Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brian P. who wrote (15770)	3/19/2000 3:40:00 PM
From: Brian P.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Came across this excerpt from Gore's book. I totally agree with it: <<"higher taxes on fossil fuels...is one of the logical first steps in changing our policies in a manner consistent with a more responsible approach to the environment." from Al Gore's radical environmental manifesto, Earth in the Balance, pg. 173>> Except I think that this is not "radical", or is "radical" only in this loony philistine country. We SHOULD be taxing gasoline and lowering other taxes correspondingly, as a way to shape national energy consumption. See: A Nation of Oil Addicts By Charles Krauthammer Friday , March 17, 2000 ; A27, Washington Post washingtonpost.com <<What to do? Some Republicans have decided to take a whack at Clinton's 4.3 cents-a-gallon gas tax. Oh, the courage. Aside from the fact that repeal, literally, won't make a dime's worth of difference at the pump, it betrays a total misapprehension of the problem. The reason we are in our current state is not high, but low gas taxes.>>. . By the way, I think, along with George Kennan (see his book, "Around the Cragged Hill"), that Americans suffer from two great national addictions: the automobile and the television.

To: Brian P. who wrote (15770)	3/19/2000 3:46:00 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Brian, here is George W's environmental thoughts from his website. It looks like your assumptions are based on something other than what the candidate has said or done(probably 4.1 second sound bites). The problem we have when discussing environmentalism is exactly what you've outlined. Far too many people see the issue as a black and white "you win-I-lose" issue. You either believe in Global Warming or you don't, you either believe in business at the expense of the environment or you don't, etc. etc. That's the problem with people like Al Gore who are so completely controlled by environmental PAC dollars. When dealing with the environment balanced ideas are what is needed, not extremist positions as described and outlined by Al Gore in his book "Earth in the Balance". But it's tough for you to understand that if you've never read his book. Michael ____________________________________________________________ Environment & Natural Resources georgebush.com Believes environmental standards must be based on the best science, market-driven technologies can provide solutions, and government should encourage innovation and going beyond compliance Recognizes that global warming should be taken seriously but will require any decisions to be based on the best science; opposes Kyoto Protocol Supports moratorium against offshore drilling in California and Florida Opposes breaching dams in Pacific Northwest Supports conservation of land, wetlands and habitat, particularly by private landowners Supports protection of private property rights Reinvest in America's natural resources by fully funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) and guarantee a 50% share of the LWCF for state and local conservation Supports alleviating the substantial repair and improvement backlog facing our national parks, wildlife refuges and other public lands