• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama supports bankrupting coal industry

Felicity said:
To quote the "first black president"...
"It's the economy, stupid."
Click to expand...

That was before your fav movie, "And Inconvenient Truth". ;)

The new mantra is: "It's the environment stupid... or we all die."
 
Well, you can't have it both ways. If America wants to totally switch over to clean, alternative energy sources, then all of the old fossil fuel industries will eventually go out of business. It's like when cars began to replace horses, OMG the wagon making industry is going to crumble!! And it did, but it was replaced with the auto industry. The same will happen here, eventually as the coal industry crumbles, it will give way to a newer industry. Do not fear change.
 
jonnyalpha said:
Well, you can't have it both ways. If America wants to totally switch over to clean, alternative energy sources, then all of the old fossil fuel industries will eventually go out of business. It's like when cars began to replace horses, OMG the wagon making industry is going to crumble!! And it did, but it was replaced with the auto industry. The same will happen here, eventually as the coal industry crumbles, it will give way to a newer industry. Do not fear change.
Click to expand...

Except that in the case of the car, it was a proven, reliable and BETTER solution to the horse and buggy. That is not being offered.
 
More proven and reliable than a horse? Have you ever seen a car with a crank starter?
 
Kernel Sanders said:
More proven and reliable than a horse? Have you ever seen a car with a crank starter?
Click to expand...

Exactly, cars were not very reliable at all, but the technology progressed into what it is today. The change didn't take place over night, and neither will an energy revolution. In the end the result will be very similar, we will think back to the days when we used to polllute the earth with coal and oil energy production, and be amazed at how far we've come in such a relatively short time.

What good does clinging to coal, and ignoring it's inevitable demise do anyone? Trying to vilify the person for working to bring about a change for the good of us all does a disservice to yourself and the rest of society.
 
And sing Kumbaya and praise Obama. I get it, you guys have bought the lie we can change from current energy uses to "new and exciting" energy uses even though... we haven't because it's NOT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE.


Did the government force people to give p the horse and buggy? Force people to buy cars? No. People bought them because they CHOSE too. Because someone could make a profit off of the car.

That's called real world economics and market forces.

But let's ignore those realities and force upon the public what's "best for them".
 
MrVicchio said:
And sing Kumbaya and praise Obama. I get it, you guys have bought the lie we can change from current energy uses to "new and exciting" energy uses even though... we haven't because it's NOT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE.


Did the government force people to give p the horse and buggy? Force people to buy cars? No. People bought them because they CHOSE too. Because someone could make a profit off of the car.

That's called real world economics and market forces.

But let's ignore those realities and force upon the public what's "best for them".
Click to expand...

Why exactly is it not "Economically Feasible"? If there are no specifics then I can only assume it's because of the Republican defecit inflicted on the U.S.A
 
MrVicchio said:
Did the government force people to give p the horse and buggy? Force people to buy cars? No. People bought them because they CHOSE too. Because someone could make a profit off of the car.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is quite impossible for me, or most Americans to commute daily on a horse. So I'd say yes, we are forced to purchase cars in quite many different ways. The government doesn't say "You have to buy a car", but dam, life will be rough without one in most parts of the country. This is very similar to coal, in the plan the government does not tell anyone that they CAN"T use coal, it's just going to get tougher and more inconvient to produce energy that way. This will drive the production and use of other energy sources.
 
Coal is, along with oil, the central figure in our energy picture. Yet, the candidates focus energy talking about it. offshore oil drilling form the backbone of McCain's energy talking points, while renewable energy and conservation form the backbone of Obama's. Both candidates say they would cap and trade carbon emissions, putting a de facto tax on coal-fired power plants.
 
MrVicchio said:
And sing Kumbaya and praise Obama. I get it, you guys have bought the lie we can change from current energy uses to "new and exciting" energy uses even though... we haven't because it's NOT ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE.
Click to expand...

No new technology is ever economically feasible. But what the Netherlands has proven is that reliance and strong tax on polluting energy can lead to huge economic industries. What is good about Obama's policy is that the developing world is still very much tried to coal. By making coal cleaner, efficient while catching up to Europe in alternative we can create huge growth in the job sector. Imagine exporting billions of dollars of clean coal technology to the developing world. I got your blue collar jobs right there. If we always went with what is currently economically feasible, we'd be buying things from other nations and never inventing anything ourselves. Your attitude is effectively to abandoned American research and development. Pfizer spends $8 billion on R&D. Much of that is not economically feasible. Do they stop? No because the few things that do come out are often blockbusters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom