48% of the entire population paid in taxes, i fail to see your point.


A comparison
By shin0bi272 on 3/8/2012 10:58:44 PM , Rating: 2
Chevy Cruze LS - starts at 16,800
Chevy Volt - Base price 39,100

At $4/gal with a 12gal fuel tank and filling up once a week you'll spend $2496 per year on gas. Yes thats way too much but hold on theres more.

$39,100 - $16,800 = $22,300

$22,300 / $2496/yr = 8.93yrs

That means you can drive your chevy cruze for almost NINE years before you recoup the difference between the two cars!

Now that volt price is prior to the government giving you money to bow to their environmentalist ideals... after the 7500 dollar tax credit (which you dont get at the time of purchase but instead get on your tax returns next year) thats $31,600. Which using the same math results in 5.93 years you can drive your gas car before recouping the subsidized price of a hybrid car's purchase price.

So lets up the subsidy for it! That'll make it better right? Ok lets do the math for $10,000 worth of tax credit... that gives us 29,100 after the credit and running it through our formula gives us 4.93 years.

Sorry ecoMentalists your ideology doesnt stand up to basic math. And who among us is going to go "oh I got 10 grand back from the government let me put that towards my car!" on april 15th? Lemme guess... NONE? Talk about a nation of people dependent on the government... no wonder our debt is out of control!




RE: A comparison
By web2dot0 on 3/9/2012 5:11:31 AM , Rating: 1
Hybrid and EV cars are NOT entry level cars.

No one is forcing you to buy them. If you don't like them, don't buy them. Free will.

Gov't subsidies are used to incentivize people to adopt the technology.

Do you know that US subsidize Corn farmers? Why do you think we get all this cheaper sugar? How come no one complain about that .....

The administration is trying to build a infrastructure to make alternative energy thrive in the US. This way, when the technology truly arrives (complete replacement of fossil fuel tech), US will be at the forefront of this innovation, not buying them from China/Germany/Japan.

Get it?


RE: A comparison
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 7:20:29 AM , Rating: 2
No but they're trying to force us to buy them by insuring that energy prices skyrocket. The stupidity of it all is they're attacking oil and gas development while at the same time forcing coal mines and power plants out of business. So gas prices will rise and electricity prices will rise.

A doubly sure way to bring an economy grinding to a screeching halt. But hey, never waste a good crisis right?


RE: A comparison
By shin0bi272 on 3/9/2012 1:46:50 PM , Rating: 2
They raised the cafe standards to 54mpg... not too many gasoline cars can do that unless youre talking about the ford fiesta which has a what 1.2L 85hp engine? So pretty soon through regulation and mandates all car manufacturers will have to make tiny little cars or hybrids. If you dont want to buy an econobox micro car you will have to get a hybrid or a CDL (commercial drivers license). So pretty soon you will be forced to buy them by proxy.

I do not want the government playing venture capitalist or subsidizing anyone to do anything they think is a good idea. Especially when said purchase is based on unproven science. I do know that they subsidize corn farmers. They also subsidize oil companies (which brings down the price of gas a couple of cents a gal so they can tax you more... vicious circle anyone?), dairy farmers, tobacco farmers, fruit growers, and on and on. But you are trying to equate the government pushing a car that makes no economic sense on us with them giving farmers money to grow food for the country. You do know that less than 2% of the population are farmers now right? And we have more food now than we ever have. Also sugar has gone up 30% in price since obama took office because in 09 they passed a tax on sugar imports. You didnt know about that because you probably listen to msnbc who if they did mention it mentioned it once as an obesity fighting measure. But that's the government's job... watching YOUR waistline.

Alternative energy in its current form has been around since the 70's and it hasnt taken off. Now youre trying to claim that if the government just gives it enough money it'll work. It hasnt worked with schools and weve given them 3 trillion dollars since 1976. Oh but we just havent given them enough right? If you believe that why dont you donate your entire yearly income to them and live on food stamps and in section8 housing. Then you can proudly pound your chest and claim that you're a good strong stand up socialist just like our president.

get it?


