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: Wharf Rat who wrote (38639)	2/28/2013 12:13:34 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86356

They did, but that would mean intervening in the free market to pick winners and losers. There is NOTHING wrong with gov't intervention into the market place if it results in a CHEAPER, more reliable, product, service, or infrastructure that results in an economic ROI for the taxpayer dollars that are spent. We all know there is private market failure, for any variety of reasons. But when parochial interests PREVENT more efficient products and/or services from being brought to market, then it's detrimental to our entire country. Take alternative energy.. if your windmills or Solar panels were able to provide the same reliability and cost efficiency as current forms of power generation, I would applaud them. The R&D is done and now it should be left for the private market to bring to to the public. But they cannot, and never will be able to.. They have their place in areas where 24x7x364 baseload power is not a problem. They would even have a place if the appropriate ability to store that power for later use, or to create a viable by-product (hydrogen, as an example). But gov't energy policy is not focused on reducing it's cost to the economy. It's being warped by the pseudo-science behind AGW in order TO INCREASE economic costs to our economy, and especially the citizens of this country who rely upon that energy for transportation, food, and shelter. You guys want to tax people even more, and them to transfer those fund to MORE EXPENSIVE energy sources.. That results in a DOUBLE WHAMMY to economic growth. Any energy policy MUST have the goal of reducing costs to the people of this country, not making it more expensive, with the resulting loss of economic activity and jobs. It's certainly not to subsidize advocates of more expensive energy to our nation's consumers. That's is WEALTH TRANSFER from the consumers to corporations who are able to buy influence with the politicians. You, being a liberal/socialist, should understand that.. But logic is now beyond you.. you cannot (or refuse to) see the forest for the trees.. Hawk