The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

My intent is not to turn this into a political debate but to discuss his method of incentives.  No doubt that the patent would bring in much more money but I think he is directing funds into an area that could benefit us.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06232008/news/nationalnews/mccain_offers_300_million_for_new_auto_b_116832.htm

June 23, 2008 --

PHOENIX -- John McCain hopes to solve the country's energy crisis with cold hard cash.

The presumed Republican nominee is proposing a $300 million government prize to whoever can develop an automobile battery that far surpasses existing technology. The bounty would equate to $1 for every man, woman and child in the country, "a small price to pay for helping to break the back of our oil dependency," McCain said in remarks prepared for delivery Monday at Fresno State University in California.

McCain said such a device should deliver power at 30 percent of current costs and have "the size, capacity, cost and power to leapfrog the commercially available plug-in hybrids or electric cars."

The Arizona senator is also proposing stiffer fines for automakers who skirt existing fuel-efficiency standards, as well as incentives to increase use of domestic and foreign alcohol-based fuels such as ethanol.

In addition, a so-called Clean Car Challenge would provide U.S. automakers with a $5,000 tax credit for every zero-carbon emissions car they develop and sell.

"In the quest for alternatives to oil, our government has thrown around enough money subsidizing special interests and excusing failure," said excerpts from McCain's prepared text. "From now on, we will encourage heroic efforts in engineering, and we will reward the greatest success."

The proposal comes as gasoline has reached a record cost of more than $4 a gallon. That has boosted the price of virtually all goods and services, sent commuters flocking to public transportation and increased tensions between the United States and its Middle Eastern oil suppliers.

Last week McCain suggested one way to ease supply concerns would be to lift a federal ban on offshore oil drilling if individual states want to allow it. His Democratic rival, Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, opposes that idea, saying it would do nothing to address immediate price concerns.

On Sunday, Obama told a Washington audience he would strengthen government oversight of energy traders whose futures speculation he blames in large part for the skyrocketing price of oil.

In his latest speech, McCain expressed exasperation both with the federal government and the private sector.

He said rising costs during a time of stagnant wages evokes the 1970s era of "stagflation."

Without blaming his fellow Republicans in the Bush administration directly, McCain said: "It feels the same today, because the unwise policies of our government have left America's energy future in the control of others."

The pork-barrel opponent also blasted "a hodgepodge of incentives" for the purchase of fuel-efficient cars.

"Different hybrids and natural-gas cars carry different incentives, ranging from a few hundreds dollars to four grand. They're the handiwork of lobbyists, with all the inconsistency and irrationality that involves," McCain said. Following the speech, McCain was scheduled to attend fundraisers in Fresno and Santa Barbara, part of a money push that helped the senator raise a personal record of $21 million last month.

Cool.  I hope it works out.

McCain has some things I support in terms of environment / energy dependency, and others I do not. 

Overall, he's a decent guy, and more than I could ask for in terms of a candidate for the GOP.  Unfortuantely, I think that he's had to change some of (or strengthen) his views to attract his base (war, drilling, etc), which has alienated me a bit.  Such are the politics of politics, I suppose.

If Obama (who I will vote for) is elected, I'd like to see him incorporate McCain into his group (maybe not in the cabinet directly...but maybe even that).  He keeps talking about how Lincoln did that and it helped bridge the two sides.  I think something like that would be good for our country right now.

Exacto! 

But sounds like a good idea.  Progress!  Innovation!  Being promoted by the government?  What else is next?

Not a bad idea but just because he offers this money doesn't mean that people have been slacking either.  If a winner pops up in less than a year or so then perhaps I'm wrong.

Of course, if no one claims the prize for several years then that'll be blamed on big oil somehow - buying up patents, intimidating inventors, etc, etc, etc.

I just think that the billions that such a battery would earn in the private market is more than enough incentive for researchers and battery companies.  Seems like more of a strategy to fool Obama supporters than a realistic motivation.  Does anyone here plan to quit their jobs and jump into battery research?

Good idea, we need to challenge forward thinking and resolve our dependence on foreign oil.

there hasn't been any need to innovate .. oil was and is relatively cheap compared to the rest of the world.

the reason biofuels didn't take off in the 90s was becuase it was cheaper to buy a gallon of gas than a gallon of ethanol.

the only pressures that will have an effect on the development of an electric car or bigger batteries is when it becomes cheaper to plug your car into the house than it is to put gas into it .. (over the life of your car, including the price of the car, and not on a gallon for gallon comparison) ..

an electric car that can run 30 miles for 15 cents and costs 120,000 isn't going to sell over a car that gets 30 miles for $5 and costs 15,000

i like the idea though .. i think innovation should be rewarded

Sounds like an excellent piece of political strategy aimed at getting him elected......but I'm all for it if it gets us some new Power. Time to show the rest of the world why we are still the best country in the World.  I just hope whatever they design , it can be retrofitted into older classic cars..........I'd hate to get rid of my Corvette because the new Power has made Gasoline obsolete and around $10 a gallon...........

10 a gallon is still less than they pay in london for gas... if it comes to the point where you have $10 gas vs. a much cheaper version, then the decision is a luxury to have

Gas in Asia and Europe has been in the $8-$10 range for several years now.

Which is why you don't see Corvettes and cool classic cars roaming the streets there. I hope that doesn't become the case here. I could deal with a retrofit as long as it still keeps my Horsepower around 315 like it is presently. But even at 315, my car can still average 25 MPG on the highway in 6th gear if you don't have a heavy foot.

Fox News was slamming McCain for this position today.  ...at the least the main host was.  I don't really understand the negatives/positives on this entirely, but I don't really see the big deal to get upset about.

How much of that is government imposed? 

The great thing about $4 gas is that gas taxes have gone from just under 74% back around the turn of the century to about 15% now!  God Bless George Bush!  (http://www.terrellowens.com/forums/style_emoticons/default/fishing.gif)

This is exactly what we need.  EXACTLY.  This partisian politics crap has to stop.  Both parties need to come together and do what's best for the country, rather than put their own selfish interests first. 

Here's some things I would like to see from our next president, regardless of if it's McCain or Obama:

1. Get the soldiers out of Iraq. 

2. Start drilling for oil in Alaska.

3. Institute programs like the one mentioned in this thread, in order to decrease U.S. dependency on oil. 

4. Incorporate a national sales tax to pay for the war in Iraq and then eradicate the national debt.  That way, Social Security won't go broke by the time people like us reach retirement age. 

5. Incorporate a national crime bill to make sure felons are punished exactly how they deserve. 

6.  Deport all illegal aliens, and hand out lengthy prison sentences to people who smuggle them in, as well as to people who "sell" them Social Security Numbers.

  What host?

  Anyways, I like this idea.  Rewards for innovation, this kind of thing can help get the ball rolling on more forms of alternative energy which is absolutely critical.

I don't know the guy's name, but he's a regular, on during the afternoon shift, before primetime.  One of his guests today was Karl Rove, and the other was a younger guy supporting McCain's $300 million offer.

What does partisan politics have to do with on-going battery research.

Several companies are already competing to build better batteries for this purpose.   $300 mil is a lot of money, but a patent for a new super battery could be worth billions.

Finish the mission first (WWI, WWII, Desert Storm) or just cut and run (Vietnam, Beruit, Somalia)?

Just think what a little foresight 10 years ago would be doing for us now.  Increasing refinery capacity should also be considered.

It's a good thought but people are already working on it.  Throwing money at the problem isn't the answer.  I mean, if $300 mil makes someone invent a better then why not raise the reward to $300 bil so they invent a pollution free hover car?  Make the reward $300 tril and they'd be able to invent transporter technology and we could do away with transportation all together - right?

Why not just cut spending ... drastically.  Starve the government beast. 

Or, how about a voluntary tax?  Let's see people who want to increase taxes walk the walk.   

Yay! If some of the people who serve our country have to "hot bunk" (sharing a bunk - 1 sleeps while the other is on duty) then why not felons?  This alone would double prison capacity.

Yay!