RE: A comparison
By mellomonk on 3/9/2012 5:28:53 AM , Rating: 2
Your comparison leaves out some of the most important reasons most people are buying Volts. Your math cannot measure it. I am seriously looking at an EV, probably a Volt and I could care less if it takes 15 years to pay off the difference. It is about helping to promote a domestic manufacture who is trying to be a leader, rather then following. I've never been a GM fan, but this was the right thing to do. And for once it got done. Not perfect, but well. And it is just a start. It is also about producing less carbon over that period. Even electricity from a coal powered plant produces less carbon per mile driven then a mile driven with a gasoline engine of similar power output. I am not trying to save the whales or the like, but I like to think about my impact. The electricity in my area is mostly coal or natural gas fired, but a small percentage is from renewables. Nice to think and American made a paycheck mining and shipping that coal and producing that electricity when you think about it. And that touches on one of the main reasons to drive something like the Volt, Pride. It may sound hokey, but an American designed and built car, unique in the world, built in a plant that I have actually visited. Just test driving it the other day I couldn't help but smile. American car, American fuel, and it was fun. It isn't cheap, but it feels right. It isn't for everyone, but fits my daily needs like a glove. I expect I would rarely hear the IC engine run. As to the tax credit, well that is a touchy issue. I cannot lie, I probably wouldn't buy it without it at this point. I am sure the economics of the Serial Hybrid will improve as production and tech scale. Looking at it another way, that is more money that I can spend in keeping the US Economy moving forward, at least if I spend it wisely. Better my hand then being spent on some useless war, or worse yet given to some foreign government. But that is another thread.

You can run all the numbers you want, EVs and hybrids will not always make sense. But until you can fully quantify the values of feelings and ideas, you will not see the whole picture. I am willing to put a little money behind some of my countrymen and live a life with thought to the future and those will exist in it. It is about being a Progressive and acting on what you believe in instead of just complaining about it. Can you put a price on Pride?


RE: A comparison
By Manch on 3/9/2012 6:13:14 AM , Rating: 5
Yeah, sorry, I dont want my tax dollars to subsidize your feelings.


RE: A comparison
By shin0bi272 on 3/9/2012 1:34:19 PM , Rating: 2
90% of the lithium for the batteries in these cars come from china. Most of the parts are made in mexico and assembled here in the us... but you can try claiming it helps american jobs all you want... it really doesnt. Hell more parts of a toyota are made in America than a volt.

You like to think about your impact? Think about the impact of shipping the raw lithium half way around the world to be refined and then to possibly japan or china to be made into a battery then back to america to be put in your "green" automobile. What do you think those huge ships run on? dreams?

Youve bought into a bunch of accounting tricks and promises that if you just give the government enough money they'll save the world. You seriously need to take a look at what theyve done with your money. Look at fisker. Millions of your tax payer dollars went to a company in finland because "you just cant build a car like this in america". So we are paying for finnish people to make cars for said environmentalist ideals and ship them over here (which again uses more diesel fuel and throws more of that ebil co2 in the air than the car will in its lifetime) and what happened when consumer reports tried to test their fisker that they paid for? It broke down in their driveway... having driven less than 200 miles it wont go into gear. Wow the wave of the future! Doesnt use any gas cause it doesnt move! How brilliant! Oh and BTW its a $100,000 car! Who buys a 6 figure car to save money on gas? An environmentalist that thinks co2 is responsible for any temperature fluctuations in the atmosphere. Couldnt possibly be that huge ball of hydrogen fire 8 light minutes away nooo... couldnt be! Its our evil cars and factories... that way the lovely government can come in and regulate them! yaaaay communism.

The point you miss is the entire 2 reasons people claim they want to get a hybrid is to save on gas and save the environment. Wrap yourself in the flag all you want youre still mathematically and factually wrong.


RE: A comparison
By Keeir on 3/9/2012 2:19:02 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
90% of the lithium for the batteries in these cars come from china.


What?

The Three Leading Lithium Producers
Chile
Australia
Argentina
http://spectrum.ieee.org/energywise/green-tech/adv...

quote:
Most of the parts are made in mexico and assembled here in the us

http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/AA...
Lets see, USA/Canada content, 46%. Pretty poor tis true.
Final Assembly Point, Michigan.
Maximum Amount of "Mexican" content. <36%
I'd like some sort of proof a Volt is more "Mexican" than "USAian"

quote:
Hell more parts of a toyota are made in America than a volt


Which Toyota? Lets go with the CT200h or Prius.

