The best energy policy ever

You're post is entirely wrong. So much capital is being funnelled to oil companies now that not much is left for the entrapranures to start new alternative oil companies. I would much rather see subsidies in the form of government handouts to start-up alternative energy companies rather than all this money going to Big Oil.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]

Massive restructuring of our economy? A 5 cent gas tax is not a massive restructuring.


[/ QUOTE ]

If your proposed "energy solution" is a mere 5 cent gas tax, you are not the target of my posts.

[ QUOTE ]
Far-reaching unintended consequences? Ya, having more physicists and technology is a real danger to the US. Do you really think educating young americans in physics and funding research will be more dangerous than uber expensive energy? I find that hard to believe. The cost of an energy research program is a drop in the bucket compared to the energy cost increases we've had in the last few months alone.

[/ QUOTE ]

What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with the proposals I oppose.


[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
An "Apollo program" implies a massive undertaking coordinated by a select few, with a specific goal and a specific plan for success. This is obviously a recipe for disaster as a means of solving our energy problems.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ya, having a specific goal for scientific research always fails. That is why the manhattan project failed. That is also why we beat the Russians to the moon. That is why skunkworks failed. That is why the push for a polio vaccine or extracting penicillin failed. Riiiiighhht. You made yet another real solid point there.


[/ QUOTE ]

Again, I don't know how I can make it any more clear but I'll try once more. I'm *not* talking about mere research grants, or military skunkworks. Those are quite different. The Manhattan Project and the Apollo Missions were a technological endeavor and furthermore they did not seek to complete or replace some other normally occurring free-market process. You're quite right that no one would have gone to the moon other than the govt, because there was no "moon mission" market being interefered with by the apollo missions. It's a completely different scenario.

What I oppose is the vocal calls for massive government intervention into the energy *market*. Calling for government to basically force us to change according to their centrally-commanded vision. This is a terrible, disastrous idea. Your counter-examples of the Manhattan Project are poor analogies. Think more along the lines of Stalin's 5 year plan, or FDR's disastrous controls that only exacerbated the Great Depression. These are the *facts* you claim I refuse to acknowldge. I really don't care much about the issue of handing out grant money for research. It's small potatoes compared to the real interventionist ideas out there.

Technology research is one thing, trying to artificially engineer the economy is quite another.

Does that finally make it clear? You're railing against the least important aspects of my posts here. Now, if you actually support govt-mandated energy policies and want to argue those, go ahead. But pointing to the DARPA over and over is not even relevant to what I'm talking about.

natedogg

[The once and future king]

[ QUOTE ]
FDR's disastrous controls that only exacerbated the Great Depression. These are the *facts*

[/ QUOTE ]

You know as well as I do that this is not a fact but a supposition, and the counter arguement can also be made and supported by rational arguement supported by good sources.

As for Stalins 5 year plan, Im not sure which one you are talking about but most of them worked perfectly given their actual goals; the cementing of Stalins political power. The 5 year plans had political goals not economic ones.

[wacki]

From your original post:

[ QUOTE ]
Many posters enthusiastically calling for massive government funding and appropriation for an "appollo program of alternative energy".

Of course this would be a complete disaster and anyone who knows anything about how our government works ...

[/ QUOTE ]




in your last post:
[ QUOTE ]
If your proposed "energy solution" is a mere 5 cent gas tax, you are not the target of my posts.

.....

I'm *not* talking about mere research grants, or military skunkworks.

.....

But pointing to the DARPA over and over is not even relevant to what I'm talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]


???? You sure had me confused.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
From your original post:

[ QUOTE ]
Many posters enthusiastically calling for massive government funding and appropriation for an "appollo program of alternative energy".

Of course this would be a complete disaster and anyone who knows anything about how our government works ...

[/ QUOTE ]




in your last post:
[ QUOTE ]
If your proposed "energy solution" is a mere 5 cent gas tax, you are not the target of my posts.

.....

I'm *not* talking about mere research grants, or military skunkworks.

.....

But pointing to the DARPA over and over is not even relevant to what I'm talking about.

[/ QUOTE ]


???? You sure had me confused.

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't get me wrong. I'm opposed to any new gas tax. I'm opposed to government research grants. But the real problem lies in economic interventions proposed by hysterical peak-oilers and misinformed patriots who think "foreign oil" is a problem.

The usual "Apollo program for energy" that people are calling for includes massive economic restructuring. Any fool knows that this would be insane.

natedogg

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FDR's disastrous controls that only exacerbated the Great Depression. These are the *facts*

[/ QUOTE ]

You know as well as I do that this is not a fact but a supposition, and the counter arguement can also be made and supported by rational arguement supported by good sources.


[/ QUOTE ]

Only by wishful thinking socialists. Not many economists will argue in favor of the controls FDR put in place. In fact, most of the FDR era controls and interventions, like the Smoot Hawley tariffs, have been undone precisely because they were so destructive.

natedogg

[Borodog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
FDR's disastrous controls that only exacerbated the Great Depression. These are the *facts*

[/ QUOTE ]

You know as well as I do that this is not a fact but a supposition, and the counter arguement can also be made and supported by rational arguement supported by good sources.


[/ QUOTE ]

Only by wishful thinking socialists. Not many economists will argue in favor of the controls FDR put in place.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only ones that possibly would work for the government.