What you seem to missing missing is that I am not advocating removing the subsidies, only pointing out that they deflect from the true cost of fossil fuel use, and that were green fuels to receive equivilent funding, they would be competitive.
I love saying "I told you so".......
- Thread starter NOVA
- Start date
What you seem to missing missing is that I am not advocating removing the subsidies, only pointing out that they deflect from the true cost of fossil fuel use, and that were green fuels to receive equivilent funding, they would be competitive.
icedancer2theend
Verified User
That's BS-
Green technologies receive abundant funding by way of tax credits; grants; and loans. In addition they have also benefited by legislation requiring higher CAFE standards on the auto makers. Again, you want to go political with this down party lines. The political machine is the problem- not the solution. Free thinkers and good old fashioned greed will be the answer to our energy needs.
even if you were right, I'd still be more intelligent than you....
:lol:
Surely you jest...
Yes there have been green subsidies, but fossil fuels receive continuous subsidies.
The green subsidies have been subject to yearly review and renewal, unlike the fossil fuel subsidies, a situation which has made startup green conpanies have difficulty raising capitol.
Again, I am not advocating the reduction or elimination of fossil fuel subsidies, in fact, unlike most "lefties" I am vigorously opposed to increased fuel taxes, since the economy is far too fragile at this time. Eliminating fossil fuel subsidies would have the same effect as raising fuel taxes.
There is a an often repeated myth that green fuels cannot compete with fossil fuels, it is only this myth which I seek to dislodge.
Where are you getting the political lines thing from?
icedancer2theend
Verified User
You did espouse and therefor advocate, eliminating fossil fuel subsidies. I contend it will not make green technologies "more competitive" it will do the opposite and slow down research. Renewable energy research has maintained adequate funding. The problem is innovative thinking and political pandering one is sorely missing, the other gets in the way. The most likely source of new energy will come from current energy producers. They know that fossil fuel as we harvest and use it currently, is finite- they want to stay rich and powerful and THEY, not government subsidies, will likely be the revolutionaries who bring us an alternative to our current circumstances.
I see that you are convinced I want to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies.
Since I can't prove otherwise and you will not take me at my word, I will concede rather than degrading into a pissing contest.
You make a very good point about the existing energy companies being in a good position to deliver alternatives, and I agree, and have said so myself,
however, I do not want to shut any doors, as new solutions could come from anywhere
zappasguitar
Well-known member
Of course it's you "profits before all else" Righties who don't give a shit about what the planet may be like in 200 years.
You'll have gotten yours and be long gone from this planet, so who cares if those living here have to deal with nightmarish conditions?
As long as you can pretend there's no "definitive proof"...which for "greedy, me first" people like you there will NEVER be, you can continue to dump whatever poisons into our oceans and rivers whenever you want and pocket the savings.
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
Oil is not going anywhere, any time soon. The 50 year estimate is based on known and exploited reserves. Hell russia aone has more than 100 years of potential in siberia (maybe 2x as much under the polar ice).
Not to say we shouldn't be trying to develope different forms of energy, we certainly should, but not for reasons so trumped up as diminishing oil or strategic need (most of our oil comes from Canada and Mexico). Rather it should be in the name of producing jobs and economic growth. If we can corner th emerging market, we can not only provide a more secure economic future for us, but a more stable globe as reduction in oil use will reduce foreign inolvement in th ME
Not to say we shouldn't be trying to develope different forms of energy, we certainly should, but not for reasons so trumped up as diminishing oil or strategic need (most of our oil comes from Canada and Mexico). Rather it should be in the name of producing jobs and economic growth. If we can corner th emerging market, we can not only provide a more secure economic future for us, but a more stable globe as reduction in oil use will reduce foreign inolvement in th ME
No....and my name is not "Surely"......
Funny Onecell didn't jump on your post to tell you that you typed 'missing' twice, btw.
He does that for me all the time......
Oh yeah....go to it moron.....we conservatives love to drink dirty water and breathing smog and stuff is just so much fun......and toxic poisons....well, what can I say,
toxic poison to flavor our food is what we crave......
Now back to your koolade pinhead,,,,,drink up and turn on Ed Shultz or go read the latest Huffington Post talking points....
you're totally pathetic.
I think this is actually the 2nd time I've done it w/ you. Not "all the time."
And I do it w/ you because you're all grammar police w/ Jarod & Darla, among others. If you're going to point out spelling & grammar w/ others, yours had better be spot on.
Maybe you need and I mean NEED to go back and see what transpired between Darla me.....her giving me bullshit about using "........." in my posts and trying to give me a lecture on ellipsis......which it isn't and was never meant to be.....
I didn't start that shit and I won't just overlook her crap and give the impression she was right to any degree.....
And I'll admit giving Jarod a hard time....I can't believe a lawyer.....high school, college, and law school, could be so fuckin' inept in his native language .....its freakin' ludicrous.....he don't deserve a high school diploma let alone a license to practice law.....
Bad typing and minor infrequent mistakes is one thing, that guy takes it too far.....
Its the same crap with the GED obsessed dude.....and that about covers EVERYONE I call out on grammar and spelling....I have my own problems with it...
So......screw U
Lowaicue
英語在香港
I'm glad you answered that correctly. Now for Question 2. You have 40 minutes to answer.
Q2. Point in the direction most commonly associated with the word 'up'.
Q3. Form a well known phrase or saying with the following jumbled up words. Off Fuck.
Does your estimate take into account population growth as well as rising middle classes in huge asian countries?
Billy the Great Khan
Uwaa OmO
To an extent. The rising middle class is a lot harder to predict than the population growth. It also doesn't differentiate in types of crude oil that can be produced.