that’s a pretty strong case.
i’m open minded. hoping for a scientific response explaining why it’s a good thing for the subsidy to be supported by a candidate.
even an overpoweringly good economic reason would suffice.
not thrilled about it damaging my car though
I am going to vote for Trump, but he is wrong to support these subsidies, just like I think Ted Cruz (who I like also)is wrong to hook up with Glenn Beck.
I guess we can’t all get 100% of what we want, but I will forever continue to believe there is no substantive benefit in the use of ethanol as an additive as long as supplies of oil are enough.
If there was even a beneficial economy to using it, then it wouldn’t need subsidy by the government, would it? A free and open marketplace would demand and get it.
Its use is political and panders to those in this society that have lost all capability to think and reason IMO.