Stop drinking the kool aid. If you want us to fight so badly then volunteer, or stfu. There is no true "mission" over there, it changes daily along with many other things. Hell it has changed since we first started it. Hate to tell you but the soldiers who have been there consider it Nam 2.0, which is why they get along with Nam vets better than WWII and Korean as the fighting is similar. So the whole "cut and run" mantra is bullshit started by spin doctors to feed to their sheep.

At this point ... is anyone over there that didn't volunteer? This group of soldiers doesn't compare to the "I just joined for the college money" kids that were against going over in the first place ... and that was only a very small percentage. The whole "why aren't you over there" thing is a really lame argument for whether it is right or wrong to be there or pull out without securing what we have established.

We are accomplishing nothing over there. Say what you want about Sadamn but you needed a MotherFer over there like that to get things done. Our ways of playing nicey nice will just get soldiers killed. Those people just don't understand anything less then the way Sadamn did business.  If G Bush and his goddamn ego could have understand that we NEEDED Sadamn and his ways over there to keep Law and order we would have been 10-4. Not only did he keep the animals at bay, he also was next door to maybe out biggest enemy, IRAN.

Oopps.......I'd like to add more but what I'm discussing doesn't match the thread title (seems you can only have answers that match the thread title around here)  So I'll leave it at that so a perfectly good conversation doesn't get Locked.  :|

Same ol' BS mooth. 

I just asked a question. (http://209.85.117.199/1250/23/0/e786//e786.gif)

Let me rephrase ... do you care about the situation we leave behind or not.  If Iraq turns into something 10x worse than Iran after we leave, will you blame that on Bush too?

The more good news/less bad news that comes out of Iraq the more people seem to want us to leave.  It's almost as if they're worried that we'll succeed and Bush will get the credit.

No more Iraq talk in this thread, please.  I created a new thread for it.  This thread is about the McCain - Battery offer.

Then put them to work building more prisons.  Better yet, make them sleep outside in the elements like Joe Arapaio (The Toughest Sheriff in America) does in Phoenix. 

  It was probably Shepard Smith or Neil Cavuto.

After thinking about this earlier today, I began to wonder how much of this is actually just a bullshit political move.  Like a "Hey, people! I care about your shitty lives enough to mention that I'm planning on doing something about $93/pint gasoline!  Here's my 'plan'"  I mean something just to grab headlines and have people admire such "progress" or "innovation" like this


Like someone with the golden egg of an idea has been waiting for an opportunity like this.  "YES! Finally I can sell this shit!" 

I don't know.  Maybe I'm just jaded.  But this looks like it'll be used in a "what have you proposed, Barack?" slogan.

Yeah, that was him.

BTW, that Shepard Smith guy gives me the willies.  He looks like a ghoul.

So what if it is?

Politicians are all going to bring up things, promises, ideas, etc. that they won't be able to keep.  But it's better that he's proposing things that will help us, even if they don't end up coming to fruition.  It gets those topics in the public forum more, and changes may be made later.

Even if McCain is just doing this for political gain, good for him.

^ I'm with you.  Only up to the political gain part though. 

I feel like its great that innovation is promoted, as well as finding solutions to better lives which includes the environment.  Bringing concerns that are affecting the overwhelming majority to the forefront is an excellent start to finding a solution.  However, I don't feel the same way if he's just doing it for political gain. 

I don't know why I picture a cheesy (that's my word of the month) 80's movie where some popular kid is running for class president and promises to let the kids run the school or some corny shit like that.  Cheering ensues by the kids "Yeeeeah!!" as a montage depicts the kids rushing to the polls and voting with crappy drum and keyboard music in the background...-ANYWAYS-...I think there is a big difference from a candidate blowing smoke up people's asses and actually following through to see that one of his "promises" get realized. 

Why not just grant that money into research that would be sure to produce results?  Hell, if he set aside 600 million (2 bucks a person) for that kind of research, I'm sure SOMETHING will come out of it.  I really can't help but feel that this is a bit gimmicky (is that even a word?)

Gimmicky?  Sure, probably.

But just last year, environmental issues were completely overlooked by much of the country.  Many didn't believe in Global Warming, etc.  Even having a candidate from the GOP address some of those things, whether or not he'll actually be able to do anything, is a step in the right direction.