Built in Japan.
NA Content? 0%

Toyota's vary significantly. A Toyota Camry NA specific model does have a fairly high USA/Canada content score. Camry Hybrid? Not so much.

quote:
Think about the impact of shipping the raw lithium half way around the world to be refined and then to possibly japan or china to be made into a battery then back to america to be put in your "green" automobile. What do you think those huge ships run on?


Lets see. In 16 kWh of battery there is ~40 kg of Lithium
http://www.meridian-int-res.com/Projects/How_Much_...

I wonder many barrels of Oil that is...
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_does_1_barrel_o...

~.3 Barrels.

Shipping 40 kg of Lithium will save the importation of ~60 barrels of Oil (mostly from Canada tis true) but the shipping impact of shipping 1/200 of the material is significantly lower wouldn't you say?

quote:
Look at fisker. Millions of your tax payer dollars went to a company in finland because "you just cant build a car like this in america".


Fisker presented a Business Plan to the DOE that was judged acceptable to extend a DOE ATVM Loan. The Loan was contingent on Fisker building a new car, the "Project Nina" sedan in the United States. Since Fisker fell behind thier plan, per DOE ATVM requirements, access was removed to the Line of Credit.

quote:
It broke down in their driveway... having driven less than 200 miles it wont go into gear.


Hardly the first time Consumer Reports has broken a car. Won't be the last either.

quote:
BTW its a $100,000 car! Who buys a 6 figure car to save money on gas? An environmentalist that thinks co2 is responsible for any temperature fluctuations in the atmosphere.


Hm. Though this post started out about the Volt and now its into Fisker.

Here are some other reasons

#1. Reduce Noise Pollution
#2. Reduce Localized Pollution
#3. Reduce Total Pollution
#4. Increase Engery Efficiency
#5. Reduce Foriegn Engery Importing

quote:
that way the lovely government can come in and regulate them! yaaaay communism.


No really sure you know what Communism is... Regulation is Republican/Socialist. Communism, a term given to "extreme" Socialist states, would have the Government RUN the Factories and OWN the cars.

quote:
Wrap yourself in the flag all you want youre still mathematically and factually wrong.


Errr... "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones"

Your're wrong multiple times in this post on easily verifable data.


RE: A comparison
By bigdawg1988 on 3/9/2012 5:35:06 PM , Rating: 2
I thought the whole point of these credits was to give a boost to the electric car technology, and an incentive to car companies to actually make them. The whole point is to wean us off of oil completely at some point in the future, thereby freeing us from protecting a large part of the world that could give less than a damn about us.
This whole energy policy is supposed to be part of a larger strategy of energy independence, and is actually part of our military strategy. You know, like if there actually was a big war and our oil supplies got cut off for some reason. You can't wait until something happens and hope for the best, you have to plan decades ahead. People have been asking about this for the last 40 years or so, but nobody realizes that it takes money to get the R&D going. The "free market" isn't going to do this until it has to.
There is federal money going to wind power, solar, cellulosic ethanol, etc. We basically have to lay it out there until the science catches up (becomes possible).
Do we want to wait for $10 gas first?


This transition is
By kensiko on 3/8/2012 3:55:47 PM , Rating: 2
painful. Everybody suffers because of the transition from gas to electricity, it costs too much and it will increases the taxes and so on. I would like to be frozen for a hundred years so that electric vehicles will be all right.




RE: This transition is
By Tyndel on 3/9/2012 3:43:19 AM , Rating: 2
100 years ago we had electric cars with a 100 mile range.... Are you sure the tech will be where you want it to be by then?

http://www.energybulletin.net/node/52736

Is an interesting read.


RE: This transition is
By FITCamaro on 3/9/2012 7:22:10 AM , Rating: 2
I'll be glad to bury you in the snow.


