SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Don Hurst who wrote (591627)10/27/2010 7:51:34 PM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 1583493
 
In Spain we found that the economy, in fact, lost a net 2.2 jobs for every "green job" the state claimed credit for, just in an opportunity cost. That is, the private sector creates jobs much more efficiently than the state – less expensively and dedicated to produce goods and services that people really demand. We found the private section would have created that many more "real" jobs had the money not been removed and put toward politically divined ends. Think "stimulus jobs."
A Power Point presentation leaked from the Spain's socialist Zapatero government earlier this year actually suggests that the loss in terms of jobs is currently even higher.
In Spain we also found that green jobs mostly (9 out of 10) were temporary. That is, they are principally installation jobs. In Italy, researchers found that 4.8 jobs were lost for each green job created.

ocregister.com



To: Don Hurst who wrote (591627)10/27/2010 7:52:26 PM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation  Respond to of 1583493
 
Spain Has Spent About $1m Per Green Job; and Has Lost More Than 2 Jobs for Every Green Job Created
WASHINGTON -- The Spanish professor is puzzled. Why, Gabriel Calzada wonders, is the U.S. president recommending that America emulate the Spanish model for creating "green jobs" in "alternative energy" even though Spain's unemployment rate is 18.1%-- more than double the European Union average -- partly because of spending on such jobs?

Calzada, 36, an economics professor at Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, has produced a report which, if true, is inconvenient for the Obama administration's green agenda, and for some budget assumptions that are dependent upon it.

~George Will's column "Tilting at Green Windmills"

The following are key points from the "Study of the Effects on Employment of Public Aid to Renewable Energy Sources":

1. As President Obama correctly remarked, Spain provides a reference for the establishment of government aid to renewable energy. No other country has given such broad support to the construction and production of electricity through renewable sources. The arguments for Spain’s and Europe’s “green jobs” schemes are the same arguments now made in the U.S., principally that massive public support would produce large numbers of green jobs. The question that this paper answers is “at what price?”

2. We find that for every renewable energy job that the State manages to finance, Spain’s experience cited by President Obama as a model reveals with high confidence, by two different methods, that the U.S. should expect a loss of at least 2.2 jobs on average, or about 9 jobs lost for every 4 created, to which we have to add those jobs that non-subsidized investments with the same resources would have created.

3. The study calculates that since 2000 Spain spent €571,138 ($800,000) to create each “green job”, including subsidies of more than €1 million ($1.4 million) per wind industry job. The study calculates that the programs creating those jobs also resulted in the destruction of nearly 110,500 jobs elsewhere in the economy, or 2.2 jobs destroyed for every “green job” created.
mjperry.blogspot.com



To: Don Hurst who wrote (591627)10/27/2010 7:53:41 PM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation  Respond to of 1583493
 
Green Joblessness
Spain shows the follow of eco-employment policies.
Article
Comments
MORE IN OPINION »
EmailPrint
Save This
? More


+ More
Text
From today's Wall Street Journal Europe.

To little fanfare this month, BP closed a solar-cell factory in Madrid, laying off 480 workers. But wait, aren't "green-collar" jobs the wave of the future -- the kind of employment that will only grow and "can't be outsourced," as President Obama likes to say?

Spain happens to be the country that the President often cites as his role model for the Green Jobs Revolution. It's also the source of an important new study that explains how expensive these jobs are -- and why Spain's renewable-energy business is a bubble waiting to burst. The study, released last month by researchers at Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, uses data from the Spanish government and European Union to demonstrate that each job created in Spain's renewables industry costs as much as 2.2 jobs elsewhere in the economy.

The study's authors calculate that jobs in Spain's solar, wind and hydroelectric power industries were subsidized to the tune of more than €570,000 apiece from 2000 to 2008 -- a total exceeding €28.6 billion. And that figure only includes the extra cost to energy consumers of being forced by the government to buy renewable energy at prices several times higher than market rates for conventional power. The authors didn't calculate direct subsidies, such as grants to build solar farms, because the government doesn't even know how much money it has handed out to the renewables industry. But the direct-subsidies tally is at least €1.1 billion.

Some commentators have reported that Spain has lost 2.2 jobs for each job created by solar, wind or hydroelectric power producers. But the study instead is talking about opportunity cost -- the jobs that weren't created because resources were used inefficiently, or what the French economist Frédéric Bastiat meant by "what is seen and what is not seen."

