My opinion on this subject seems to be overall the same as yours. We need to see incentives for development of a host of environmentally responsible programs. For example, more people would take advantage of solar energy if it was not so expensive.
Quote:
|
Have you become a Christian version of a Muslim Theocracy?
|
I certainly looks that way for them, doesn’t it? I don’t think they want to destroy the U.S. by giving in to terrorists, I think they are just being opportunistic. They just want to get into (public) office, and do not care about the aftermath. Whatever bad things happen will just be blamed on the previous administration(s). This is very short-sighted and very dangerous.
If you think Pelosi and Reid are bad, wait and see what happens if Hillary Clinton gets in the White House. The 2008 vote so far looks like trying to pick the lesser of evils from the available candidates and hope for the best, but expect the worst.
No disrespect to anyone is intended but I think that the issue with the Dems and the tax credits thing is that the Dems would rather encourage change (to more environmentally sound technologies) by taxing carbon emissions rather than encourage such changes through tax credits or similar types of incentives.
Whereas both taxation and tax credits would encourage changes, tax credits encourage change and does not cause bureaucratic induced waste, and is not confiscatory.
The kind of changes that need to happen can not happen overnight. Whereas changes won’t come swiftly, they are far less likely to come at all if there is no incentive for change.