Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Red Badger

And what does this legislation do, except to fund research that has already been done over and over, and the technical feasibility has already been demonstrated again and again.

What we need is for a COMMERCIAL enterprise to get into the large-scale conversion of coal to liquid fuel, and if it is necessary to do so, extend that enterprise a tax abatement program on whatever profits they make on the marketing of these products.

The very idea of "corporate welfare", however, is enough to send the Dem'crat majorities in both the House and Senate into screaming fits. This would only "benefit the rich", and "concentrate even more money into corporate hands".

Duh.

Do people want energy independence or not? And energy which shall be available at a reasonable price. Compare this with the subsidies proposed to producers of ethanol, or tariffs laid on imported ethanol, how is that different from paying subsidies to primary energy producers?

Carbon taxes? Only if the rest of the income tax structure, both corporate and individual, is ELIMINATED altogether, for Federal revenue purposes.


13 posted on 01/08/2007 8:26:03 AM PST by alloysteel (Character is a private trait. Reputation is the public aspect that is revealed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: alloysteel

I am surprised that the UMW and the UAW are not screaming for CTL to be made the new standard of fuel.......


14 posted on 01/08/2007 8:29:28 AM PST by Red Badger (New! HeadOn Hemorrhoid Medication for Liberals!.........Apply directly to forehead.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: alloysteel

"Do people want energy independence or not? And energy which shall be available at a reasonable price."

and have you thought about the implications of your policy of "energy independence"??

If the US was not sucking up vast amounts of oil from Venezuela and the Middle East, those volumes would be flowing into China and India at marginal prices. This would reduce the incentive for developing nations to reduce/eliminate the direct subsidies they pay for oil: Those subsidies lower production & living costs and make manufactured good from there so cheap that American industry cannot compete, whether it is vastly more efficient or not.

Higher global energy (oil) prices force some reality into people's decisions both in the developed world and developing world, and the idea that the US could ever be isolated and 'independent' is a myth.

You policy of "independence" and paying next to nothing for energy would actually destroy the US economy.


26 posted on 01/09/2007 2:19:09 AM PST by Diggadave (You cannot buck the market (but you can make it tilt!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson