See what others have said

Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.

Comments

1. #1
   On February 18th, 2009 at 6:12 am, Craig said:

   Six weeks of paid time off.

   Are you kidding me?? I’m in the WRONG business.

2. #2
   On February 18th, 2009 at 6:17 am, Send_Me said:

   According to the L.A. Times, solar power isn’t as clean as most think. But hey, we shouldn’t worry about such ancillary details. This is President Obama’s effort to provide “hope and change” to failures of all kinds, whether it be individual,corporate, state governmental, whatever. Enjoy the ride.

3. #3
   On February 18th, 2009 at 6:54 am, zorro said:

   Question: If existing solar and wind energy companies can’t make it with the present level of government aid, why should we pretend that throwing more money at them will guarantee success?

   There was a rock band years ago at Kent State, the name of that group came to mind after reading this… the name, “You Can’t Reason With A Sick Mind“. I think this describes the disconnect between the green daydreamers and the real world.

4. #4
   On February 18th, 2009 at 7:37 am, bansharia said:

   MM,
   did obambi turn heat down?

   I noticed in picture yesterday from oval office ( friday I believe was when taken as pork bill was passed ) they all had coats on. NO doubt we will always see coats on pics from now on only control the delusion ops image

5. #5
   On February 18th, 2009 at 7:39 am, drivingjack said:

   How long do solar panels work effectively? Where do you dispose of them? What is more important: birds or wind power? Why won’t the rich elite have wind turbines in their back yard? Why is the MSM asking these questions of Obamessiah? Oops – they’re not.

6. #6
   On February 18th, 2009 at 7:40 am, bluesoc said:

   If existing solar and wind energy companies can’t make it with the present level of government aid, why should we pretend that throwing more money at them will guarantee success?

   I think the idea is that other energy sources, like coal, are actually under priced because the prices to do not reflect the all the costs of consumption, particularly the pollution they cause. This is essentially a market failure caused by externalities, and leads to over-consumption.

   To correct the market failure, you either have to raise the price of such energy sources (which is not politically possible) or subsidize those that do not have such externalities.

   The tax would actually be a better option because the government would not need to pick and choose what to subsidize. However, people simply won’t go for it. Thus, you have subsidies of “clean energy.”

7. #7
   On February 18th, 2009 at 7:40 am, bansharia said:

   Zorro,
   was it an acoostick band or did they only use solar powered instrooments?
   what tools!

8. #8
   On February 18th, 2009 at 7:43 am, bansharia said:

   Jack Jack Jack
   pack your bags for gorebull edumacation camp.

9. #9
   On February 18th, 2009 at 8:02 am, conservativesRus said:

   On February 18th, 2009 at 7:40 am, bluesoc said:

   Thank you, thank you. You finally explicitly admitted that you believe a few are smarter than the market. You believe the market prices things incorrectly. You believe you are smarter than that.
   May I ask what YOUR credentials are to determine that “the market” has priced things incorrectly?
   Why should I believe your position about this is correct vs. any other position?

10. #10
    On February 18th, 2009 at 8:20 am, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

    bluesoc said:
    I think the idea is that other energy sources, like coal, are actually under priced because the prices to do not reflect the all the costs of consumption,

    You can think the moon is made of green cheese but that does not make it so. But you go ahead and subsidize clean energy and make sure we are locked into old technology for a generation. That is a concept that I know Liberals can not understand.

    But those solar panels BroBama and friends were ooohing over were obsolete before the turn of this century. Again I know Liberals can not understand that. But go ahead and subsidize them, twit.

11. #11
    On February 18th, 2009 at 8:22 am, karl9000 said:

    Ah yes, “level the playing field.” Another euphemism for “it don’t work!”

    WHen are these people going to learn? If any green technology is worth anything, then it would be, hands down, kicking butt on EVERY OTHER form of energy out there. The green tech should slash and burn its way through a capitalist economy and send every thing else into economic oblivion.

    But it don’t, can’t, and won’t (in the near future). Hence, the need to “level the playing field.”

12. #12
    On February 18th, 2009 at 8:23 am, wrcnossen said:

    There is no such thing as “clean, cheap energy”. The manufacture of solar panels requires many deadly,poluting, hazardous chemicals and toxic waste. The disposal of old, broken panels is costly. The compact light to “save energy” contains mercury for out landfills and ground water.

    I’ve told the story here before about getting the price for enough solar panels and equipment to cover $450 per month of my motels $900 per month electric bill. $180,000, with a $30,000 tax credit to bring the price to $150,000. 378 months, over 30 yrs, to see break even, without interest or repair/replacement costs. This is not technology good for anything other than remote instalations, farm gate openers, etc. unless you want to install it just because you have the money and you just want it.

13. #13
    On February 18th, 2009 at 8:32 am, swede said:

    Question: If existing solar and wind energy companies can’t make it with the present level of government aid, why should we pretend that throwing more money at them will guarantee success?

    Because this is how we solve the public education crisis.

    Probem: Public schools are turning out functionally illiterate graduates

    Solution: Mo money!

    The stunning sucess here is…well, nevermind.

14. #14
    On February 18th, 2009 at 8:45 am, jangar said:

    More government teet suckers. Just what we needed.

15. #15
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:05 am, Paul Revere said:

    All major decisions would be made by consensus of all company employees.

    Epic FAIL! OMG…!

16. #16
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:06 am, TXGator said:

    Nine years in public school….I was finally asked to resign this year. I just couldn’t learn to play by their rules. It’s about time. I actually thought I could help kids….how naive I was.
    Throwing more money at anything is the opposite of what we need. Where government needs to be, they neglect (border?). Where they need to get out of the way, they interfere. Let the market and capitalism work everything out. It works every time.
    Hard times ahead.

17. #17
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:06 am, granite said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 8:22 am, karl9000 said:

    Ah yes, “level the playing field.” Another euphemism for “it don’t work!”

    WHen are these people going to learn? If any green technology is worth anything, then it would be, hands down, kicking butt on EVERY OTHER form of energy out there. The green tech should slash and burn its way through a capitalist economy and send every thing else into economic oblivion.

    But it don’t, can’t, and won’t (in the near future). Hence, the need to “level the playing field.”

    Exactly.

    Another example of what, as the old saying goes about life insurance, “…is not bought; it’s sold.”

18. #18
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:07 am, John Deaux said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 7:40 am, bluesac said:

    They call that rationalization.

    This is how the thought process works.
    1. Here’s what we want to do.
    2. Find a way to explain that it’s better than the current way.

19. #19
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:09 am, bradley said:

    This socialist company is in the business of feeding off the Federal, state and local teat. And he needs MORE handouts? Excellent company plan. Karl Marx would approve.

20. #20
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:10 am, tarpon said:

    It seems like it’s a back scratching loop. You praise my green hoax program, I will praise your hoax green company.

    Pay to play, get government grants. And get bailouts as needed.

    Nobody is fooled.

21. #21
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:13 am, swede said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:06 am, TXGator said:
    Nine years in public school….I was finally asked to resign this year. I just couldn’t learn to play by their rules. It’s about time. I actually thought I could help kids….how naive I was.

    At least you tried. My hat’s off to you. My daughter in law is fighting the same battle now. Don’t even get her started.

22. #22
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:17 am, sonofdy said:

    I think the idea is that other energy sources, like coal, are actually under priced because the prices to do not reflect the all the costs of consumption, particularly the pollution they cause.

    Errr thats actualy wrong. Do you know how much coal plants spend on polution control standards???

    You should look it up.

    But there is actualy a method of safe, clean solar power production already planned and has been arround at least in concept since the 70′s. Orbital solar power stations. The science actualy works. But of course commericaly exploiting space is hardly ever brought up.

23. #23
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:20 am, sonofdy said:

    Not to mention the concept of mining the asteriod belt or the moon.

    I actualy talked to a nutcase one day who said we shouldn’t use nuclear powered spacecraft because we would flood space with radiation.

    

24. #24
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:20 am, genso said:

    Good grief.

25. #25
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:24 am, RTater said:

    Paul Revere – you got that right. Ben and Jerry’s tried a similar, but less ambitious/idiotic strategy with their CEO, offering a salary no higher than any other worker at the factory. Of course, the plan failed.

26. #26
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:26 am, granite said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:20 am, sonofdy said:

    I actualy talked to a nutcase one day who said we shouldn’t use nuclear powered spacecraft because we would flood space with radiation.

    He also probably worries about all the rain that falls into the oceans.

    Sounds like another one of those damned fools whose vote counts as much as yours or mine.
    This is one reason why I so often say, God help us.

27. #27
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:27 am, John Deaux said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:20 am, sonofdy said:
    Not to mention the concept of mining the asteriod belt or the moon.

    I actualy talked to a nutcase one day who said we shouldn’t use nuclear powered spacecraft because we would flood space with radiation.

    The best one I ever heard was that we have global warming because Bush didn’t sign the Kyoto Protocol.

28. #28
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:36 am, backwoods conservative said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:20 am, sonofdy said:

    I actually talked to a nutcase one day who said we shouldn’t use nuclear powered spacecraft because we would flood space with radiation.

    It’s incredible that anyone could be so unaware of how much radiation is already in space in this day and age.

    I remember a few years ago the green chicken littles were in an uproar because a nuclear powered space probe was doing a flyby of Earth to get a gravity assist on its way to the outer solar system. Of course, the catastrophe they predicted never occurred, and the Cassini mission is teaching us much about Saturn and its moons.

29. #29
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:42 am, bansharia said:

    TX,
    He shall open a better door for you.
    Private school/home school advisor?
    God Bless and thank you for not caving.
    huggggs, B

30. #30
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:46 am, chicagojedi said:

    Namaste Solar? Sounds like a company on the tv show Lost. This is just further proof that capitalism no longer exists in the US. If you can’t possibly run a successful business you can always get endless government free cheese. As long as you don’t mind all the strings attached, like being forced to spout the President’s agenda. Well, he probably loved that.

31. #31
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:49 am, dfern said:

    I’ve told the story here before about getting the price for enough solar panels and equipment to cover $450 per month of my motels $900 per month electric bill. $180,000, with a $30,000 tax credit to bring the price to $150,000. 378 months, over 30 yrs, to see break even, without interest or repair/replacement costs. This is not technology good for anything other than remote instalations, farm gate openers, etc. unless you want to install it just because you have the money and you just want it.

    This is correct. I live in San Diego, without question one of the best locations in the country for installation of a solar power system for my home. I have actively looked into installing such a system, but from an economic standpoint it makes no sense. The State of California says they want to encourage the use of solar power, however the rebate structure that they offer is very poor, and there are so many restrictions on how the system must be installed, that the time to recapture the investment is well over 10 years.

    The reason that these companies can’t stay afloat is because no one wants to buy their product. This will not change until either of two things happen — the government gets serious about providing tax incentives to installation of solar systems, or a technological breakthrough occurs to significantly reduce the price of photovoltaic technology. So, once again, it is the government that is obstructing the adoption of clean energy technology.

32. #32
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:49 am, bansharia said:

    The only thing missing from dumb photo op yesterday with obambi and biden actually bending over and TOUCHING the solar panels was a kerry hazmat suit.
    ewwwww what a does a solar panel feel like TOOLS!!!

33. #33
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:50 am, bluesoc said:

    Thank you, thank you. You finally explicitly admitted that you believe a few are smarter than the market. You believe the market prices things incorrectly. You believe you are smarter than that.
    May I ask what YOUR credentials are to determine that “the market” has priced things incorrectly?
    Why should I believe your position about this is correct vs. any other position?

    I urge you to look into the concept of externalities. It is not a “liberal” idea. It is an economic idea, and it’s not controversial (at least in the world of econ).

34. #34
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:52 am, happy2behere said:

    Got an estimate for solar panels a couple of weeks ago from Nasty and their competitor. For solar panels – $45K! With rebates and tax breaks, can get cost down to about $30K. If I want solar hot water too, another $16K or so. It pays to be government green.

35. #35
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:52 am, granite said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:46 am, chicagojedi said:

    Namaste Solar? Sounds like a company on the tv show Lost.

    Namaste…sounds familiar…I wonder if that’s Hindi for “Hello”.

    This is just further proof that capitalism no longer exists in the US. If you can’t possibly run a successful business you can always get endless government free cheese. As long as you don’t mind all the strings attached, like being forced to spout the President’s agenda. Well, he probably loved that.

    Did you just post a description of one type of beta male?!

36. #36
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:52 am, lgm said:

    You of course know why we subsidize solar energy, even if you disagree. Our dependence on foreign oil has many indirect costs not born by the user: trillion dollar invasions of Iraqi countries, global warming, balance of payments issues that lead to economic meltdowns, etc.

37. #37
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:55 am, granite said:

    Speaking of beta male…right on cue!

38. #38
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:56 am, bansharia said:

    OT:
    Two tv stations here decided not to wait until postponed digi transition
    CW and PBS.
    So THE only station that gets direct taxpayer do-re-mi goes off air.
    Based on the biased blowjob frontline
    gave to Barney and Dodd lastnight small wonder.

39. #39
    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:58 am, happy2behere said:

    I got the estimate because my natural gas/heating bill doubled from DEC 07 to DEC 08. Even though Colorado has an abundant supply of natural gas, since the new pipeline that pumps gas out of Colorado opened, natural gas has more than doubled for Coloradoans.

    So I get to pay more for heat or a fortune for panels.

40. #40
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:00 am, bansharia said:

    Happy,
    if you are so inclined there are MUCH cheaper alternatives for solar/wind you can build from scratch poke around on a non antiAmerican search engine

41. #41
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:01 am, happy2behere said:

    lgm – your general point was well made, but in reagrds to my heating bill it doesn’t apply as my natural gas comes from here in Colorado.

42. #42
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:01 am, backwoods conservative said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:52 am, lgm said:

    Our dependence on foreign oil has many indirect costs…

    And the left responds by stifling domestic production.

    global warming

    A global hoax.

43. #43
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:01 am, conservativesRus said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:50 am, bluesoc said:

    I have a little formal post-graduate education so I am well aware of the concept of “externalities”. So you are not saying you understand better than “the market”? What are you saying? Are you saying that “externalities” (as determined by you) are a good reason to do something?

44. #44
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:02 am, bansharia said:

    Happy,
    HMM move to America? that is cheapest option lol!! Can you even burn wood there?

45. #45
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:03 am, bansharia said:

    I have a Judge Judy law degree pick my brain anytime.

46. #46
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:03 am, sonofdy said:

    You of course know why we subsidize solar energy, even if you disagree. Our dependence on foreign oil has many indirect costs not born by the user: trillion dollar invasions of Iraqi countries, global warming, balance of payments issues that lead to economic meltdowns, etc.

    Well then you would agree the best solution would be to increase domestic production to cover the time inbetween now and the day when we no longer need to import right?

47. #47
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:04 am, conservativesRus said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:52 am, lgm said:

    You of course know why we subsidize solar energy

    That one I know but I’m still trying to figure out why we subsidize math teachers.

48. #48
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:07 am, granite said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:01 am, conservativesRus said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:50 am, bluesoc said:
    I have a little formal post-graduate education so I am well aware of the concept of “externalities”. So you are not saying you understand better than “the market”? What are you saying? Are you saying that “externalities” (as determined by you) are a good reason to do something?

    So you are not saying you understand better than “the market”?

    Of course…that’s exactly what he is saying.

    Are you saying that “externalities” (as determined by you) are a good reason to do something?

    Again, Of course….

    …“externalities” (as determined by you)….

    The trifecta!
    Yet again, Of course….

49. #49
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:07 am, TXGator said:

    Bansharia,
    Thanks! I needed that. When they started changing my grades and, oh, just ask swede’s daughter. Would you believe the lowest level classes are called ‘advanced’ at my school, or the fact that you can’t give a zero/100 for no work? I could go on and on. We are producing the most selfish, self-absorbed, and least qualified generation in American history. Thank God for private school and homeschoolers, or the National Spelling Bee would be won with a word like “homeboyz”. Good news is there are some great kids out here, and they see the writing on the wall.
    I know I am out this year, and it is a freeing feeling. I did try to instill responsibility…but you can’t fight everyone in the administration that just wants to keep the funding coming. You know what they say about stats. We make ours up out of whole cloth, it seems.
    Swede, tell your daughter to not compromise herself.
    I think I’m gonna sell my houses, quit working, and go John Galt on them for a while.
    I pay enough taxes already.

50. #50
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:07 am, happy2behere said:

    Bansharia – actually, you are not far off! My husband and I are looking for a vacation cabin in the mountains that is either self-contained (off the grid) or one that we can make that way. We like the backside of Breckenridge, its beautiful there.

51. #51
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:10 am, happy2behere said:

    And Bansharia, can you please make sense next time?

52. #52
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:10 am, sonofdy said:

    trillion dollar invasions of Iraqi countries

    There are more than one iraqi country???

    

53. #53
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:12 am, happy2behere said:

    TXGator – tell me about it. My poor mom taught in LA for almost 40 years before being harassed to retire. You are a hero in my book – thanks for your service.

54. #54
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:12 am, backwoods conservative said:

    There are more than one iraqi country???

    If you use Biden math there are.

55. #55
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:13 am, bansharia said:

    TX,
    If you and family need a place to hang you are welcome here. Wood to chop, weeds to pull, guns to clean and Bibles to thump
    Again I thank you for standing up for children and America.

56. #56
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:14 am, lawhawk said:

    Yes, Obama had to go to Colorado to sign this bill into action. He had to claim that he was doing it to save the children from the perils of global warming.

    Did he take into account the tons of COx emitted by Air Force One and all the support planes, helicopters, and vehicles brought along so that he could sign this bill in Colorado rather than DC at the White House?

    Of course not. This isn’t going to solve anything except line the pockets of those businesses and entities that supported Obama and his agenda all along.

57. #57
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:15 am, swede said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 9:52 am, lgm said:
    You of course know why we subsidize solar energy, even if you disagree. Our dependence on foreign oil has many indirect costs not born by the user: trillion dollar invasions of Iraqi countries, global warming, balance of payments issues that lead to economic meltdowns, etc.

    Solar needs to be subsidized because it is not cost effective and in most parts of the country the percentage of time the sun actually shines makes it even less so. Nuclear, coal and natural gas are much better immediate options to combat the oil problems.

    BTW, the “clean coal is a myth” meme is false. GA Power has a coal plant with a scrubber that rocks. Put the subsidies into further research in that area.

58. #58
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:16 am, mchristian said:

    My brother has owned and operated his solar business for over twenty years, primarily installing and maintaining pool and water heaters. Like other small business owners, he works every day, is on call when not working and would only take six weeks off if he were ill. He can’t afford it.

    Namaste sounds like a racket and I have no doubt that we will hear about more enterprises like this one.

59. #59
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:16 am, bansharia said:

    Happy,
    off the grid sweet!
    as far as making sense.. I do to those who agree taint my job to translate for those folk who dont

60. #60
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:18 am, TXGator said:

    I appreciate the kind words guys. I was born in rural Georgia, so chopping some wood and gardening sounds pretty good to me right now. My mom used to plant corn, tomatoes, etc. in our front yard. I want to get back to the simpler stuff.
    I was a chemistry guy, and I have tenants/properties, so I have options here, but I think I’m going old school cabin in the GA/TN mountains on them. Let them fund acorn and other various boondoggles without my tax money.
    And, I definitely feel better whenever I get into that Bible around some good old fashioned Christian folk.

61. #61
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:20 am, bansharia said:

    law,
    but obambi looks soooo sexy touching solar panels I wonder how many babies were spawned by that photo op!
    hm we need a link to when I think about you I touch myself HAHAHAHAHA

62. #62
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:23 am, bansharia said:

    TX,
    There ya go come back to your roots.
    A chem guy is very handy for the future.
    How can I contact you? ( if you are interested)

63. #63
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:24 am, DBNinKY said:

    This isn’t going to solve anything except line the pockets of those businesses and entities that supported Obama and his agenda all along.

    And the graft doesn’t stop there: when the states get their shares of President Obamapelosireids’ spending bill, millions will flow into Democrat coffers as private companies donate huge sums to win government contracts, making it that much harder for Republicans to compete.

64. #64
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:30 am, Bluejester said:

    My wife said she watched a video of the signing ceremony and told me it was one of the funniest things she’d ever seen. “It’s like watching a infomercial Namaste’ .” Of course the healthcare suff has her scared, but it was nice to find someting to smile about at the time.

65. #65
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:31 am, bansharia said:

    DB,
    as am sure you are aware the vast majority of $ states are getting is being used to close gaps in bloated spending and postpone AFSCME union and other union job cuts. I did find humor with the silly photo op of some job site in mizzoo that claimed to start job seconds after obambi signed the bill lawdyyyyy the media hacks and dem slacks really think we are stupid. oh well

66. #66
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:32 am, PhredE said:

    “If you can’t possibly run a successful business you can always get endless government free cheese.”

    Within recent history, businesses in the US have figured out that instead of concentrating on core business practices to innovate and lead to survive, they have simply shifted focus to lobbying and pressuring various levels of government for tax breaks, [undeserved and unwarranted] subsidies, special tax provisions, etc.

    The debacles of: Enron, MCI, Bernie Madoff, etc. all involved ostensibly “legal” businesses, and all were engaged in outright accounting/fiscal fraud. Plus, anytime you add “special considerations” into the tax law, you make something already infinitely complex even more complicated (read unenforceable). It’s well past time to get serious once again about regulating large corporations/ institutions and treating white-collar crime on par with ordinary street crime.
    Simplify tax law/code(s) would go a long way to helping this situation.

    For example: my local electric utility (PGE – which was bought up by Enron in the late 1990s) has filed income tax returns where they paid, yes, the grand sum of $10.00 in income taxes in past years. Uh, not to sound to out of line here, but well, I pay more than $10.00 in income taxes every year and I don’t have the luxury of billions in gross income. …This from an entity that enjoys a near-captive customer base and a predictable and large income every year.

67. #67
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:36 am, bilgerat said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:15 am, swede said:
    Solar needs to be subsidized because it is not cost effective and in most parts of the country the percentage of time the sun actually shines makes it even less so.

    Amen to that…My husband and I looked into solar energy last fall since we are replacing our heating system. We have no natural gas on our street and propane is not an option. We currently have a 30+ year old oil burner so we thought, hey, let’s check out solar heat.

    We would have to change to a radiant heating system which would involve tearing up the floor throughout the house. You also need to have a site survey done to see if your roof is positioned well enough to capture enough sun energy to provide heat.
    Your roof also needs to be strong enough to support the panels.

    To make an already long story somewhat shorter, both solar companies we contacted recommended we upgrade our oil burner to a new, more efficient unit, which we are doing in a couple of weeks. It would be more cost effective for us in the long run regarding both installation and maintenance to stick with oil. They crunched the numbers and we would never recoup enough money to make a solar install financially worthwhile.

    Moral of the story is there are some honest solar companies out there. However, solar is NOT an option for many people due to geographic and financial contraints.

    Deal with it, solar geeks. We’re sticking with oil….Drill Here Drill Now!!!

68. #68
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:38 am, granite said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:32 am, PhredE said:

    I guess we need to add corollaries to the old saying, “It takes money to make money.”

    How about:

    “It takes money to take money.”

    And:

    “It takes money to keep money.”

69. #69
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:42 am, Pasadena Phil said:

    LA has a Proposition B for which the DWP has spent well over $100M promoting that will cost the city taxpayers almost $4 BILLION. According to the LA Times, it will be hiring gangbangers.

    This bill was written COMPLETELY by the DWP, bypassed all normal vetting processes and was not announce until 3 weeks ago. Elections are in 3 weeks.

    Get used to it folks, that is what life is like in Hugo Chavez’ Venezuela. No chattering allowed.

70. #70
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:45 am, swede said:

    TX said
    

    Swede, tell your daughter to not compromise herself.

    Not a chance. She’s a rock and trusts the Lord rather than the system. But, like you, I suspect time will wear her down.

    I understand your frustration, but I’m thinking someone with your heart and skill is desperately needed. Think about private schools, tutoring or ?? Your gifts are sorely needed. Praying for you.

71. #71
    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:57 am, ctmom said:

    Atlas Shrugged.

72. #72
    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:03 am, cheapseat said:

    lgm, you ignore that we have subsidized wind, solar, and fairy dust energy schemes coming out of propeller headed academicians since jimmy carter in the 70′s. the argument was the same, the problem was the same, the stupid answer from the left was the same. being from the show me state, show me one single street vehicle that runs on solar or wind power. show me one city that runs exclusively on wind/solar/ or fairy dust electrical power. the univ of colorado/boulder has a nuclear plant to generate electrical power as does the u of mo. it’s ok to live in disneyworld when you are operating in the cozy umbrella of socialist academia, but the real world can’t run on bicycles and birkenstocks.

73. #73
    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:17 am, wighttrasch said:

    Ben and Jerry’s tried a similar, but less ambitious/idiotic strategy with their CEO, offering a salary no higher than any other worker at the factory. Of course, the plan failed.

    Change ‘Ben & Jerry’ to ‘A Hospital’ and ‘CEO’ to ‘doctors’, as well as ‘the factory’ to ‘the hospital’ and you’ll get an idea why socialized medicine won’t work either…

74. #74
    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:19 am, rocketman said:

    ***
    A new employee at work had a sign on his truck that said, “FREE ELECTRICITY–ASK ME HOW. I did–he had installed solar panels on his home.
    ***
    I asked him how much they cost–answer was $15k. I asked him how long they would last–answer was 15 years–barring a really bad hailstorm.
    ***
    The cost per year was $1000.–more if something failed. This works out to $83. a month. The solar panels could not run an electric stove, electric clothes dryer, or electric heat–natural gas still had to do these jobs. The system involved batteries that had to be replaced every 3 to 5 years–this cost ($1000?) was not included in the power costs.
    ***
    My electric bill is $60. a month–without any maintenance costs–and I get all the power I need when I need it.
    ***
    FREE POWER MY A**!! Even with any government subsidies this is a losing proposition at present.
    ***
    John Bibb
    ***

75. #75
    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:22 am, conservativesRus said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 10:32 am, PhredE said:
    … they have simply shifted focus to lobbying and pressuring various levels of government for tax breaks,

    Given that taxing a corporation is a completely non-sensical thing to do…. but politicians think companies are just fine to tax, a company lobbying for a tax break is a valid activity for themselves.
    On the other hand, if a business model requires ANY subsidy, then it’s not viable.

76. #76
    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:24 am, wighttrasch said:

    has a nuclear plant to generate electrical power as does the u of mo

    hey! cheapseat! I’m in mid-MO too, and I hear AmerenUE wants to get another nuclear plant started up…it will only cost 6 billion dollars…

77. #77
    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:40 am, PhredE said:

    “Given that taxing a corporation is a completely non-sensical thing to do….”

    Sorry, I’ll just have to respectfully disagree on this. If a corporation can have rights and benefits on par with an individual taxpaying citizen backed by US law, then it should also have every responsibility as a citizen as well.
    I don’t have the luxury of not paying taxes – nor should any business or corporation.

78. #78
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:02 pm, TXGator said:

    Swede,
    Thanks for the prayers. I’ll be doing the same for your daughter. I have a feeling the old knees are going to get pretty tough in the next few years.

    Bansharia,
    What do you have in mind?

79. #79
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:06 pm, conservativesRus said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:40 am, PhredE said:
    Sorry, I’ll just have to respectfully disagree on this

    Please define what a corporation is. What “rights” do corporations have? (other than paying taxes)
    Do corporations vote?
    Further – if a corporation “makes money” – what is that really – OWNERS making money. Owners are people who pay taxes. (unless they are democrats)
    Corporations should not be taxed.

80. #80
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:07 pm, mattm said:

    • Six weeks of paid time off.

    Get a job their, Unionize it and they you can get 12 weeks off. Why should I have to work in the Summer when Teachers don’t? It’s not ffaaaair.

81. #81
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:10 pm, conservativesRus said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 11:40 am, PhredE said:

    PhredE – I apologize if that came back too strongly. It’s a very worthwhile conversation and I don’t mean to be demeaning to you about it.

82. #82
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:17 pm, happy2behere said:

    PhredE – “Free government cheese” is and old one and it dates you – and (uhem) me.

    Back to the subject – Namaste’ (Nasty) is located in Boulder, around here that says a lot.

83. #83
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:19 pm, cheapseat said:

    yes wighttrash, powerplants cost money, especially with lawyers fighting do gooders at every step trying to have us return to the horse and buggy age. but unless i’m mistaken, the taxpayers won’t be paying for it, the shareholders of ameren u.e. will. and my per month cost on electricity, which is reliable without my having to store lead/acid batteries in my basement which could explode and or spew toxic gasses, is 83 dollars per month. i’m spending more subsidizing the crack pipe dreams of the intelligencia through grants off my tax money which have not produced one viable product in forty years, than i will ever spend on electricity. econ 101, and why the left has never understood that making budgets while taking drugs has never worked. my father used to call it “the magic slate” and when we were teenagers and begged for a loan to buy a car, he trotted out reality such as insurance, gas/tires/oil, and all those pesky cost overuns, to point out our magic slate could not be balanced when our brain was residing below our belt thinking about hein & shein.

84. #84
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:24 pm, PhredE said:

    “PhredE – “Free government cheese” is and old one and it dates you – and (uhem) me.”

    I quoted someone else’s comment – the wording was not mine.

    conservativeRus – No apologies necessary… we still disagree though.

85. #85
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:29 pm, wighttrasch said:

    Yeah; I’m on an electric cooperative and my electricity bill is so low you’d get a fright.

86. #86
    On February 18th, 2009 at 12:50 pm, conservativesRus said:

    PhredE – actually we agree about one of the major points – if the company cannot exist w/o government help, then it should not exist.
    On that point we have 100% agreement.

87. #87
    On February 18th, 2009 at 1:16 pm, AlohaGuy said:

    GA Power has a coal plant with a scrubber that rocks. Put the subsidies into further research in that area.

    Duke has a scrubber that outputs gypsum panels for wallboard! I believe that was Al Gore’s idea right after he invented the Internet…no,no, wait – it was someone who has to meet a payroll while competing in the marketplace. I believe there was a company intern there who used the word “externalities” and spent the next six months loading wallboard onto forklifts…

88. #88
    On February 18th, 2009 at 1:34 pm, jdubya said:

    A Recipe of Destruction:

    Environmental concerns would be a driving force in every aspect of the company.

    • Six weeks of paid time off.

    • A concept called FOH — frank, open and honest — to help eliminate gossip and grudges.

    • Employees, no matter what their job description, have the same pay scale.

    • One percent of yearly revenues goes to solar systems donated to community groups.

    • All major decisions would be made by consensus of all company employees.

    Six weeks paid time off, does this include sick time? Is this up front? Anyone can get a job, then just cut out and get the six weeks in pay, BY LAW.
    I had this happen at another employer. It was a bad idea then and a bad idea now, if it is not served with stipulations.

    FOH: This policy is a joke. Does not work. People are people and you cannot dispell rumors.

    Same pay scale. This does not weed out the good, better, best of any organization. Good luck on retention. When a slacker or milkman gets the same rate and increase as the most seasoned worker, you have failed business management 101: Reward for success.

    Hooray! Part of our revenue is going to people who don’t work anyway. With this new StimPAK(TM) we are double whammied (from the worker’s point of view).

    WOW! WTF!?! All employees weigh in on major decisions? Does this include whether we get a foosball table in the lunchroom, or if we are going to sell cells to Cuba? Probably the dumbest of dumb. Not implying the workers are stupid in anyway shape or form, but if the upper management cannot make key decisions at times when they are needed the most, the company should implode and recede back to the septic tank whence it came.

89. #89
    On February 18th, 2009 at 1:48 pm, bluesoc said:

    So you are not saying you understand better than “the market”? What are you saying? Are you saying that “externalities” (as determined by you) are a good reason to do something?

    It appears you have concerns about two aspects of what I said. I’m assuming that you accept the existence of externalities in the general sense.

    First, who determines when externalities are present (or more precisely when action should be taken)?

    I think this is a fair question. I would argue that it’s the legislature’s job to make such determinations. I would hope they would have some empirical basis for their decisions.

    Second, how do we correct externalities?

    You seem to be suggesting that the market will fix itself. I think such a proposition is fundamentally wrong. Externalities are, by definition, costs (or benefits) that the market has failed to account for. They are market failures, and the market cannot correct it’s own fundamental failings. Thus, other active measures must be taken, either voluntarily or through government regulation.

90. #90
    On February 18th, 2009 at 1:54 pm, b-cat said:

    They are market failures, and the market cannot correct it’s own fundamental failings. Thus, other active measures must be taken, either voluntarily or through government regulation.

    Government is an external force.

91. #91
    On February 18th, 2009 at 1:54 pm, TXGator said:

    Someone went to a liberal arts college….

92. #92
    On February 18th, 2009 at 1:59 pm, bluesoc said:

    Someone went to a liberal arts college….

    You are correct that economics is a social science.

93. #93
    On February 18th, 2009 at 1:59 pm, bluesoc said:

    Government is an external force.

    I don’t see your point.

94. #94
    On February 18th, 2009 at 2:29 pm, TXGator said:

    Bit dog howls.
    Try reality sometime.

95. #95
    On February 18th, 2009 at 2:33 pm, greenfairie said:

    Even your friendly local street drug dealer has more business sense than the numbskulls who run this company.

96. #96
    On February 18th, 2009 at 2:58 pm, conservativesRus said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 1:48 pm, bluesoc said:

    I go back to my fundamental point – are you smarter than “the market”? You seem to think government people are.
    I might suggest that the members of legislative bodies for the most part are educated in law. An education in law does not give one the necessary tools to design jet engines, power plants, fuel cells or make determinations about how the electrical grid should be structured. If they don’t know how energy is converted from one form to another, I sure as shootin don’t want “them” making determinations about whether or not externalities exist and how to correct same if they did exist. Further if they did exist, why are you convinced that “the market” would not properly price them in?
    People price things into their behavior patterns all the time – some of it correct, some of it incorrect – but for you to claim superior knowledge and wisdom than all others is simply arrogant.
    Lastly – because something is taught in a classroom, does not make it true.

97. #97
    On February 18th, 2009 at 3:06 pm, bluesoc said:

    Further if they did exist, why are you convinced that “the market” would not properly price them in?

    You have a fundamental misunderstanding of externalities. By definition they are not accounted for in the price.

    I don’t think we can have a conversation about externalities if you don’t know what they are.

98. #98
    On February 18th, 2009 at 3:34 pm, cheapseat said:

    i agree with moving away from petroleum based vehicles, but they have to be viable in the real world. today, hybrid vehicles are making the grade, although the long term effects of all these batteries once discarded may be troublesome. but biodiesel for diesel vehicles seem the easiest, most viable change we can produce. our car companies and virtually all european car companies have diesel vehicles which get 25% or more better gas mileage than a similar gasoline engine. it is torque rich which is what america values as we don’t have autobahns. and biodiesel can be made from waste products be they grease, algae, or rotten fruit. IF we could get our politicians to stop kissing the butt of these crazy environmentalists, we could bring these vehicles into the u.s. tomorrow. especially since the two largest selling vehicles in the world year after year are the ford and gm pickup truck, a natural for diesel.

99. #99
    On February 18th, 2009 at 4:47 pm, corkie said:

    On February 18th, 2009 at 3:06 pm, bluesoc said:

    I don’t think we can have a conversation about externalities if you don’t know what they are.

    SOX, NOX, and particulate matter are externalities which are already priced into the market.

    CO2 is NOT an externality.

100. #100
     On February 18th, 2009 at 4:54 pm, Danceswithdachshunds said:

     As they say Michelle, insanity, by definition, is repeating the same behavior and expecting a different outcome. Such is manifest in the mental disorder known as “liberalism”.