Posted by Melodie de l'Epine on April 14, 2011, 9:42 am
Le 06/04/11 23:09, Vaughn a crit :
> .
>>>
>>> Actually a temporary subsidy for new technology can reduce costs by
>>> creating
>>> demand, (IE: "creating a market"). The larger demand should lead to
>>> manufacturing and distribution efficiencies and competation that can
>>> greatly
>>> reduce unit costs.
>>
>> 1) The initial cost has not been reduced; it has merely been shifted from
>> one demographic to another.
> Wrong. Please go back and read what I wrote above.
>>
>> 2) Governments are not instituted to 'create markets' or to control
>> economies of scale.
> Thats your opinion. Actually governments have created markets and
> controlled economies of scale forever. It doesn't always come out well (see
> the housing bubble) but it's done, like it or not.
> Vaughn
They did it for coal, gas and nuclear, so why shouldn't they do it for
renewables?
Mel
Posted by Peter Franks on April 14, 2011, 2:04 pm
On 4/14/2011 2:42 AM, Melodie de l'Epine wrote:
> Le 06/04/11 23:09, Vaughn a écrit :
>> .
>>>>
>>>> Actually a temporary subsidy for new technology can reduce costs by
>>>> creating
>>>> demand, (IE: "creating a market"). The larger demand should lead to
>>>> manufacturing and distribution efficiencies and competation that can
>>>> greatly
>>>> reduce unit costs.
>>>
>>> 1) The initial cost has not been reduced; it has merely been shifted
>>> from
>>> one demographic to another.
>>
>> Wrong. Please go back and read what I wrote above.
>>>
>>> 2) Governments are not instituted to 'create markets' or to control
>>> economies of scale.
>>
>> Thats your opinion. Actually governments have created markets and
>> controlled economies of scale forever. It doesn't always come out well
>> (see
>> the housing bubble) but it's done, like it or not.
>>
>> Vaughn
> They did it for coal, gas and nuclear, so why shouldn't they do it for
> renewables?
Do three wrongs now make a right?
Posted by Giga2 on April 7, 2011, 8:30 am
> On 4/6/2011 1:03 PM, Vaughn wrote:
>>> Subsidies don't reduce price, they just shift costs from one person to
>>> another through compulsion.
>>
>> Actually a temporary subsidy for new technology can reduce costs by
>> creating
>> demand, (IE: "creating a market"). The larger demand should lead to
>> manufacturing and distribution efficiencies and competation that can
>> greatly
>> reduce unit costs.
> 1) The initial cost has not been reduced; it has merely been shifted from
> one demographic to another.
> 2) Governments are not instituted to 'create markets' or to control
> economies of scale.
That is part of their role.
Posted by Peter Franks on April 7, 2011, 1:33 pm
On 4/7/2011 1:30 AM, Giga2 <Giga2 wrote:
>> On 4/6/2011 1:03 PM, Vaughn wrote:
>>>> Subsidies don't reduce price, they just shift costs from one person to
>>>> another through compulsion.
>>>
>>> Actually a temporary subsidy for new technology can reduce costs by
>>> creating
>>> demand, (IE: "creating a market"). The larger demand should lead to
>>> manufacturing and distribution efficiencies and competation that can
>>> greatly
>>> reduce unit costs.
>>
>> 1) The initial cost has not been reduced; it has merely been shifted from
>> one demographic to another.
>>
>> 2) Governments are not instituted to 'create markets' or to control
>> economies of scale.
> That is part of their role.
No, but it is one of their biggest failures, to be sure.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted
among Men..."
Posted by Giga2 on April 7, 2011, 7:06 pm
> On 4/7/2011 1:30 AM, Giga2 <Giga2 wrote:
>>> On 4/6/2011 1:03 PM, Vaughn wrote:
>>>>> Subsidies don't reduce price, they just shift costs from one person to
>>>>> another through compulsion.
>>>>
>>>> Actually a temporary subsidy for new technology can reduce costs by
>>>> creating
>>>> demand, (IE: "creating a market"). The larger demand should lead to
>>>> manufacturing and distribution efficiencies and competation that can
>>>> greatly
>>>> reduce unit costs.
>>>
>>> 1) The initial cost has not been reduced; it has merely been shifted
>>> from
>>> one demographic to another.
>>>
>>> 2) Governments are not instituted to 'create markets' or to control
>>> economies of scale.
>>
>> That is part of their role.
> No, but it is one of their biggest failures, to be sure.
Perhaps but it is still part of what they do and what they *should* do imo.
> "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
> that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
> that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to
> secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men..."
I don't see anything there that says governments may not try to influence
markets.
XML site map
>>>
>>> Actually a temporary subsidy for new technology can reduce costs by
>>> creating
>>> demand, (IE: "creating a market"). The larger demand should lead to
>>> manufacturing and distribution efficiencies and competation that can
>>> greatly
>>> reduce unit costs.
>>
>> 1) The initial cost has not been reduced; it has merely been shifted from
>> one demographic to another.
> Wrong. Please go back and read what I wrote above.
>>
>> 2) Governments are not instituted to 'create markets' or to control
>> economies of scale.
> Thats your opinion. Actually governments have created markets and
> controlled economies of scale forever. It doesn't always come out well (see
> the housing bubble) but it's done, like it or not.
> Vaughn