To take this point by point:
. It's a widely understand tenet of social theory that the "masses" will make decisions in direct opposition to the individual's better judgement (i.e., "groupthink").
Again progressive thinking,the elite can decide what's best for the masses.
Appropriately and sparingly applied, government power can indeed be used to correct the most egregious of these situations.
......There were over 5000 people in this country sterilized against their will in the early twentieth-century.This was done by progressive elitists (google eugenics) and backed-up by a Supreme Court decision. There were those who wanted to go a step further and decide,based on your percieved value to society,who lived and died.Would you consider that "appropriate" or "sparing"? Those were some of the forefathers of the current progressive movement.You see,the apple doesn't fall far from the commie.
Conservatives have so successfully demonized government that most people accept as axiomatic that the private sector will always perform better than the public. In my 50+ years of experience, this is emphatically not the case. I've worked for both public and private sector entities large and small (as well as had my own business for 10 years), and overall, there was more waste and idiotic decision-making present in the large private companies than in government - not by much, but definitely a difference.
.....Pure BS, I have worked with,and been burned-by, big business and still know that a politician spending other people's money is far more wasteful and dangerous than someone deciding what to do with a private dollar.The only profit-making Govt. entity i am aware of are the Corp of Engineer electrical plants,which have their own huge downside.
I'm glad we can agree on something (your first sentence)! But I disagree partially with the second. Not all have been "losers". I grew up not far from NREL, and they have a fairly impressive list of successes, just not very well-known. And no one should expect the "birthing" phase of alternative energy to be without some spectacular failures.
.....Risk is inherent in any venture,that's why it makes no sense to borrow from China,convert to dollars and squander borrowed money to develop alternative energy.We just put in a wind gen ordinance here. In studying pros and cons I noticed that they wear-out years before ever making a profit,they make the landscape at least as ugly as an oilfield, are very hard on wildlife and the only way they are cost-effective is with the Govt. paying huge subsides.Otherwise that flicker they add to the grid would cost you even more.
I see. So you state you are 100% for alternative energy as well? Then why are you still driving that Toyota?
........Because I live in the real world.When I can run it on water I'll be the first in line.That's why you won't see me in line at Wal-Mart with a cart full of needless consumer garbage.
My point in asking not to be lectured is that I already carry around PLENTY of cognitive dissonance on that as well as a couple dozen other behaviors that are not exactly environmentally neutral - nothing you say is going to significantly add to that.
.....Because how could a SD hilljack like me ever know anything that someone else could learn.
But once again, this is another conservative straw-man. It is extremely difficult, given the current structure of our society and economy, to go "off the grid" and achieve a significant reduction in one's carbon footprint, or whatever you want to call it.
.....Break the mold man,be a pioneer.That's another excuse I hear from politicians...."it's ssssoooo hard".
but my income is solidly middle class (and no, I don't consider $250K middle class). Those "elite" you conservatives love to rail against are in actuality very few in number.
........I do consider a couple running a proprietership grossing 250k to be middle-class.That is if they are efficient and can net 50k.Otherwise they are just working poor with none of the Govt benefits of being poor.Yes,as stated before, a few progressive elitists are running this country when they should be organizing barbeques in South Chicago.
Again,if you met me,you would laugh at yourself for trying to pigeon-hole me as a conservative.However,if you happen to mean that I understand that replacing unsustainable sources of energy(fossil fuel) with unsustainable forms of alternative energy just to feel better about myself,then yes.
Of course 'everything' is made of petroleum! I've known that since forever. The point is, we need to change that! And your last sentence is flat out disingenuous. I specifically stated I was trying to let us down gently, NOT crash the economy! You want a crash, just keep that gas artificially low (as in, don't pay for the environmental cost), as well as everything else we extract, and see what happens when it all runs out - and it WILL run out, eventually. Maybe not in your lifetime or mine, but not that far down the road, either.
