my idea for job creation

[Mafesto]

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

We can remove mountaintops, extract the coal & replace the mountaintops,
and still produce electricity at a lower cost than solar or wind.
So to answer your question.........YES.

I don't care if we castrate migrant workers & burn their testicles for power,
if it makes affordable power, let's do it!

 

[ruffryder]

We can remove mountaintops, extract the coal & replace the mountaintops,
and still produce electricity at a lower cost than solar or wind.
So to answer your question.........YES.

Isn't coal energy subsidized in larger amounts then renewable energy?

 

[94fordguy]

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

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.

Here's the answer to all our problems...

 

[Mafesto]

Isn't coal energy subsidized in larger amounts then renewable energy?

Absolutely not in relation to the % of energy derived from each.

But I agree with your premise that coal/nat gas subsidies should be scrutinized just as every subsidy should be.

 

[ruffryder]

Absolutely not in relation to the % of energy derived from each.

That sure is an interesting way to look at it.

So after 20 years of subsidies to the wind / solar energy sector, and the production of energy from these sources becomes on par with coal, if the coal and renewable subsidies at that time are the same, then it is ok? Just messing with you.

I just wish people would be more interested in reducing our energy imports, then worrying about where our domestic energy comes from.

 

[94fordguy]

That sure is an interesting way to look at it.

So after 20 years of subsidies to the wind / solar energy sector, and the production of energy from these sources becomes on par with coal, if the coal and renewable subsidies at that time are the same, then it is ok? Just messing with you.

I just wish people would be more interested in reducing our energy imports, then worrying about where our domestic energy comes from.

Bingo!!!!!

 

[swampwater]

Ruffy
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...

No I fully understand the point of the federal government, it is to abide by the contract with the states and the people, it's called the constitution and it has no provision to allow the government to take the life energy of one person and give it to another. Wasn't the point of your post for the federal government to distribute the funds to accomplish your ideas?

Ruffy
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?

I guess you missed this:
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

Ruffy
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).​

Again wasn't that the point of your initial post, spreading taxpayers money to favor the actions you promote? Swampy

 

[ruffryder]

No I fully understand the point of the federal government, it is to abide by the contract with the states and the people, it's called the constitution and it has no provision to allow the government to take the life energy of one person and give it to another. Wasn't the point of your post for the federal government to distribute the funds to accomplish your ideas?

Isn't that the whole point of government? Collect funds and distribute to common goals? Like defense, like infrastructure, like the FBI... Without taxes the govt wouldn't have any teeth to do any of the goals that we want it to.

I guess you missed this:
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

So what does these workers do? What parts of the government are they in? Can you explain this point a little more, I am confused as to who you are actually talking about and what the percentages you are using actually represent. Sorry.

Again wasn't that the point of your initial post, spreading taxpayers money to favor the actions you promote? Swampy

I guess. I was thinking that the primary goal would be to reduce our oil imports. The net benefit of that would be a better economy. I don't think the primary goal of the government is to create jobs, but during some of its decisions and it has the ability to help grow markets.

So that is a yes and a no combined.. how is that? lol

 

[swampwater]

Isn't that the whole point of government? Collect funds and distribute to common goals? Like defense, like infrastructure, like the FBI... Without taxes the govt wouldn't have any teeth to do any of the goals that we want it to.

Who the hell is complaining about constitutional expenditures, the military, post roads etc. I am posting about the unconstitutional expenditures(Corp for public broadcasting, save americans treasures, legal services corp etc, I have a partial list that would save 2.5 trillion over the next ten years.How about the money spent $899,769.00 sent as part of a grant to NDRI to study the effects of the penis sizes of gay men on health.


So what does these workers do? What parts of the government are they in? Can you explain this point a little more, I am confused as to who you are actually talking about and what the percentages you are using actually represent. Sorry.

They are the beauracrats employed within the iunconstitutional agencies of the federal government or are you nieve enough to believe these agencies perform a necessary service even though they are unconstitutional?

