To: Publius
I’m going to take the easy question. Currently, so-called
“green energy” requires subsidies in order to be “profitable.”
In a way, we’re not currently living this particular chapter. We’ve been living this chapter for several years now.
20 posted on
03/28/2009 9:53:11 AM PDT by
stylin_geek
(Senators and Representatives : They govern like Calvin Ball is played, making it up as they go along)
To: stylin_geek
Currently, so-called “green energy” requires subsidies in order to be “profitable.”Worse than that, they now want to add taxes to non-green energy so that green energy will be "profitable".
We’ve been living this chapter for several years now.
Yep.
22 posted on
03/28/2009 10:02:43 AM PDT by
r-q-tek86
(The U.S. Constitution may be flawed, but it's a whole lot better than what we have now)
To: stylin_geek
You can add ethanol to that, which is nothing but corporate welfare for Archer Daniels Midland.
32 posted on
03/28/2009 11:02:26 AM PDT by
Publius
(The Quadri-Metallic Standard: Gold and silver for commerce, lead and brass for protection.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson