Visit Paul William Tenny's column >>

PAUL WILLIAM TENNYHome Page

Freelance screenwriter living in North Carolina
Add To Watchlist
Articles Posted: 276; Links Seeded: 1329
Member Since: 9/2006Last Seen: 11/24/2009

Intel report predicts U.S. decline, Russia\'s rise

Read ArticleArticle Source: msnbc.com
advertisement

Global warming could be a boon to Russia while the U.S. could further decline in importance during the next two decades, says a U.S. intelligence report with predictions for the world in 2025.

Published to:

What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
1.4
1.4
0.4
Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3
{"commentId":4151834,"authorDomain":"erniegofishing"}

What a bunch of pessimistic jackasses are the folks who published this"report". America is still, and always will be, the leader of the world. This nation is presently experiencing a few problems and we are faced with some tough decisions concerning the future of our industries and the general economy. I am confident that our way of life will prevail, after all. We are a resilient people, despite our political and social differences and will always unite when we are under adversity. I am not about to give up hope because there is a possibility that "global warming" is going to make things so wonderful for Russia ( still a bunch of Commies ) and Canada  and so on. Our predesessors did not die in vain to preserve this wonerful Democracy. Remember: after every economic bust we have had there has alyays been a corresponding boom that overshadowed the previous downturn. I will continue to work hard , and invest what little I can in my 401K and never give up hope for a brighter future and a dignified retirement. Patience and confidence are always rewarded. USA--USA--USA!

{"commentId":4151834,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"erniegofishing"}
    Reply#26 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:07 AM EST
    {"commentId":4151892,"authorDomain":"gaithersburger"}

    You don't seem to know very much about history. Over the centuries great powers have come and gone. Some last longer than others but just like in sports and music, no one stays on top forever. It may not happen in 2025, but at some point in the future America will not be top dog. It's as inevitable as the sun rising in the east.

    {"commentId":4151892,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"gaithersburger"}
      #26.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:12 AM EST
      {"commentId":4152312,"authorDomain":"piglizard420"}

      Apparently you believe that the great America will buck all of the prior history of the world. Pipedream.

      {"commentId":4152312,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"piglizard420"}
        #26.2 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:43 AM EST
        {"commentId":4158390,"authorDomain":"Herstal57"}
        HerstalDeleted
        Reply
        {"commentId":4151848,"authorDomain":"Canakid53"}

        Yah, well let the auto industry go in the toilet and that wouldn't help this country any. Let 3 million plus lose their jobs and that won't help this country either.

        {"commentId":4151848,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"Canakid53"}
          Reply#27 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:08 AM EST
          {"commentId":4151857,"authorDomain":"larrybyrnes"}

          One of the main reasons why America is declining is because it has massive debt. It has massive debt because of unnecessary and destructive wars - first we carpet bomb and then reconstruct countries - all financed by the taxpayer. The wars were created by the large financial interests to put America into massive debt. The financial interests want us in debt so that they have total control of our lives. They can produce nothing themselves so must live off our productivity.

          When Americans stop producing food, high tech products, innovative solutions to energy, etc. the world loses. Including these criminals that create the wars. But they don't look that far out. They are in apathy going towards death and trying to take us all with them.

          Who are these guys? Jefferson had it right.

          "I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.

          If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." --

          Thomas Jefferson 1802

          {"commentId":4151857,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"larrybyrnes"}
          • 2 votes
          Reply#28 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:09 AM EST
          {"commentId":4152352,"authorDomain":"piglizard420"}

          Exactly. Someone who understands history and who appreciates the wisdom of our founding fathers.

          {"commentId":4152352,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"piglizard420"}
            #28.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:46 AM EST
            {"commentId":4153366,"authorDomain":"bobperillo"}

            I don't see what my mortgage has to do with the Iraq war.  Jefferson is preaching against consumer debt.  How else could the American people allow private banks to control the issue of their currency?  The real problem is with those of us who chose to live beyond our means thereby granting the banks (credit cards, car loans, mortgages etc..) control over our lives.  

            The use of Thomas Jefferson's words in context with your views on the war is literary malpractice.