Yet these "lost" jobs have a real impact, particularly when employment rolls are shrinking elsewhere. They're also politically pernicious, in that it's easier to point to a new green-collar worker than to the two or three people who remain unemployed because other jobs were crowded out.

What hasn't been reported in much detail from the Juan Carlos study is the way Spanish renewable-energy policy created an enormous investment bubble that may already be bursting. In many ways, this is the most important element of the report.

Since 2004, Spain's Socialist government has essentially guaranteed a huge return on any investment in solar, wind or hydro. It's done so by requiring electricity distributors to buy all renewable energy produced in the country, at prices that at times have been 10 times higher than market rates. This is known as a "feed-in price," and it has cost Spanish energy customers an extra €28.6 billion this decade.

Initially, the government set a regulated price for solar power of 575% of market rates for small producers and "only" 300% for larger ones. The result was a series of inefficient solar farms small enough to get the higher subsidy but often owned by the same companies. And not just by power companies: "builders, real estate companies, hotel groups and even truck manufacturers" got in on the action.

In 2007 the government finally tweaked the subsidy schedule to level the playing field for larger solar producers. Yet within four months, regulators realized that the mandated prices were still so generous that 85% of all solar-powered generating capacity due by 2010 was already in place. To rein in the market, Madrid passed still another law that sharply reduced incentives to build new solar capacity.

Firms had one year to get in under the old system, and, boy, did they work overtime to make it: Government data indicate that 83% of Spain's solar capacity was installed in those 12 months. That jump came after solar capacity had already grown by 118% in 2005, 308% in 2006, and 458% in 2007. In all, solar-power capacity in Spain grew by more than 20,000% from 2004 to 2008, a rate surpassed perhaps only by Zimbabwe's inflation.

If that's not a bubble, we don't know what is. And while it will be a few months longer before the effects of the new, stricter solar regime can be measured, it's not hard to predict sluggishness -- if not an outright bust.

Madrid's chosen method of curtailing solar-power growth is to set a quota for new installations, one that equals about 15% of the growth seen in 2008. That means the jolly green job fairy will soon be leaving: Two-thirds of the roughly 50,000 jobs created in renewables have been in construction, manufacturing and installation -- exactly the kind of growth that couldn't be maintained, and which Madrid is explicitly trying to curb now. Trade unions say the new law has already led to 15,000 solar job losses in just a few months -- and that was before the 480 that BP cut.

Some people might be tempted to conclude from Spain's experience that renewable-energy policies must simply be drawn up more tightly to avoid this kind of boom and bust. They'd be wrong.

Spanish policy shows that green dreams like renewable energy are achievable only through massive transfers of money from productive sectors to those seeking to get rich quick thanks to government mandates. And that the few jobs created greatly depend on maintaining impossible levels of growth. Even in Mr. Obama's Washington, you can't print enough greenbacks to pay for these green jobs.

online.wsj.com



To: Don Hurst who wrote (591627)10/27/2010 7:57:11 PM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 1583493
 
"The Democrats increased private sector jobs in the last nine months straight and shrunk the government's payroll."

which is a lie



To: Don Hurst who wrote (591627)10/27/2010 9:25:20 PM
From: longnshort  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1583493
 
another evil liberal bites the dust



ROWDY DEMOCRAT PROTESTER ARRESTED AT ERIC CANTOR CAMPAIGN APPEARANCE

what is wrong with you whackos ?

breitbart.tv



To: Don Hurst who wrote (591627)10/27/2010 9:28:02 PM
From: longnshort  Respond to of 1583493
 
AMAZING: MATTHEWS ACKNOWLEDGES DEMOCRAT CANDIDATE LIED TO HIM AND MAKES NO COMMENT

They call this "HARDBALL"?

breitbart.tv



To: Don Hurst who wrote (591627)10/27/2010 11:43:09 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1583493
 
Poll: Obama regains ground among independents, young

By STEVEN THOMMA
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON -- President Barack Obama has improved his standing among voters, and Democrats finally have started to energize their base, but it might be too little and too late to change the course of Tuesday's elections, according to a new McClatchy-Marist poll.

The national survey found that Obama's weeks of campaigning across the country have paid off with higher approval ratings for him, particularly among independents and the young and in the Northeast.

At the same time, Democratic voters now are more enthusiastic than they were at the beginning of October.

