Open thread: O’s next jobs press conference

posted at 10:42 am on October 6, 2011 by Jazz Shaw

The first I heard about President Obama’s intention to hold yet another press conference this morning was from the ever popular Amanda Carpenter’s twitter feed.

Reporters, make this presser worth your time! You’ve heard everything he has to say about his jobs bill already. Make some news!

The timing of this conference is, no doubt, in response to yet another set of dismal jobless claims numbers which will serve as an excuse for yet another call to Pass This Bill. But even with Reid thinking he’s found the silver bullet to get Democrats in line – in the form of yet another version of the millionaire’s tax – the bill is less likely than ever to reach the White House. So what should the White House press corps do?

Two choices. They can rehash the same old questions about the bill and allow Obama to use the bully pulpit for yet another campaign speech, or they can raise the roof a bit. Assuming there will be questions allowed after the President’s comments – a big assumption, I know – they could risk the wrath of The One and venture off into some other, more fertile areas of inquiry.

Will any of them ask if the Attorney General plans on investigating the … errr… Attorney General about possible perjury charges in lying to Congress about Fast and Furious? Will the phrase “Durbin amendment” or “Dodd-Frank” see the light of day in relation to Obama playing politics with Bank of America? Confidence in the press these days isn’t much higher than that of Congress, which is saying something since both are only slightly more positive than eating worms.

Will anyone shake things up, as Amanda suggested? What should they be asking about today? Your suggestions, as always, are welcome.

Update (Allahpundit): Not surprisingly, the millionaire tax is very much on the table at the White House.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5

“Happy anniversary to President Obama and the first lady. They had a nice private dinner to celebrate the 19th anniversary of the last time someone said ‘yes’ to an Obama proposal.” — Craig Ferguson

Schadenfreude on October 6, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Delusional? WTF is that stupid down-home good ole boy speech pattern he’s trying? First it was all Black street talk or Down South Black talk to the CBC, now this? We need to make a commercial of all this Harvard graduate’s phoney patter to the masses.

Deanna on October 6, 2011 at 12:24 PM

“I ain’t in no ways tard.” ——-HRC

hillbillyjim on October 6, 2011 at 12:27 PM

Get used to this. The MSM is going all in to get him reelected and they are going to destroy anyone who gets in his way. Between now and next November is going to be ugly. Unprecedented ugliness.

SurferDoc on October 6, 2011 at 12:28 PM

Rush’s monologue on Apple is touching

TheQuestion on October 6, 2011 at 12:29 PM

I am woefully dense about the DOW ….
Can someone explain the climb during / since the 0′s presser ?

pambi on October 6, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Rush’s monologue on Apple is touching

I guess you can’t torment the dead, so it’s ok.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Oh, and China is beating us in the race to fund fraudulent solar energy companies.

Punchenko on October 6, 2011 at 11:50 AM

I’m not sure you’re understanding what China is doing here.

China recognizes that the West will bend over backwards and happily hand over their fortune in the deluded quest for solar power.

They aren’t going to stand by while nations throw money away, China just holds up it’s can for nation’s to toss their money into and they hand over solar panels that are obsolete upon delivery.

China then takes that money and develops actual working energy production facilities, ones that use concentrated solar energy (i.e. fossil fuels).

China’s solar panel industry is viable as long as Westerners worship at the altar of the Global Warming/ACC. If the West ever gives up on ridiculous idea that solar panels can be a primary energy source in a functioning economy, China will shutter the factories.

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 12:50 PM

I was cleaning the toilets and missed the “campaign” speech.Did he really blame Solyndra on the Bush administration?

sandee on October 6, 2011 at 12:52 PM

If the West ever gives up on ridiculous idea that solar panels can be a primary energy source in a functioning economy, China will shutter the factories.

It’s obvious that you’ve never traveled to China and seen the widespread application of solar tech. In some cities, nearly every home has a solar array that supplies hot water. Try to contain your wing nut anger directed at technology. Given the investments of Intel, Dow Chemical, and US venture capital, American technology will triumph. It’s only a matter of time.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 12:54 PM

I am woefully dense about the DOW ….
Can someone explain the climb during / since the 0′s presser ?

pambi on October 6, 2011 at 12:43 PM

It was up well before the presser, and perhaps they, like us, are mostly ignoring him for the moment.

Midas on October 6, 2011 at 12:54 PM

A Marxist President with Executive Order power………be very very afraid America.

PappyD61 on October 6, 2011 at 12:56 PM

It’s obvious that you’ve never traveled to China and seen the widespread application of solar tech. In some cities, nearly every home has a solar array that supplies hot water. Try to contain your wing nut anger directed at technology. Given the investments of Intel, Dow Chemical, and US venture capital, American technology will triumph. It’s only a matter of time.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 12:54 PM

That’s a capitalist argument. Why not allow the market to determine it then? How do you justify stealing from taxpayers and funding disasters like Solyndra?

fossten on October 6, 2011 at 12:59 PM

Question: “How many unemployed teachers, firemen and cops will it take to fix the bridges dear leader?”

joe btfsplk on October 6, 2011 at 1:00 PM

I guess you can’t torment the dead, so it’s ok.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Nor the braindead. So go ahead and listen.

fossten on October 6, 2011 at 1:01 PM

I was cleaning the toilets and missed the “campaign” speech.Did he really blame Solyndra on the Bush administration?

sandee on October 6, 2011 at 12:52 PM

I forget the exact wording of ‘began before my administration’, but, basically, yes.

ElectricPhase on October 6, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Precisely put.

Thank you.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Try again, liar.

hillbillyjim on October 6, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Between this and the Wall Street Squatters, I really, truly fear for this country.

kurtzz3 on October 6, 2011 at 1:06 PM

That’s a capitalist argument. Why not allow the market to determine it then? How do you justify stealing from taxpayers and funding disasters like Solyndra?

fossten on October 6, 2011 at 12:59 PM

I agree that the government shouldn’t be funding late-stage growth companies such as Solyndra. The government has a historic role in funding R&D projects but this was much more.

The original justification for funding this type of project was the dysfunctional capital markets. In normal times, the government couldn’t rationalize this kind of stupid behavior.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Rush is on a roll. God Bless Mr. Limbaugh.

hillbillyjim on October 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM

It’s obvious that you’ve never traveled to China and seen the widespread application of solar tech. In some cities, nearly every home has a solar array that supplies hot water. Try to contain your wing nut anger directed at technology. Given the investments of Intel, Dow Chemical, and US venture capital, American technology will triumph. It’s only a matter of time.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 12:54 PM

The Chinese have the advantage of not having Democrats.

Chuck Schick on October 6, 2011 at 1:10 PM

I guess you can’t torment the dead, so it’s ok.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Swine are indignant.

Schadenfreude on October 6, 2011 at 1:13 PM

The original justification for funding this type of project was the dysfunctional capital markets.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM

No, that was the ‘purported’ justification.

The real reason was to launder money back to Democrat campaign coffers.

fossten on October 6, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Schadenfreude on October 6, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Thank you, S.

hillbillyjim on October 6, 2011 at 1:18 PM

Hell’s Unholy Bells.

Here we thought that O’Reilly was full of shit.

Thanks, Jugears. You tha man.

hillbillyjim on October 6, 2011 at 1:21 PM

Question: “How many unemployed teachers, firemen and cops will it take to fix the bridges dear leader?”

joe btfsplk on October 6, 2011 at 1:00 PM

We better get on this QUICK! Thieves are dismantling the infrastructure faster than we can build it.

From Drudge:
Thieves Steal Entire Bridge.
http://www.ellwoodcityledger.com/news/local_news/bold-thieves-steal-bridge-in-north-beaver/article_4a5ae43e-20df-5b6f-a732-9b33716e2b3b.html

and in Oregon,
Some guy was stealing all the telephone wire he could get.
http://www.kval.com/news/local/126259278.html

orbitalair on October 6, 2011 at 1:29 PM

The original justification for funding this type of project was the dysfunctional capital markets.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 1:09 PM

You guys sure showed them!