            {"commentId":4153366,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"bobperillo"}
              #28.2 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:50 AM EST
              {"commentId":4158602,"authorDomain":"Herstal57"}
              HerstalDeleted
              {"commentId":4162722,"authorDomain":"larrybyrnes"}

              Well the professor definitely has it right about our responsibility for our own condition.

              But I was referring to the decline of America - not your mortgage difficulties. If you understand and follow the money control mechanisms, you will see who benefits from wars and thus why wars are created.

              The Fed is a private banking system that is neither Federal nor Reserve and this is the institution set up by the Rockefellers and other similar criminals around the turn of last century to control the U.S. currency.

              Perhaps THE main control mechanism on the manipulation of relative values of international currency resides here - bis.org. Check out the Board of directors. This is the crowd that Jefferson so adequately predicted as the ultimate control mechanism.

              Make no mistake, this crowd creates wars to profit from them. Same type of power elite clique who financed Hitler and paid themselves back from the plunder of Europe. And the huge amounts of interest from their "loans" to the U.S. taxpayers so we could pay to rebuild Europe.

              The current Financial meltdown is all about a further property grab and further police state control.

              But hey, don't pay any attention to me. What do I know.

              We are only 10 trillion in debt. Probably an accident  - no one could have planned it that way.

              As for Herstal - pretty brave with the personal insults on these blogs. Wonder how you would do face to face?

              But feel free to toot your own horn as a constitutional scholar. We all need an audience and who could be better for you?

              {"commentId":4162722,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"larrybyrnes"}
                #28.4 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:09 PM EST
                Reply
                {"commentId":4151861,"authorDomain":"caseyman96"}

                Well... all of this is preventable... with American ingenuity.  Do we still have it?  That remains to be seen.  If we become oil independent and make it our mission to come up with an alternative to the combustion engine.  If we make an effort to see that land should not be moonscaped in the name of consumerism (maybe elevation is the answer -- with ground intact, trees to reduce CO2, decreased erosion... hmmm maybe Jetsons were onto something).  I'm just saying that humans are the only species that has the capacity to prevent any of this.  The only question is whether we choose that path.

                {"commentId":4151861,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"caseyman96"}
                  Reply#29 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:09 AM EST
                  {"commentId":4154100,"authorDomain":"steveurkel"}
                  Steven-446650Deleted
                  Reply
                  {"commentId":4151874,"authorDomain":"jandjdevore"}

                  And you all remember what placed the Russians in the position for a comeback...an unwinable eight year land war in Afganistan.   I might add...which they just picked up and left.  

                  {"commentId":4151874,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"jandjdevore"}
                    Reply#30 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:10 AM EST
                    {"commentId":4158632,"authorDomain":"Herstal57"}
                    HerstalDeleted
                    Reply
                    {"commentId":4151881,"authorDomain":"superlogi"}

                    Actually, I think the report is counter-intuitive.  Global warming will promote less fossil fuel usage, and reduceboth the market and market prices for that commodity.  Additionally, it is impossible for me to understand how Russia is going to increase food production when it isn't their climate that's causing them problems, but their lack of moisture.  In southern Russia, arguably their most production agricultural region for example, they are prohibited from irrigating in many areas because of salt and alkaline problems.  Also, with regard to acreage under production that has never been a problem since before WWII, they were the world's largest producer/exporter of Wheat albeit with very low yields per acre.  Also, with regard to other economic indicators, other than energy and mineral commodities, natural gas, oil, gold, diamonds, etc.they produce nothing the rest of the world values.  Additionally, they are one of the biggest polluter countries in the world.  They will continue to be a very large land with a fraction of haves and an overwhelming majority of have nots with their government and criminal class working in concert to keep the that vast majority down.  Frankly, I don't know what makes an analyst and analyst, but I do know that our supposed expert analysts have proven themselves on many if not most occasions less than accurate with their predictions.

                    PS  Russia is about twice the size of the US with less than half it's population which is decreasing every year due to their poor middle class economy.  However, most of their land is tundra and almost unhinabitable, so I doubt any possible scenario where their fortunes rise significantly relative to our own.

                    {"commentId":4151881,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"superlogi"}
                      Reply#31 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:11 AM EST
                      {"commentId":4151992,"authorDomain":"Nailem"}

                      The human animal is a perverse creature.The future is a total unknown and it is rather disingenuous to be focusing energy and resources on a dimension with oh so many variables.Live for the day,weenies,because there is no guarantee any of us will be around in 2025 anyway.God is in his heaven and what will be will be!

