....
It
isn't money we need to splash all over the problems.
If you do an analysis
of all the detriment caused by
the combustion engine,
then insert in a different
engine, you'll see
that there
will be a fundamental
reduction
in poverty when we correct the engine equation.
Sachs is working
the issue from the wrong side.
He's trying to "head
butt" the beast.
Sir,
if you take a little time to look closely at our
present vehicles
you'll reach the same conclusion
as I have:
our
present engines are patched engines.
They're grossly
wasteful & inefficient... so wasteful
they
had to have a cooling system built around them
to
make them work
without melting into slag.
My
engine does away with all that... because it achieves
a near 100% efficiency.
Some think greater than that.
Instead
of throwing trillions at health<after-the-fact>care,
the new engine makes
people healthier, reducing health
care costs. Sachs
is right. Everything could be fixed as
he says in just
a few years. He just tries to do it
-like you said-
from the 1960's side of the coin.
We need a new coin.
A new paradigm solution.
Our
problems, again as you said, are at the bottom,
the
base, the $150,000.00 per child... so the solution has
to
be at the same place. Each child grows up needing Energy.
Each
child comes with an automatic Energy Debt.
When
we solve that, everything spirals upward
from
that point on. And Sachs will see the
economic
reversal he knows is possible.
Woodrow Riley 6/26/2005