I guess. I was thinking that the primary goal would be to reduce our oil imports. The net benefit of that would be a better economy. I don't think the primary goal of the government is to create jobs, but during some of its decisions and it has the ability to help grow markets.So that is a yes and a no combined.. how is that? lol

Well that is surely whats going on, do you realize that 80% of the stimulous money spent on altrernative energy went out of the country, not creating a single job here. Do you understand your OB sent taxpayer money to Brazil to help them develope their offshore drilling to sell oil to china while stopping any drilling off our shore or anywhere even though we have over 100 years known supply. And the primary goal of the government should and must be to follow the dictates of the original contract, the constitution or it is simply a rogue criminal organization You can spin what you feel are the benefits all you want but government cannot create jobs other than determining winners and losers. Only the private sector can save this economy and this country.
Swampy

 

[snowmobiler]

Do you understand your OB sent taxpayer money to Brazil to help them develope their offshore drilling to sell oil to china while stopping any drilling off our shore or anywhere even though we have over 100 years known supply.

we are so screwed.

 

[DOO DAWG]

Speaking of BHO, this is a long read here! If you read comments.

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] The Imperial President »
Having just shed the shackles of monarchy, the Founding Fathers were loath to establish a government with an all-powerful chief executive. To prevent it, they created a government divided into three equal branches. Their idea was that each branch would check the other in order to limit government's growth. But Congress has abdicated its responsibility, the Federal judiciary has become the oligarchy Thomas Jefferson warned about, and the result is we now have an imperial Presidency. More »
[/FONT]




If that one doesn't work........

http://www.personalliberty.com/cons...mperial-president/?eiid=&rmid=2011_07_18_PLA_[P11789395]&rrid=387322601

 

[ruffryder]

And the primary goal of the government should and must be to follow the dictates of the original contract, the constitution or it is simply a rogue criminal organization

Well, the constitution created the framework that allowed for a congress to create rules and the like. Therefore what congress and the government does is constitutional....

Do you believe that we should follow the constitution with no other additions?

Do you understand your OB sent taxpayer money to Brazil to help them develope their offshore drilling to sell oil to china while stopping any drilling off our shore or anywhere even though we have over 100 years known supply.

They were loans and this had nothing to do with stimulus money, it was the EX - IM bank.

http://www.exim.gov/brazil/petrobasfacts.cfm

Excerpt from their website...

Charge: The U.S. government is giving away more than $2 billion in taxpayer dollars to Brazil's largest oil and gas company to drill for oil in Brazil.
Fact: The Bank has established a $2 billion financing opportunity for Petrobras to use solely for the purchase of American-made goods and services. So far, Ex-Im has approved $300 million to finance Petrobras' purchase of U.S. oil and gas equipment and services.
The funds go to American exporters as payment for their sales to the Petrobras.
If Petrobras fails to award contracts to U.S. companies for the remaining amount, it will not access those dollars.
Of note, the Bank is self-sustaining and no taxpayer dollars are involved.
Charge: The loans to Petrobras represent a giveaway of U.S. tax dollars.
Fact: Ex-Im is a self-funding, independent agency which operates at no cost to the taxpayer. Ex-Im does not make grants, and charges fees and interest for the financing it provides. In fact, since 2006 the Ex-Im Bank has generated more than $3.4 billion in revenue for U.S. taxpayers.
Charge: America is exporting jobs to Brazil as a result of the loans.
Fact: Only American made goods and services qualify for Ex-Im Bank loans or guarantees.
Ex-Im Bank only supports U.S. jobs by providing financing to ensure that American goods and services can compete on a level playing field against foreign competition.
Charge: The loan to Petrobras represents a reversal of the Obama Administration's policies on off-shore drilling.
Fact:There is no connection between federal policies on offshore drilling in U.S. waters and financing U.S. export sales for drilling by other countries. In fact, should Ex-Im Bank refuse to finance sales by U.S. companies it is likely that the sales will go instead to their foreign competitors.
It is notable that the Bank's bipartisan Board of Directors unanimously approved the preliminary commitment to Petrobras on April 14, 2009, before any Obama appointees joined the Bank. In fact, at the time the Bank's Board consisted of three Republicans and two Democrats, all of whom were appointed by President George W. Bush.

Not sure where you get your information swampy...

 

[DOO DAWG]

So you are saying these banks don't cost US taxpayers anything?

 

[ruffryder]

So you are saying these banks don't cost US taxpayers anything?

That is what it seems like. Note that I think this is only one bank, specifically the EX-IM bank.

Ex-Im Bank operates without taxpayer funding and earns revenue that helps reduce the deficit. By charging fees and interest on all loan-related transactions, Ex-Im Bank is self-sustaining and is able to cover all operation costs and potential losses while also producing revenue. The Bank has generated $3.4 billion for U.S. taxpayers over the past five years.

Any other thoughts on this?

 

[swampwater]

Well, the constitution created the framework that allowed for a congress to create rules and the like. Therefore what congress and the government does is constitutional....

