Davin News Server

On 2025-07-30, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Jul 2025 10:29:17 -0400, -hh wrote:
>
>>On 7/28/25 14:14, Alan wrote:
>>> On 2025-07-28 10:51, pothead wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> Again, let the market decide. 
>>>
>>> But keep the subsidies for big oil, right?
>
> This is the kind of partisan thing I've been talking about, pothead.

Well maybe I am not presenting my points clearly.
See below.


> You're perfectly ok with government meddling in markets as long as it
> only meddles in the markets YOU want meddled with.

Wrong.
First off depending upon the market I have differing opinions.
So for example, I was not against the auto industry bailout as it was implemented.
It saved jobs however as a free trade person I'm mixed on the reasons for the
bailouts in the first place which were mainly crappy cars nobody wanted and
mismanagement.

In the end though the money was paid back AFAIK.

As for the current discussion of EV vs ICE and subsidies I have no problem
either way as long as the other platform is not attacked and restricted by
over regulation.
Promoting American made cars or EV or both is not a problem for me as long
as at the same time you don't tell me ICE cars will have major regulations
put on them all for the purpose of destroying them and pushing the people to EV.

Same goes for say wind farms vs coal plants.
Let the market decide but don't hamstring one or the other in order to
push an agenda.

Again "free market" or more accurately a fair market.


>>Ah, good catch:  I'd forgotten about how pothead has avoided answering 
>>why its okay for fossil fuels to receive huge government subsidies.
>>
>>
>>-hh
>
> Still hasn't answered it despite answering Siri's post.

Answered already in different threads but you can see my answer above.

I am a free/fair market person.
Sometimes subsidies are good and sometimes bad.
I have opinions on both and I prefer to not make a blanket statement.


> As an aside:
> On the one hand, Republicans whine about losing manufacturing jobs.
> Otoh, they're deliberately killing them.


They are killing green energy jobs which have produced almost zero for
the working class but lined the pockets of the elite with tons of money.


> EVs and solar panels need manufacturing and are 21st century
> technologies but cons want to end subsidies for them in favor of
> subsidies for 19th and 20th century technologies that are already huge
> and profitable.

Profitable for whom?
Sure but companies are free to manufacture those products.
Where is the problem?

Again, let the market decide.

Do consumers want to buy EV or solar panels?
If so, the market will correct itself.


> Now, China is the number one manufacturer of both solar panels and EVs
> and Taiwan is the number one manufacturer of silicon chips.

Bingo.
If EV, green energy is to be successful the raw materials and products
need to be made here in USA.
However if the consumers don't want to purchase the above then what?
Continue to buy from China or move on?

However, I do agree we need to cut our dependence upon other countries for
critical needs, drugs are a huge example.
COVID should have taught the politicians something but I guess not.


> What are we supposed to manufacture if Republicans keep cutting
> subsidies for cutting edge technololgies and markets?

Huh?

<https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/03/president-trump-is-putting-american-workers-first-and-bringing-back-american-manufacturing/>

Biden's chip act was an abject failure, although a good idea.
Do you know why?
He demanded DEI, woke policies to which the Asian countries objected.
His administration failed to understand that the rest of the world,
especially Asian countries, are not idiots supporting DEI like the US is.

<https://thehill.com/opinion/4517470-dei-killed-the-chips-act/>




-- 
pothead

"Our lives are fashioned by our choices. First we make our choices.
 Then our choices make us."
-- Anne Frank