                      {"commentId":4151992,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"Nailem"}
                      • 1 vote
                      Reply#32 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:20 AM EST
                      {"commentId":4153727,"authorDomain":"lenvera"}

                      I do believe that G-d expects Planet earth inhabitants to solve their own problems. My issue is that I may be around in 2025 at age 83 and that my investments today will survive the unforeseen calamities of the future.

                      But your right, que sera, sera.  

                      {"commentId":4153727,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"lenvera"}
                        #32.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:11 AM EST
                        Reply
                        {"commentId":4152199,"authorDomain":"myself63444"}

                        We don't take care of our own.  They take care of theirs.  Large multi-national companies get larger and more powerful, but could care less about americans, yet we pass legislation that benefits them.  what is wrong with the people in power in this country?

                        {"commentId":4152199,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"myself63444"}
                          Reply#33 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:35 AM EST
                          {"commentId":4154059,"authorDomain":"steveurkel"}
                          Steven-446650Deleted
                          Reply
                          {"commentId":4152333,"authorDomain":"mhelwig"}

                          I honestly predict it will happen much sooner if we do not drastically change our monetary policy. The culprit behind this collapse in the Federal Reserve-which is neither part of the federal government, nor does it rely on monetary reserves – is an unconstitutional, unelected cartel that literally creates the devastating problems it was supposed to prevent.

                          Today, the entire Western financial world holds its breath every time the Fed chairman speaks, so influential are the central bank's decisions on markets, interest rates and the economy in general. Yet the Fed, supposedly created to smooth out business cycles and prevent disruptive economic downswings like the Great Depression, has actually done the opposite.

                          From the Great Depression, to the stagflation of the seventies, to the burst of the dotcom bubble in 2001, every economic downturn suffered by the country over the last 80 years can be traced to Federal Reserve policy.

                          While many Fed defenders claim it worked valiantly to prevent or minimize the ravages of the Great Depression, in reality the Fed caused the Depression and greatly increased the severity of its effects. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve, middle and working-class Americans have been victimized by a boom-and-bust monetary policy.

                          And now Obama is looking to fill his Treasury position with the Federal Reserve governor of San Francisco...this is absolutely sickening!! Open your eyes! (this is not a partison statement, because I hate Bush and company just as much)

                          The truth is that the markets have come to the sobering realization that the Bush administration's $850 billion rescue plan won't work quickly to unfreeze the credit markets, and that many banks are still having difficulty gaining access to cash. That's caused investors to exit stocks and move money into the relative short-term safety of government debt.

                          But if you had a bird’s eye view of events since 2000, then you will have seen a lot more than that- you will have witnessed the devaluation of the US Dollar by nearly 70%. During this period, the Federal Reserve Bank repeatedly printed large sums of money and pumped it into the system, further devaluing our nation's Fiat currency beyond recognition. Foreign dollar reserves disappearing as these devalued dollars get dumped on to the international money markets.  

                          The ‘Bail Out Bill’ is not the last bail out, but it does mark a point in US history. It essentially signals the takeover of the US by private bankers. Congress has essentially  handed over $850 billion in unmarked bills to the very cartel who engineered the financial crisis in the first place. This so called rescue package was sold to the American public as a “plan to save us”, yet it is us the people, whose taxes have been used to run this entire façade, who will be left with nothing but an over-inflated money supply and the increasing spectre of stagflation.

                          So do not be surprised in a few months time, when the Central Bankers will rear their heads and say "hey, here's a new currency. This will solve all of our economic problems". Say hello to the AMERO!

                          {"commentId":4152333,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"mhelwig"}
                          • 1 vote
                          Reply#34 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:45 AM EST
                          {"commentId":4163874,"authorDomain":"larrybyrnes"}

                          Right on Bro. 

                          Not too many of us understand and can confront this amount of evil. But our numbers are growing - so keep up the good work!

                          {"commentId":4163874,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"larrybyrnes"}
                            #34.1 - Sat Nov 22, 2008 12:50 AM EST
                            Reply
                            {"commentId":4152637,"authorDomain":"mhubertw"}

                            "The Magic Act of George W. Bush"

                            ilovepoetry.com/viewpoem.asp?id=95898

                            {"commentId":4152637,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"mhubertw"}
                              Reply#35 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:06 AM EST
                              {"commentId":4153996,"authorDomain":"steveurkel"}
                              Steven-446650Deleted
                              {"commentId":4158647,"authorDomain":"Herstal57"}
                              HerstalDeleted
                              Reply
                              {"commentId":4153053,"authorDomain":"apostolu"}

                              Making predictions that far out are iffy at best but interesting. The US has been in decline internally for the past 15 years so the prediction of it getting worse was a no brainer. Our government has been getting worse which obviously impacts our country as a whole. You can't point fingers at one party either, they are both to blame. Also, I am surprised that there is no mention of China. It seems like they are this big quiet giant that is growing stronger year after year. I would think that they would be a major player in the future and probably have a more stable government than Russia.

                              {"commentId":4153053,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"apostolu"}
                              • 1 vote
                              Reply#36 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:31 AM EST
                              {"commentId":4153306,"authorDomain":"whyit"}

                              US dominance will wane ... this is a pretty safe prediciton ... point at one nation that has never waned at some point.  China as an example, has been up and down, up and down for thousands of years.  Hopefully if we stick to our principles rather than abandon them in a desire to retain our power, we will influence and "infect" the people who constitute the next world power with our ideas, and they'll continue them, just as we continued the ideas of the ancient Greeks (democracy), Romans (global order and infrastructure), and British (magna carta and religious pluralism).

                              {"commentId":4153306,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"whyit"}
                              • 1 vote
                              Reply#37 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:47 AM EST
                              {"commentId":4153337,"authorDomain":"lenvera"}

                              The big three are down because of regulation, hardly. The American automobile manufactures stepped into their own manure over thirty five years ago when the Japanese automakers tolerancing methods as applied to manufacturing engineering were implemented to become producers of higher quality, and reliable vehicles to this day.  The American automakers are going through the same thing as IBM went through in the early 1980s when the PC market took off and IBM was still "selling" large mainframe computers. 

                              In the early seventies, university engineering students had senior projects in developing an "air  cycle" and the electric car, yet unfeasible for the big three at that time to invest in research of alternatives to the ever guzzling internal combustion engine, therefore leaving the development to India and Israel as of today.   

                              Toyota auto manufacturing plants in this country when compared to American ones are vastly different such as in:  management style, employee decision in policy making,  and by the way the "employee" is the most important resource and not the CEOs.  Toyota executives earn not even one million dollars per year producing 20 - 30 percent increase in sales and safeguarding jobs whereas American auto maker CEOs earn over 20 million dollars per year, but with losses of 30% of sales commensurate with layoffs, more politically correct by saying that companies are downsizing.  There is something wrong with this picture.

                                A new mind set is needed in this country, otherwise the Russians, Indians and the Chinese will be the top producers globally in the future.  For me, I will continue to teach kids their math and science. 

                              {"commentId":4153337,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"lenvera"}
                                Reply#38 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 10:49 AM EST
                                {"commentId":4153625,"authorDomain":"jbb929"}

                                In 1950 34% of our jobs were in manufacturing, which was almost double that in 1900. Now we are down to about 10% of our jobs in the manufacturing fields. We continue to send our jobs oversea's donkey's and elephant's alike. Greed is behind this nothing else. Instead of being satisfied with 10million in profits we send our jobs to china, india wherever we can make 20million. The hell with the fact that people can't afford to buy it when it get's here. We are heading down the drain in the name of the almighty dollar. Someone mention the lack of China in this report, I can't believe there not listed as well. China is admitting to spending 24% of their new windfall on their military. If that is what they admit to, guess what, it's probably double that at least. We will all be afraid of China in the not to distant future, you should be afraid now.

                                {"commentId":4153625,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"jbb929"}
                                  Reply#39 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:05 AM EST
                                  {"commentId":4153771,"authorDomain":"lenvera"}

                                  Joeb929

                                  I agree. Excellent observation 

                                  {"commentId":4153771,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"lenvera"}
                                    #39.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:15 AM EST
                                    {"commentId":4154472,"authorDomain":"gamerk2"}

                                    The only way to lure jobs back is to repeal the minimum wage, and go back to 10 cents an hour.

                                    Nope, don't think that will get very far...

                                    {"commentId":4154472,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"gamerk2"}
                                      #39.2 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:00 PM EST
                                      {"commentId":4158923,"authorDomain":"superlogi"}

                                      JoeB, the world has been employing fixed assets and equipment, tools and machinery in place of labor since the industrial revolution, so it should come as no surprise that this country which employs more capital than any other would have a reduction in manufacturing jobs.  The problem is, people like you think that other countries are stealing those jobs with cheap labor.  A fellow by the name of Ricardo around Adam Smith's time suggested that if you can do it better than the other fellow, you should and the other fellow should find a line of work better suited to him and one that others will value.  That way, everybody wins; you, the other fellow who now does something of value and the consumer who purchases both your goods and services and the other fellows.  You dig?  In short, those manufacturing jobs you're so concerned with are gone and the people that once did them better find something else to do.  Now that may require relocating and/or changing occupations.  It might even require further education.  But, whatever it takes, its your responsibility, not mine and @!$%#ing about it, won't change a thing.

                                      {"commentId":4158923,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"superlogi"}
                                        #39.3 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:30 PM EST
                                        Reply
                                        {"commentId":4153684,"authorDomain":"greene0723"}

                                        The U.S. definitely needs to get away from OIL!

                                        {"commentId":4153684,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"greene0723"}
                                          Reply#40 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:09 AM EST
                                          {"commentId":4158967,"authorDomain":"superlogi"}

                                          Then you better come up with an altenative, one that doesn't require you to carry a pooper scooper for horse droppings.

                                          {"commentId":4158967,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"superlogi"}
                                            #40.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:33 PM EST
                                            {"commentId":4163327,"authorDomain":"middimar"}

                                            i agree, but its money, where there is moey - there is corruption and greed. U think our politicians really want to switch into green techs. I bet there was a scientists who was burried deep in somewhere after inventing tech that uses H2O instead of oil (just hypothetical example). Its gona be slow and painful

                                            {"commentId":4163327,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"middimar"}
                                              #40.2 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:22 PM EST
                                              Reply
                                              {"commentId":4153842,"authorDomain":"cgudipaty"}

                                              If alternate sources of energy will be a norm than an exception by 2025, I hope it will be by then, then oil abundance in Russia & hence its prominence will become a less important factor.  On the other hand Russia gaining more prominence for other reasons, such as their own technological advances meanwhile (esp.) if US still have the same short-sighted vision of promoting service-oriented industries more at the expense of the product-oriented ones, or neglecting R & D in Science and Technology here in US, or Russia developing more closer friendship/ties with now emerging countries like China, India, etc. will then be a different story. Those are some areas where we need to learn lessons to be competitive and remain relevant in the changing world's landscape. 

                                              {"commentId":4153842,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"cgudipaty"}
                                                Reply#41 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:19 AM EST
                                                {"commentId":4159043,"authorDomain":"superlogi"}

                                                What technological advances? If you can name just one product Russia adds value to, that has found a market anywhere in the world, other than a jet airplane, I would be eternally grateful for the information.

                                                {"commentId":4159043,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"superlogi"}
                                                  #41.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:37 PM EST
                                                  Reply
                                                  {"commentId":4153947,"authorDomain":"steveurkel"}
                                                  Steven-446650Deleted
                                                  {"commentId":4154056,"authorDomain":"ajimov"}

                                                  We need to pump the hell out of our own resources.

                                                  {"commentId":4154056,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"ajimov"}
                                                    Reply#43 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:34 AM EST
                                                    {"commentId":4155254,"authorDomain":"kramerforbcc"}

                                                    Bush and the Neo-cons (and they are cons) should be held accountable for the financial cesspool we are in and for the overall decline in our country's wellbeing. They should be tried for treason, along with EXXON and the rest of the oil companies who have put profit ahead of the wellbeing of the country.

                                                    {"commentId":4155254,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"kramerforbcc"}
                                                    • 1 vote
                                                    Reply#44 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:51 PM EST
                                                    {"commentId":4159212,"authorDomain":"superlogi"}

                                                    Kathy, it wasn't the Bush administration which pushed sub-prime lending, active union building, isolationism, protectionism, and unaffordable social spending programs, all of which have contributed to our economic mess. But I'll bet if you try real hard to find out who the culprits were, even you could figure it out. With regard to oil company unconscionable profits, Microsoft makes more than three times Exxon's gross margins. So, if you're going to take down the oil industry for making too much money, you may as well go after a majority of all US businesses. But then, who would you work for? Or maybe, that's the idea.

                                                    {"commentId":4159212,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"superlogi"}
                                                      #44.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:48 PM EST
                                                      Reply
                                                      {"commentId":4155342,"authorDomain":"Toradze"}

                                                      Two nasty words we all need to repeat:

                                                      Nuclear power.

                                                      It doesn't produce green house gases, and coal ash puts into the atmosphere 5 times the amount of uranium mined every year in the world. (It's a lot.) Where do people think Marie Curie got her radium from?  That's right!  Pitchblende, leftovers from coal burning.

                                                      Nuclear power is also almost entirely priced by regulations. Pre-approve Swedish design plants, kick the regulatory roadblocks out of the way and we could be selling power at $0.01 per kilowatt or less. That would be a huge shot in the arm for our economy.

                                                      Folks, war is what happens when the world has a depression - it's as predictable as clockwork. War has huge environmental impacts. Time for us to go for the true low-impact system.

                                                      {"commentId":4155342,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"Toradze"}
                                                        Reply#45 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 12:57 PM EST
                                                        {"commentId":4155404,"authorDomain":"j-whitman"}

                                                        Too bad no state wants to store the nuclear waste, isn't it ??

                                                        {"commentId":4155404,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"j-whitman"}
                                                          #45.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:02 PM EST
                                                          {"commentId":4159279,"authorDomain":"superlogi"}

                                                          John, there is another small problem.  First of all, unrefined Uranium 235 in any form is not in unlimited supply.  But I do agree we should be utilizing nuclear energy more than we are, but that would require that our politicians grow backbones and that is a very tall task, one which could be impossible.

                                                          {"commentId":4159279,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"superlogi"}
                                                            #45.2 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:52 PM EST
                                                            Reply
                                                            {"commentId":4155419,"authorDomain":"Steve-NV"}

                                                            As the causes (man-made or naturally) of global warming are somewhat irrelevant, the effects are proven, and solutions are complicated.  For those of you who want to ignore the problem, put your head in the sand and get your butt kicked.

                                                            If the US is no longer the worlds police force- so much the better.  While we can not descend into isolationism we can still look inward to get our own house in order first- environmentally, morally, financially, educationally, and politically.  Let's help ourselves, our neighbors, and our friends first and worry about the rest later. The US can still be the shining example for the rest of the world, but we need to lead by example, not by dictates and military might.

                                                            {"commentId":4155419,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"Steve-NV"}
                                                              Reply#46 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:03 PM EST
                                                              {"commentId":4155445,"authorDomain":"j-whitman"}

                                                              If we don't bail out our big 3 auto manufacturers our nation will sink like a rock even faster than it is now.

                                                              {"commentId":4155445,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"j-whitman"}
                                                                Reply#47 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:04 PM EST
                                                                {"commentId":4157885,"authorDomain":"celticdreaming"}

                                                                Then maybe those big 3 auto makers should get their heads out of the butts of the oil companies and take a good look around at what is holding them down.  It's not the Unions, and it's not the wages.  It's the fact that they only wanted to invest in fossil fuel vehicles.   If they were really concerned with their business model, then back during the fuel shortage of the 70s they would have had a back up plan to really use innovative technology to create and promote alternative fuel cars.  They would have made an effort to observe the vehicles coming out of Japan and Korea and produced vehicles with the same type of gas milage and quality....as well as the afforability.  Instead they continued on with the same o, same o.  As if gas was always going to be plentiful, and always affordable to the average consumer.  Wrong.  

                                                                Maybe they should be happy with a certain percentage of profit, instead of getting rediculous and greedy.  Maybe their Execs and CEOs should get a REASONABLE wage, instead of millions of dollars in bonuses.  If investors want to see where their profits are draining off to, they should be looking at executive salaries instead of laying off workers and closing plants.   I know it's only part of the problem, but it's a good size part.   The cost of health care for the workers is also rediculous.  No wonder plants go to Canada.  In the US, car companies pay about $5k a year per worker for worker health insurance.  In Canada they pay about $800.   Hmmm.....perhaps that is something that needs to be addressed.  Again...just HOW MUCH PROFIT does a company need?  As much as the market can bear?  Guess what?  It can't bear it anymore.

                                                                I don't agree with a bail out for our auto makers unless they can put up a business plan that shows that money will be used to make their companies viable.  That it will go into re-tooling plants to produce cars that run on alternative energy, that are AFFORDABLE to the average American (not Luxury financially out of reach crap).  People are looking for TRUE Hybrids (like the Prius) that actually do that 40 - 50 miles per gal  performance.  Not some vehicle that says it's 'hybrid'...while it STILL only gets 25 miles per gal.   People have had a wake up call, and most are very willing to give up their SUVs and huge trucks...especially if the don't really need them.

                                                                I have a Jeep Liberty SUV.  Do I need it?  No.  I could do just as well with a smaller vehicle.  I have it because it was a really good deal 4 years ago.  Now?  Not so much.  In fact, Even tho its blue book is around 7k plus, it's trade in value is only 3k.  About 3k less than what I owe on it.  So I have to keep it for now.

                                                                I would rather have a small truck...like the Mazda B2000 I had back in '85.  It got 30-35 miles per gal back THEN!  And....it was only $6k then.  Of course that was 20 years ago...but even if you tripled the price...it would only be 18k now....and given that it was 20 years ago, the technology should have gotten better so I would expect a version of it to now get at least 40-45 miles per gal.  Well?  Where is it?  I'd buy it.   I would rather buy American than foreign.   And preferably a vehicle that only costs about $15-$18k.  I could reasonable afford that.  Besides which I would never buy a car for over $20k anyways.  Why pay that amount of money for something that depreciates the min you drive it off the lot?  Rather put the money into my home or my retirement and INCREASE my value.

                                                                So...once the big 3 can come up with a viable business plan for the loan, then I might be hehind it and urge my Representative to be behind it.  Until then....nope.  I want the money to go towards making the car industry improve.  I dont' want it going towards CEO, Exec salaries, or to pay for the everyday cost of the plants.   Hey!  Maybe they could sell those private Corp jets and get some money!  Sell off some assets that they don't REALLY need.   Or...if they don't want to give a viable business plan, or have oversight to make sure the money goes where it should...then perhaps they should go to the oil companies...maybe Exxon...and ask THEM for the loans!  I'm sure they would be glad to help.  NOT!

                                                                {"commentId":4157885,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"celticdreaming"}
                                                                  #47.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 3:26 PM EST
                                                                  {"commentId":4159598,"authorDomain":"superlogi"}

                                                                  Just the opposite, Jim.  If we bail them out by subsidizing poor performance, we will be promoting uncompetitive solutions to a very competitive market place.  Canada, Europe, and more notoriously, Russia, Cuba and North Korea have all taken that route and you see where its gotten them.  On the other hand, capitalism including the right for businesses to fail has brought this country 25% of the world's economy.  So, you can go with a model that has been proven wrong or one that has been proven right.  Of course, the utopian rhetoric of Marx does have it's attractions, including the abolition of the uber wealthy which we know most of you envy if not despise.  With regard to the celtic, he should understand that it isn't the hybrid market that's beating our car industry, it's those dirty gas burners from Japan, South Korea and Europe that are.  Oh and by the way, we have hybrids too, they just aren't as good as the competitions.

                                                                  {"commentId":4159598,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"superlogi"}
                                                                    #47.2 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 5:12 PM EST
                                                                    {"commentId":4159633,"authorDomain":"rventurakean"}

                                                                    our car companies only make up 4 percent of the nation's gdp. THe government wants to bail them out because if they go their suppliers will cut massive amounts of jobs.

                                                                    {"commentId":4159633,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"rventurakean"}
                                                                      #47.3 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 5:14 PM EST
                                                                      Reply
                                                                      {"commentId":4155661,"authorDomain":"rider-83"}

                                                                      Maybe Russia is on the rise is because they are not owned by Israel or maybe it is because their people are expected to act like adults instead of whiney useless self-serving lying idiots!!!

