MM,
You will not leave, I know that you will stay and help Americas children to pay off the costs of the most expensive American administration in US history. It will take 10 to 15 years to get the deficits back to pre Bush levels and to repair the damages done to the US international standing. I have never seen the US foreign relations at such a low level, during my life time. I think that Bush have been very effective in helping Ossama bin Laden with his goals. It does not take much scratching on the surface of todays US problems, to discover the root of them. The logic says that it is all about energy and it is remarkable that US do not have a comprehensive energy plan. How do you get that message to the American people and most of their representatives? Fix the US energy problems and the world will be a much safer place to live in. It is amazing that US spend so much on the military and so little on "ready for use" energy conservation and energy alternatives. I know that it is a little offensive to spell it out, BUT IT IS STUPID!!! Bush is not a solution of the problems, he is a part and symptom. His utilization of the situation and hysteria, for personal and political purposes, is not only immoral, it is also very damaging for US. Hakan At 06:59 04/03/2004, you wrote: >I think you have a pretty good handle on how things are here in this >country with Energy Policy and other related matters. Your post on >our expectations of South American Generals was particularly >enjoyable. > >Anyway, I will try not to disagree with you or other folks overseas >too often. If President Bush is re-elected, some of us will turn an >eye toward leaving this country, and we will need whatever allies we >have overseas. I probably won't be one to leave (I guess if military >guys can risk bullets, I can risk living under this somewhat-statist >Administration for another four years), but I'll think about it. > >MM > >On Thu, 04 Mar 2004 00:43:14 +0100, you wrote: > > > > >MM, > > > >First I thought that you disagreed with me and then you said "if and where > >possible", which is exactly what I said, but in more specific terms. -:) > > > >Hakan > > > >At 00:03 04/03/2004, you wrote: > >>I thought there were a couple of good ideas inherent in Bob's > >>response. > >> > >>First, it made me think and realize that making a tax law more complex > >>may often lead to favoring large established companies. They can > >>afford to hire more people to track these matters, lobby on these > >>matters and calculate their taxes. They can afford to establish > >>entire departments to determine optimal ways of handling tax strategy, > >>and dealing with those pesky renewable energy activists and their > >>naive tax attempts.... they can do a lot, whereas a lone person or two > >>trying to run a startup company or work out of their home to take some > >>action may simply not have time or resources to devote their attention > >>to trying to master accounting. > >> > >>So, to establish a "level playing field" may mean, first of all, > >>favoring less complexity in our tax laws, not adding to them. So, in > >>that sense, I thought I liked his reaction, even though I would not > >>insist on preventing all proactive tax measures until bad ones were > >>removed. That may be very many years, if ever, to wait for some > >>helpful-to-renewables tax laws. > >> > >>Second, he's simply right, it's possible that one could do more > >>(quantitatively) than any proactive tax law by getting rid of the > >>massive incentives that are sometimes said to exist for the > >>non-sustainable energy companies to continue their ways. I just dont' > >>quite keep track of them. I hope Mr. Kerry, if he gets into office, > >>will make it a priority to get rid of them, if and where possible. > >> > >>On Wed, 03 Mar 2004 22:39:32 +0100, you wrote: > >> > >> > > >> >Bob, > >> > > >> >It is hard to say, many subsidies are useless and to corporations, they > >> >should be replaced with meaningful ones. At the end it must be a > >> >restructuring process. Otherwise the losses are going to be too high > and it > >> >is not resources, financial and human, to create completely new structure > >> >from scratch. The restructured solution must by nature be diversified and > >> >flexible, it is the only way to move fast enough. The attempts to > force and > >> >speed up a hydrogen economy are only signs of desperation. The > technologies > >> >are not there to support it and will not be there for the next 20 > years, if > >> >ever. > >> > > >> >If you look at Brazil, Germany, Sweden, Denmark and a couple of other > >> >countries (maybe also California), US could form a strong and meaningful > >> >energy plan, which handles both energy conservation, alternative energy > >> >sources and the transition. Even I could write an outline for an energy > >> >plan, that is better than what US have today. The most difficult is > that US > >> >have waited too long to really address it, the time lines on almost all > >> >issues are critical now. > >> > > >> >The cost of the SUV tax breaks, raised from $30,000 up to $100,000 by > Bush, > >> >is enough to give away VW Lupo class vehicles to qualified users instead. > >> >Today it is a mess of corruption and lobbying for more. It is very > >> >difficult to see any clear energy policies. other than the military ones, > >> >who are there to secure supplies, which are mathematically impossible in > >> >the long run. It will be difficult for everybody to secure large supplies > >> >in the future. With China and others competing for them now, it will > not be > >> >enough and increasingly more difficult to secure at low cost. > >> > > >> >Hakan > >> > > >> >At 21:19 03/03/2004, you wrote: > >> >>If I were the energy dictator, I would first level the field by stopping > >> >>all energy subsidies. Renewable fuels will never catch up in the area > >> >>of subsidization with the breaks given to the fossil fuel industry. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>murdoch wrote: > >> >> > I have been turning over in my head some attempts at constructive > >> >> > ideas for the (hopefully) incoming President Kerry. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >>------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> >>Bob > >> > Allen,<<<http://ozarker.org/bob>http://ozarker.org/bob>http://ozarker.org/bob>http://ozarker.org/bob > >> >>------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> >>----------------------------------------------------------------- > >> >>The modern conservative is engaged in one of Man's oldest exercises > >> >>in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral > >> >>justification for selfishness JKG > >> >>-------------------------------------------------------------------- Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biofuel/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
