How should GOP candidates handle ethanol subsidies while campaigning in Iowa? (politicians, federal)

[LauraC]

How should GOP candidates handle ethanol subsidies while campaigning in Iowa? I don't have an answer, by the way. I just want to know what you think.

[jojajn]

Honesty is the best policy-right?

[LauraC]

Originally Posted by jojajn

Honesty is the best policy-right?

I agree but that may be just wishful thinking. Let's see how many of them address it.

[Glitch]

Ethanol subsidies should be abolished. If there is a market for ethanol, then subsidies are unnecessary. If there is no market for ethanol, then the taxpayer should not be funding more federal failure.

[wxjay]

Originally Posted by Glitch

Ethanol subsidies should be abolished. If there is a market for ethanol, then subsidies are unnecessary. If there is no market for ethanol, then the taxpayer should not be funding more federal failure.

That works in a theoretical market-driven world. In the real world, that is not the case - consumers do not drive all market-produced items nor do consumers have "perfect information" to understand the costs of, say, oil vs. ethanol vs. solar.

My personal opinion is that corn-based ethanol is a boondoggle anyways. It does not reduce carbon emissions and it does not decrease dependence on foreign (or domestic) oil as a energy source. Now if we want to start funding and producing cellulosic ethanol, then I am willing to consider that for funding and subsidies.

[ndwolfwood]

They should come out against subsidies; being politicians they will do nothing of the sort. Candidates who have no chance of winning Iowa anyway, might try to get some press by taking a stand against them.

[BentBow]

Look, you can actually make a buck growing corn, soybeans and cotton.
Have you seen porkbellies lately?
How about beef?

I know I'm getting more than I ever for calves at the auction.