• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear plants power plants?

Should the U.S. subsidize the construction of nuclear plants power plants?

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 36.4%

  • No

    Votes: 14 63.6%
  • Total voters
    22
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

Ikari said:
As for your smarmy "you should have posted" blah blah blah. I did. At any point, you could have read the article. I find it a bit unbelievable that I had to hold your hand this far. But whatever, so it goes.
Click to expand...

No you did not. You posted two entire articles of which 99% was of no use. In the end, I had to read both articles in their entirety because you wouldn't post just the relevant items. Let's not forget that only one article had relevant material and I had already read the one that had nothing. I think that if you are going to make allegations, it should be you who produces the evidence. I will gladly do that when I make an allegation.
 
Last edited:
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

Ikari said:
I would end subsidies for all corporations.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.

Ikari said:
No tax breaks, no deals, no special treatment. Everyone pays, if you don't you're in trouble.
Click to expand...

Are you taxing profits? If not, please elaborate. If yes, what rate would you charge?

Ikari said:
Because all these special cuts and subsidies to the tune of 4 billion a year for the oil industry cost all of us money.
Click to expand...

So far you have offered evidence of $850 million a year. Where is the rest?

Ikari said:
Whether we're paying people to not farm, incentives for turning food into gas, or giving tax incentives to follow the law essentially; the tax payers should not be paying for it.
Click to expand...

Again, we are in agreement.

Ikari said:
The oil industry already enjoys some of the most aggressive subsidies of all companies and it should be ended.

You think they get more than auto manufacturers or farmers or those in "green" technologies? They might, but I have not seen evidence of that.

Ikari said:
In the end, as it is currently with our corporate capitalist model (as opposed to free market capitalism), corporations on the whole enjoy various perks and benefits from their existence, which in essence stifles proper competition.
Click to expand...

While I would not use the rhetoric you use, I think we are in agreement here too.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

The Mark said:
Not subsidize, but rather give initial tax breaks.

Also, streamline the process which certifies a given plant for operation (not reduce safety requirements, just make it easier, faster, and cheaper go through the process of doing so).


In short, reduce startup costs.
Click to expand...

Brazil pays taxes to the USA?
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

While there's a lot of money given out for green technologies (primarily in the form of research dollars currently), it does not reach the 4 billion per year subsidy to the oil corporations.
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

Kandahar said:
Yes, of course it should. The public benefits of nuclear power are hard to overstate: Less pollution, less global warming, more safety, a more stable economy, and a more sensible foreign policy.
Click to expand...

I have been agreeing with you too much over the past three or four days... STOP IT!!!

Seriously, I totally agree with you. We need nuclear power until cleaner, renewable forms become viable on a large-scale basis.

It is also a national security issue. Energy and food are vital to the national security of any nation and each and every state has the right and responsibility to seek self-sufficiency in both to the greatest extent possible.
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

Why not skip the middle man (greedy, private enterprise) and just make them publicly owned? Don't try to run them for profit. Take the same approach to power that we do with the military. There's a job that needs doing, and we just do it. It costs as much as it costs, but the benefit is worth it.
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

Henrin said:
If the start up costs are too high it’s just not worth doing and the idea is poor.
Click to expand...
I'm saying eliminate all but the necessary red tape for starting a nuclear plant.
Far too large a portion of startup costs for nuclear plants and many other things are a direct result of an extremely overlarge bureaucracy and the red tape it generates to support its existence.

UtahBill said:
Brazil pays taxes to the USA?
Click to expand...
I have not the slightest clue what you are getting at here.
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

The Mark said:
I'm saying eliminate all but the necessary red tape for starting a nuclear plant.
Far too large a portion of startup costs for nuclear plants and many other things are a direct result of an extremely overlarge bureaucracy and the red tape it generates to support its existence.

I have not the slightest clue what you are getting at here.
Click to expand...

Read post 13 and 14, looks like they are connected, maybe not...
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

Why should the government subsidize nuclear power, or any other kind of power? Subsidizing one industry simply puts competing industries at a disadvantage. If nuclear power is really cheaper than coal or natural gas, then private capital will develop it and will reap a profit to the benefit of the purchasers of power and of their stocks as well.

If energy independence is the goal, then a reverse subsidy, i.e., tax, on imported energy would be a better way to reach that goal, wouldn't it?
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

Ikari said:
Does the oil industry really need more subsidies?
Click to expand...

Oil Industry "subsidies" aren't really subsidies. They are tax breaks. Of the $4 billion in alleged subsidies to Big Oil, $1.7 billion derives from a domestic manufacturing tax deduction intended to keep factories in the U.S. It is available to every company, not just oil companies.

Another $850 million comes from another tax provision, also available to every U.S. corporation, that gives a credit for taxes paid to foreign countries...just as you can deduct your state taxes from your federal income taxes.

Another $1 billion comes from tax rules that let oil companies treat oil in the ground as capital equipment for write-down purposes, and the rest comes from rules that let oil companies write off certain business costs immediately.

I'd like to add: If there is any hope of getting back to free market capitalism instead of crony capitalism... it would be really nice to see the system of RISK - REWARD be the dominate way businesses are initiated and grown.
 
Last edited:
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

What the Government needs to do is wave all taxes during constuction and then give a 40% tax break for the next five years.

It would cost nothing, and be a big boost to those who want to build them.

We need the power and you have to think outside the box.
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

Councilman said:
What the Government needs to do is wave all taxes during constuction and then give a 40% tax break for the next five years.

It would cost nothing, and be a big boost to those who want to build them.

We need the power and you have to think outside the box.
Click to expand...

That's great...but we have millions who are having their homes in foreclosure. We're in a pretty bad recession. Who's gonna buy these new construction projects?

In other words...you have to have buyers, not just sellers.
 
Re: Should the U.S. government subsidize the construction of nuclear power plants?

UtahBill said:
Read post 13 and 14, looks like they are connected, maybe not...
Click to expand...
Not connected, just coincidental. But I can readily see how you would make that mistake.

I was actually responding to the poll question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom