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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mr. Palau who wrote (25136)	1/22/2008 4:32:03 PM
From: Geoff Altman	Respond to of 71588

Hey, guess what, for the most part we agree on the issues that need to be addressed. I've no doubt though that we see the issues in a completely different light however. Dealing with foreign threats and foreign affair effectively and rationally IMO this is being done NOW, but has little hope of being dealt with effectively or and especially rationally if the Dems win the Presidency. The dual goals of adopting policies to end our dependance on foreign oil and better protecting our environment Nuclear power is one VIABLE way of putting a dent in this problem also drilling in Alaska and off shore Fla. but the environmental lobby blocks this with every turn. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Reforming our health care system so that the delivery of our unmatched medical expertise is rational and not driven by the insurance industry If you think that a massive government driven health care program is the answer you're deluding yourself. Nor is socialized healthcare, just look at the countries that have it....their HC systems are in shambles. There's a cronic shortage of doctors in Japan........ Having policies based on science and facts, not changing science and facts to fit the policies Oh, you must mean sucking down Algores BS with a straw. No, you couldn't mean that since the scientists with the "facts" disagree with his findings. Not basing our military decisions on guys named Curveball Oh please, you act as though going to war with Iraq was a whim with Bush. Oh, wait, could it be that congress saw the same info and voted to go to war too? Get over it, we're there and need to finish what we started. Improving the judiciary That most likely means stacking the court with a bunch of secular progressive liberal judges...not my idea of improving the judiciary.

To: Mr. Palau who wrote (25136)	1/22/2008 4:38:13 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 71588

Most of those are fairly generic ideas. What I mean by that is they are so vague that positions on the opposite side of many controversies could be said to be inspired by such ideas. None of them are highly specific, but I'll address one that at least isn't very vague (how you intend to get there is vague but the idea itself isn't) - "Ending dependence on foreign oil" - That one is really tough, and probably something that would do more harm than good. Most of the foreign oil comes from Canada or Mexico so the benefit of ending imports might not be as good as you think.. Also the Middle East producers have the lowest cost and the highest reserves, while a lot of American oil is pretty high cost. That means if you reduce oil use by the amount we currently import from the Middle East (or even the amount of our total imports) you don't end imports from the Middle East, instead you get less production in the US and imports almost as high as before. Also even if you really could shift to more expensive American oil, our supplies would run down faster and later on, when oil is even more expensive, we'd have to import a larger percentage of the oil we use. To end oil imports you pretty much have to almost eliminate oil use. Eliminating oil use isn't in the cards any time soon. Oil is our biggest source of energy for transportation, and one of the biggest sources of other purposes, for a reason. Any other source is going to cost more, and may have other negative impacts. For example see - Rapeseed biofuel ‘produces more greenhouse gas than oil or petrol’ 'Fertilising' oceans with iron may combat climate change \| Climate change may help rainforests A renewable energy source designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is contributing more to global warming than fossil fuels, a study suggests. Measurements of emissions from the burning of biofuels derived from rapeseed and maize have been found to produce more greenhouse gas emissions than they save. Other biofuels, especially those likely to see greater use over the next decade, performed better than fossil fuels but the study raises serious questions about some of the most commonly produced varieties. Rapeseed and maize biodiesels were calculated to produce up to 70 per cent and 50 per cent more greenhouse gases respectively than fossil fuels. The concerns were raised over the levels of emissions of nitrous oxide, which is 296 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Scientists found that the use of biofuels released twice as much as nitrous oxide as previously realised. The research team found that 3 to 5 per cent of the nitrogen in fertiliser was converted and emitted. In contrast, the figure used by the International Panel on Climate Change, which assesses the extent and impact of man-made global warming, was 2 per cent. The findings illustrated the importance, the researchers said, of ensuring that measures designed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions are assessed thoroughly before being hailed as a solution. “One wants rational decisions rather than simply jumping on the bandwagon because superficially something appears to reduce emissions,” said Keith Smith, a professor at the University of Edinburgh and one of the researchers... timesonline.co.uk

To: Mr. Palau who wrote (25136)	1/22/2008 5:54:59 PM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Thank you for the insight. I must say that once again we agree on many of the priorities you list. "Dealing with foreign threats and foreign affair effectively and rationally." Agreed. Continuing the current Administration's policies would go a long way towards this. "Improving the judiciary" Agreed. We need to depose the petty despots who have prevented this in the Senate. Democrats have obstructed President Bush's appointments from day one. "end our dependance on foreign oil and better protecting our environment " Admirable and difficult to achieve. Did you see the graph Tim posted the other day showing the growth rates for public transit versus private vehicle use in urban areas? It does not look good for mass transit. "Reforming our health care system so that the delivery of our unmatched medical expertise is rational " Agreed with that part. We need to limit government meddling before they completely destroy the American medical miracle. "Having policies based on science and facts, not changing science and facts to fit the policies" Agreed. Of course this destroys the GW myth, so Kyoto is out.