                                                                      {"commentId":4155661,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"rider-83"}
                                                                      • 1 vote
                                                                      Reply#48 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 1:17 PM EST
                                                                      {"commentId":4159653,"authorDomain":"superlogi"}

                                                                      What makes you think Russia is on the rise?  They aren't by the way.  Kind of screws up your entire bigoted premise, doesn't it?

                                                                      {"commentId":4159653,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"superlogi"}
                                                                        #48.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 5:16 PM EST
                                                                        Reply
                                                                        {"commentId":4157555,"authorDomain":"helmasri"}

                                                                        I find most of this article to be dubious; give me the who, what, when, where and why of and for the integrity of the intel used to make these statements and then maybe I will listen.
                                                                        Anything to do with intel at this point will somehow have a Bush/Cheney thumb print and we know how skewed things have been under that administration!

                                                                        {"commentId":4157555,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"helmasri"}
                                                                          Reply#49 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 3:07 PM EST
                                                                          {"commentId":4166211,"authorDomain":"superlogi"}

                                                                          The article does come to some dubious conclusions, but suggesting Bush or Cheney had anything to do with them brands you as a silly twit.  After all, the intel we had before the Soviet breakup suggested that it was an economic powerhouse which was obvioiusly in error and that was intel created in the late 80's, early 90's.  Addtionally the CIA director who suggested the Iraqis had WMD's and that the information was a "slam dunk", was hired by Clinton, not to mention that the intelligence of 4 other countries corroborated that information.  Oh, and three of those countries were at odds with US policy towards Iraq.  So, while I'm not suggesting Bush didn't want to attack Iraq, there is absolutely no evidence he manufactured the intel on Iraq.  Time to get off that camel.

                                                                          {"commentId":4166211,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"superlogi"}
                                                                            #49.1 - Sat Nov 22, 2008 10:21 AM EST
                                                                            Reply
                                                                            {"commentId":4157814,"authorDomain":"REALITYCHCK"}

                                                                            One really fed up boomer

                                                                            You say that the Earth can sustain only 2 Billion people. What do you suggest we do with the other 4.7 Billion people now living?

                                                                            {"commentId":4157814,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"REALITYCHCK"}
                                                                              Reply#50 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 3:22 PM EST
                                                                              Reply
                                                                              {"commentId":4159108,"authorDomain":"rventurakean"}

                                                                              This is not a good article. If The world is going to be off of oil by 2025, how is Canada going to rise because of oil?

                                                                              {"commentId":4159108,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"rventurakean"}
                                                                                Reply#51 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 4:41 PM EST
                                                                                {"commentId":4159824,"authorDomain":"apostolu"}

                                                                                Good point. The way technological advances occur at a very fast rate, dependence on oil should be minimal by 2025. The study may have just used assumptions based on current situation with no account of future technology advances.

                                                                                {"commentId":4159824,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"apostolu"}
                                                                                  #51.1 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 5:28 PM EST
                                                                                  {"commentId":4163159,"authorDomain":"middimar"}

                                                                                  those technologies will be affordable only to few nations due to their price tags. If u wana run electric cars, u need to retrain auto shops to be able to repair those new cars, build chraging stations throughout the nation, and so on. You think nations that can barely keep up  buying old technologies to sustain their economies- will find any money to buy the best of the best?

                                                                                  by that time (2025) prices will drop (i predict) due to higher production andlower consumption by US and European nations. This is when the developing nations will see a boom in their economies, since they are going to be the #1 consumers of crude oil by that time.

                                                                                  But on the other hand, oil is money, money is money in any part of the world. So US has high reserves that are gold mines. So many politicians would even create problems for those companies who miht try to go green.

                                                                                  {"commentId":4163159,"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873","authorDomain":"middimar"}
                                                                                    #51.2 - Fri Nov 21, 2008 11:04 PM EST
                                                                                    Reply
                                                                                    Jump to discussion page: 1 2 3
                                                                                    {"canLink":false,"threadId":"424855","isPrivate":false}
                                                                                    Leave a Comment:
                                                                                    You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                                                                    As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                                                                                    {"threadId":"424855","contentId":"2134873"}
                                                                                    Start TrackingStart Tracking
                                                                                    Stop TrackingStop Tracking