Curse Obama and his radical fact-based agendas.

Who's going to pay for the NEW energy? There is a reason why we are dependent on the OLD energy. Its cheapest. I am an Obama fan but he sure avoids telling us the real costs here. Like how much exactly we are going to pay for these ideas. And also how far in debt we will be in 8 years.

you already are! your paying for it in higher health costs , but they are widespread and low grade , also lower worker productivity due to high particulate counts in the air thanks to dirty coal.
the difference here is credit vs. pay now .
currently we are back loading all the energy costs in our country and hiding the total cost because adding up those costs are extremely complex .
the cost of keeping our military and intelligence agencies active in the oil rich regions for more than 50 years equals what?
and what is the cost of 2-4 degrees celsius in 50 years next?
for around 1.1 trillion we could cut our emissions to 50% OF 2005 . for about 30 billion we could feed all the hungry everywhere in the world for a year .
instead ,, we gave it to the banks. for what?
as far as how bad our debt will be? lets hope buddha will be kind,, cause the next year surely wont be.

>> ^DrPawn:
Who's going to pay for the NEW energy? There is a reason why we are dependent on the OLD energy. Its cheapest. I am an Obama fan but he sure avoids telling us the real costs here. Like how much exactly we are going to pay for these ideas. And also how far in debt we will be in 8 years.


In 100 years, which do you think people will condemn us more for? Burning all the fossil fuels on the planet, and releasing the results into the atmosphere, or running up budget deficits to numbers that will seem quaint to them?

In World War 2, we ran up debts to 120% of our GDP, our historical record high for debt ratio. That would be about $17 trillion today, nearly double where we are now.

What was the gross debt at the end of the war and the New Deal? $257 billion dollars.

Is it a lot of money? Sure. Should we make sure it's invested wisely? Absolutely.

Besides, investment in green tech probably won't require anything like what it's going to take to clean up after Bush's disastrous financial policies.

At least a clean energy source would be a reliable revenue stream for a long time to come.

Do your figures account for inflation Netrunner? I mean you could do alot more with a dollar back in 1940s then today.

In fact I think his project fall short for what I would have liked. I would have said 45 miles per gallon by 2015 because cars like the Honda non-hybrid has proven it can be done. So there is not excuse to keep on delaying that situation.

I would also have created a very aggressive insulation and energy efficient building code. Such all the building/houses moving forward have all the key technologies to safe energy, insulation, water, etc. I would also have included solar power for them as mandatory. To help start build the idea of energy decentralization. Which is good for many reasons.

I would also have announce that we are looking into defining a Manhattan project for the USA to help us be energy independent by 2030.

Obama just bombed Pakistan. Has everyone gone back to sleep?

>> ^Irishman:
Obama just bombed Pakistan. Has everyone gone back to sleep?


Anyone who was paying attention to his foreign policy plans during the election should have been aware that this was a distinct possibility. Why, exactly, do you think Christopher Hitchens endorsed him?