If America Had Of Taken Carter's Advice Back In The 70s?

And had of started seriously developing alternative fuels sources back in the 70s when he was in office, would we ALL be a lot better off today?





Sort of puts egg all over the faces of those who like to take cheap shots at him, doesn't it?If America Had Of Taken Carter's Advice Back In The 70s?
I don't recall ever hearing that everything Carter tried to do was wrong.


Creation of the Department of Energy came as a response to the so called gas shortage in the 1970's. This, in my opinion was one of the best things Carter ever did. So far though things are not working the way Carter had hoped, in the past 40 years the democrats have voted down almost every bill that would have led to alternative fuels or drilling in our own soil for oil that is already under our land, bowing to pressure of the tree huggers.If America Had Of Taken Carter's Advice Back In The 70s?
But we had gasoline shortages because of Carter's price controls, and OPEC's one-time stunt couldn't last. When oil traded at $10/bbl it made no sense to develop alternatives. That capital was instead used to develop other things - - like computers.





All investments are made from a range of choices. It's easy to say ';it'd be better if we had invested in X'; (assuming that the technology was in fact there) but you have to consider that an investment in X means less, or no, investment in Y.





It'd be nice if the Red Sox had Mark Teixera but whether that would be better is not a matter of adding his numbers to the Red Sox' present numbers, but rather adding his numbers AND SUBTRACTING Mike Lowell's numbers or Kevin Youkilis' numbers.
Where's your sources ? Anyway, Yes, it would be nice, but at that time, both the UAW and the ';Big Three'; were trying to take back market-share from the Japanese by producing the biggest, fanciest, cars and trucks possible. The US manufacturers attempts to build an economical car, resulted in complete jokes, like the Pinto, the Vega, and the Chrysler ';K-cars';.


Also, Big Oil had everyone in their pocket, in both State and Federal Politics, and Big Oil's idea of conservation, was to shut-down their producing wells, so they could peddle the expensive stuff from OPEC, and quadruple their profits.


It would have been nice, but sadly, Jimmy lost his political clout with the ';Great Malaise'; speech, combined with his refusal to compromise with Congress on a single issue.


Sometimes, a ';Man-of-Principle'; can be his own worst enemy!
I was around during Carter. He was Jerk then, he's a jerk now and he'll always be a jerk. He manufactured a gasoline shortage in the 70's, he gave Iran the Government they have to day and the means by which to produce the nukes, and he and Clinton gave N Korea the nukes they have. Don,t ever hold Carter up for a pat on the back. If anything he should be in jail instead of shooting his big mouth off.
The only reason the ideas got nowhere, were because of environmentalists, lobbyists, and big corp...............I must say, the same is happening in this day and age. An agenda is pushed upon us by those who will fill their pockets. THAT IS A FACT. Doesn't matter which side of the agenda, they all act alike. Our Politicians are no better either.
We would we have had a thirty year jump on energy independence! I'd even go so far as to say that WTC bombings and 9/11 might not have happened either because with a goal of breaking our dependence on OPEC, the US might not have needed to pursue such an interventionist foreign policy in order to secure an oil supply.





Here's an interesting comparison of the Carter and Bush Energy Plans:


-- April 18, 1977


http://www.mnforsustain.org/energy_speec鈥?/a>


-- 28 Years Later - a comparison:


http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0503鈥?/a>
Yes we would and the Middle East would be a non-issue for us right now. Nor us to them as they'd have no reason to hate us because we wouldn't be trying so desperately to get their oil.





But the ';American Way of Life'; was non-negotiable according to Reagan and so Americans went with the candidate that supported their ever more spending and wasteful habits.
It was the ideal time to construct nuclear power plants.





But, the environmentalists didn't want nuclear. Carter backed down, as usual.





The problem with alternate fuel sources now, and more so then, is that they are much more expensive than coal, gas, and oil.
Nope. Even today all the crap from B.O. is pie in the sky...





Solar - Technology is in its infancy





Wind - No infrastructure





Clean coal - An oxymoron








Carter was and is still an idiot.
Carter was ahead of his time, unfortunatly he inherited a lot of problems caused before him: stagflation and iran





He also warned against spending over your means and getting into debt.
What, like ethanol, which pollutes worse than fossil fuels and ruins car engines? Alternative YES. Smart NO.
Not really. Carter suggested alternative fuels but never followed through with any concrete plans for that.
If America Had Of Taken Carter's Advice Back In The 70s there would be no America today. Thanks for the laugh.
Yes. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Undoubtably
Why not just admit we took 40+ years of untapped oil reserves? And let businesses take care of the rest?





Thank you Bush.
So true, but the republicans had a better plan.
yes it does





f8ck big oil





diesel rules!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
We would be in a much better position.
UH! not really..