Is this Corporate Welfare?

Muddy Creek said:

I see this as a needed incentive to make us less dependent on oil. The oil companies get subsidies from the government despite record breaking profits. I see THAT as corporate welfare.

Click to expand...

I'm stating that maintaining the status quo of Big Energy is two steps backwards, whether it is fossil fuel entering the Energy Distribution Network and collecting its proportionate share or Lockheed Martin making sure that it doesn't change to a De-Centralized Distribution Network. Why don't people realize that our distribution network is as much a problem to Global Warming as fossil fuels. The inertia generated attempting to dis-lodge the status quo of Big Money is considerable. After all, who owns the politicians? How many do you own? That is where I see this struggle and it seems truly important to me. Ergo, you get may rants, although I try to be logical and thoughtful and produce insight from many years ofd solar research. That research tells me that the status quo is the problem and offers no hope for a solution. I always go out on a limb and offer a solution. Otherwise, I would just be bitching.

VanceMack said:

Offering money to taxpayers to purchase systems is STILL nothing but a gift to industry. The systems need to be better and more efficient. With as long as we have been working on this technology, it should be.

Click to expand...

That is the point. No money has been spent to do renewable energy research. It has all been spent trying to get any renewable energy that is generated in to the existing Centralized Diostribution Network. That is my complaint and the object of the post. To get people to realize that.

DaveFagan said:

That is the point. No money has been spent to do renewable energy research. It has all been spent trying to get any renewable energy that is generated in to the existing Centralized Diostribution Network. That is my complaint and the object of the post. To get people to realize that.

Click to expand...

And you DID see my comments that I could see it as justified IF it was going to R and D...otherwise...no...correct?

@VanceMack,

Re: your post #22.

Sometimes debate crosses the line and can be perceived as a "fight". Was not my intention, but apparently that was the way it looked and it looks like I belabored the topic with you and did indeed go over the line. Was genuinely curious.

Apologize, and only excuse is that I'm new here and still trying to get the flavor of the players. Plus, I have been on boards that are echo chambers and are devoid of reasonable and civil debate, so perhaps I'm a little too anxious for that "debating".

The remark about the avatar was a bit hostile.

In any case, apologize again and will withdraw..

@DaveFagan,

Hope you didn't perceive that I was "fighting" with you. As I said above, was just genuinely curious. Thanks for the patient answers and am getting a better handle on where individuals stand.

DaveFagan said:

Sandia Lab building solar test centers across US :: WRAL.com

Sandia Lab building five solar test centers, including one in Denver - The Denver Post

"The Sandia National Laboratory is building test centers in Albuquerque, Denver, Las Vegas, Orlando, Fla., and Burlington, Vt., the Albuquerque Journal reported (ABQJournal Online » Sandia Labs expands, upgrades solar R&D).
"The centers are designed to not only provide independent assessments of commercial systems, but to do that in multiple locations and climates," Sandia solar group member Jennifer Granata said."

I see this as gov't subsidization of Big Corporate.

Click to expand...

It is.

I see this as Renewable Energy monies being hijacked to maintain the status quo.

Click to expand...

I can't fathom why you would think that. It's just the government providing some funds to help make us relevant in the global renewables market. It has little or no impact on the status quo.

Renewable Energy is most efficient when utulized locally, downhome, on individual taxpayers domiciles.

Click to expand...

I suppose you're right about this, but it can be equally as effective in large scale generation.

Is this Corporate Welfare?

Click to expand...

I don't think you understand corporate welfare. It's a process where the government artificially keeps private corporations afloat. This, well, is not.

BobJam said:

So are you saying that government messing with the Renewable Energy biz is a legitimate function of government?

While some may view it as a "necessary" function, there's a big difference between "necessary" and "legitimate".

Click to expand...

Sure, they broke up Standard Oil because it was too big and successful. You know a monopoly? The government subsidies farming, so prices stay stable. They recently bought car companies and bailed out banks and insurance companies. They protect strategic interests involving oil producing nations that sell us oil. Government is always getting involved in business.

waas said:

It is.



I can't fathom why you would think that. It's just the government providing some funds to help make us relevant in the global renewables market. It has little or no impact on the status quo.



I suppose you're right about this, but it can be equally as effective in large scale generation.



I don't think you understand corporate welfare. It's a process where the government artificially keeps private corporations afloat. This, well, is not.

Click to expand...

I'm saying the Renewables monies are hijacked by Corporations who fight change that could hurt their bottom lines. This money goes to COMMERCIAL applications for centralized distribution. The gov't will artificially keep these Corporations afloat at the expense of the taxpaying public. These monies should be spent attempting to de-centralize and the monopolistic powers of those entities prevent that. This is already a huge profit enterprise and does not require development with public monies. Use their own to maintain their monopolistic powers and not be subsidized by the taxpaying public. This Corporation is Lockheed Martin. We don't need more of the same, we need change.

grip said:

Sure, they broke up Standard Oil because it was too big and successful. You know a monopoly? The government subsidies farming, so prices stay stable. They recently bought car companies and bailed out banks and insurance companies. They protect strategic interests involving oil producing nations that sell us oil. Government is always getting involved in business.

Click to expand...

Absolutely correct.. Standard is Rockefeller's ExxonMobil today and also JPMorgan Chase because if you make really big money, you become a bank, and he was allowed to keep 20% of each of the other 7 sisters. The gov't subsidizes Farming and now we don't have small farms. Do you see a pattern emerging. Ah yes, gov't is always getting involved in business and somehow small business dies as a result. The gov't that is the best that money can buy is always bought with and by BIG MONEY. I like to emphasize the details.