EcoRenovator  

Go Back   EcoRenovator > Off Topic > The Billiards Room
Advanced Search
 


Blog 60+ Home Energy Saving Tips Recent Posts Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-31-10, 08:53 PM   #11
Xringer
Lex Parsimoniae
 
Xringer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Woburn, MA
Posts: 4,918
Thanks: 114
Thanked 250 Times in 230 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick View Post
Or maybe I'd leave the price the same and finally start selling some of it because the price had been too high for anyone to afford it without the government subsidy.
What might actually happen, is competition.. In a free market place.
Sellers would look at their actual profit margin and try to undercut their
competitors.

Instead of sitting on their assets and waiting for the next government
'program' that will allow companies to harvest taxpayers dollars.


I'm not so sure these 'programs' are all that great.. Seem to hurt more than they remedy.

Xringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-10, 09:15 PM   #12
Patrick
Apprentice EcoRenovator
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: East Coast of Florida, USA
Posts: 149
Thanks: 2
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xringer View Post
I'm using fuel oil for heating my hot water right now, burning gasoline in my car.
I'm already paying too much tax gas.. Not sure about the heating oil taxes,
but it's about the same price as the taxed diesel..




I'm not sure that punishing fuel users with extra-heavy taxes is the best thing for our current economic situation.
Unless our goal is to slow down the economy even more, since we all know that higher fuel prices increase the cost of just about everything else..
Food, being one of the first hit..

I agree with you there. I'm sick of paying taxes. I can decide how to spend my money far better than any government ever could.

Last edited by Patrick; 10-31-10 at 09:18 PM..
Patrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-10, 09:19 PM   #13
Patrick
Apprentice EcoRenovator
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: East Coast of Florida, USA
Posts: 149
Thanks: 2
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xringer View Post
What might actually happen, is competition.. In a free market place.
Sellers would look at their actual profit margin and try to undercut their
competitors.

Instead of sitting on their assets and waiting for the next government
'program' that will allow companies to harvest taxpayers dollars.


I'm not so sure these 'programs' are all that great.. Seem to hurt more than they remedy.
Don't expect to see any affordable renewable energy then.
Patrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-31-10, 10:52 PM   #14
Xringer
Lex Parsimoniae
 
Xringer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Woburn, MA
Posts: 4,918
Thanks: 114
Thanked 250 Times in 230 Posts
Default

Right now, both the buyer and the seller knows there is 'free' taxpayer
money that's going to be transferred from the taxpayers/gov to the sellers/installers.

The money transfer is not greatly benefiting the buyer, since his tax break
or rebate is most likely already built into the installed price.


So, imagine a product without the 'redistribution' of taxpayers dollars.

You want to buy some pecans, so you look for the best quality
at a price you can afford. You go to the market and pick what
you want, and buy it. Very simple.

No money was stolen from other people.. Seems like a nice idea eh?

It is a nice idea, because those the young folks down the road,
cooking those Big Macs, don't have to help pay for my pecans.
Why should they?


The government is saying to 'rich' people, If you install Solar,
we will take other taxpayer's money and help you pay for those panels..

Some of those other taxpayers live in apartments and can't buy solar..
And maybe can't even afford to buy their kids good shoes.
Is giving their tax dollars away, fair to them?


It's like a pyramid scam. If you buy in early on, you win!
Everyone else pays for you.
But, if everyone jumps on it, it has to be canceled.
I think you know why..
Xringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-10, 02:49 PM   #15
benpope
Helper EcoRenovator
 
benpope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Little Rock, AR
Posts: 95
Thanks: 16
Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xringer View Post
Right now, both the buyer and the seller knows there is 'free' taxpayer
money that's going to be transferred from the taxpayers/gov to the sellers/installers.

The money transfer is not greatly benefiting the buyer, since his tax break
or rebate is most likely already built into the installed price.


So, imagine a product without the 'redistribution' of taxpayers dollars.

You want to buy some pecans, so you look for the best quality
at a price you can afford. You go to the market and pick what
you want, and buy it. Very simple.

No money was stolen from other people.. Seems like a nice idea eh?

It is a nice idea, because those the young folks down the road,
cooking those Big Macs, don't have to help pay for my pecans.
Why should they?


The government is saying to 'rich' people, If you install Solar,
we will take other taxpayer's money and help you pay for those panels..

Some of those other taxpayers live in apartments and can't buy solar..
And maybe can't even afford to buy their kids good shoes.
Is giving their tax dollars away, fair to them?


It's like a pyramid scam. If you buy in early on, you win!
Everyone else pays for you.
But, if everyone jumps on it, it has to be canceled.
I think you know why..
Well, yes and no. First, I doubt installers and PV manufacturers are going to change their prices much based on subsidies. While in the short term prices could go up due to induced scarcity because more people are buying them, in the long term prices will drop as production rises due to more manufacturers entering the market. Supply rises to meet the new "artificial" demand induced by the subsidies and prices stabilize at a lower level than before. Keep in mind that as long as there is no monopoly or price collusion, markets continue to work even when they aren't "pure".

Unfortunately I can't find a better graph, but this one shows installed price per watt excluding subsidies 2008 to 2009in California . That small increase roughly correlates with the stimulus, but you see a general decline in prices after that. Incentives induce more people to buy which induces more production and more installers rushing into the market. Overall, prices go down, but like you say there is a cost.

The cost for the solar installations are borne by all taxpayers in the form of higher taxes now, inflation, higher taxes later, or some combination of the three. You are right that the subsidies are going to go to the wealthy, but the wealthy are also the heaviest users of energy per capita. They get some of the benefits--prestige and social credit for "going green"--but the real benefits--cleaner air and a less rapidly warming planet--are shared by everyone, not just US taxpayers.

Free markets are good at doing what is most efficient (when economists say efficient, they mean the easiest way, the path of lowest resistance), but they are not so good at doing what is best for the group as a whole. What the individual thinks is best for them is not always what is best for them and is rarely what is best for everyone. One famous example is a thought experiment called the Tragedy of the commons--basically everyone acts in their own best interest, but that depletes or destroys a common resource. To use your pecan/Big Mac example, we might want to subsidize pecans to encourage people to eat them instead of Big Macs. We would all benefit--former Big Mac eaters individually in the form of better health and all people in the form of lower health care costs.

Solar subsidies are a sort of pyramid scam when they aren't sufficiently funded. But, take a look at this infographic from 1BOG that looks at applying the same level of subsidies to solar as we do to fossil fuels. I am a bit dubious of their numbers, but they are probably mostly right. If we funded it sufficiently, subsidies would make solar power cheaper than coal across the US.

The amount of money that is being "redistributed" from the rich to the poor for solar subsidies is, in the grand scheme, minuscule and the entire world benefits from it. The real redistribution now is going from the young to the old--social security and medicare--so don't kvetch too much about redistribution .
benpope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-10, 04:36 PM   #16
tasdbois
Lurking Renovator
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Mirabel, QC
Posts: 28
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I'm in the pricing business, and depending on the number of unwise players in the field, you can bet that a fair chunk of that government money goes straight into corporations profits along the distribution channels. But, that still lowers the price to the end user, and those profits are partly reinvested in R&D or in the economy in general.
tasdbois is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-10, 05:41 PM   #17
Xringer
Lex Parsimoniae
 
Xringer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Woburn, MA
Posts: 4,918
Thanks: 114
Thanked 250 Times in 230 Posts
Default

I can almost understand keeping 'big' oil going. Our military runs on oil. And a lot of our
industry would be in trouble if American oil companies all went broke..

Why would we be subsidizing coal? That sounds a little crazy. You dig it out of the ground and sell it..
Why do they need taxpayer's money to do that??

It's not like we need a whole new infrastructure to make
a crappy gasoline additive, out of a food source.
An additive that cuts your MPG, so you need to get more fillups.
Yeah, the corn ethanol scam needs billions to succeed..


I paid my taxes and social security taxes for over 45 years. (I'm still paying today).
Will I ever get back what I put in? (After paying taxes on it of course)..
Maybe, if I live a lot longer than my Dad or Granddad..
SS is one size fits all.. Those people who never get much past 70 are SOoL..
(One reason I retired at 62)..

I didn't volunteer to sign up for social security, I was given a direct order.
Had I not obeyed that order, I would have been tried and send to a military prison.

Once SS pulls you in, you never get out. Unless, you become part of a
special elite class of citizen who does not have to pay into SS.
One of those special people who can retire after a mere 20 years,
and be paid an amazing amount of money, right out of the taxpayers pockets..
(Those very people are in the process of bankrupting a few liberal states).


So, after they 'took' money from me for 45 years, I would like to get some of it back.
Xringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-10, 06:09 PM   #18
Xringer
Lex Parsimoniae
 
Xringer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Woburn, MA
Posts: 4,918
Thanks: 114
Thanked 250 Times in 230 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tasdbois View Post
I'm in the pricing business, and depending on the number of unwise players in the field, you can bet that a fair chunk of that government money goes straight into corporations profits along the distribution channels. But, that still lowers the price to the end user, and those profits are partly reinvested in R&D or in the economy in general.

I have to wonder why the government HAS to be involved in the process..?.
Isn't it possible that green tech companies can come up with products
that will be profitable, without the nanny state sticking their noses into it??

Maybe if they were a little less T-Rex about their intrusions..?.

Like this idea:
If cities and towns all over north America told their citizens they could
pay their property taxes & water bills with energy credits earned from the local power company.
IF the homeowners had installed PV or wind.
If the city got more kwh credits than it could use, they could give some
to the poor, (removing the cash equivalent from their 'entitlement' checks).

With all the schools in my little town and all the city buildings with all their incandescent etc etc..
City workers don't give a dam about saving taxpayers money.
They aren't interested in turning off the lights or AC when they go home.
I'll bet our city electric bill is massive!
It would be nice if we didn't have to give all that cash away every month..
(I'll bet 30% goes to Canada)!
Xringer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-10, 01:17 AM   #19
Clev
Wannabe greenie
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Crestline, CA
Posts: 74
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xringer View Post
I can almost understand keeping 'big' oil going. Our military runs on oil. And a lot of our
industry would be in trouble if American oil companies all went broke..
There's no reason to subsidize big oil; they're making money hand over fist--even in the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression. And that doesn't count the hundreds of billions we spend stationing our military in sh*tholes to protect the pipeline.

Quote:
I paid my taxes and social security taxes for over 45 years. (I'm still paying today).
Will I ever get back what I put in? (After paying taxes on it of course)..
Unfortunately, we've been robbing social security to pay for massive military programs and corporate welfare for decades, all the while giving the rich increasingly massive tax cuts. Now those same baby boomers are suddenly deciding that they're "taxed enough already"... but don't you dare touch the military, space program, Medicare or Social Security!
Clev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-10, 01:45 AM   #20
strider3700
Master EcoRenovator
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver Island BC
Posts: 745
Thanks: 23
Thanked 37 Times in 30 Posts
Default

I was reading in the local paper that the regional district that I live in spends a little over $800,000 per year on electric. They aren't a huge institution or anything, I bet the city doubles or triples that.

What I did find interesting is they like most of the large organizations here have energy managers and their new policy has them doing a 10% reduction this year.

The most interesting part however is they are doing real time monitoring of all of their usage and if they identify any improvement that has a 10 year payback or less they have to make that change. This is why solar hot water is popping up on pretty much all of the government buildings around here.

My biggest complaint is in one case they ripped out 1-2 year old plumbing and redid a bunch of it to add the solar hot water to a local conference center. The rules force the change but nothing forced them to build it intelligently in the first place.

strider3700 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Ad Management by RedTyger
Inactive Reminders By Icora Web Design