California communities suing for polluters to pay for storm damage

[senormechanico]

Originally Posted by NevisDog

Is it all simply about getting re-elected? What a terribly distorted marketplace you seem to have!

You NAILED it.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Exile

Maybe if the taxpayer dollars had been directed more towards R&D and less towards propping up for-profit enterprises run by billionaires, we'd actually be further along with actually making renewables competitive.

Where do you think the bigger subsidies to the fossil-fuel industry go? Building orphanages?

[SV THIRD DAY]

How many Billions has Elton Musk received for his Telsa...or Solyndra....or the other countless Green energy projects that the only green thing about them is the public sector money they suck from the US Taxpayer!

[Exile]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Where do you think the bigger subsidies to the fossil-fuel industry go? Building orphanages?

Same problem L-E. And in case you haven't noticed, I've made it clear that I don't condone any such subsidies, regardless of the type of industry. In limited applications I'm sure a case can be made for their contributing to the public good, but generally speaking the harm to society from the corruption & inefficiencies they bring to taxpayers & consumers far outweigh any public interest. The govt can play a productive role in spurring the development of technologies, but human nature seems to always kick in to benefit private or political interests along the way.

I know you're wedded to your monolithic partisanship for whatever reason, but what we're discussing transcends politics, personalities, and personal philosophy. It's about how much accountability we want from our political leaders. By failing to question their motives & mantras, we are instead empowering them to divide us over largely unsolvable issues for the sake of their next re-election bids, and to continue the corrupt cycle of subsidies for campaign contributions at taxpayer expense.

You don't have to be on the payroll of Exxon-Mobil to question the true cost of renewable energy, let alone how it will be paid for, when a politician promises that if you vote for him/her your new commuter train will henceforth run on "free energy" from wind turbines. If citizens want to vote to pay for what they believe will make the planet "healthier," then that's their right. But the true costs are never disclosed, and so it's never an informed choice. Besides, if the politicians even knew how to figure out such costs they'd be doing something far more productive than making speeches for a living. This is how the Elon Musk's of the world continue feasting at the public trough.

[Lake-Effect]

Same old, same old...

Originally Posted by Exile

I know you're wedded to your monolithic partisanship for whatever reason

Issues seem to crystallize into only two sides, apparently, and anyone discussing the issue must therefore be in Camp A or B. If I disagree with Exile, I must therefore be engaging in monolithic partisanship.

There's not more than a century or two of fossil fuel left to burn, no matter who you ask. And burning it at current rates... is apparently not so good, if you think raising the atmospheric temperature is not desirable. It kind of makes sense to foster the development of energy technologies that can be used indefinitely without penalty. There are worse uses of government money. Anyone need a reminder?

The US reveres its industrialists, inventors and enterpreneurs. Except if you're in renewable energy it seems. Sorry Elon.

[SV THIRD DAY]

I make a substantive post talking about how the MMGWC Models are not working, but rather than defend the models Lake goes after me. That's ok...I can take it. But it's hilarious to watch the squirming.

[Adelie]

Thread closed pending review by moderators as to whether topic has strayed to far from cruising.