McCain calls for $300 million prize for better car battery

[All Tell]

Was it 300 million for better car battery or better cardio battery, as in pacemakers?:sssh:

 

Wow more age jokes, aren't we clever?

 

If the Socialist is elected everyoone will be driving the same car anyway so what's the difference?

[HHSDad]

Wow more age jokes, aren't we clever?

 

If the Socialist is elected everyoone will be driving the same car anyway so what's the difference?

C'mon AT, that was funny. We have to be able to laugh at our candidates. Otherwise, we'd cry.

[H]

Awarding a monetary prize after the fact is not the same as subsidizing the development of alternative energy sources, the subsidization which I generally oppose (beyond tax incentives). I oppose direct government subsidies because the government has a pretty bad track record of picking winners and losers in the market - ethanol from corn being a prime example.

 

So, should government subsidies in the form of military protection for Middle East shipping lanes be discontinued? Or should a "military protection" tax be levied on petroleum products to properly account for this overlooked government subsidy? Surely you're not suggesting that market forces govern the pace of alternative energy research, even as we actively subsidize the world price of crude oil through the use of our armed forces? Boy, do the Saudis have us by the short hairs--not only do we (the American taxpayers) foot the bill for the protection of their fabulously wealthy kingdom, we also provide protection services (free of charge) for their valuable product on the high seas, AND we refuse to fund the research necessary to end our addiction to their product. Did I mention that 15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers and a large part of AQ funding comes from there?

 

 

Efficient batteries will be developed just as quickly without the government dangling taxpayer money as a prize.

 

Is that why the federally-funded 1869 Transcontinental Railroad was completed 13 years before the first privately-funded competitor? In the case of developing efficient batteries, I'm sure additional resources wouldn't speed things along.

 

 

I do not strongly object to McCain's proposal but it is clearly an election year gimmick that will do far less to solve our problems than allowing the Texas-size oil production from ANWR to be brought on line in a few years.

 

Yes, because we all know that the way to solve an addict's problems is to provide them with more of the substance they are addicted to. :creepy: :scared:

[All Tell]

C'mon AT, that was funny. We have to be able to laugh at our candidates. Otherwise, we'd cry.

 

I don't disagree but there are some that have given me grief because I refer to Obama as "The Socialist" and a certain poster who shall remain nameless tends to use the "rollseyes" image when it is done. I was just returning the favor.

[the mathemagician]

Wow more age jokes, aren't we clever?

 

If the Socialist is elected everyoone will be driving the same car anyway so what's the difference?

 

 

Mr. McCain joked about his age on SNL. I think he has a sense of humor about it. I am not offended by anything I read on here, and that includes your inaccurate Socialist Obama cracks. I laugh along with all of it. Some folks make careers out of political humor and satire. Lighten up. I like John McCain a hell of a lot more than you do.

[All Tell]

Mr. McCain joked about his age on SNL. I think he has a sense of humor about it. I am not offended by anything I read on here, and that includes your inaccurate Socialist Obama cracks. I laugh along with all of it. Some folks make careers out of political humor and satire. Lighten up. I like John McCain a hell of a lot more than you do.

 

That's not saying much.

[the mathemagician]

C'mon AT, that was funny. We have to be able to laugh at our candidates. Otherwise, we'd cry.

 

 

I agree. There's nothing wrong with political humor. Our politicians try to shoot smoke up our nether regions(thanks Alltell), so why can't we send a little satire their way.

[the mathemagician]

I don't disagree but there are some that have given me grief because I refer to Obama as "The Socialist" and a certain poster who shall remain nameless tends to use the "rollseyes" image when it is done. I was just returning the favor.

 

 

I don't mind the Comrade Obama stuff at all. I believe all of our public officials are fair game. It just doesn't make me laugh. I don't find it funny like I do the "nether regions" language and stuff like that. That did make me laugh. Socialist Obama just isn't funny. No one would laugh if Leno or Letterman tried Socialist Obama or Comrade Obama jokes.

[All Tell]

I don't find it funny either that I feel Obama has such socialist leanings. There are enough people ready to follow him like lemmings over the cliff that he may just get elected and I find nothing at all funny in that, to be quite honest it scares me terribly.

[mcpapa]

I don't find it funny either that I feel Obama has such socialist leanings. There are enough people ready to follow him like lemmings over the cliff that he may just get elected and I find nothing at all funny in that, to be quite honest it scares me terribly.

 

 

As is the case most of the time, this election may come down to a lesser of the two evils scenario. I for one am frightened of four years of the status quo.

[True blue (and gold)]

I don't disagree but there are some that have given me grief because I refer to Obama as "The Socialist" and a certain poster who shall remain nameless tends to use the "rollseyes" image when it is done. I was just returning the favor.

 

You can say my name and point your finger at me any time you like. It's not like those regular in P/R don't know who you are talking about, anyway. I do, however, feel secure in my belief that you do not use your "socialist" Obama references as a joke, as Math does with McCain's age.

[Hasbeen]

You can say my name and point your finger at me any time you like. It's not like those regular in P/R don't know who you are talking about, anyway.

 

 

Actually, I thought he was talking about someone else.:irked: :lol:

[cch5432]

We have had $4 gas what, a month or so now? How long do you think it takes to develop breakthrough technology? I'm sure the market is working on research as we speak, but research can always be pursued more aggressively with more funding. Let's assume there is a speculative bubble propping up the price of oil and the bubble burst next month, sending oil to $80 and gas to $3.00. Would the research continue? Not if the economic breakeven for the cost of research required $4.00 gas to make it viable. It would get canceled or certainly scaled back. Does the research need to continue? I believe it does, because I think our oil dependence is a national security risk in addition to being an economic risk. Leaving such research primarily to free market forces has resulted in what we have today--no technical solution and incredible vulnerability to events in other countries.

 

If government funding were assured, the bar to economically justify research projects would be much lower (and therefore the risk to private firms would be lower) and they would be much more willing to aggressively pursue new technologies. Properly supported, economies of scale and learning would accumulate and reduce the cost of these technologies to the point of viability.

 

There are plenty of successful examples of government investment in new techology throughout American history. The transcontinental railroad (completed 1869) was substantially financed by the federal government and resulted in tremendous economic expansion by linking east to west. Could the private market have accomplished the same thing? Probably, but not nearly as quickly. The interstate highway system is another example--it was actually sold as a national security project, but ended up being primarily an engine of interstate commerce and provided a major boost to economic growth within the U.S. Would we have enjoyed that economic benefit if government sat back and left such an undertaking to the private sector? Government research was the primary driver that led to the development of the internet (no Al Gore jokes, please).

 

What I am saying is simple- if alternative fuels were practical at a price that would be lower to consumers then gasoline is right now, than they would be being sold right now. I guess I am just not as optimistic that alternative fuels are cheap, at least not now.

 

Believe me, I'm no expert on this subject, you are going to win an argument here. But I believe that when the market is left to itself, it will correct itself.

[Jim Schue]

I have very little confidence in "the market" (which essentially means "our current energy sources") to spur this type of technological advance. "The market" seems far more interested in short-term profit squeezing than long-term benefits.

[Hasbeen]

By the way, I had the opportunity today to drive a Chev Tahoe Hybrid for several miles. I found it interesting as far as the way it operates switching among battery and electric motor power to full V8, then, as needed, cutting out up to 5 cylinders. The owner said he averaged about 25 mpg. After driving and watching the on board computer, I think it could get it near 30.