dayman Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 What? No I'm not, re read it again We're not talking loan guarantees to select companies. We're talking tax credits to industries.
WorldTraveller Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 You're not understanding what I'm saying, let me try to be a little more clear. One invests in companies. The other invests in research Big difference between the two
dayman Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 You're not understanding what I'm saying, let me try to be a little more clear. One invests in companies. The other invests in research Big difference between the two Oh I see you are anti-market. I didn't realize that my bad.
WorldTraveller Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 Is that what you got out of that? Ok, now I see I'm wasting my time with someone who is economically challenged
dayman Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 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?
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 Oh I see you are anti-market. I didn't realize that my bad. I understand you're being snarky, but you do realize that neither of those types of spending are market based at all, right?
dayman Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 Is that what you got out of that? Ok, now I see I'm wasting my time with someone who is economically challenged 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.
WorldTraveller Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 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. Yeah, and I get that you're handicapped. No biggie
dayman Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 I understand you're being snarky, but you do realize that neither of those types of spending are market based at all, right? 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. Yeah, and I get that you're handicapped. No biggie Explain why we need to eliminate those tax credits. Go ahead. Lets here your position.
meazza Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 Explain why we need to eliminate those tax credits. Go ahead. Lets here your position. hear
WorldTraveller Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 I already told you light weight, it's a matter of picking winners and losers, and this point was argued by myself long before you ever showed up here at PPP and most people that are regulars on this site know this. But go ahead, continue to embarrass yourself. That's on you
dayman Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 I already told you light weight, it's a matter of picking winners and losers, and this point was argued by myself long before you ever showed up here at PPP and most people that are regulars on this site know this. But go ahead, continue to embarrass yourself. That's on you 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?
dayman Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 (edited) Link? It was sarcasm he isn't there is no link. Oil gets tax credits. Wind doesn't. Edited August 8, 2012 by TheNewBills
WorldTraveller Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 Every time you begin losing a certain argument, you switch it to another argument. Nice clever tactics
dayman Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 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.
WorldTraveller Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 I don't care what past or current GOP politicians supported, I'm talking about my philosophy and how Romneys current position is more in line with my line of thinking. And I have answered, I don't believe we should be in the business of picking winners and losers, I believe that the market should determine if a business model is to succeed or fail. I don't support most subsidies, I believe it creates distortions and Disallocations in the market. I don't support the oil tax breaks, I don't support most farm subsidies.
dayman Posted August 8, 2012 Posted August 8, 2012 I don't care what past or current GOP politicians supported, I'm talking about my philosophy and how Romneys current position is more in line with my line of thinking. And I have answered, I don't believe we should be in the business of picking winners and losers, I believe that the market should determine if a business model is to succeed or fail. I don't support most subsidies, I believe it creates distortions and Disallocations in the market. I don't support the oil tax breaks, I don't support most farm subsidies. 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.
Recommended Posts