"bb" wrote in message
ups.com...
"In some ways it's the '60s all over again. Focusing on the wrong
problems and
fighting the wrong enemy. Most of all, a short-term point of view."

Jim, what are the right problems to focus on? Who is the right enemy?

It will be interesting to hear what your NPR trained mind will come up
with.


Well, if Jim (N2EY) doesn't mind me jumping in here ...

My own beliefs are that the free market is not necessarily the right place
for certain things. Would we have all of the nice communications satellites
if the government had not been in a space race with Russia (and spent many
billions of dollars)? Now, of course, it is moving into commercial market,
but without the government lead, I doubt we'd have nearly the communications
capability that we currently have.

The federal deficit is enormous; so is the imbalance of trade. I would
probably start (and get promptly voted out of the White House LOL) with
getting some experts and deciding and a good gasoline rationing plan (not
the odd/even stuff from the 70s).

Allow so many gallons per licensed driver in a household (no, you don't get
more because you have a truck, SUV, RV, two Jaguars and three motorcycles),
plus some additional for school age children. Take the numbers and come up
with a limit to reduce oil consumption by 10%. Each year, reduce it a bit
more. Some folks wouldn't use their allotment, and they'd be entitled to
turn it into an "open" account. They would receive cash equal to the
unpurchased gasoline. Anyone who wishes could purchase gasoline credits
from that account. The government would, of course, tack on about a 50%
tax, both to pay for this rationing plus bring a few extra dollars into the
treasury.

Over a few years, folks would be looking once again for fuel efficient
vehicles. If someone really wants to buy a Dodge Viper with a 500
horsepower 10 cylinder engine, they could. They could also expect to be
purchasing from that fund of unused gas rations (with the extra surcharge).
However, if we could reduce our dependence on foreign oil by 25 or 30
percent, we'd be in better shape (both in the trade balance department as
well as in better shape in case of an oil embargo).

Let us not kid ourselves, however. Currently, I believe we only produce 25%
of the oil we consume. I think it was a bit more than 50% back in the days
of the oil embargo.

This might be a reasonable place to start.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA
ps - not going to start with the FCC auctioning of spectrum. That is crazy
enough, but doesn't help the foreign trade deficit.