Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It says the Gov is responsible for the National Defense. Corperations with the best tech to do that get the sales. ergo Goverment invests in research.....
It says the Gov is responsible for the National Defense. Corperations with the best tech to do that get the sales. ergo Goverment invests in research.....
I'm talking about the research into energy and loans to companies like Solyndra.
For example, imagine if the USA managed to create some super source of power, and then we could keep it inside the US, offering it to companies that were inside our borders. It wouldnt take long to dominate the world on an economic basis once again, and the military implications would be huge.
We already have this, it's called coal. There is only two nations on this planet with vast reserves of diverse fossil fuel energy compared to their needs/population. The US and Russia, most certainly other nations would like to see the use of this resource restricted.
If you take China for example they will exhaust their supply within the next 20 to 30 years at their current rate of consumption.
It's not our government's job to spend money on finding alternative energy. It IS their job to protect the country.
Military invasion is not the only riske to our country. The fact that you buy most of a necessity from other countries is a risk to our country. We need to be self sufficient on necessities.
If all the money spent on wars/actions taken in the interests of getting/protecting our oil supply had been spent on alternative energy advancement, how far do you think we'd be in using alternative sources?
Up to 2007 our Armed duty personnel is the smallest since 1950 at 1,459,462
2007 1,380,082
1955 it fluctuated from 2,935,107 to 1990 2,043,705 and has dropped since then
If all the money spent on wars/actions taken in the interests of getting/protecting our oil supply had been spent on alternative energy advancement, how far do you think we'd be in using alternative sources?
Not very far. A country with no military but rich natural resources is called: target for invasion.
Read the Constitution sometime. The federal government actually has a duty to provide for the defense of this country.
So? If we are not involved in a WW we do not need to keep a huge active duty military. Besides most of the increase in military spending has problem been from paying the military industrial complex.
True, but the OP's question does bring up an interesting thought.
For example, imagine if the USA managed to create some super source of power, and then we could keep it inside the US, offering it to companies that were inside our borders. It wouldnt take long to dominate the world on an economic basis once again, and the military implications would be huge.
How 'bout we let the free market take care of that? Because we ALL know that once the US had this technology, the companies that had access to the technology would be the ones that were campaign donors to the administration.
With the most corrupt administration in MY lifetime occupying the WH, if that was the case now, any GOP donor would be shut out of that technology, as would any states that voted GOP, and any states that were right-to-work states, etc.
No thank you....
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.