dayman

What I'm saying you don't understand is not that intervention in markets is good. It's that there are a few special instances where market forces are not going to take us to the promise land. With all the global competition for clean energy, CO2 reductions efforts, and the status quo....if we are going to stay competitive and be a leader in both energy independence and CO2 reduction then these tax credits are a good thing. And their elimination (to sound like a broken record) without the elimination across the bar off all other credits (including oil, coal, etc) is nothing more than backwards energy and environmental policy.

Me and gungy v. the world. Get w/ it.

No deal here. The winners and loser argument isn't intellectually consistent when credits are pervasive in our tax code for all sorts of continuing business flush w/ cash including Oil. And anyway the future energy market is one of the few where public incentives are crucial. And Obama's green energy initiative supports these credits....as every President since the early 90s have. I don't think Mitt hates green energy and desires CO2 emissions and oil addiction. But this policy makes absolutely no sense, and is asinine. It shows an utter lack of understanding of what is going on in the global market for future energy and the impact of tax credits on our domestic leadership in innovation and production of alternative energy. And aside from environmental and future energy independence concerns, It also is pissing off Iowa officials b/c it directly threatens jobs in their state immediately if it goes away...a not so insignificant side effect for people in Iowa and many other states. I've yet to see a Romney position I disagree with as much as this one. There is almost no credible argument to defend it. Obama is green, his political philosophy is to turn anything Obama supports toxic regardless of its merit, and so now Mitt Romney (former moderate Republican) is against tax credits for domestic wind production. It's just bad.

LOL ya like World said I am generally on your team haha leave me alone my feelings are hurt. I'm just trying to talk about ... the topic.

But you support the elimination of tax credits for green energy while Mitt could care less about Oil credits? Mitt's a philosophical purist here in this position? Mitt is doubling down on anti-green sentiment and meanwhile, India, China, Germany...they can have public incentives and become the leaders of the future. We'll do nothing and let the market work...and by the market work we mean give credits for oil but not wind. This is plain and simple the wrong step and I'm actually as surprised as the Iowa GOP. I disagree with a lot of Romney's positions but few seem as totally asinine as this one. This is quite literally, an anti-future energy policy. It's not about guaranteed loans, it's not about ideology, it's plain and simple about giving the finger to green energy b/c Obama likes it.

LOL my God can we all get off Romney being a self made man v. silver spoon product and back to the metrics of this prediction?

Losing traction? World I've asked you to explain how eliminating the tax credit for wind is a good thing. You haven't. You say it's bad b/c it picks the winners and losers. Of course, other tax credits are all over the place including oil and nobody is talking about those... In fact, it's not even a partisan issue. They have been championed by the past 2 GOP Presidents, passed by GOP congress, and the first post is GOP leadership opposing their elimination. There's no losing traction here. R&D is not something that replaces the benefits of tax credits for wind. And Obama supports both. The elimination of these credits is backwards energy policy.

It was sarcasm he isn't there is no link. Oil gets tax credits. Wind doesn't.

So Mitt is out there talking about oil tax credits needing to be eliminated also? B/c he's not going to pick winners and losers? He's just going to fund R&D b/c that's something we don't already do and Obama doesn't already push for more money for?

Tax incentives to stimulate the green energy investment and production is not market "based?" I do understand your point it's not a purist approach but as has been discussed (I believe with you actually) in the CO2 thread I've made my position known on this. Explain why we need to eliminate those tax credits. Go ahead. Lets here your position.

You have to support the elimination of tax credits for green tech b/c it's Romney's position. I understand. It's ok. I get it.

And by the way to act like we don't fund R&D? We don't already do this? This is a new idea from Romney and it requires the elimination of green tax cuts?

Oh I see you are anti-market. I didn't realize that my bad.

We're not talking loan guarantees to select companies. We're talking tax credits to industries.

I'm talking about production and investment tax credits....idk why you are still talking about Solyndra. You see, this is why what I described above of mixed messaging hurts America.

Solyndra speak about government picking winners used to defeat tax credits politically is bad IMO. And R&D v. Tax Credits is false choice. It's not a 0 sum game. It's not a liberal position.

You shouldn't convince your base good ideas are bad by associating them with different ideas.

The quote I posted that I don't like is dirty IMO b/c speaking to Solyndra (even though you aren't mentioning them) to vilify tax credits is dirty.

damn I need to learn to speak (*#lj4)@ I can't follow discussion these days

Romney will remove specific things that work and replace them with "regulatory reform and R&D and production." Ok, he's got a plan. I realize that now. Haha, look I don't care about the politics of energy. Whoever is elected needs to keep the incentives and credits for domestic production of green energy, frack smart and a lot, and position ourselves for the future in a way that keeps up w/ China and Germany. It's not some voodoo. Parlaying Solyndra into making green energy a bad thing and tax credits wasteful government spending is just backwards political inertia.

LOL look I didn't realize quoting a Romney spokesperson from the 5 hour old article posted in the 1st post was spouting misinformation.

Tax credits and incentives for domestic production of wind, solar, tidal, etc...that kills oil and coal? And nobody is trying to kill gas. Romney either doesn't get the energy game or he's playing up the "love oil, green energy is bull ****" angle for election purposes. I hope it's the latter if he wins.

A shade better than what?

hehe