Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (3206)	11/29/2008 11:52:42 AM
From: Eric	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86352

You hit the nail on the head again. Ignorance. The scientific illiteracy of most of our citizens is simply shocking. No wonder we cannot make good decisions.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (3206)	11/29/2008 3:43:27 PM
From: Sam	Respond to of 86352

Bob's problem is that he has adopted a perma-skeptic, like this: Global warming is a hoax. Even if it isn't a hoax, it isn't due to human activities. Even if it is due to human activities, we couldn't do anything about it. Even if we could do something about it, we won't do anything about it. Even if we could have done something about at some point in the past, it is too late to do anything now. All IMHO from past experience.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (3206)	11/29/2008 9:13:20 PM
From: Bearcatbob	Respond to of 86352

"Take all of that into account and I'd bet alternatives would start to look very competitive." Now - talk about a subsidized industry. Yup - let's be holistic - I am all for it - and truthful as well.

To: RetiredNow who wrote (3206)	12/2/2008 3:29:12 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86352

and then you don't address the massive subsidies our government makes to keep oil priced as low as possible If you count all the taxes paid by producers and consumers of oil and refined products, the net flow is to the government not from it, so the "subsidies" are negative. If you don't count that tax revenue the subsidies are still much less per unit of energy than they are most alternatives. In economics, we price in externalities so that the true costs are known and accounted for in the market place. By definition an externality isn't accounted for in the market price. -- The military costs are not subsidies or externalities, and would mostly be incurred if we didn't import or even didn't ue any oil. The environmental impact is an externality, but not a subsidy. As for below market leases, that's rather questionable. Below market, implies that the government could give the leases to someone else for more money, but without he demand from the oil companies you wouldn't even have a market in much of these areas. Also there are royalties, and other payments to state and federal governments for this oil, not just the lease payments. As for "direct tax subsidies", the only thing that approaches that is more rapid depreciation, but that's mainly a time value of money benefit. The cost officially gets recognized sooner, but the costs aren't higher, over time. Yes getting money 5 years from now instead of today, is a real cost to the government, but its a much lower cost than never getting the same money, and shouldn't be counted as if it was the same.