Well, we're headed that way. The EPA needs to be stripped of its' authority.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/04/25/energy-america-oil-drilling-denial/
To me, the whole stink about the polution here does not solve our nations fuel and energy problems, it merely exacerbates them. When the nation is paying five dollars a gallon for gas, and our economy is further hampered from recovery, I say we put the EPA's budget on the chopping block for all the lost tax revenue, as well as their fair share of the further cuts that will need to be made to make up the deficit.
We're trillions of dollars in debt, and the interest grows daily. Every bureaucrat in our government has a duty to considering the overall implications of their decisions and actions. When they make a stupid decision like this, they should be charged a portion of their salary to help cover their share of the cost of it. Please, have some consideration for those of us who actually have to do an honest day's work for our money, and don't want to see the first third of our work day go to cover our fuel bill.
While we're on the subject of fuels and energy, there are means by which we could reduce our carbon emissions overall and drive a stronger economy while still meeting our energy needs. The truth is that environmental energy sources are prevalent and would greatly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions while still meeting our nations energy needs. and I don't want to hear that building fifty foot tall windmills will look ugly. If it comes down to it, put a facade on them and make them look like Dutch windmills. With modern solar panel technology, we could put much of the open deserts that our nation has to good use powering our nation. That would reduce the carbon emissions used to power our homes and businesses. Maybe the EPA could put their energies into expanding cleaner energy sources, and finding new ways to power our transportation infrastructure. It's stupid to think that we have to cut carbon emissions without recourse to the fact that our modern society needs energy to function. I'll tell you what, you give me Star Trek Transporters, and I'll give up my car. It's that simple. I can't ride the bus to work, I'm in a leadership position now, I have to be readily available to to assist my soldiers in whatever means I can when they need it. Don't tell me I have to pay five dollars a gallon to drive my car when I need it. It could be argued my car is a matter of national security.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/04/25/energy-america-oil-drilling-denial/
To me, the whole stink about the polution here does not solve our nations fuel and energy problems, it merely exacerbates them. When the nation is paying five dollars a gallon for gas, and our economy is further hampered from recovery, I say we put the EPA's budget on the chopping block for all the lost tax revenue, as well as their fair share of the further cuts that will need to be made to make up the deficit.
We're trillions of dollars in debt, and the interest grows daily. Every bureaucrat in our government has a duty to considering the overall implications of their decisions and actions. When they make a stupid decision like this, they should be charged a portion of their salary to help cover their share of the cost of it. Please, have some consideration for those of us who actually have to do an honest day's work for our money, and don't want to see the first third of our work day go to cover our fuel bill.
While we're on the subject of fuels and energy, there are means by which we could reduce our carbon emissions overall and drive a stronger economy while still meeting our energy needs. The truth is that environmental energy sources are prevalent and would greatly reduce our greenhouse gas emissions while still meeting our nations energy needs. and I don't want to hear that building fifty foot tall windmills will look ugly. If it comes down to it, put a facade on them and make them look like Dutch windmills. With modern solar panel technology, we could put much of the open deserts that our nation has to good use powering our nation. That would reduce the carbon emissions used to power our homes and businesses. Maybe the EPA could put their energies into expanding cleaner energy sources, and finding new ways to power our transportation infrastructure. It's stupid to think that we have to cut carbon emissions without recourse to the fact that our modern society needs energy to function. I'll tell you what, you give me Star Trek Transporters, and I'll give up my car. It's that simple. I can't ride the bus to work, I'm in a leadership position now, I have to be readily available to to assist my soldiers in whatever means I can when they need it. Don't tell me I have to pay five dollars a gallon to drive my car when I need it. It could be argued my car is a matter of national security.
No comments:
Post a Comment