Still, Obama's overall approval rating remains split - 48 percent of registered voters approve of the way he's doing his job, while 43 percent disapprove. Among likely voters, the numbers are a shade worse, with 47 percent approving and 48 percent disapproving.

And while Democrats are more excited, they still lag well behind Republicans. Weeks before, Republicans enjoyed a whopping 23-point advantage - 51-28 - among those voters who say they're "very enthusiastic" about voting. Now, that Republican edge is 49-35 - narrower, but still a 14-point advantage for the Republicans.

"Although there's been some late movement toward the Democrats, we're still looking at likelihood of a new political reality after Tuesday," said Lee Miringoff, the director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion at Marist College, which conducted the poll.

"The president's approval rating has improved. The enthusiasm gap has narrowed. That is some reflection that things are getting a little bit more competitive. For the most part, that's where the good news for the Democrats ends."

While voters are signaling their anxiety - 54 percent say the country is headed in the wrong direction - that doesn't mean they want a new Republican Congress to reject Obama completely.

By a margin of 72-22, registered voters want Republicans to work with Obama to get things done rather than stand firm if it means gridlock. Among likely voters, the margin is 68-27.

Favoring bipartisan cooperation were 75 percent of independents. Notably, 46 percent of Republicans said they want a Republican Congress to work with Obama.

Contrary any talk of a clear mandate for the Republican agenda on Tuesday, likely voters split almost evenly, with 37 percent saying Obama has a better agenda, 31 percent saying the Republicans have a better agenda, and 27 percent saying neither has the better plan.

Long considered a drag on his party's prospects, Obama's campaigning across the country, including big rallies on college campuses, has helped his standing.

Overall, 48 percent of registered voters approve of the way he's doing his job, still below half but up 5 points from a McClatchy-Marist poll in early October.

At the same time, 43 percent disapproved, down 7 points from earlier in the month.

Other changes:

-Among independents, Obama gained 13 points, to 48 percent approving.

-Among those age 18-29, up 11 points, with 69 percent approving.

-Among those who said they're very enthusiastic about voting, Obama gained 11 points, to 43 percent.

-In the Northeast, Obama was up 12 points, to 54 percent.

-In the West, Obama was down 5 points, to 48 percent.

Obama and the Democrats also energized their base.

The ranks of Democratic voters most excited about voting rose 7 points, to 35 percent.

The total percentage of liberals who are the most enthusiastic rose by 8 points, also to 35 percent.

The percentage of Republicans among the most enthusiastic eased slightly, from 51 percent to 49 percent. The total of conservatives among the most energized went essentially unchanged, from 53 percent to 52 percent.

Overall, registered voters favor an unnamed Democrat for Congress over a Republican by a margin of 47-41. However, those likely to vote are evenly divided 46-46.

Other findings:

-Likely voters want U.S. troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq by a margin of 62-30.

-54 percent of likely voters said that Obama has fallen below their expectations.

-82 percent of likely voters said that TV ads annoy them, while 13 percent say the ads help inform them.

-67 percent of likely voters said that money from corporations and unions corrupts politics, while 25 percent said corporations and unions have the same right to political speech as individuals.

METHODOLOGY

This survey of 917 U.S. residents was conducted Oct. 22-25. Residents 18 and older were interviewed by telephone. Telephone numbers were selected based upon a list of telephone exchanges from throughout the nation. The exchanges were selected to ensure that each region was represented in proportion to its population. To increase coverage, this land-line sample was supplemented by respondents reached through random dialing of cell phone numbers. The two samples were then combined.

Results are statistically significant within plus or minus 3.3 percentage points. There are 807 registered voters. The results for this subset are statistically significant within plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. There are 461 likely voters and 350 most likely to vote. The results for these subsets are statistically significant within plus or minus 5.0 and plus or minus 5.5 percentage points, respectively. The error margin increases for cross-tabulations.

.

Read more: miamiherald.com



To: Don Hurst who wrote (591627)10/29/2010 4:14:20 PM
From: longnshort1 Recommendation  Respond to of 1583493
 
Hursty is this you ?

PROTESTER DISRUPTS NATIONAL ANTHEM AT TEA PARTY RALLY

A man carrying an anti-Beck sign marched threw a crowd saluting the flag during the national anthem and stood right between the crowd and the flag so everyone had to notice him. Classy.

breitbart.tv