Quote:
Originally Posted by Don9
|
Solyndra illustrates the fallacy of the so-called "public/private" partnership that Obama has been touting. The "public" part is all about using tax dollars to pick winners and losers. Solyndra is not the first company in the U.S. that has been driven out of business by cheaper foreign goods. So why does Solyndra get tax dollar support and those other companies don't? Quite apart from the role of George Kaiser and political favors, this "investment" is all about ideology, beginning with the administation buying into the notion that fossil fuels are bad for the environment and that, to save the planet, alternative sources of energy must be developed. In these kinds of deals ideology trumps economics. A private investor looks for a return on investment. The government looks first to advancing the policy goal and only secondarily to a possible return on investment for the taxpayer. That is because the policy makers are not playing with their own money. It's only taxpayer money and if the venture goes belly up, oh well, not a big deal. It's the good intention that matters in the end.
If developing alternative sources of energy is a national priority, as determined by our elected representatives in Congress, then it should be the subject of a government-run project, like NASA, with close oversight by the relevant congressional committees and with no profit motive intruding to bring corruption to the enterprise. Obama hasn't pursued this avenue for the simple reason that he couldn't sell it to the people and their representatives, like JFK did when he proposed sending men to the moon. So he operates like an autocrat, not a president.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