NO NO NO!!!!
By corduroygt on 3/8/2012 4:01:49 PM , Rating: 2
We don't have $5B to spend on BS like this. The only government spending that's acceptable for EV research is one that awards grants for research...Once the tech is there, then EV/PHEV's will sell on their own merits without any problems!!!!




RE: NO NO NO!!!!
By Mint on 3/8/2012 9:37:27 PM , Rating: 2
The research has already come up with good enough solutions for this particular problem. Getting production cost down through economies of scale are all that matter now.

There's an easy way to see that plugin cars are very close to major cost reduction: the difference between a regular hybrid and a plugin hybrid is just a bigger battery and a charger; however, the MSRP difference is much more than that. Most of it is from automakers trying to milk a little more profit from early sales to cover the R&D costs.

For renewable energy, though, I agree with you. No need to rush into wind/solar production. Just research until it's cost effective.


RE: NO NO NO!!!!
By corduroygt on 3/8/2012 10:01:34 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The research has already come up with good enough solutions for this particular problem. Getting production cost down through economies of scale are all that matter now

No it has not. Batteries are expensive and use rare earth materials from China, and they still suck at energy density and recharge times.
A much better solution will be to research into growing out own fuel and using diesel cars...


It's just money
By FITCamaro on 3/8/2012 7:14:55 PM , Rating: 2
Only a $229 billion dollar deficit in February. No biggie. What's another $4.7 billion right?




RE: It's just money
By Ringold on 3/9/2012 1:06:02 AM , Rating: 2
$735 deficit for every man, woman, and child.

$1760 for every man and woman actually working.

Quite a bit more for every man and woman actually paying income taxes.

For just February. Last I heard it'll be a trillion dollar deficit year again, so $3,215 and $7,700 for the year respectively.

(All based on your 229B number, and numbers pulled from http://research.stlouisfed.org/ )


shortsighted views
By Nexing on 3/10/2012 7:57:04 PM , Rating: 2
I just can't believe what I read here!
Petrol caused the 1973 recesion, 2001 catastrophe, Irak war and who knows what resource costs for the US and world economy since.

Together with that, we've seen (in this same forum) a plethora of promising energy-saving related discoveries. I tried to add here some links for you to see but this site doesn't allow it...

These advancements (and many others) are mainly achieved by Universities and independent science centers. However they fail to reach the market, for reasons that I wont go into... but undoubtedly are market-related. And nope, not free-market related but controlled ones, like patent acquisition, and other less overt controlling maneuvers.

AS I see it, the fastest way now to advance would be if there is an international inter-governmental agreement to (1) take over (paying due charges) the license properties and rights from potential technological advancements and (2)creating a fund that finances privates that apply for the fabrication of these new products.

Obama's government subsidies do push new energies to some rather limited extent, but International cooperation and tight action could be the real answer to the long standing petrol alternative energy development blockade.




RE: shortsighted views
By Nexing on 3/10/2012 8:11:04 PM , Rating: 2
A novel tech link, just search for the article
"lithium sulphur triples battery life"
at bit-tech (dot net)

And also:
The article "new lithium battery takes seconds to charge" at the Batteries section at
goodcleantech.pcmag (dot com)

These two technological discoveries, placed together will change the energetic supply and demand at the world.

We need action to avert the shortsighted powers that slow this evolution.


Oh good. More money for the UAW
By borismkv on 3/8/2012 4:21:20 PM , Rating: 2
That's all these grants to the auto industry are for. Lining the pockets of Union Bosses.




Billions More Down The Drain
By mindless1 on 3/8/2012 4:58:03 PM , Rating: 2
Why not? At this point we don't have a snowball's chance in hell of a balanced budget.




Future headlines
By jimbojimbo on 3/8/2012 9:28:11 PM , Rating: 2
August 2012:
Ford freezes production for another 6 weeks due to low demand. Obama pushes a bill to raise tax credit to $12,500 and $6Billion to be handed out for companies claiming to develop electric vehicle technologies.

Obama is pushing so hard to make this his legacy he's willing to do whatever he thinks will accomplish it regardless of cost! Hey, it's not his money right?




I have an idea....
By loboracing on 3/9/2012 8:46:17 AM , Rating: 2
Lets give the upper class even a bigger tax break to purchase these expensive vehicles then when all the upper class has them lets increase the taxes on fuel so we can milk even more money out of the middle class.




