Paul Ryan - Stimulus Cash Advocate

[krill]

You bring up some great common sense points. Not to mention our reluctance to "drill here, drill now", tap into our oil reserves, use clean coal, alt energy such as wind, solar, atomic etc......

 

Sadly, R or D, we have been dependent on Middle Eastern oil since the 1970's and Carter. You figure somebody in control would have demanded that we find some way to get independent energy. I have read that we are sitting on one of the world's largest shale (IIRC) deposits in the world, but we refuse to exploit. Seems like that would create jobs and decrease our dependence.

 

Enjoy the back and forth and different views.

 

Glad to hear that you are doing well in NE. They do seem to be one of the areas still doing well. Trying to convince the wife to move back. Need to come back in January to make sure she is good with winter!

 

Oil & gas production have gone up every year in the past 3 years.

 

 

The shale formations in ND, and probably some others that are economically feasible to extract oil from are being exploited. I underlined economically feasible because these are colossal investments that have lower margins than traditional extraction methods; there is a point of too much risk that prevents other resources from being tapped.

 

I don't know why there is a debate about coal in this country. Clean coal doesn't exist, no matter how much it is scrubbed it still pumps loads of poison and other contaminants into the fair. Even if you 100% believe global warming is not real, this should be of concern to you. The extraction of coal is also wrecking the environment wholesale...mountaintop removal and coal slurry delight? Investing another penny of anyone's money into coal for electricity, or nuclear fission for and all its associated risk when solar power will soon be cheaper seems ridiculous to me. If nothing else, If nothing else, I hope Obama's legacy is that there is a chance of solar panels for the globe reading Made in USA rather than Made in China...

 

I'd say the biggest reason we don't drill more domestically is the one that is never mentioned, we as a country want to use everyone else's oil up first. Then when the world is out of oil and scrambling for alternatives we will still have some here in reserve to use. It's great to come up with alternatives, I'm all for it, but we are decades and even centuries away from finding alternate energy sources that will power things like jets, tractors, tanks, etc. Sorry but you aren't going slap a solar panel on a tractor and watch it pull an 18 row planter through the field. Bio fuels are a nice thought but we are quickly learning how fragile that industry is when grain prices skyrocket. The world isn't getting any less populated either and I'm not seeing any less demand for food in the near future.

 

BTW, I'd love for you to post some sources confirming that solar is going to be the cheaper source soon because I haven't seen it. I'd love to have solar panels on my house and in fact have been looking into it the past year even looking into making your own and I haven't seen anything close to making it economically worthwhile on my part to do it. Right now the investment far exceeds the return.

 

I am a realist about oil and gas, note that I tried to separate the arguments between those sources of energy and the generation of electricity. We will need great quantities of oil, or some form of it (like biofuels) and natural gas long into the foreseeable future. There has however been a great example of the NIMBY attitude about oil right here in Nebraska though...everyone seems to have the attitude of wanting more, anywhere, until it affects their life or potentially disrupts their environment. The future of biofuels is clear as mud...obviously corn ethanol is a boondoggle ladden road to nowhere, and big ideas like grass based fuel or algae are not economically feasible yet.

 

I don't know when solar will reach grid parity, google "solar grid parity" for plenty of opinions. In some places it already has, but there won't be a specific point where it is cheaper than coal, and it will be a long time before it is cheaper than coal in all instances. The fact is though solar is getting cheaper every year and is limitless in supply, while coal is not getting cheaper and not getting cleaner. Public policy plays a large role in how much solar cost per watt installed in utilities and homes. For instance, it is much cheaper per watt (real cost) in Germany because they have clear goals, policies, and government backed funding...here we have relative chaos because of politics. That's what I don't really understand about the Solyndra scandal...yes it was a waste of money, and there was cronyism at work, but if 95%+ of the other solar related funding in the stimulus bill was put to good use, why do we spend 100% of the time focused on Solyndra?

[strigori]

Only a complete fool thinks the oil drilled here is only for our use. The oil companies will sell it on the open market. More drilling won't do squat for prices. The oil companies have everyone used to $3.50+ gas, what reason are they going to lower prices?

 

To say nothing on the fact that gas prices are as much influenced by the speed in which crude is refined into gasoline. And you can count on a refinery going down for 'maintenance' whenever prices start to slip. Just use the last few months for a case in point.

it is a complete scam largely based on speculation and artificial influences applying upward pressure on price.

 

also, hskr, the need is for improvements in battery technology. you mentioned that we may be centuries away from the necessary technology to be energy independent. i think we will have to figure it out sooner, do we know how much longer we can rely on oil?

"Centuries away?" I must have missed that line. I don't think there is much of anything one can say we are 'centuries away from.' Simply look at the tech leap in the last 40 years. Star Trek thought hand held communicators were centuries off. And computers took up whole rooms. We have smart phones now. Pure insanity even in the 80s or 90s.

[sd'sker]

I'd say the biggest reason we don't drill more domestically is the one that is never mentioned, we as a country want to use everyone else's oil up first. Then when the world is out of oil and scrambling for alternatives we will still have some here in reserve to use. It's great to come up with alternatives, I'm all for it, but we are decades and even centuries away from finding alternate energy sources that will power things like jets, tractors, tanks, etc. Sorry but you aren't going slap a solar panel on a tractor and watch it pull an 18 row planter through the field. Bio fuels are a nice thought but we are quickly learning how fragile that industry is when grain prices skyrocket. The world isn't getting any less populated either and I'm not seeing any less demand for food in the near future.

 

BTW, I'd love for you to post some sources confirming that solar is going to be the cheaper source soon because I haven't seen it. I'd love to have solar panels on my house and in fact have been looking into it the past year even looking into making your own and I haven't seen anything close to making it economically worthwhile on my part to do it. Right now the investment far exceeds the return.

all new ventures start out with investments exceeding the returns. that is why it is call an 'investment'.

[Alamo City Husker]

Not to mention the dumbass commisions a "bi-partisan budget commision", then doesn't do one thing they say? Why are all the states with democrat governers in the crapper and going bankrupt and people leaving there state and states with Republican Governers are not doing bad at all?

calling the president 'dumbass'? classy.

Anyone using the Daily Show for any form of information as being a credible source is what is wrong with America!

what states are you referring to?

do you have evidence to the contrary of 'the daily show' not being credible?

All the sh#t he has said, he doesn'r deserve any respect let alone class. Bush was NEVER as divisive as this current administration has been! THEY DAILY SHOW IS A SHOW!!! SHOW ME WHERE THE RUN THEIR SOURCES AT THE END OF THE SHOW??? Like I said use it as a source for a thesis and see what you get! funny that oil speculators hasn't been mentioned yet. I like a Pantera version when it comes to oil. Just go in and take it all from them bomb them and take it!!!Then control the prices by being in complete control."You think you own I take away make it my own"!!!!Regular People. Besides if sh#t goes down it will be back to the hunters and gatherers anyways. What are you?

[Moiraine]

Not to mention the dumbass commisions a "bi-partisan budget commision", then doesn't do one thing they say? Why are all the states with democrat governers in the crapper and going bankrupt and people leaving there state and states with Republican Governers are not doing bad at all?

calling the president 'dumbass'? classy.

Anyone using the Daily Show for any form of information as being a credible source is what is wrong with America!

what states are you referring to?

do you have evidence to the contrary of 'the daily show' not being credible?

Bush was NEVER as divisive as this current administration has been!

*snicker*

[sd'sker]

Not to mention the dumbass commisions a "bi-partisan budget commision", then doesn't do one thing they say? Why are all the states with democrat governers in the crapper and going bankrupt and people leaving there state and states with Republican Governers are not doing bad at all?

calling the president 'dumbass'? classy.

Anyone using the Daily Show for any form of information as being a credible source is what is wrong with America!

what states are you referring to?

do you have evidence to the contrary of 'the daily show' not being credible?

All the sh#t he has said, he doesn'r deserve any respect let alone class. Bush was NEVER as divisive as this current administration has been! THEY DAILY SHOW IS A SHOW!!! SHOW ME WHERE THE RUN THEIR SOURCES AT THE END OF THE SHOW??? Like I said use it as a source for a thesis and see what you get! funny that oil speculators hasn't been mentioned yet. I like a Pantera version when it comes to oil. Just go in and take it all from them bomb them and take it!!!Then control the prices by being in complete control."You think you own I take away make it my own"!!!!Regular People. Besides if sh#t goes down it will be back to the hunters and gatherers anyways. What are you?

is this why we no longer have the negative reputation button?

he is the president of the united states, that position always deserves our respect.

karl rove's whole strategy was to create factions out of groups to get people to vote. how has obama been divisive, other than you personally not liking him?

all news shows are shows? what does that even mean. and they only use primary sources. what news show does run sources at the end? i would not use it as a thesis (maybe i would, depending on what the thesis regarded), but how does that make them not credible?

the rest of your post is nonsense.

also, you still have not answered which states are doing well and which are not (no one answer for him/her, i want his/her answer).

[sd'sker]

Besides if sh#t goes down it will be back to the hunters and gatherers anyways. What are you?

i do not know if you think this last point was thought-provoking and some odd challenge, but hunters and gatherers are not adversarial they are merely the two necessary groups of a functional primitive society.

[Alamo City Husker]

Besides if sh#t goes down it will be back to the hunters and gatherers anyways. What are you?

i do not know if you think this last point was thought-provoking and some odd challenge, but hunters and gatherers are not adversarial they are merely the two necessary groups of a functional primitive society.

I am going to censor my self right now for the sake of Kanpp banning me and say, I hope you haven't procreated.<does clingon sign>

[knapplc]

I'm glad people are aware of the rules of conduct. Let's all make sure we abide by them.

[carlfense]

Hey KNAPP what is the reason for Obama being the only President EVER to not submit a budget? What was he afraid of when he had all three branches of government for 2 years? Looks to me like he is hiding something. At least Ryan had the BALLS to submit a budget! Put that in your objective pipe and smoke it!

 

Ummm... Even Paul Ryan knows that Obama has submitted a budget each year in office. That's just pathetic, Alamo.

 

Now, if you want to talk about the colossal failure of the Democrats in Congress not passing budgets, that's something we can discuss (and likely agree that it's a terrible, terrible abrogation of duty to the American people).

 

But if you're going to throw crap around, at least know what you're talking about. K?

[JJ Husker]

knapp- Thanks for clarifying that you were calling him a hypocrite and why. Your clarification substantiates the claim whereas I did not feel your original claims did. To be clear, I don't feel the mere fact that he claimed to be against the stimulus and then subsequently wrote letters in favor of people seeking those funds is a valid enough reason to accuse him of being a hypocrite. Being for a republican stimulus but against a democrat stimulus could however meet the mark. Of course, depending on the specifics of the different plans.

 

I guess what gets me most in this whole debate is why anyone would defend so vigorously the Obama administration or so readily attack his opponents. I understand that the republicans have virtually limitless shortcomings as well but, I just don't understand how, after the last 4 years, Obama merits this level of support and the endless attacks on his opponents. It may very well have been time for a change when Obama was elected but, I feel it is more desperately a time for a change once again. Nothing has improved and things have only gotten worse in my estimation. I have stated numerous times that I do not particularly like Romney but I firmly believe ANYONE other than Obama is the better option at this point in time. Using Obama's own reasoning, he has not earned re-election. I struggle with why and how people who claim to be impartial seem to find more fault with his opponents when there is the clear body of evidence of the last 3.5 years. I'm trying to understand it but just not getting there.

[carlfense]

<snip>

I guess what gets me most in this whole debate is why anyone would defend so vigorously the Obama administration or so readily attack his opponents. I understand that the republicans have virtually limitless shortcomings as well but, I just don't understand how, after the last 4 years, Obama merits this level of support and the endless attacks on his opponents. It may very well have been time for a change when Obama was elected but, I feel it is more desperately a time for a change once again. Nothing has improved and things have only gotten worse in my estimation. I have stated numerous times that I do not particularly like Romney but I firmly believe ANYONE other than Obama is the better option at this point in time. Using Obama's own reasoning, he has not earned re-election. I struggle with why and how people who claim to be impartial seem to find more fault with his opponents when there is the clear body of evidence of the last 3.5 years. I'm trying to understand it but just not getting there.

Which Romney/Ryan policy proposals do you think offer more economic hope than the current administration? Romney seems to be offering the exact same ideas as the George W. Bush fiasco that helped get us into this mess . . . complete with the potential for starting another war in the Middle East.

 

Honestly JJ, I think that you and I have a similar mindset but are coming at the issue from different directions. I don't think that Obama is great. You don't think that Romney is great. I don't think that Obama's policies are the best possible options for the US but I do think that they are better than the alternative. You don't think that Romney's policies are the best possible options for the US but you do think that they are better than the alternative. Etc.

 

 

Anyways, one way or another we will have some answers this fall. Ryan as VP makes this election something of a referendum on which direction is desired by the American people. If Romney/Ryan loses . . . it will be interesting to see if the GOP doubles down again or if they gradually move back towards the center.

[knapplc]

knapp- Thanks for clarifying that you were calling him a hypocrite and why. Your clarification substantiates the claim whereas I did not feel your original claims did. To be clear, I don't feel the mere fact that he claimed to be against the stimulus and then subsequently wrote letters in favor of people seeking those funds is a valid enough reason to accuse him of being a hypocrite. Being for a republican stimulus but against a democrat stimulus could however meet the mark. Of course, depending on the specifics of the different plans.

