[Hoot Gibson]

Ok, so like always there is so much to clean up in this thread. You all bounce from topic to topic in each thread. So lets go to the unions. Hoot and TRT how does right to work strengthen unions?

So dealing with jobs, Biden's idea with producing cars with lithium batteries (just an idea that is point, but was on his platform, think of it was Trump Building a wall, therefore, I personally do not put stock into it, but none the less it is his platform). This idea is suppossed to have the effect of 1 million new jobs).

In the idea of government spending to prop up companies, the defense department probably would like to weigh in on this topic.

In the idea of government leading scientific research, I give you NASA.

In the pipeline, is it not true the pipeline would cut across the heartland of the US where the food supply is mostly grown. If there was a leak in that area what does it do to the US?

The right to work strengthens individuals, not unions. It is the responsibility of unions to sell individuals on the value of union membership, not the government's.

Australia, Chile, and China dominate the world's production of lithium. The U.S. ranks no better than 8th. China (including Hong Kong) also leads the world in the production of lithium-ion batteries. Biden seems determined to do everything in his power to strengthen China's position in the world, both economically and militarily.

China will increase its manufacturing capacity and increase its use energy produced from fossil fuels so that the U.S. government can subsidize the use of more expensive non-fossil fuel energy sources. The net result will be higher CO2 emissions and a less competitive U.S. manufacturing sector.

The Constitution requires that the federal government provide for the security and defense of the nation. Using a competitive bidding process among private companies is more efficient than the government owning manufacturing plants. Subsidizing companies to avoid being solely dependent on foreign companies during war time makes sense. Subsidizing companies for political reasons is nonsense.

Space travel and launching private satellites into orbit became cost effective only after opening the market to private enterprise and competition. NASA is not as great of an example as you seem to believe. Sometimes government needs to do basic research where there is no profit motive for the private sector, but such expenditures often result in zero return on the investment. In most cases, the greatest innovation in technology has been the result of private individuals and companies recognizing potential market appeal of a product, manufacturing it, and then selling it.

It is unlikely that a pipeline leak would be any more damaging to the environment than one of Warren Buffet's trains hauling petroleum wrecking. Buffet donates large sums of money to Democrat campaigns in exchange for political decisions that are contrary to the public interest, such as the one that Biden made regarding the pipeline. The people who will lose their jobs are just out of luck because they could not muster a better bid for Biden's services.