Thought it deserved it's own thread, cuz the guy is brilliant Dumb as We Wanna Be By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN It is great to see that we finally have some national unity on energy policy. Unfortunately, the unifying idea is so ridiculous, so unworthy of the people aspiring to lead our nation, it takes your breath away. Hillary Clinton has decided to line up with John McCain in pushing to suspend the federal excise tax on gasoline, 18.4 cents a gallon, for this summer’s travel season. This is not an energy policy. This is money laundering: we borrow money from China and ship it to Saudi Arabia and take a little cut for ourselves as it goes through our gas tanks. What a way to build our country. When the summer is over, we will have increased our debt to China, increased our transfer of wealth to Saudi Arabia and increased our contribution to global warming for our kids to inherit. No, no, no, we’ll just get the money by taxing Big Oil, says Mrs. Clinton. Even if you could do that, what a terrible way to spend precious tax dollars — burning it up on the way to the beach rather than on innovation? The McCain-Clinton gas holiday proposal is a perfect example of what energy expert Peter Schwartz of Global Business Network describes as the true American energy policy today: “Maximize demand, minimize supply and buy the rest from the people who hate us the most.” Good for Barack Obama for resisting this shameful pandering. But here’s what’s scary: our problem is so much worse than you think. We have no energy strategy. If you are going to use tax policy to shape energy strategy then you want to raise taxes on the things you want to discourage — gasoline consumption and gas-guzzling cars — and you want to lower taxes on the things you want to encourage — new, renewable energy technologies. We are doing just the opposite. Are you sitting down? Few Americans know it, but for almost a year now, Congress has been bickering over whether and how to renew the investment tax credit to stimulate investment in solar energy and the production tax credit to encourage investment in wind energy. The bickering has been so poisonous that when Congress passed the 2007 energy bill last December, it failed to extend any stimulus for wind and solar energy production. Oil and gas kept all their credits, but those for wind and solar have been left to expire this December. I am not making this up. At a time when we should be throwing everything into clean power innovation, we are squabbling over pennies. These credits are critical because they ensure that if oil prices slip back down again — which often happens — investments in wind and solar would still be profitable. That’s how you launch a new energy technology and help it achieve scale, so it can compete without subsidies. The Democrats wanted the wind and solar credits to be paid for by taking away tax credits from the oil industry. President Bush said he would veto that. Neither side would back down, and Mr. Bush — showing not one iota of leadership — refused to get all the adults together in a room and work out a compromise. Stalemate. Meanwhile, Germany has a 20-year solar incentive program; Japan 12 years. Ours, at best, run two years. “It’s a disaster,” says Michael Polsky, founder of Invenergy, one of the biggest wind-power developers in America. “Wind is a very capital-intensive industry, and financial institutions are not ready to take ‘Congressional risk.’ They say if you don’t get the [production tax credit] we will not lend you the money to buy more turbines and build projects.” It is also alarming, says Rhone Resch, the president of the Solar Energy Industries Association, that the U.S. has reached a point “where the priorities of Congress could become so distorted by politics” that it would turn its back on the next great global industry — clean power — “but that’s exactly what is happening.” If the wind and solar credits expire, said Resch, the impact in just 2009 would be more than 100,000 jobs either lost or not created in these industries, and $20 billion worth of investments that won’t be made. While all the presidential candidates were railing about lost manufacturing jobs in Ohio, no one noticed that America’s premier solar company, First Solar, from Toledo, Ohio, was opening its newest factory in the former East Germany — 540 high-paying engineering jobs — because Germany has created a booming solar market and America has not. In 1997, said Resch, America was the leader in solar energy technology, with 40 percent of global solar production. “Last year, we were less than 8 percent, and even most of that was manufacturing for overseas markets.” The McCain-Clinton proposal is a reminder to me that the biggest energy crisis we have in our country today is the energy to be serious — the energy to do big things in a sustained, focused and intelligent way. We are in the midst of a national political brownout. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/30/opinion/30friedman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
^the degree to which the Republican party and the Bush Administration in particular is absolutely captured and ruled by the fossil-fuel burning industry simply cannot be overstated - it's also one of the greatest scandals of the last 25 years that nobody seems to care about.
Scientists and environmentalists have campaigned again and again against it and other erosions of departmental integrity, but I guess they're intellectual pinko hippies who want to destroy America economically, so they shouldn't be taken seriously.
Campaigned against what exactly? The fossil fuel industry is here to stay. Power consumption continues to grow very fast and projects like wind and solar are still small and need lots of subsidies just to be profitable. I'm not saying don't subsidize clean energy, but we cannot abandon fossil fuels, and we have to support nuclear power as well.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Bush_regime_environmental_record If makes me breathe deeper when State Attorneys and activist groups have to constantly sue the EPA to do its job or report accurately. There's a difference between "abandoning fossil fuels" and comparing how much subsidies fossil fuels still get compared to how much alternative energy doesn't get. A realistic solution is a steady transition with increased spending on research grants in biofuels and alt. energy subsidies. We have no national energy policy and no plan on reaching foreign energy independence. Our plan is a deliberate lack of a plan with the holy Invisible Hand guiding our future.
Friedman did not help things by being a cheerleader for the Iraq War. Imagine if we had invested $ trilllion in alternative energy,
Campaigned against what? You name it, the administration campaigned against it. Tax credits for alternative energies? Against. Higher fuel efficiency standards for automobiles? Against..... Industrial Technologies Program (conservation research program that has returned tons of savings?) Against. This is the typical straw man response that glosses over important facts - nobody is saying abandon fossil fuels tomorrow. Rather we are saying subsidize alternative energy programs today...or yesterday. Having Dick Cheney determine the nation’s energy policy for the last 8 years, given his incredibly symbiotic relationship with the fossil fuel industry, which he still financially benefits from is one VERY large reason why alternative energy has nto made much progress at all since 2008 and why are even closer to the precipice than before. The man’s views on energy consumption are archaic and dangerous - the idiot actually dismissed conservation as economically valueless. His nominal boss’ views, to the extent he has any that aren’t dictated to him, aren’t worse. To make matters worse, Cheney made his grand energy plan in a series of secret meetings w/oil company executives that he spent millions of dollars of taxpayer money in legal challenges to keep secret
I think you're missing the point. The fact that we're not even trying to cut down fossil fuels for energy is a gonna be a huge problem if it isn't already today.
Hillary was also an idiot for promoting that useless and counterproductive idea of having a federal gasoline tax 'holiday', I almost wanted to spit at her the first time I heard her say it. I actually gained a little more respect for Obama for his refusal to join the political posturing about this whole stupid gas tax holiday idea. America's collective IQ seems to take a dive every 4 years or so. I may not be as opposed to the idea of a benevolent King as I once was...
exactly. brilliant my ass. the guy is a tool who just says obvious things two years later with nicer rhetoric.