Kaleidescope
New member
Couldn't the US government cut that money by half, then use half of what's remaining to eliminate the deficit and pay off debt?
Then there'd still be trillions left over that could be used for whatever the hell else. One of my ideas:
Building up a fund to switch from AC to DC. All of our electronics (Generators, pumps, batteries, etc) either must use DC current (they can't be built to use AC directly, a transformer must be used) or can use DC current. What this would do is allow computers, solar panels, cell phones, things with rechargeable batteries, etc to not have to have their own transformer to convert AC to DC power. Most new machines could be built to plug directly into the system, eliminating tons of energy wastage every second of every day. The price of consumer electronics would go down - way fewer transformers would have to be built. Future generators could all be made to make DC. There is no technical barrier to doing this, and it would cause:
-lower electric bills due to lower power consumption - especially in the average person's home
-lower costs for becoming independent of the grid; ie: solar panels will no long need to have a transformer to change the current from DC to AC...to only be changed back into DC again when used by a computer, etc.
-lower prices for consumer electronics due to the lack of a need to manufacture transformers for most things.
Basically, after the initial costs are spent, which can be built over time without increasing taxes, DC will lower costs for anyone who charges batteries or uses computer systems or uses solar panels along with other applications, for lifetimes to come. Additionally, the sheer number of transformers not manufactured and used, and thus energy not wasted and air/water/earth not polluted will greatly benifit the envrionment in the long term.
And there'd still be billions left over to lower taxes, or do whatever the hell else.
My question is, what do you think? Feel free to comment on my idea, or on the idea of cutting subsidies to all the sectors listed in the title to pay off the debt, etc.
I'd like to add, that for lighting, direct current could be run through the existing wiring and all the bulbs replaced with direct current; though incandescent bulbs prob wouldn't have to be replaced. For existing appliances and electronics, though, a new transformer would have to be bought so that it can handle whatever is placed on the direct current line. New appliances and electronics could be plugged in and run directly from the wall, thus having all the benefits listed before.
I personally would recommend 12V DC, since then someone could simply buy an adapter (not an inverter/transformer), and plug all their shit right into their car.
Note***: Please note that most of the existing wiring would not have to be replaced, along with generators. It's mostly just building lots of new transformers and lights to make the switch, which hopefully could be done in the country of origin (thus creating jobs). After that, fewer transformers would need to be made per device and much less electricity would be wasted, resulting in long term savings for everyone but electric and transformer companies.
By that money in the first sentence, I mean the money spent on the stuff in the title. Half of what's remaining I think would be more than enough to eliminate the deficit and pay off the debt.
Then there's still the other half of what's remaining, some of which I think could be spent on my idea.
@TheOnlyBeldin
Yah, that's a real problem.
@obama Downgraded America
Everything produces revenue. By reverting the companies that do what I mentioned above back to capitalism, the ones that waste money would die off resulting in an economic downturn as people panic. However, if initiatives to spend money of projects (like going green, redoing the North American grid, construction, and environmental cleanup more jobs will be created than lost among nearly every educational level, even though under technical terms we will be in a recession. The growth model will not be nessesary to economic stability, and after a few years people will realize that and invest in the economy thus boosting all sectors.
The reason that this would work is that a smaller percentage of GDP is needed to be placed in the government's hands with this hypothetical system than the current system.
@Don't fear the Reaper
I think that you might be reffering to a metaphor or simile with the word distance - DC power actually looses less energy than AC power as the distance increases and voltage does not have such an effect on it's energy loss compared with AC. If what you say is true about the cables though: that they would have to be thicker than AC, then the wiring might have to be replaced making my idea almost unfeasable.
Also, most computers run on DC power. Nearly every device now has a computer in it. In many applications, what I thought was still good but you do have a point, especially on industrial systems.
Then there'd still be trillions left over that could be used for whatever the hell else. One of my ideas:
Building up a fund to switch from AC to DC. All of our electronics (Generators, pumps, batteries, etc) either must use DC current (they can't be built to use AC directly, a transformer must be used) or can use DC current. What this would do is allow computers, solar panels, cell phones, things with rechargeable batteries, etc to not have to have their own transformer to convert AC to DC power. Most new machines could be built to plug directly into the system, eliminating tons of energy wastage every second of every day. The price of consumer electronics would go down - way fewer transformers would have to be built. Future generators could all be made to make DC. There is no technical barrier to doing this, and it would cause:
-lower electric bills due to lower power consumption - especially in the average person's home
-lower costs for becoming independent of the grid; ie: solar panels will no long need to have a transformer to change the current from DC to AC...to only be changed back into DC again when used by a computer, etc.
-lower prices for consumer electronics due to the lack of a need to manufacture transformers for most things.
Basically, after the initial costs are spent, which can be built over time without increasing taxes, DC will lower costs for anyone who charges batteries or uses computer systems or uses solar panels along with other applications, for lifetimes to come. Additionally, the sheer number of transformers not manufactured and used, and thus energy not wasted and air/water/earth not polluted will greatly benifit the envrionment in the long term.
And there'd still be billions left over to lower taxes, or do whatever the hell else.
My question is, what do you think? Feel free to comment on my idea, or on the idea of cutting subsidies to all the sectors listed in the title to pay off the debt, etc.
I'd like to add, that for lighting, direct current could be run through the existing wiring and all the bulbs replaced with direct current; though incandescent bulbs prob wouldn't have to be replaced. For existing appliances and electronics, though, a new transformer would have to be bought so that it can handle whatever is placed on the direct current line. New appliances and electronics could be plugged in and run directly from the wall, thus having all the benefits listed before.
I personally would recommend 12V DC, since then someone could simply buy an adapter (not an inverter/transformer), and plug all their shit right into their car.
Note***: Please note that most of the existing wiring would not have to be replaced, along with generators. It's mostly just building lots of new transformers and lights to make the switch, which hopefully could be done in the country of origin (thus creating jobs). After that, fewer transformers would need to be made per device and much less electricity would be wasted, resulting in long term savings for everyone but electric and transformer companies.
By that money in the first sentence, I mean the money spent on the stuff in the title. Half of what's remaining I think would be more than enough to eliminate the deficit and pay off the debt.
Then there's still the other half of what's remaining, some of which I think could be spent on my idea.
@TheOnlyBeldin
Yah, that's a real problem.
@obama Downgraded America
Everything produces revenue. By reverting the companies that do what I mentioned above back to capitalism, the ones that waste money would die off resulting in an economic downturn as people panic. However, if initiatives to spend money of projects (like going green, redoing the North American grid, construction, and environmental cleanup more jobs will be created than lost among nearly every educational level, even though under technical terms we will be in a recession. The growth model will not be nessesary to economic stability, and after a few years people will realize that and invest in the economy thus boosting all sectors.
The reason that this would work is that a smaller percentage of GDP is needed to be placed in the government's hands with this hypothetical system than the current system.
@Don't fear the Reaper
I think that you might be reffering to a metaphor or simile with the word distance - DC power actually looses less energy than AC power as the distance increases and voltage does not have such an effect on it's energy loss compared with AC. If what you say is true about the cables though: that they would have to be thicker than AC, then the wiring might have to be replaced making my idea almost unfeasable.
Also, most computers run on DC power. Nearly every device now has a computer in it. In many applications, what I thought was still good but you do have a point, especially on industrial systems.