Nobody wants to admit to the people that in the future, energy is going to cost more, a lot more. So, politicians are taking the low road instead and pretending that they have fixes. They don’t have fixes.

Eventually the free market WILL take care of this problem but it will be much more painful for us in the USA than it will be in some other countries with more responsible governments that have been taking action for decades to reduce energy consumption.

Americans were always the big thinkers and the optimists and because of that America changed the world, politically, technologically and economically – yes, for the BETTER. Not anymore. After decades of elitist environmental politics, law-fare and propaganda. America has been gradually feminized by these know it alls into believing less is good and thinking big and taking big risks is a peculiar American “cowboy” disease that needs to be eradicated. One can even sense that in your post.

“With his proposals to open currently closed off areas of the USA for oil production, John McCain seems to think that the problem is addiction to foreign oil rather than to oil per se.”

Why? It looks to me switching to locally produced oil would be a very big improvement and a first step toward breaking our oil addiction. Locally produced oil will send less US money over to all those petro-tyrants overseas. The new profits made by oil companies on locally produced oil can be taxed to fund research and alternative energy infrastructure. Also, It will have the side benefit of reducing our trade deficit – last I checked that was still a problem.

This moves automotive power to the grid, which is currently 51% coal, 18+% nuclear, 20% nat gas, and some hydro. Now if you don’t like dumping Carbon Dioxide into the atmosphere, then start repacing the coal and nat gas plants with nuclear generation.

By the way, you should probably start beefing the power grid. Since the Prius and Volt are hybrids, you will still be able to drive long distances if you need to. With regenerative braking, your mileage should be pretty good.

It seems to me that McCain’s policy is consistent with this picture.

There is not now nor ever has been any man made global warming and since 1998 not even any warming 8man made or otherwise. Furthermore over the last 18 months the world average temperature has been cooling much faster than it ever rose during the entire 20th century. Don’t believe me, go check the NASA climate figures. MMGW was never anything other than lefty propaganda. So stop with the baloney already, pleeeeaaase.

DON’T BELIEVE THE HYPE!!!

Climate change (formerly known as weather) is mainly caused by cyclical fluctuations in the energy output of the sun. The reason the planet is cooling for the moment (yes, cooling) is due to very low sunspot activity.

What McCain pointed out are bullet points. Never in a speech you can talk about the details. Well, the Devils are in the details, so to speak.

But it should not be McCain’s task as a national leader to the draw up the details. In economic sense, it should be the end-users, the American people, who must provide the details.

1. On nuclear power. Definitely, we should invest in alternatives, not only on production side but also on the disposal side. We need clear discussions on this, to discuss property right issues. NIMBY issue is I think a valid issue because it is indicative of inherent practicality, both safety and economics. Collective discussion on this option will give us a better plan on HOW TO DO IT.

2. Oil Drilling. Obviously, Obama’s frame of 6 years is not accurate. That is justifiable because he is a lawyer; totally not within the business. But I tell you what… even in 2 years results can already be achieved. If right incentives are given. Norwegian and Canadian technologies can be transferred here using the framework of capitalism, where America was once a champion of (America’s strong labor unions now undermined capitalism – in mixed economy K & L are enemies and not independent inputs of production). This is the problem with Obama’s rebuttal. He is already talking about details, not policy. McCain is not referring to Obama as the driller. Obama should shut up instead.
Oil drilling has a profound economic implications: jobs, energy independence, supply relaxation, etc.

3. Lowering Tax on Oil. The article says that higher Oil price will lead to greater consumption. That depends if petroleum products are price elastic. Last time I looked, this is not very elastic. You still continue to use your car. There are still traffic on the street. Conclusion: FALSE claim. Tax cut will relieve everyone – gasoline is indirect input in the overall value chain of almost all goods due to transportation costs.

NOTE: Arguments on electricty and coal (electricity, steel production, etc.) follow almost the same argument.

4. Use of Renewables. McCain’s policy is balanced, for one. Renewables should be tapped whenever economically feasible. Everyone knows the limits of renewables. Ethanol has to be mixed with gasoline/diesel to run. Pure ethanol engines will be TOO HEAVY AND COSTLY for you. Wind and solar PV are intermittent. You don’t want 24-hour wind and daylight. When it comes to grid, they require support (called ancillary services) which are provided by mainly by oil-fired gas turbines. Conclusion: 100% Renewables is far-fetched.

5. Cap and Trade. Cap-and-trade can be politically possible. You know many states are now practicing Renewable Portfolio Standards. Technically they involve premiums to renewables and certificate trading is also involved. Level of allowance (i.e., cap) has to be decided and discussed. AMERICA HAS BEEN DOING THAT SINCE 1990s.

6. Global Warming In General: You’ve been telling about energy conservation. But we human beings and animals (most of which we eat) are releasers of Carbon Dioxide. To control global warming, you must control population, the main reason for the same. Population and energy use are directly proportional. America Both are indicators of Economic Growth, particularly the much-talked about GDP as used by Democrats. IF DEMOCRATS WANT TO REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING, LET US START MAKING OUR GDP GROWTH AS NEGATIVE. Will you sacrifice for that?

As Obama said: Leadership in Global Warming. HE IS ASKING US TWO THINGS:

1. REDUCE YOUR ECONOMIC ACTIVITY – INCLUDING EATING (he actually alluded to this).

2. REDUCE YOUR NUMBERS. This is consistent with Obama’s policy of abortion. More terrorism attacks, which is the same as doing nothing and appeasing the terrorists, is also consistent with this direction. But Blacks and Latinos are the fastest growing races in America. Their proportions are steadily increasing. Can Obama focus his policies on these races? Note the major consequence of reducing populations: It will make your country weak. Population is a strength especially nowadays. Arabs and muslims are growing.

Final Word:

DEMOCRATS’ ENERGY STANDS ARE THE REASONS FOR AMERICA’S DEPENDENCE ON ARAB OIL. BACK IN 2002, BUSH OFFERED THIS THE CONGRESS BUT BLOCKED BY 100% DEMOCRATS AND 10% REPUBLICANS.

WHY NOT ADMIT THAT MCCAIN MADE A GOOD SPEECH. HE’S BECOMING A TRUE REPUBLICAN.

WHY REPUBLICANS ARE ALWAYS CORRECT ON ECONOMICS? BECAUSE THEIR PRINCIPLES ARE CONSISTENT WITH ECONOMICS – PURE MARKET ECONOMY AND LEAST GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION LEAD TO MARKET EFFICIENCY. MARKET FAILURE MUST BE ADDRESSED THROUGH OUTPUT-BASED wealth transfer for those who are willing.

OBAMA’S GREATER ROLE OF GOVERNMENT SPECIALLY IN TIMES OF RECESSION IS WRONG. IT WILL CAUSE GREATER INFLATION AND WILL NEVER ALLOW MARKET TO SELF HEAL.