 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Space Forum » ... The Solution to Global Warming Everyone Can Agree... |
|
Page 3 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Jonathan... |
 Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 11:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:0052e96b$0$6937$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
[quote]not-jonathan wrote:
Democracy and Freedom!
Imho. Thank you for reading.
Why would a free market (whether democratic or otherwise, and whatever that
means anyway) be able to handle this?
[/quote]
It means a society which is both a legitimate democracy and
a well organized free market system. So the two camps compliment
each other.
[quote]
If global warming exists, and is caused by humans, then it's a good example of
both an external cost mechanism, which the free market tends to ignore
complete, and a "tragedy of the commons", which the free market is
particularly incapable of dealing with.
Both of these have to be addressed by regulatory intervention, because the
freemarket can never cope.
[/quote]
So government action alone is better than a combination of govt
and market solutions? My post was meant to say both the form
of govt and market systems need to be free, legitimate and well organized.
All the things most western nations believe in, needs to continue to
expand worldwide if we are to stabilize and gain control of our biosphere.
But otherwise we agree completely on the notion of strong govt
actions in the abstract.
But strong government actions can take the form of new restrictions, and
other mandates imposed upon society. Or govt can try to tackle the
problem itself. By jump starting a new high tech market with endless
potential such as this.
NASA'S SPACE SOLAR POWER EXPLORATORY
RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY (SERT) PROGRAM
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10202&page=1
The difference between imposed mandates and a direct solution
in partnership with the markets, is the difference between a
negative sum and positive sum game.
Throttling back, as opposed to generating something new is also the
difference between reducing or increasing economic activity, and
being popular or not. This problem needs all the help it can get.
So the political aspect must be the first consideration.
The solution must be first and foremost designed to be as
widely popular as possible, from all angles.
The primary govt action must be popular with the left and right wings.
With big business and the greens. With the taxpayers and legislatures.
With Americans and our allies.
The only groups I can think of that would oppose Space Solar Power
or not benefit....are the Middle Eastern...countries~
The Russians could easily become partners in such a goal.
And it could serve as a way of ending the military space race
with the Chinese, if we get them to join in as a way of
ameliorating the weapons potential of SSP.
Space Solar Power is an elegantly positive sum solution.
Direct, creative and a simple idea anyone can comprehend.
If a politician can't 'sell' Space Solar Power these days, they
can't sell anything to anyone.
Jonathan
s
[quote]
Sylvia.[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sylvia Else... |
| Posted: Fri Oct 23, 2009 11:34 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Jonathan wrote:
[quote]"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:0052e96b$0$6937$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
not-jonathan wrote:
Democracy and Freedom!
Imho. Thank you for reading.
Why would a free market (whether democratic or otherwise, and whatever that
means anyway) be able to handle this?
It means a society which is both a legitimate democracy and
a well organized free market system. So the two camps compliment
each other.
If global warming exists, and is caused by humans, then it's a good example of
both an external cost mechanism, which the free market tends to ignore
complete, and a "tragedy of the commons", which the free market is
particularly incapable of dealing with.
Both of these have to be addressed by regulatory intervention, because the
freemarket can never cope.
So government action alone is better than a combination of govt
and market solutions? My post was meant to say both the form
of govt and market systems need to be free, legitimate and well organized.
[/quote]
The free market is incapable of dealing with the issue, and to the
extent that governments intervene, the market is not free.
So the concept of the free market has no place in the solution.
Sylvia. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:23 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 25, 6:58 am, "Jonathan" <H... at (no spam) Again.net> wrote:
[quote]"BradGuth" <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:625e511d-23d1-409f-bd9b-ae06e9f8fb26 at (no spam) d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
SSP is worth doing at 50/50, meaning 50% public funded. However, as
you already know, Big Energy (local and foreign) will manage to foil
any such SSP efforts.
Big Energy (Bush/Cheney) ...have left the building!
They have managed to foil it for ten years now, but
ya' never know what the future holds.
Truth is always stranger than fiction.
[/quote]
They put us at risk and so far in debt that it'll take at least next
decade just to break even if absolutely nothing goes wrong, like
another Ponzi Madoff, AIG, Katrina, 9/11 or let us hope that
Yellowstone doesn't blow a gasket. We're still uncovering nasty shit
that Alan Greenspan and his Federal Reserve insiders had covered up.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:26 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 23, 10:34 pm, Sylvia Else <syl... at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote:
[quote]Jonathan wrote:
"Sylvia Else" <syl... at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:0052e96b$0$6937$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
not-jonathan wrote:
Democracy and Freedom!
Imho. Thank you for reading.
Why would a free market (whether democratic or otherwise, and whatever that
means anyway) be able to handle this?
It means a society which is both a legitimate democracy and
a well organized free market system. So the two camps compliment
each other.
If global warming exists, and is caused by humans, then it's a good example of
both an external cost mechanism, which the free market tends to ignore
complete, and a "tragedy of the commons", which the free market is
particularly incapable of dealing with.
Both of these have to be addressed by regulatory intervention, because the
freemarket can never cope.
So government action alone is better than a combination of govt
and market solutions? My post was meant to say both the form
of govt and market systems need to be free, legitimate and well organized.
The free market is incapable of dealing with the issue, and to the
extent that governments intervene, the market is not free.
So the concept of the free market has no place in the solution.
Sylvia.
[/quote]
True, because it's more like a kosher free-for-all market that has us
nailed to a cross, as well as being waterboarded at the same time...
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 4:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 25, 6:54 am, "Jonathan" <H... at (no spam) Again.net> wrote:
[quote]"Sylvia Else" <syl... at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:005b217b$0$1595$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
Jonathan wrote:
"Sylvia Else" <syl... at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
The free market is incapable of dealing with the issue, and to the extent that
governments intervene, the market is not free.
So the concept of the free market has no place in the solution.
A government needs to behave like a market system if it's
solutions or 'products' are to be successful. Unless you prefer
the least efficient, or most wasteful solutions?
I think for such large programs the government should start
them, but always with the intention of having the market place
take it over eventually. Like a public utility, a private company
that's tightly regulated. A partnership of the two.
Sylvia.
[/quote]
How about giving my 50/50 option a fair shake?
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sylvia Else... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:07 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Jonathan wrote:
[quote]"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:005b217b$0$1595$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
Jonathan wrote:
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
The free market is incapable of dealing with the issue, and to the extent that
governments intervene, the market is not free.
So the concept of the free market has no place in the solution.
A government needs to behave like a market system if it's
solutions or 'products' are to be successful. Unless you prefer
the least efficient, or most wasteful solutions?
I think for such large programs the government should start
them, but always with the intention of having the market place
take it over eventually. Like a public utility, a private company
that's tightly regulated. A partnership of the two.
Sylvia.
[/quote]
The market place will always tend to externalise costs where possible,
and individuals will look to their own interests before those of the
community. In the context of global warming that means that no matter
what the government does at the beginning, once it relinquishes control,
the market will undo what the government started.
If the government regulates to prevent these effects, then the market
will adapt accordingly. There's no need for direct government
involvement even at the beginning. But as I said, it's not a free market
if it's regulated.
Sylvia. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jonathan... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"BradGuth" <bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6a127753-a418-49ad-8717-6d8f22f978b8 at (no spam) j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
[quote]That's certainly idealistic and/or wishful. Too bad it can not happen
in this real world where you can't hardly trust anyone that uses a
phony/bogus name. Ghost writing for yourself isn't exactly a good
idea, because you can't convey integrity or trust.
[/quote]
The great attractor in the sky is ...uncertainty.
As Dickinson said long ago
" I'm nobody! Who are you?
Are you nobody, too?
Then there 's a pair of us-don't tell!
They'd banish us, you know."
Governments want detailed personal info to
have control. People want that info to place you
(limit you) to one camp, or the other.
[quote]Life is risky business, where death is always around the next corner.
I'm a risk taker as long as innocent others are not getting hurt by my
actions.
[/quote]
But our words may end up hurting others. In a non linear world
we can't really predict the future or unintended consequences. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jonathan... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:005b217b$0$1595$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
[quote]Jonathan wrote:
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
The free market is incapable of dealing with the issue, and to the extent that
governments intervene, the market is not free.
So the concept of the free market has no place in the solution.
[/quote]
A government needs to behave like a market system if it's
solutions or 'products' are to be successful. Unless you prefer
the least efficient, or most wasteful solutions?
I think for such large programs the government should start
them, but always with the intention of having the market place
take it over eventually. Like a public utility, a private company
that's tightly regulated. A partnership of the two.
[quote]
Sylvia.[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jonathan... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 24, 2009 11:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"BradGuth" <bradguth at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote in message
news:625e511d-23d1-409f-bd9b-ae06e9f8fb26 at (no spam) d9g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
[quote]SSP is worth doing at 50/50, meaning 50% public funded. However, as
you already know, Big Energy (local and foreign) will manage to foil
any such SSP efforts.
