Davin News Server

On 7/30/25 19:50, pothead wrote:
> 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.

The problem with your position is that you appear like you're being 
deliberately blind to the huge subsidies that the FF industry has 
received, as these utterly dwarf those of the 'Green' industries.


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

Does your definition of 'fair market' include taking into account the 
externality costs imposed on society by a product?  Because when you 
complained about unsightly offshore windmills, it sure looks that way.

Point here is that there's huge unpaid bills in environmental damage 
that's been inflicted on us by fossil fuels.  In addition to huge lakes 
of coal slurry, there's also 3-4 million (yes, *million*) abandoned oil 
wells just in the USA, with TBD of them which are actively leaking.

The documentation is thin, but this one study found the leak rate to be 
roughly half of the wells they tested (40 of n=76 is 53%):

<https://abcnews.go.com/US/abandoned-oil-gas-wells-us-bring-fears-leak/story?id=116764814>


>> 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.
Guess what class of workers are the ones who've been employed for 
installing those solar panels?

There's currently more of these 'green' jobs in the USA (3.3+M) than 
jobs working oil pipelines or otherwise directly employed (2M).


>> 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.


But if you want to on-shore those jobs away from China, there needs to 
be the investment to do so, and the straight financials are such that 
private equity won't risk trying to go head-to-head against China.  As 
such, one needs to find an investor who's willing to take on that risk: 
that's the Federal Government.


>> 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/>

Those 'DEI' requirements were merely the political compromise to garnish 
sufficient votes in Congress for the legislation to pass.

-hh