Posted on 12/13/2015 11:44:09 AM PST by conservativejoy
Donald Trump attacked Ted Cruz for not supporting ethanol subsidies. He said in Iowa on Friday, "Oil companies give him a lot of money, so he's for oil."
The thing about oil and gas is, it doesn't require big subsidies, because it's the cheapest and most efficient form of fuel for cars. Ethanol, on the other hand, does require big government subsidies, because it is highly uneconomical. Ethanol is much more expensive than oil and gas and, gallon for gallon, produces much less energy than gasoline. That's why the government has to hand over billions in subsidies to big agri-businesses to keep it going. And that's also why the government has to force oil companies to blend ethanol in with their fuels. Because without government coercion, oil companies wouldn't do it, and the price of gasoline would be substantially lower than it is now.
Additionally, ethanol actually acts as a corrosive on car engines. It slowly degrades car parts over time.
But the worst thing about ethanol is that not only does it require taxpayer subsidies, and not only does it raise the price of blended gas, but it also raises the price of many different kinds of foods. Ethanol is made with corn – a lot of it. And when a lot of corn production is diverted to ethanol, there is less corn available to use for food. Corn is heavily used as a sweetener in many food products. By raising the price of corn, the price of many different kinds of foods are raised.
That is what subsidizing ethanol gives us. That is what Donald Trump is for and Ted Cruz is against. Ted Cruz is starting to lead in some Iowa polls, and he's doing it without this kind of pandering.
I think Donald Trump is fabulous when it comes to immigration and securing our borders, even better than Ted Cruz. But on economic issues, Donald Trump is no economic conservative. His tax plan would not lower taxes as much as Cruz's and would take many taxpayers off the tax rolls entirely,
giving them no incentives to vote against tax hikes on the rest of us.
If only we could take the immigration part of Trump and merge it with the rest of Cruz, we'd have the ideal candidate.
This article was written by Ed Straker, senior writer of NewsMachete.com, the
See tagline.
Cruz is right on this issue. I do wish that Trump and Cruz would lay off each other. One of them is going to be the candidate and I want them in good shape.
I totally disagree with Trump on this issue.
But the only issue that I am voting on is immigration.
That is the only issue that matters
I agree and don’t understand why they are going after each other.
Trump: If you like Corporate Welfare for the Chamber of Crony Capitalists, Vote for ME!
Not with you on this one, Donald. Pork is pork and is the sign of a fattened government.
Populist Demagogue (Trump) vs Principled Conservative (Cruz)
It’s becoming clear now.
It’s a Mandate to require use of Ethanol, not a Subsidy.
Don’t agree with Mandates, but this is a non issue. There is NO Congress that will get rid of the Ethanol Mandate in Fuel.
As I said before, Republican Senator Chuck Grassley is the King of Ethanol and his successor, Democrat or Republican will follow in that tradition.
Populist Demagogue (Trump) vs Principled Conservative (Cruz)
Trump needs to get on board with Cruz on ethanol subsidies. They’re costing all of us billions. Eliminate them, let the free market sort it out.
And conservative Steve King is King for ethanol which puts him at odds with Cruz or maybe not.
“Crop flop: Cruz panders to King Corn
Union Leader ^ | December 12, 2015 | Editorial “
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3372105/posts?page=59
Government subsidies and mandates for ethanol destroy liberty and distort economic signals. They also have the effect of tying the price of food to the substitution price of hydrocarbons from oil. In a time when the federal government is printing or borrowing over 40% of the money it spends, a balanced budget can only be achieved by cutting every possible subsidy.
Corn is subsidized in addition to the ethanol mandate. I know a lot corn farmers who are subsidized.
But it’s right there in the U S Constitution, in the section on taxpayer subsidies to corporations. /sarc
Great, now I can’t even enjoy Corn on the Cob and Popcorn anymore.
Thanks a lot. LOL
From what I have seen, Trump has only come out in favor of ethanol. Nowhere has he actually stated that he supports mandates and subsidies specifically...or am I mistaken?
As an alternative, instead of offering agribusiness huge subsidies to produce ethanol, how about offering them a free market, a brand *new* free market, using marginal land instead of their high quality farmland, to make them billions of dollars?
This means to open the floodgates to legal hemp production.
In its first few years of full production, hemp might generate between $3-12 billion dollars to the economy, for products to include paper, textiles, oil, high quality animal fodder, and many other products. It would also employ one or two hundred thousand Americans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.