This is about the Volt I think
By Hulk on 3/9/2012 10:02:55 AM , Rating: 2
Since Obama was a heavy backer of GM and more specifically the Volt, and Volt sales are lagging to badly they are halting production for a while, this additional $2500 (from $7500 to $10,000) and providing the money at point of sale instead of the tax return, is a way of trying to keep the Volt alive.

Obama is linked to the success of the GM and of course specifically the Volt. While his goals are admirable, to move to alternative energy and use more efficient automobiles, unfortunately he doesn't really understand the market forces must drive this change, not government. Government can help in supportive ways, mainly by staying out of the way (reducing taxes and regs on companies), but the market must drive the effort if it is going to happen.

So who is going to be blamed with killing the electric car this time?




Done
By jjmcubed on 3/10/2012 7:59:28 AM , Rating: 2
Know you don't care, but I'm done with Dailytech. I pride myself on being a person that listens to people and enjoys a healthy discussion, but you people just insult, insult, insult. If you don't agree with someone you act like a five year old and call names. Everyone knows who calls the names on this board, so there is no use pointing to anyone... You might say "use the ratings to leave out the -1's" but you CAN NOT follow comments without reading the spewing of hate by certain people. Also a surprising amount of comments in the 5's have just as much hate if not more. I've only been around for around five years visiting daily, so no loss....




irresponsible
By DockScience on 3/10/2012 3:45:26 PM , Rating: 2
Obama orders another round for the house and puts it on YOUR children's tab.

This month 54 cents out of every federal dollar he hands out is borrowed.




Dems make everyone richer
By Dan Banana on 3/11/2012 1:26:06 PM , Rating: 2
Programs like this one are a great reason why this factually documented phenomenon occurs despite the denial and protestations to the contrary by the perpetually angry "Gummint is evil" gang.

Democrats Make Everyone Richer
by Lisa Wade, Jan 20, 2011, at 10:38 am

Tipped off by Dmitriy T.M., I enjoyed a Slate slideshow depicting and contextualizing the shrinking of the middle class and the growing advantage of the very top earners in the U.S. over time. We’ve highlighted this slideshow before, but I thought this image deserved its own post. Drawing on data from 1948 to 2005, put together by Larry Bartels, Slate shows that all income brackets prosper under both Democratic and Republican leadership, despite the idea that Republicans are fiscally responsible and Democrats irresponsible. Under Democrats, however, nearly everyone is much more prosperous. The highest income brackets are, given the margin of error, equally prosperous and all other brackets are significantly more so.

http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/01/20/de...




By Dan Banana on 3/13/2012 9:06:41 PM , Rating: 2
Put that in your talking points and smoke it wingers.

Washington —Energy Secretary Steven Chu disavowed his controversial statement in 2008 that he favored higher gas prices.
Before he was named energy secretary, Chu told the Wall Street Journal in 2008 that "somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels of Europe."
For months, Republicans have beaten Chu over the head for the comment. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has repeatedly called for Chu to be fired over the comment.
"I no longer share that view," Chu said. "Of course we don't want the price of gasoline to go up. We want it to go down."
Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, questioned Chu about the comment at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources hearing on Tuesday. "I don't think high gas prices help anyone. I don't think they do anything but hurt the American people," Lee said. "I don't know how much driving you personally do yourself, so you may not be personally be feeling the gouge at the pump."

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120313/AUTO01...




Grammar
By adiposity on 3/8/2012 4:06:45 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Other EV troubles include the failure of Indiana's Think City EV plant, which contains 100 unfinished Think City cars waiting to be completed but can't.


While the meaning is clear, the grammar here should be fixed. It's a bit jarring.




I love this idea
By Dan Banana on 3/8/12, Rating: 0
I hope this criminal is removed from office soon!
By Beenthere on 3/8/12, Rating: -1
By Breathless on 3/8/2012 5:05:24 PM , Rating: 1
Wishful thinking, but i'm wishing with you....


"We shipped it on Saturday. Then on Sunday, we rested." -- Steve Jobs on the iPad launch














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki