End Green Energy Subsidies Now!

[bripat9643]

The claim that we subsidize oil companies is 95% horseshit. For one thing, oil companies pay hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes. What taxes do these so-called "green energy" companies pay?

Yeah, what a great idea Rabbi!
Respiratory diseases are on the rise and Respiratory Therapist are in demand.
===================================================
Best Health Care Jobs
Respiratory Therapist
Respiratory Therapist Job Overview Best Jobs US News Careers
AIR QUALITY
http://www.lung.org/assets/documents/publications/solddc-chapters/air-quality.pdf
=====================================================
Yup, I think this country should go backwards and go with ancient technology. Let's not move forward to make a better life of us, our children and our future generations!
This is what it means to "take our country back"?

So are you in favor of wasteful corporate welfare to green energy producers or not? I can't tell from your garble.

That "garble" was simplistic enough that a grade schooler could figure it out.
And yeah, we should invest in energy technology research for the long-term welfare of our country's citizens.

How is a boondoggle in the the best interests of the country's citizens?

 

[CowboyTed]

Hardly. Oil is set to run out by the end of the century, even by the most generous forecasts. Removing green energy subsidies wouldn't help America adapt to the eventual fossil fuels crash. Sunlight should last several billion years, and hydrogen fuel cells aren't that far off from replacing oil in cars either.

There is no evidence that oil will run out. People were saying that in 1976.
Having green energy subsidies will not help America become energy independent either.

Even the oil industry believe the oil will eventually run out, and are investing in alternative fuels. A lot of the technology for extraction wasn't there in the 70s, and they hadn't done as much oil exploration. Most respectable scientists put peak oil near the middle of this century, and expect oil sources to be used up by the end of the century.

Green Energy subsidies help support the construction of wind farms, solar panels, bio-fuels, and otherwise encourage the use of the renewable energy. Shell, BP, and so on have no issues with them, and frankly any argument on removing energy subsidies, be it towards fossil fuels or green energy, and so on - ultimately is about removing artificial factors in the economy. But I would be hard pressed to find anything wrong with green energy subsidies, beyond the premise of involuntary taxation.

We were said to reach peak oil about 15 years ago. Or maybe 20. Whatever it is, the notion has been blown away decisively.
ZThe subsidies distort the market for energy and channel resources into inefficient endeavors, costing the economy overall in addition to subsidies.
If oil starts to run out the market will signal shortages and green energy will become economically feasible. No need to pour money down that well.

Peak Oil has not been 'blown away decisively', it is always going to be contentious as it relies on estimates of oil supplies, and on estimates over extraction costs.

And they've been consistently wrong for about 40 years.

Forgot to mention the elephant in the room.

The biggest Oil subsidy is Iraq War...

The U.S. war in Iraq has cost $1.7 trillion with an additional $490 billion in benefits owed to war veterans, expenses that could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next four decades counting interest, a study released on Thursday said

If even a small part of that was used on renewables subsidies we would have a different landscape in a decade...

Rabbi, you have been beaten so bad here your looking like a clown.

 

[Politico]

Well that wasnt really my question. So I guess you need to find a grade schooler to help you with my posts.

The US subsidizes wind power for example in the billions every year. They siubsidize ethanol as well btw in a variety fo ways.
With cheaper traditional fuel the gap in cost will get bigger and bigger. Should we continue to subsidize green energy when the money could be better spent on other things. Like making sure we have a military capable of fighting wars.

A grade schooler knows that the gubbermint subsidizes big oil to the tune of billions more than green energy each year. And they are making money. Yet nowhere in the last 11 pages have you answered the people asking whether you think those subsidies should be ended as well. Do you?

 

[The Rabbi]

Green energy has always been more expensive than traditional fuels. Which is why the industry wouldn't exist without extensive gov't subsidies. Those subsidies cost taxpayers real money and distort the market for energy. Wind power has been subsidized since the 1980s (maybe more)..
Especially now with oil prices plunging due to increased production (take that, you "we're running out of oil" milquetoasts) the difference between green and traditional energy is even more.
Time to pull the plug on this expensive waste of taxpayer resource.

No, you're wrong as usual. Instead of following your stupid fucking suggestions what we ought to do is devote massive resources into research and development of new energy technologies so that this country can lead the way into the 21st century instead of lagging behind with the energy solutions and technology of the 19th century.

As usual a bunch of assertions and emotion. Do you ever argue with logic and facts? Try it sometime.

 

[The Rabbi]

We can do better than fossil fuels or nuclear, it's just a matter of how much money and resources we want to devote into developing it. Green energy has doubled in efficiency on average every five years and shows every indication of evolving even faster in the future. Fossil fuels and nuclear have no such potential.

See, this is the problem with libs. THey throw out a factoid like that and make assumptions.
The truth is that green energy is massively more expensive than traditional energy. It doesnt matter that it is gettig cheaper. It would need to get massively cheaper to be competitive. And there is no way for that to happen. Idiots assume present trends continue at the same rate. It ijust isnt so.
So idiots like Disconnected think we should spend massive amounts on unproven inefficient technology. That of course leaves less money to spend on things like defense, crime prevention, feeding hungry people, providing shelter or education. Because resources arent unlimited.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well that wasnt really my question. So I guess you need to find a grade schooler to help you with my posts.

The US subsidizes wind power for example in the billions every year. They siubsidize ethanol as well btw in a variety fo ways.
With cheaper traditional fuel the gap in cost will get bigger and bigger. Should we continue to subsidize green energy when the money could be better spent on other things. Like making sure we have a military capable of fighting wars.

A grade schooler knows that the gubbermint subsidizes big oil to the tune of billions more than green energy each year. And they are making money. Yet nowhere in the last 11 pages have you answered the people asking whether you think those subsidies should be ended as well. Do you?

Bullshit. If a grade schooler knows that it's because he's been brainwashed by his idiot lefty teacher.
In fact there are no subsidies for Big Oil. Which in fact pays huge amounts to both federal and state treasuries.

 

[Seawytch]

Let's turn every road into a toll road. I mean, why are our taxes going to pay for the paving and upkeep of roads we never drive on. Let's see what happens when people have to pay directly to get their streets paved.

How is that even relevant to the OP?
Do you support subsidies for green power or not?

I absolutely and enthusiastically and wholeheartedly support subsidies for green power. Perhaps you want to see the Chinese and the Germans beat the US to the punch when it comes to developing the cutting edge technology that will allow them to capture the emerging market in renewable energy. I don't.

I think that ship may have sailed...

 

[LordBrownTrout]

There are no subsidies in the oil industry. That's just more media sensationalism.

 

[kaz]

Fine, lets end them for oil companies too.

I notice that you failed to provide actual figures.

What subsidies do oil companies get? Are you referring to allowing them to write off their expenses again?

Only a liberal is too stupid to understand the difference between government giving out money and a business not paying income tax on it's expenses, which means it isn't income.

 

[kaz]

Green energy has always been more expensive than traditional fuels. Which is why the industry wouldn't exist without extensive gov't subsidies. Those subsidies cost taxpayers real money and distort the market for energy. Wind power has been subsidized since the 1980s (maybe more)..
Especially now with oil prices plunging due to increased production (take that, you "we're running out of oil" milquetoasts) the difference between green and traditional energy is even more.
Time to pull the plug on this expensive waste of taxpayer resource.

Let's eliminate them while eliminating all other subsides.

 

[kaz]

Let's turn every road into a toll road. I mean, why are our taxes going to pay for the paving and upkeep of roads we never drive on. Let's see what happens when people have to pay directly to get their streets paved.

How is that even relevant to the OP?
Do you support subsidies for green power or not?

I absolutely and enthusiastically and wholeheartedly support subsidies for green power. Perhaps you want to see the Chinese and the Germans beat the US to the punch when it comes to developing the cutting edge technology that will allow them to capture the emerging market in renewable energy. I don't.

Hmm..talk about pulled out of your ass. So in your mind, if government doesn't do it, then it doesn't happen. Our government isn't paying for green power, so we'll lose. When has that happened before, Skippy? That US can't compete unless government funds it?

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Under a true free market there are no subsidies or market barriers. Green energy subsidies are what help the US become more energy independent, and fund renewable energy sources. They are more beneficial than subsides to fossil fuels, which will run out by the end of the century. If America gets rid of any subsidies however, agriculture subsidies and oil subsidies cost America the most.

The problem is so called green energy is costly and inefficient. And it is a mere drop in the ocean as compared to our actual energy needs.

What specifically are you referring to?

You are making a blanket statement without regard to what type of green energy.

Ethanol isnt even green, so what are the other power sources you are refering to?

Help me out, because, as per usual, the green haters are not presenting facts to back up their assertions, just opinion.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

There are no subsidies in the oil industry. That's just more media sensationalism.

So, oil companies paying 11% is good for America?

Make them pay taxes and lower the middle classes, you will not even feel it at the pump.

 

[CowboyTed]

Fine, lets end them for oil companies too.

I notice that you failed to provide actual figures.

What subsidies do oil companies get? Are you referring to allowing them to write off their expenses again?

Only a liberal is too stupid to understand the difference between government giving out money and a business not paying income tax on it's expenses, which means it isn't income.

Posted this earlier, you may have missed this:

Forgot to mention the elephant in the room.

The biggest Oil subsidy is Iraq War...

The U.S. war in Iraq has cost $1.7 trillion with an additional $490 billion in benefits owed to war veterans, expenses that could grow to more than $6 trillion over the next four decades counting interest, a study released on Thursday said
If even a small part of that was used on renewables subsidies we would have a different landscape in a decade...

We are talking trillions.... Developing a clean renewable at home means none of this crap...

 

[LordBrownTrout]

There are no subsidies in the oil industry. That's just more media sensationalism.

So, oil companies paying 11% is good for America?

Make them pay taxes and lower the middle classes, you will not even feel it at the pump.

I work in exploration and development petroleum. I look at P and L's and tax receipts all day long. There are no subsidies. We receive the same tax provisions that all companies are afforded in the US tax code laws. If I drill dry holes, nobody gives me any compensation for the money it cost to drill that dry hole.

 

[zeke]

United States[edit]
Allocation of subsidies in the United States[edit]
A 2011 study by the consulting firm Management Information Services, Inc. (MISI)[19] estimated the total historical federal subsidies for various energy sources over the years 1950–2010. The study found that oil, natural gas, and coal received $369 billion, $121 billion, and $104 billion (2010 dollars), respectively, or 70% of total energy subsidies over that period. Oil, natural gas, and coal benefited most from percentage depletion allowances and other tax-based subsidies, but oil also benefited heavily from regulatory subsidies such as exemptions from price controls and higher-than-average rates of return allowed on oil pipelines. The MISI report found that non-hydro renewable energy (primarily wind and solar) benefited from $74 billion in federal subsidies, or 9% of the total, largely in the form of tax policy and direct federal expenditures on research and development (R&D). Nuclear power benefited from $73 billion in federal subsidies, 9% of the total, largely in the form of R&D, while hydro power received $90 billion in federal subsidies, 12% of the total.






Hey rabbit. You should go after wiki for being able to post shit like this that you claim is wrong. Maybe you could do the edit to set them straight. Cause everybody don't seem to know that the oil and gas industry doesn't receive any subsidies.

 

[kaz]

The biggest Oil subsidy is Iraq War...

We are talking trillions....

Word games. Look dude. I'm a libertarian who is against being in the middle east at all. And I agree also that we would not be there but for oil. We aren't in places like Indochina or Africa that have pretty bad regions that don't have oil. However, to call the Iraq war a "subsidy" for oil companies is pretty stupid. It's a broad policy with broad implications supported by both parties.

And it's definitely not what idiot cabbie was referring to in his quote. He was referring to allowing oil companies to write off their expenses and not grasping the difference between that and handing them money. Which is what you want to do, just to different companies, as you said in your next sentence.

Developing a clean renewable at home means none of this crap...

Ideologue to the end. No, it doesn't, it means flushing trillions down the toilet. It is fracking that gives us actually cost effective energy independence, but that isn't part of your world, only government is part of your world. You love that renewable energy isn't economically viable on a large scale, that gives government the pretext to control it. When it is economically viable, the market will provide it on their own. That will be a terrible day for you as they won't need government.

Fracking is the real solution. It gets us out of the middle east and it also gets us out of government chosen winners and losers and to true, sustainable energy independence. Renewable energy will grow, but not by throwing government money at it. Then again, renewable energy isn't the actual goal of the left, government control is.

 

[kaz]

There are no subsidies in the oil industry. That's just more media sensationalism.

So, oil companies paying 11% is good for America?

Make them pay taxes and lower the middle classes, you will not even feel it at the pump.

I work in exploration and development petroleum. I look at P and L's and tax receipts all day long. There are no subsidies. We receive the same tax provisions that all companies are afforded in the US tax code laws. If I drill dry holes, nobody gives me any compensation for the money it cost to drill that dry hole.

Yes, I spent quite a few years at GE Energy including Nuclear and Energy Services. Mad Cabbie doesn't know what he is talking about. He never does.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

United States[edit]
Allocation of subsidies in the United States[edit]
A 2011 study by the consulting firm Management Information Services, Inc. (MISI)[19] estimated the total historical federal subsidies for various energy sources over the years 1950–2010. The study found that oil, natural gas, and coal received $369 billion, $121 billion, and $104 billion (2010 dollars), respectively, or 70% of total energy subsidies over that period. Oil, natural gas, and coal benefited most from percentage depletion allowances and other tax-based subsidies, but oil also benefited heavily from regulatory subsidies such as exemptions from price controls and higher-than-average rates of return allowed on oil pipelines. The MISI report found that non-hydro renewable energy (primarily wind and solar) benefited from $74 billion in federal subsidies, or 9% of the total, largely in the form of tax policy and direct federal expenditures on research and development (R&D). Nuclear power benefited from $73 billion in federal subsidies, 9% of the total, largely in the form of R&D, while hydro power received $90 billion in federal subsidies, 12% of the total.






Hey rabbit. You should go after wiki for being able to post shit like this that you claim is wrong. Maybe you could do the edit to set them straight. Cause everybody don't seem to know that the oil and gas industry doesn't receive any subsidies.

Those are tax provisions and allowances that are afforded to every company under US tax code laws. Are y'all really this dense?

 

[kaz]

United States[edit]
Allocation of subsidies in the United States[edit]
A 2011 study by the consulting firm Management Information Services, Inc. (MISI)[19] estimated the total historical federal subsidies for various energy sources over the years 1950–2010. The study found that oil, natural gas, and coal received $369 billion, $121 billion, and $104 billion (2010 dollars), respectively, or 70% of total energy subsidies over that period. Oil, natural gas, and coal benefited most from percentage depletion allowances and other tax-based subsidies, but oil also benefited heavily from regulatory subsidies such as exemptions from price controls and higher-than-average rates of return allowed on oil pipelines. The MISI report found that non-hydro renewable energy (primarily wind and solar) benefited from $74 billion in federal subsidies, or 9% of the total, largely in the form of tax policy and direct federal expenditures on research and development (R&D). Nuclear power benefited from $73 billion in federal subsidies, 9% of the total, largely in the form of R&D, while hydro power received $90 billion in federal subsidies, 12% of the total.






Hey rabbit. You should go after wiki for being able to post shit like this that you claim is wrong. Maybe you could do the edit to set them straight. Cause everybody don't seem to know that the oil and gas industry doesn't receive any subsidies.

Those are tax provisions and allowances that are afforded to every company under US tax code laws. Are y'all really this dense?

Unfortunately, yes, they are. That Oil companies pay taxes just like other companies is way, way past their comprehension. Then again, what isn't past their comprehension? I haven't been able to establish a baseline yet, they fail every test of comprehension.