Posted by Giga2 on April 14, 2011, 8:44 am
> On 4/12/2011 7:00 PM, Bob F wrote:
>> Peter Franks wrote:
>>> (Government) Subsidies is a feel-good word for stealing. Taking $$
>>> from one group by force and giving to another.
>>>
>>> There should be NO subsidies. Either it stands on its own, or it
>>> doesn't.
>>
>> Nonsense. That is your opinion and nothing more. Subsidies happen all the
>> time.
>> Admittedly, many huge multinational corporations get way more than their
>> share.
> So, you are advocating a non-uniform taking of $ by force (aka stealing)
> and arbitrarily giving to others?
Force is reserved for those who would use it themselves. Just go quietly to
prison.
Posted by Giga2 on April 14, 2011, 8:45 am
> Peter Franks wrote:
>> On 4/12/2011 7:00 PM, Bob F wrote:
>>> Peter Franks wrote:
>>>> (Government) Subsidies is a feel-good word for stealing. Taking $$
>>>> from one group by force and giving to another.
>>>>
>>>> There should be NO subsidies. Either it stands on its own, or it
>>>> doesn't.
>>>
>>> Nonsense. That is your opinion and nothing more. Subsidies happen
>>> all the time. Admittedly, many huge multinational corporations get
>>> way more than their share.
>>
>> So, you are advocating a non-uniform taking of $ by force (aka
>> stealing) and arbitrarily giving to others?
> A society makes decisions as to which ways they want to go. That is part
> of being a society.
> Do you really think those who get the enormously overwhelming benefit of
> out society shouldn't be willing to support the society that got them
> there?
> You, of course, support the current trend of cutting everything protecting
> the lesser among us so all the savings can be passed on to the ultra rich.
Seems to have really swallowed the poison pill of fanatasism with the good
medicine of right -wing politics IMO. Self-reliance, yes, self- absorbtion,
no.
Posted by Falcon on April 6, 2011, 7:33 pm
>
> >>
> > [..]
> >> >> Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is a
> >> >> reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
> >> >> still be worth quite a lot in 15 years?
> >> >
> >> > No.
> >>
> >> Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of the
> >> price?
> >
> > Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price
>
> So would and will everyone else, that is why renewables will explode
> given a bit of a nudge IMHO.
>
> > nd doing so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher
> > electricity prices. The cost of panels isn't the only factor to be
> > considered when deciding to install them; like wind turbines, without
> > generous Feed in tariffs working alongside the Renewables Obligation
> > they would never pay their way. Currently these measures are adding
> > around 15% to all fuel bills and that's expected to rise significantly
> > as penetration levels increase.
>
> If you personally choose to pay for your panels I don't see why everyone
> else shouldn't be just grateful for your investment?
You don't mean everyone should be 'grateful', you mean everyone should help
'pay for them'. Call me old-fashioned, but frankly that's not the way I
like to do business with pensioners or people on benefits.
--
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
Posted by Giga2 on April 7, 2011, 8:38 am
>>
>> >>
>> > [..]
>> >> >> Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is a
>> >> >> reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
>> >> >> still be worth quite a lot in 15 years?
>> >> >
>> >> > No.
>> >>
>> >> Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of the
>> >> price?
>> >
>> > Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price
>>
>> So would and will everyone else, that is why renewables will explode
>> given a bit of a nudge IMHO.
>>
>> > nd doing so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher
>> > electricity prices. The cost of panels isn't the only factor to be
>> > considered when deciding to install them; like wind turbines, without
>> > generous Feed in tariffs working alongside the Renewables Obligation
>> > they would never pay their way. Currently these measures are adding
>> > around 15% to all fuel bills and that's expected to rise significantly
>> > as penetration levels increase.
>>
>> If you personally choose to pay for your panels I don't see why everyone
>> else shouldn't be just grateful for your investment?
> You don't mean everyone should be 'grateful', you mean everyone should
> help
> 'pay for them'. Call me old-fashioned, but frankly that's not the way I
> like to do business with pensioners or people on benefits.
Yes, because hopefully we will all benefit in the longer run. You can argue
whether this will be true but not that everyone would benefit from virtually
free-energy!?
Posted by rasterspace on April 7, 2011, 1:36 am
these kinds of questions per technology,
I ask a similar one: because, or
in spite of the "small phase-space" of GCMs,
what are the main effects of jetting around
in a big plane with Al Gore, Jr.?
XML site map
>> Peter Franks wrote:
>>> (Government) Subsidies is a feel-good word for stealing. Taking $$
>>> from one group by force and giving to another.
>>>
>>> There should be NO subsidies. Either it stands on its own, or it
>>> doesn't.
>>
>> Nonsense. That is your opinion and nothing more. Subsidies happen all the
>> time.
>> Admittedly, many huge multinational corporations get way more than their
>> share.
> So, you are advocating a non-uniform taking of $ by force (aka stealing)
> and arbitrarily giving to others?