 

I guess what gets me most in this whole debate is why anyone would defend so vigorously the Obama administration or so readily attack his opponents. I understand that the republicans have virtually limitless shortcomings as well but, I just don't understand how, after the last 4 years, Obama merits this level of support and the endless attacks on his opponents. It may very well have been time for a change when Obama was elected but, I feel it is more desperately a time for a change once again. Nothing has improved and things have only gotten worse in my estimation. I have stated numerous times that I do not particularly like Romney but I firmly believe ANYONE other than Obama is the better option at this point in time. Using Obama's own reasoning, he has not earned re-election. I struggle with why and how people who claim to be impartial seem to find more fault with his opponents when there is the clear body of evidence of the last 3.5 years. I'm trying to understand it but just not getting there.

Obama is defended vigorously because he is attacked vigorously. If the vitriol from the Republicans and their Tea Party overlords would ramp down you'd see a lot less defense of Obama, here and everywhere.

 

So many of us just want to have a legitimate discourse on the issues facing America, but instead we get this slanted partisan crap about birth certificates, stimulus rage, he's a Muslim, death panels, "You lie!" during a presidential address to congress, he's socialist, he's going to take away the guns, blah blah blah. Every president deals with crap from the opposition, but we have broached historic levels of vitriol during this administration, and it is hurting our country.

 

Also, rather than own up to the problem and ending support for people who use such tactics, the most common reply to this point is "Yeah, but the other side does it too!" The problem is, the other side has never done it to this level (nobody has in our lifetimes), and that answer perpetuates the problem.

 

It is fine to have different political beliefs than the president. It's fine to dislike the president personally (I don't like Clinton to this day), but it is not fine to perpetuate a political climate like we have today. It needs to stop.

[Moiraine]

I don't think there's such a thing as impartial with politics. Independents always lean one way. They just aren't gungho for one party. I honestly don't understand how so many people are gungho. Both sides have things about them and politicians under their name that are indefensible.

 

Anyhow, I lean toward Obama because I think the alternative is worse. I don't believe in trickle down economics. The disparity between the wealthy and the poor pisses me off and while I don't think Obama or the Democrats will fix it (and may not really even give a crap) I think they'll do less to widen it further. I hate when people whine about taxes and I think they should be raised for everyone. (I'm not posting all of this to argue about the points. Just to say why I lean slightly a certain way at this time).

 

Overall I think this country won't last much longer, at least not without a serious change in how people are elected and how laws get passed. It isn't right that a vote for term limits would have to be made by the people whose terms it would effect. That's just one example. We need more checks and balances than currently exist. I don't like that elections can be semi-bought with money. This used to be illegal (or at least far more difficult). It's a proven fact that commercials do have an effect on people, no matter how immune they think they are. It isn't right that corporations can pay for favorable laws to be passed. I know coming up with a solution to that would be difficult because it's hard for morals to win out over money, but it sucks feeling powerless. We have less and less laws protecting against corporations completely taking over (if they haven't already done so) and those corporations don't need the US economy to do well. They might want it to do well but it isn't a necessity. They're global companies now. Yet they have members planted on all these U.S. government boards.

 

The last paragraph had nothing to do with why I lean a certain way. It was why both sides fail. And I felt like ranting.

[Comish]

I don't think there's such a thing as impartial with politics. Independents always lean one way. They just aren't gungho for one party. I honestly don't understand how so many people are gungho. Both sides have things about them and politicians under their name that are indefensible.

 

Anyhow, I lean toward Obama because I think the alternative is worse. I don't believe in trickle down economics. The disparity between the wealthy and the poor pisses me off and while I don't think Obama or the Democrats will fix it (and may not really even give a crap) I think they'll do less to widen it further. I hate when people whine about taxes and I think they should be raised for everyone. (I'm not posting all of this to argue about the points. Just to say why I lean slightly a certain way at this time).

 

Overall I think this country won't last much longer, at least not without a serious change in how people are elected and how laws get passed. It isn't right that a vote for term limits would have to be made by the people whose terms it would effect. That's just one example. We need more checks and balances than currently exist. I don't like that elections can be semi-bought with money. This used to be illegal (or at least far more difficult). It's a proven fact that commercials do have an effect on people, no matter how immune they think they are. It isn't right that corporations can pay for favorable laws to be passed. I know coming up with a solution to that would be difficult because it's hard for morals to win out over money, but it sucks feeling powerless. We have less and less laws protecting against corporations completely taking over (if they haven't already done so) and those corporations don't need the US economy to do well. They might want it to do well but it isn't a necessity. They're global companies now. Yet they have members planted on all these U.S. government boards.

 

The last paragraph had nothing to do with why I lean a certain way. It was why both sides fail. And I felt like ranting.

I believe one area not considered/discussed nearly enough concerning this years election is the judiciary. More than likely, this election will allow the appointment of Supreme Justices that will shape the court for the next 30 years. That is just at the Supreme level. The influence at lower courts will be affected similarly.

Far more important than the two individuals involved, this election will decide the direction of the country for the foreseeable future.