my idea for job creation

[milehighassassin]

Nuclear is safe?.lol

Yeah it is assuming you don't put it on one of the largest faults zones in the world, while ignoring safety warnings.

I agree we need to spend money on our aging infrastructure. Roads are a joke in most places, our bridges are aging and unsafe. Our rail is a somewhat of a joke in comparison to other countries.

I did read in I think Popular Mechanics that GE is working on some groundbreaking technology that will allow power grids to actually store energy. It can be stored now on VERY small levels. This would be storable on a HUGE scale. I'll see if I can find it.

 

[snowmobiler]

they allready spent zillons and did the new roads and bridges here in ore.it put like 10 local people to work.yippy.another big waste of money.

 

[DOO DAWG]

Nuclear is safe?.lol

AND
Keep the diesel generators above and away from any body of water

 

[POLZIN]

Power, Water, Schools, Roads, and other local projects that will put folks to work and generate more tax revenue in the process.

Uh thats spending ! The jobs that it "creates" are taypayer funded jobs . Short term ,corrutption ridden jobs. Thats what we need to stop. at least for a while. We need to stop spending until we can pay the bills again. simple as that.

we need factories that build things from raw materials that is how wealth is made! Taxing an already staped nation to build roads only adds to the problem if we can afford it and we cant. its time to tighten the belt thats the only proven way to deal with the debt.

 

[ruffryder]

We need to stop spending until we can pay the bills again. simple as that.

You do know that will result in a larger amount of people out of a job right?

I am not disagreeing with you, as I think we do need to spend as much as we bring in, and only that much.

I just get frustrated that people say that we need to cut govt spending, then complain about the jobless rate. If you cut govt spending, you will cut a lot of jobs.

Do you agree with that?

 

[POLZIN]

You do know that will result in a larger amount of people out of a job right?

I am not disagreeing with you, as I think we do need to spend as much as we bring in, and only that much.

I just get frustrated that people say that we need to cut govt spending, then complain about the jobless rate. If you cut govt spending, you will cut a lot of jobs.

Do you agree with that?

yes that is what has to happen. people will lose mostly goverment jobs and I say thats good if there is a real need the private sector will fill it and do a better job for less.

 

[tudizzle]

half a million government jobs cut since Obama took office


good or bad?

 

[POLZIN]

half a million government jobs cut since Obama took office


good or bad?

yes I do think its a nessesary thing! We cant all work for the goverment.if we do no new Money enters our econmic system.It must have this growth to sustain a balance . that balance is waaaay off. find a way to crate millions of real jobs not infrastructure (spending) jobs and bring new outside cash back to our econmy then you can afford the spending. in the future we just need to actually have the money we spend. how to do that is a way tougher question this country cant get out of its own way to make a buck if we had to. The EPA ,OSHA, MSHA, have such a strangle hold on things we cant compete.

 

[swampwater]

Swampy, What do you have against wind? I think a problem with the energy market, or rather most markets is the lack in quantifying and monetizing the environmental impact on the choices that are offered in the market.

!. They are an eysore in otherwise prestine areas
2. They are quite noisy
3. At this tuime they kikll about 33,000 birds per year how much will that inncrease.
4 They are only usefull at certain wind speeds
5. when they blow up they create a lot of damage even fires.
Swampy

 

[swampwater]

half a million government jobs cut since Obama took office


good or bad?

Only because they got rid of the temporary census workers.

 

[swampwater]

There my friend is the problem, the government creates nothing of value, any government jobs are an actual net loss on the economy, their cost increases for regulations, complying with government forms, extra accounting procedures, extra hiring to comply with government requirements and extra hiring by the government to process all this crap. And if your pointing out giovernment money to the private sector for jobs I don't think you will find much economic growth there. It works this way, the federal government takes 100.00 dollars from the private sector in taxes, or credit, wastes over 80 % in the federal beauracracy than sends back 20% to the private sector with all the controls they want. They wish to determine the winners and losers. One can only dream of the economic activity growth that would be created leaving the money in the taxpayers and the private sectors hands. Swampy

You do know that will result in a larger amount of people out of a job right?

I am not disagreeing with you, as I think we do need to spend as much as we bring in, and only that much.

I just get frustrated that people say that we need to cut govt spending, then complain about the jobless rate. If you cut govt spending, you will cut a lot of jobs.

Do you agree with that?

 

[tudizzle]

the government creates nothing of value,

My friends in the military disagree...you think our military has no value?

