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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (530160)	11/18/2009 12:54:29 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574267

Mindmeld, > My definition of an expense is one where the money goes out the door with no expectation that there will be any return on that money. That contradicts with your view that Bush's tax cuts were an "expense." Bush's tax cuts were one half of a "stimulus" that fueled the growing economy of the past decade. Assuming you don't have a double-standard, you would have to admit that Bush's tax cuts were an "investment" and not an "expense." > In fact, we already have many renewable energy companies that are making profits. Without heavy support from the government, "renewable energy" is not a profit-making enterprise. Even the Toyota Prius isn't profitable on its own (though it does wonders for Toyota's image, which itself is invaluable). The bottom line is that solar and wind doesn't get you nearly enough energy as you can get from burning fossil fuels (or utilizing uranium). Tenchusatsu