Posted on 04/27/2006 11:21:18 AM PDT by John Geyer
Edited on 04/27/2006 11:47:26 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I am not going to debate analogies.
But I am far from the only one that considers tax breaks a subsidy.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLG,GGLG:2005-49,GGLG:en&q=ethanol+tax+subsidies
Big Oil is spending big bucks knocking ethanol because it is in direct competition with them. They try every bit of negative propaganda and demagogery they can think up.
Eventually, the U.S.A. will be like Brazil, very close to being independent of Big Oil.
Every dollar spent on ethanol stays in the United States, not as in the case of gasolene, in the pockets of Venzuela, Saudi Araba, Iran etc etc, almost all of the money goes into the pockets of Arab princes or muslim mullahs.
I'm not reading all the posts here already.
So, has anyone mentioned how many millions of acres we'd need to satisfy the appetite for gasoline with this ethanol fad?
IOW, ethanol is sounding like the pipe dreams of enviro-mentals whose great idea about wind and solar power require millions of acres to = the power of nuclear or oil-based generating plants.
They're substituting 1 problem for another. Never fails.
Make that me and federal government. (not that I like being lumped with the goverment)
In May 1999, the Office of Policy, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), asked the Energy Information Administration (EIA) to prepare an update of EIA's 1992 Service Report on Federal energy subsidies, using a more specific definition of "subsidies" provided by the Office of Policy. In its letter of request, the Office of Policy asked the EIA to examine Federal programs that provided a "specific financial benefit" covering "primary energy only."
Federal energy subsidies take three principal forms:
* Direct Payments to Producers or Consumers. These are Federal programs that directly affect the energy industry and for which the Federal Government provides a direct financial benefit. Currently, three energy programs provide direct payments to producers or consumers. Two of them focus on energy end use, and are excluded from this study. The third program is the Renewable Energy Production Incentive.
* Tax Expenditures. Tax expenditures are provisions in the tax code that reduce the tax liability of firms or individuals who take specified actions that affect energy production, consumption, or conservation in ways deemed to be in the public interest.
* Research and Development. R&D expenditures do not directly affect current energy production and prices, but if successful they could affect future production and prices. An example of the impact of Federal energy R&D is the important role that Federal R&D spending has had in the development of the U.S. commercial nuclear power industry.
Fine. Therefore, the Federal government IS the bully who takes everyone's lunch money.
Also, if you itemize, I'm sure you'll agree that ...
1. the Federal government has subsidized every home mortgage you've ever had.
2. the Federal government has subsidized all the charitable contributions you've ever claimed.
3. the Federal government has subsidized all the real estate and other property taxes you've paid.
In summary, the Federal government has subsidized everything for which you've ever taken a tax deduction.
Not everything, but most.
what you say applies more so to 2-stroke motors and older cars. today's cars can run fine on 10% ethanol, although 20% content effect has yet to be scientifcally determined.(although MN,in all their wisdom, has just made a gumbint mandate to do so by 2010.)
yes, gubmint subsidizes home ownership.
everyone should want to own a home. not every one should want to be a corn farmer.
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.