Do you believe that we should follow the constitution with no other additions

?

I am not going to respond to this until I understand if your statement means the way I read it. Do you believe the Constitution is a living breathing document that can be changed at the will of congress? And what pray tell are "other additions" You might want to be a little clearer?

They were loans and this had nothing to do with stimulus money, it was the EX - IM bank.

I did not say it was stimulous money I was pointing out that they are spending taxpayer money to help brazil develope offsore drilling they have completely curtailed for the US.

[COLOR="red"]http://www.exim.gov/brazil/petrobasfacts.cfm

Excerpt from their website...[/COLOR]
Not sure where you get your information swampy...

I will surely not accept the rantings of the exim-banks site patting themselves on the back for their illustrious actions. The exim-bank is an unconstitutional agency filled with arrogant globalists with no love for the US.
It is the same agency that brokered the deal for Ford Motor Company in the early 70's to build the largest truck factory in the world in Kama River Russia at the height of the Vietnam war giving aid to our enemy.
The biggest recipient of green jobs funding in the stimulous package was a bankrupt Austrailian company that imported Japenese turbines for a windmill farm. Spain's "green jobs" program , which obama cited 8 times as a model for his own green jobs and global warming programs, completely failed, destroying jobs and driving up Spain's skyrocketing deficit. Each new green job "created" in Spain wiped out 2.2 existing jobs and cost 800,000.00.
Swampy

 

[milehighassassin]

!. 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

Can you show me a power plant that is not an eyesore? How many animals are killed from coal plants? How about the trains that take the coal to the power plants? When they blow up they damage a lot as well.

Your argument doesn't really prove much.

 

[milehighassassin]

Private sector did a great job running our banks... just saying.

 

[swampwater]

Most new plants I have seen are not eyesores in my opinion they just look like modern structures with lots of landscaping and vegitation, not the miles of area needed for windfarms. As for your other question I have not researched those statistics so maybe you can enlighten us. However I doubt the trains are only carrying coal. My arguments prove a lot to me, I want niothing to do with windfarms.Swampy

Can you show me a power plant that is not an eyesore? How many animals are killed from coal plants? How about the trains that take the coal to the power plants? When they blow up they damage a lot as well.

Your argument doesn't really prove much.

 

[swampwater]

First of all there is no such thing as private sector banks they are all part of the FED and heavily controlled by the federal government, so maybe that was the problem! You know we used to have some state chartered banks not part of the FED system, funny as all those dissapeared our problems have increased. Swampy

Private sector did a great job running our banks... just saying.

 

[ruffryder]

I am not going to respond to this until I understand if your statement means the way I read it. Do you believe the Constitution is a living breathing document that can be changed at the will of congress? And what pray tell are "other additions" You might want to be a little clearer?

other additions.. ammendments, laws and rules passed by congress. Since the constitution involves mechanisms that allow for changing the constitution and adding amendments, it is definitely allowed to change. The constitution allows for congress to change it. Oh, and it doesn't breathe. So, if I assume that you are a strict constitutionalists, what is your stance on a standing federal army?

I did not say it was stimulous money I was pointing out that they are spending taxpayer money to help brazil develope offsore drilling they have completely curtailed for the US.

I guess not. You segwayed very quickly from stimulus to spending tax payer money, I guess I didn't realize you were talking about "tax payer money" as being non-stimulus.
Anyways, I believe you stated "give" to Brazil. It wasn't a gift, it was a loan, and it seems like it wasn't any taxpayer money anyways.http://<font color="red">http//www.exim.gov/brazil/petrobasfacts.cfm</font>

I will surely not accept the rantings of the exim-banks site patting themselves on the back for their illustrious actions. The exim-bank is an unconstitutional agency filled with arrogant globalists with no love for the US.

so again, what information sources do you accept?

It is the same agency that brokered the deal for Ford Motor Company in the early 70's to build the largest truck factory in the world in Kama River Russia at the height of the Vietnam war giving aid to our enemy.
The biggest recipient of green jobs funding in the stimulous package was a bankrupt Austrailian company that imported Japenese turbines for a windmill farm. Spain's "green jobs" program , which obama cited 8 times as a model for his own green jobs and global warming programs, completely failed, destroying jobs and driving up Spain's skyrocketing deficit. Each new green job "created" in Spain wiped out 2.2 existing jobs and cost 800,000.00.
Swampy

That is great and all, but what has this to do with us providing our own energy and not importing? You seem to be arguing with yourself..