Things are bad. What's the solution?

Damn Yankee said:
No compelling reasoning except the points that you subsequently brought up.

Damo just gave AssHat a blow job.
Click to expand...

Look idjit. Green energy is a fine thing, it's just not so great it will save our entire economy.

Getting off foreign oil is good, but it won't provide jobs.

You're still not making the case that green energy will provide sufficient jobs to revive the economy.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Look idjit. Green energy is a fine thing, it's just not so great it will save our entire economy.

Getting off foreign oil is good, but it won't provide jobs.

You're still not making the case that green energy will provide sufficient jobs to revive the economy.
Click to expand...
I haven't the ability nor inclination to run the numbers on his, but I don't have to. Its a no-brainer that free energy and elimination of oil imports would be a huge boon to our economy.

I myself spend about $800/ month on electricity, gasoline, fuel oil and propane and if I could cut that in half I'd be better off.
 
Damn Yankee said:
I haven't the ability nor inclination to run the numbers on his, but I don't have to. Its a no-brainer that free energy and elimination of oil imports would be a huge boon to our economy.

I myself spend about $800/ month on electricity, gasoline, fuel oil and propane and if I could cut that in half I'd be better off.
Click to expand...

You don't have to run numbers to see that cheapening things is not job creation.

Some things would be cheaper, that's true. But no matter how cheap things get, you can't pay for them without a job.

What will provide jobs?
 
Damn Yankee said:
*shrug*
Click to expand...
So you somehow use this mental block to equate local sources with "green" energy? Especially when it was pointed out that attempting to "compel" it to solely be "green" energy would be fruitless and cause harm?

It is worthless to argue with somebody who takes posts that are on the same page even and attempts to put them out of context.
 
AssHatZombie said:
You don't have to run numbers to see that cheapening things is not job creation.

Some things would be cheaper, that's true. But no matter how cheap things get, you can't pay for them without a job.

What will provide jobs?
Click to expand...

With $400 more in my pocket every month I could buy a lot of stuff. And that stuff would be cheaper because the energy to produce it would be cheaper. Factories would have to make more stuff, trucks would have to haul more stuff and stores would have to sell more stuff. Factories, trucks and stores would have to hire folks to make, haul and sell the stuff. :palm:
 
Damocles said:
So you somehow use this mental block to equate local sources with "green" energy? Especially when it was pointed out that attempting to "compel" it to solely be "green" energy would be fruitless and cause harm?

It is worthless to argue with somebody who takes posts that are on the same page even and attempts to put them out of context.
Click to expand...

Damo I've never been a single source guy on energy. Drill baby, drill, nukes, wind, solar, hydro, everything. It is worthless to argue with somebody who takes posts that are on the same page even and attempts to put them out of context.:palm:
 
Damn Yankee said:
With $400 more in my pocket every month I could buy a lot of stuff. And that stuff would be cheaper because the energy to produce it would be cheaper. Factories would have to make more stuff, trucks would have to haul more stuff and stores would have to sell more stuff. Factories, trucks and stores would have to hire folks to make, haul and sell the stuff. :palm:
Click to expand...

But most of that stuff will be imported, just like now. You're still creating no new jobs in america.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Damo, how could getting off foreign energy save our economy? How will that provide jobs?
Click to expand...
So you think that upgrading engines in our automobiles to run on NG wouldn't provide jobs? Drilling for NG and changing the infrastructure to provide NG over oil wouldn't provide jobs? Building electrical plants that would use locally sourced energy, nuclear or coal, wouldn't provide jobs? That the oil we would use to make plastics, etc. would be drilled from local sources, that wouldn't provide jobs?

Methinks you are pretending to "misunderstand"... The fact that the energy would be provided locally would necessarily compel local employment to provide it...
 
Damn Yankee said:
What's your theory? My turn to rip you a new one. :)
Click to expand...

Sever trade relations with nations that don't share our notions of civil rights. Put massive tariffs on all imports to stimulate domestic industry of all kinds.

I went over all this in the first part of the thread. The bfgrn got us all on the energy panacea idiocy.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Sever trade relations with nations that don't share our notions of civil rights. Put massive tariffs on all imports to stimulate domestic industry of all kinds.

I went over all this in the first part of the thread. The bfgrn got us all on the energy panacea idiocy.
Click to expand...
Won't we need energy to fuel this new economy?
 
Damocles said:
So you think that upgrading engines in our automobiles to run on NG wouldn't provide jobs? Drilling for NG and changing the infrastructure to provide NG over oil wouldn't provide jobs? Building electrical plants that would use locally sourced energy, nuclear or coal, wouldn't provide jobs? That the oil we would use to make plastics, etc. would be drilled from local sources, that wouldn't provide jobs?

Methinks you are pretending to "misunderstand"... The fact that the energy would be provided locally would necessarily compel local employment to provide it...
Click to expand...

It would provide some jobs. I don't think it's ENOUGH jobs.

I see you've managed to choke down the "green jobs" lie and are managing to regurgitate it with no problem. We all knew you were a reliable sellout. congratulations on your intellectual malfeasance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top