The time has come for an all out effort ($100+B) to come out with much higher (1000+ Wh/Kg) e-energy storage units by 2020.

To many, it is more important than going to Mars or other similar places.

A temporary (10 to 20 years) levy on fossil fuels could be used to pay for the development and mass production facilities for higher energy density storage units. It would be a much better investment than the current $100B/year oil wars.

Couldn't agree more.

Yup, but that would be "socialism"! :-))

That's not socialism
That's what all governments (and our in particular) are supposed to be for.

Our preamble says; ” .. provide for the common defence .. ”.

One administration invades another country; the next does little but try to nationalize medicine.

The long term ROI from that $100+B investment would dwarf the Oil war expenses many times. Bush etc, what a waste of Trillions the past decade...

"Our preamble says; ” .. provide for the common defense .. ”

The annual US minimum wage is $14,500 per person and health care costs top $8,000 per person. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/02/24/health/main4824163.shtml

A healthy citizenry is the greatest "common defense" and "..pursuit of happiness" - with all citizens having the same health care as their 'representatives.' - anything less is tyranny.

Battery research is minor to the medically uninsured 44,000 Americans murdered annually.

Kelley:

If USA could develop and mass produce lower cost very high performance batteries + electrified vehicles by investing $100B ++ now, the secondary benefits could be:

1) An quick end to very expensive oil wars.

2) A quick reduction in oil imports.

3) A quick reduction in the number of International terrorists.

4) Creation of many million new jobs.

5) Increased national wealth.

6) Reduced national trade deficits.

7) Quick reduction in national budget deficits.

8) Enough resources to pay for the national health care program and better schools.

How can we pass it up?

"waste of Trillions the past decade..."

Exactly, but that does not keep the oil companies, the Military Industrial Complex and their contractors happy. I figure that the last 8 years may have been the last gasp from old oil. They put their people in there to preserve and increase profits for a while longer. As the VP stated "it's not about the oil"... I am not sure there is anyone that believes that.

HarveyD,

"How can we pass it up?" Health first, besides:

On March 1, 2010, billionaire Warren Buffett (who is considered one of the world’s most savvy investors[52]) said that the high costs paid by U.S. companies for their employees’ health care put them at a competitive disadvantage. He compared the roughly 17% of GDP spent by the U.S. on health care with the 9% of GDP spent by much of the rest of the world, noted that the U.S. has fewer doctors and nurses per person, and said, “[t]hat kind of a cost, compared with the rest of the world, is like a tapeworm eating at our economic body.”[53]

Universal health care is already taxed for, cheaper, and only harms the medical insurance industry lobbying against it - as three dozen nations with better health care already know.

Kelley:

Well managed national health care do a decent job with 7% to 10% of the GDP in many countries. USA is up to almost 18% and many are not getting minimum cares while others, well to do, are getting the best. The latter group does not want to pay for others.

With the same reasoning, childless couples would refuse to pay school taxes?

However, the current cost of many medical acts and drugs are grossly excessive. WalMart should operate new medical facilities and sell generic drugs. Law suits should be restricted and/or limited to reduce the rediculously high ($250,000/yr) medical insurances that doctors have to pay.

"Life and Death" services aren't 'optional' or 'free market' and can't be made "for profit."

No nation does this with it's defense or defenders (or should battle wound health care be subject to the soldier showing his fully-paid private health insurance card while bleeding - like the US citizens he's defending must?), besides our fire departments, police services etc.

To do so would open the nation's public to blackmail, be it unending wars or no-bid contracts or limit-less medical expenses and soaring defense/medical/insurance services charges and profits - all leading more war/death and finally bankruptcy, revolt, and the like..

I can remember in 1993 Bob Dole said that health care was 8% of GDP and we should not mess with it. 17 years later it is more than 16% of a much larger GDP and I guess we are still not suppose to "mess" with it.

But the best part of the story is yet to come.

Later I saw a US politician explain why he was opposed to the healthcare reform. He didn't want a European style healthcare system that was patronizing.

But a system that forces you to see your doctor 6x as often than necessary (only out of fear for lawsuits) is not patronizing. Oh no.

What ignorance.