[/quote]
Big Energy (Bush/Cheney) ...have left the building!
They have managed to foil it for ten years now, but
ya' never know what the future holds.
Truth is always stranger than fiction.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:04 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 27, 5:54 pm, "Jonathan" <H... at (no spam) Again.net> wrote:
[quote]"Sylvia Else" <syl... at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:005f848c$0$23335$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
There's no need for direct government involvement even at the beginning. But
as I said, it's not a free market if it's regulated.
A market must be regulated in order to be 'free'.
Free means that the opposing forces have a fairly
even playing field or power, to optimize the interaction
between the two. A lack of regulation allows one side
or the other to have all the control, when that happens
we get things like the recent stock crash.
Too little controls on a market system and the boom and
bust cycle emerges. Too much control leads to all the
inefficiencies of socialism.
And like a public utility, the markets and govt remain partners.
Markets are more short sighted with investment, which is
what I think you are getting at. This only means a long
term problem like climate change needs govt involvement
to help start the solution rolling earlier than a profit motive
normally would.
[/quote]
Perhaps our Sylvia Else is a devout Republican, whereas that alone
would explain quite a lot.
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 4:26 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 26, 6:07 pm, Sylvia Else <syl... at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote:
[quote]Jonathan wrote:
"Sylvia Else" <syl... at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:005f848c$0$23335$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
There's no need for direct government involvement even at the beginning. But
as I said, it's not a free market if it's regulated.
A market must be regulated in order to be 'free'.
Well, if you want to start redefining terminology.
Sylvia.
[/quote]
Without enforced rules you've got nothing but another Alan Greenspan
free-for all, along with that kosher approved SEC and their Ponzi
Madoff types just about everywhere...
~ BG
~ BG |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Sylvia Else... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:07 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
Jonathan wrote:
[quote]"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:005f848c$0$23335$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
There's no need for direct government involvement even at the beginning. But
as I said, it's not a free market if it's regulated.
A market must be regulated in order to be 'free'.
[/quote]
Well, if you want to start redefining terminology.
Sylvia. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jonathan... |
| Posted: Mon Oct 26, 2009 11:05 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:005f848c$0$23335$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
[quote]There's no need for direct government involvement even at the beginning. But
as I said, it's not a free market if it's regulated.
[/quote]
A market must be regulated in order to be 'free'.
Free means that the opposing forces have a fairly
even playing field or power, to optimize the interaction
between the two. A lack of regulation allows one side
or the other to have all the control, when that happens
we get things like the recent stock crash.
Too little controls on a market system and the boom and
bust cycle emerges. Too much control leads to all the
inefficiencies of socialism.
And like a public utility, the markets and govt remain partners.
Markets are more short sighted with investment, which is
what I think you are getting at. This only means a long
term problem like climate change needs govt involvement
to help start the solution rolling earlier than a profit motive
normally would.
[quote]
Sylvia.
[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| BradGuth... |
| Posted: Tue Oct 27, 2009 7:45 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 26, 6:26 pm, BradGuth <bradg... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 26, 6:07 pm, Sylvia Else <syl... at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote:
Jonathan wrote:
"Sylvia Else" <syl... at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:005f848c$0$23335$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
There's no need for direct government involvement even at the beginning. But
as I said, it's not a free market if it's regulated.
A market must be regulated in order to be 'free'.
Well, if you want to start redefining terminology.
Sylvia.
Without enforced rules you've got nothing but another Alan Greenspan
free-for all, along with that kosher approved SEC and their Ponzi
Madoff types just about everywhere...
~ BG
[/quote]
Where's the usual republican and otherwise kosher come-back? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jerry Okamura... |
| Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 2:21 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"Jonathan" <Home at (no spam) Again.net> wrote in message
news:IaKdndEC8cd9z3vXnZ2dnUVZ_u2dnZ2d at (no spam) giganews.com...
[quote]
"Sylvia Else" <sylvia at (no spam) not.at.this.address> wrote in message
news:005f848c$0$23335$c3e8da3 at (no spam) news.astraweb.com...
There's no need for direct government involvement even at the beginning.
But as I said, it's not a free market if it's regulated.
A market must be regulated in order to be 'free'.
Free means that the opposing forces have a fairly
even playing field or power, to optimize the interaction
between the two. A lack of regulation allows one side
or the other to have all the control, when that happens
we get things like the recent stock crash.
[/quote]
NO!!! You cannot have a truly free market is it is regulated. When you
regulate a market, that means is it not a free market. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Sat Dec 05, 2009 4:38 pm
|
|