The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
13 Points
The Contender
olle15
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

government should intervene in the transition to alternative energy

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/27/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 833 times Debate No: 2241
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (6)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

why the government should intervene more with alternative fuel.

people say the market will take care of itself. in the end, it will. but at what cost in the mean time? we should act now because we'll look back and see how much we've wasted on gasoline.

companies say they can make alternative biodesial fuels for a dollar a gallon. (using algae farms, or any organic material using bacteria to make ethanol from hte cellulose material, switch grass and other things more entergy intensive than corn etc.. and exemplified by brazil etc who are energy dependant right now from gas)
but, there's a catch 22 occuring. comanyies make alternative companies but often must put operations on hold. why? because there's no demand. the consumers who make demand say there's no supply. who can afford as a consumer to buy altnernative vehicles? the richer. does the rising prices right now of gasoline hurt them? not as much so they don't buy. but, even if they bought cars sometimes as they are now, there's still not much there in way of an infrastructure for the supply side.
the rich won't start buying more until it really starting hurting them. the poor won't do it cause they can't. the middle won't do it, probaly for the same reason. it's conventional wisdom that the rich are the ones who start these new technologies... and the conventional wisdom is probably true here too.

but, unlike many situations with conventinoal wisdom... for altrnernative fuel, waiting till the rich start teh technology isn't in the best interest of the country right now. that's because... for many other things, like buying a DVD player... fuel isn't something that's simply a perk as much, and isn't such a regular and substantial cost for the consumer. it has a noticable affect on the economy. fuel is the opposite.
while we're waiting for the rich to convert, what's happening? in the mean time, the poorer are spending their money on gas, or not being as productive as they could with cheaper gas or some gas at all. the middle class largely too. consider all that money they're spending on that, when they could be spending on an array of other things. all that money could have been going to the economy at large, instead of the pockets and costs of a few. (and foreignors, which is a major concern in and of itself)

to make it more of a practical example. say a new biodesial machine at a gas station costs fifty thousand. all that money that the poorer are wasting right now would have been more than enough to either subsidize or lend to that station. (you could lend the money to them... and ensur ethey make a tidy profit before they ever have to pay it back, if ever considering there's a risk they might not make money) if we invested in them as a government then, the effects would be much sooner, and the poorer and middle class would save more, and it'd be a boon to the economy. (plus all the jobs involved with the transitioning infrastructure) there'd be so much savings, you could even lend or subsidize biodisal plants too, though it'd probably not be needed for them.

government intervention is the way to break the catch 22 sooner when it'll make a difference for hte economy, than later when we'll look back and see all that wealth that has been squandered.
olle15

Con

olle15 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
olle15

Con

Sorry for not making my first dead line anyways back to the debate.

First off you are wrong about going green being to expensive in fact you usually save money going green the first expense may be a little higher than than usual but over all you save money. But you are right we can't wait for the rich because it's never gonna happen because whats in is not the ugly gas saver but the big cool flashy shows you have money gas guzzlers. What we really need is for the gov't to inform us on how easy and cheap it really is to go green instead of us having to the info out of research. The resources are there we just need to start using them.

Your turn
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

dairygirl4u2c forfeited this round.
olle15

Con

olle15 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by sadolite 9 years ago
sadolite
If you want alternative fuel, offer a prize of 100 billion dolars, you'll have it by the end of the week.
Posted by Derrida 9 years ago
Derrida
Olle15, just a reminder. You haven't actually posted anything in the debate you decided to take up with me.

If you're not going to post anything more, can you at least give me a reason for this?
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
dairygirl4u2colle15Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by sadolite 8 years ago
sadolite
dairygirl4u2colle15Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
dairygirl4u2colle15Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by dairygirl4u2c 9 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
dairygirl4u2colle15Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by YummyYummCupcake 9 years ago
YummyYummCupcake
dairygirl4u2colle15Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by kato0291 9 years ago
kato0291
dairygirl4u2colle15Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30