 

[POLZIN]

!. They are an eysore in otherwise prestine areas
2. They are quite noisy
3. At this tuime they kikll about 33,000 birds per year how much will that inncrease.
4 They are only usefull at certain wind speeds
5. when they blow up they create a lot of damage even fires.
Swampy

6 The current over hung fan/generator design will NEVER be practical . GAME OVER END OF STORY! There IS a Very good reason why such a design is only used in crude equipment throughout the rest of industry. Without subsidies todays wind energy is DOA.

 

[swampwater]

I was only speaking of the civil government of which there are over 2 million without even counting the congeressional or judicial branches, the military or the post office. The actual number including grantees and funded private companies is probably over 4 million. Don't even think of laying that anti military trip on me. Swampy

My friends in the military disagree...you think our military has no value?

 

[ruffryder]

There my friend is the problem, the government creates nothing of value,

I think you misunderstand the point of the federal government. It is not to create anything, but to be a forum of linking all states together to make joint decisions and then distribute funds to carry out those decisions. The point of the federal government is to be a union of states, not a business creating widgets...

It works this way, the federal government takes 100.00 dollars from the private sector in taxes, or credit, wastes over 80 % in the federal beauracracy than sends back 20% to the private sector with all the controls they want.

Really, just 20%? I highly, highly doubt that 20%. In fact, it is just plain wrong. If you look at the budget of the federal govt.. 20% isn't the only thing being spent. Isn't like 10 - 20% spent on the military anyways?

They wish to determine the winners and losers. One can only dream of the economic activity growth that would be created leaving the money in the taxpayers and the private sectors hands. Swampy

Again, I think you miss the point of the government. It isn't to create job, or to create growth, it is to allow the people of the US to join together for common goals that benefit all of society (less of all as of lately).

Things that the govt does that works out pretty well.
DARPA
USPS (yah it looses money, because it is subsidized by the but loads. Shipped anything to an APO lately?)
Military Development (all private sector)
NASA / Space
Plane develpment
Interstate system (well, before we stopped keeping up with infrastructure improvements)
Research and Development

In all of these, the govt only facilitates the US to direct funds as deemed appropriate.

To state that the US govt doesn't create anything, is erroneous, as it was never designed to create anything in the first place. Does it say anything about creating stuff in the constitution?

I am not saying that the govt is perfect, has no red tape, and does everything correctly. There are functions that work best using a utilized front, which is the federal government.

 

[POLZIN]

Denmark has 6,000 wind turbines serving a population of 5.3 million and when the wind conditions are just right wind produces around 19 percent of its electricity. Yet despite huge financial investment no conventional power plant has yet been shut down while Danish electricity costs to consumers are the highest in Europe, according to research

 

[snowmobiler]

i heard economic armageddon comming and we will need a windmill to power our houses

 

[Mafesto]

Taxpayer subsidies to wind or solar should not exceed a level of R & D.

We have an endless supply of coal, which produces power far more efficiently than solar or wind.

Why would we promote moving away from coal to a more expensive form of power generation?

It makes no sense.

It handicaps our industry.

It raises our costs of living.

I can understand subsidies with the intent of improving technologies in hopes of a viable alternative,
but this massive trend towards wind & solar at their current inefficient state is self destructive.

Moving away from coal makes as much sense as a cattle rancher promoting sushi.

 

[ruffryder]

Yet despite huge financial investment no conventional power plant has yet been shut down while Danish electricity costs to consumers are the highest in Europe, according to research

have the conventional power plants used less fuel? There is a difference between shutting down a plant, and reducing its amount of energy (not power) produced.

Is the purpose of the wind farms for the Danish population only to reduce costs? I would be interested to know if the electricity costs have changed much from before to after the large amounts of wind turbines. It looks like their gas prices have increased a lot as well, and they get a bunch of their electricity from natural gas.

 

[ruffryder]

We have an endless supply of coal, which produces power far more efficiently than solar or wind.

what definition of efficiency are you using? Does removing a whole mountain top sound like efficiency to you?

Why would we promote moving away from coal to a more expensive form of power generation?

What if instead of thinking about renewable energy in competition with coal, think about renewable energy in competition with gasoline and other transportation fuels.

With an increase in electric vehicles, it will result in coal generated electricity displacing gasoline. Would this not be a great thing for our country?

I think this discussion is getting distracted by the renewable energy vs coal energy issue. IMO, I don't care where our energy comes from, as long as it isn't imported from other countries. Be it coal, nuclear, natural gas, hydro, wind, solar, biomass, and anything else they can think of.