I think there is a somewhat naive notion that if we all ran electric cars or hydrogen vehicles that all our foreign policy escapades would go away. I think there would still be wars, and jockying for control and power. I just hope that we can someday get past this through effective internationalist institutions like the UN and make closed authoritarian institutions like the WTO more open and democratic. That is the way out of these wars in my opinion.

Make your comment box a little taller, it will make editing and posting one’s comments a little easier. Perhaps 10-12 rows high instead of 4

Change this line of code
textarea name=”comment” id=”comment” cols=”60″ rows=”4″ tabindex=”4″

into

textarea name=”comment” id=”comment” cols=”60″ rows=”10″ tabindex=”4″

Here is a fairly succint description of Kennedy’s position on pollution and subsidy. He has some good points about farming in Idaho and the nuclear industry. I think this is basically true. Subsidy avoids the true economic cost of production and ultimately leads to wasteful inefficiency. But obviously this is not an absolute. I think it is helpful to draw a distinction between investment and subsidy. Obviously, certain industries really need to reach a critical mass to achieve specific economies of scale and it corollary efficiencies. Perhaps the solution lies in coming up with very tight sunset provisions in the appropriations process. We should fund new innovative projects, research, and technologies. Everything needs seed money, works that way with venture captial in the tech world, and R&D in energy industries. I am all for some federal spending or tax breaks to get Bio Diesel, renewable wind energy, lesser environmentally destructive dam building etc. but there has to be explicit limits on it. If after a number of years or dollars an industry or technology cannot acutally be self sufficient, and more importantly environmentally sustainable, then perhaps the industry or technology should just die a graceful death. This goes for nuclear as well. If these power plants can operating in a safe and cost effective way so be it but if they are wholely dependent on subsidies for operational costs then we need to look at that.

@3 Oliver I totally agree. Not enough attention is paid to the real costs of things. This is why I am in favor of a universal recycling program. There should be a recycle bin everywhere there is a trash can. Apart from the environmental benefits, it creates awareness. If someone is visually confronted with a recycle bin and a trash can then they will have to think about trash and reuse etc. I see so much waste and affluence/effluence in this country it boggles the mind. I just drove down to Arizona from Washington. I had some bottled juice with me. I had to drive all the way to the freaking Grand Canyon to even recycle the bottles. Very discouraging. I am sure there are other areas and industries where we can call attention to the waste and process and true economic cost. Why do things have to be artificially cheap? Because we are afraid of a little economic disruption?

From this angle, then, the “subsidies” for nuclear power or some alternative energy doesn’t seem so bad.

Regarding WA’s minimum wage, I think it’s one of the finest aspects of living in this state. I’m proud of our state government for doing it, and I have not one ounce of sympathy for businesses who cry about it. The only shame is that all states don’t have similar minimum wage levels.