Chuck Schick on October 6, 2011 at 1:32 PM

It’s obvious that you’ve never traveled to China

Fuchon, part of a team that built a TFE plant there.

In some cities, nearly every home has a solar array that supplies hot water.

Not with photo-voltaic solar panels they aren’t. Solar hot water is NOT photo-voltaic panels.

Yes, many homes do have a PV panel on them, that’s not primary distributed power generation, that’s local spot power to make up for deficiencies in local infrastructure.

Quite a huge difference.

Given the investments of Intel, Dow Chemical, and US venture capital, American technology will triumph. It’s only a matter of time.

Intel, Dow and US venture capital for Solar would disappear quickly if the tax and subsidy structures didn’t result in a net effect of “spend 1 dollar on solar, pay 3 dollars less in taxes”.

As for triumph, terrestrial solar PV panels will NEVER be a primary source of reliable distributed power in our, our childrens’ or our children’s children’s lifetimes or beyond.

Even if you covered the state of Texas with nothing but Solar panels, it would not constitute a reliable source of primary distributed power. The ROI on dollars, “emissions”, and power generation doesn’t support your claim.

Nor would it be “green” or good for the environment to cover so much land and deprive the ecosystem of the photons that run it by intercepting them before they deliver their energy to the planet.

Collect the photons in orbit and microwave the energy down. . . fine, I’ll support that plan on a 50 year timescale, blanket the soil with panels intercepting photons “to save the planet?” Not hardly.

Likewise Windmills are not beneficial to the environment, besides the easy arguments, like interruption of migration patterns and desertification downwind. The idea that we can suck hundreds or thousands of terrawatts out of the wind and not DRASTICALLY affect the climate is logically ABSURD.

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 1:41 PM

I don’t always agree with you Jason, but you always have a solid argument. Thanks for dismantling bayam the broken record.

Good Solid B-Plus on October 6, 2011 at 1:49 PM

It’s obvious that you’ve never traveled to China and seen the widespread application of solar tech. In some cities, nearly every home has a solar array that supplies hot water.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 12:54 PM

The real goliath of solar water heaters, based on the sheer number of solar water heaters in use, is China. More than 30 million Chinese households rely on the sun to heat their water.

LOL, 30 million households? China’s population is over 1.3 Billion people, so the percentage of Chinese households using solar hot water is still miniscule.

“The Chinese strategy is very clear. They are engaging in predatory financing and they’re trying to drive everybody else out of the market. When you’ve got free money you can out-dump everybody below cost,” Ashley said in an interview with Climate Progress.

And the Chinese do this by selling solar hot water heating systems to their Subjects by pricing them exactly the same ($200 US) as a regular hot water heater. Here in the US, that same system costs at least 5 times as much.

As for other Solar in China…

The amount of electricity generated with solar power within China itself is so far comparatively small: as of the end of 2008, the solar power capacity attached to the national grid (i.e., excluding autonomous systems) was under 100 MW (Megawatt), i..e merely 0.01% of the nation’s power generation capacity.

Del Dolemonte on October 6, 2011 at 1:50 PM

Midas on October 6, 2011 at 12:54 PM

Works for me, thanks.
It’s pretty bouncy-bouncy, atm.

pambi on October 6, 2011 at 1:52 PM

Intel, Dow and US venture capital for Solar would disappear quickly if the tax and subsidy structures didn’t result in a net effect of “spend 1 dollar on solar, pay 3 dollars less in taxes”.

If you Intel’s tech assessments or quarterly filings, you’d find that your claim is completely unsubstantiated. Intel generally doesn’t fail and it certainly doesn’t pursue massive R&D projects because of government subsidies that may be short-lived in nature. The same general rule applies to venture capital investors.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 1:53 PM

attached to the national grid (i.e., excluding autonomous systems)

You don’t seem to understand the implications of this point or why it’s largely explain by China’s infrastructural shortcomings. In other words, it makes number if pointless.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 1:41 PM

I’m glad you’re here.

You do a great job of melting the stupid.

hillbillyjim on October 6, 2011 at 2:00 PM

You don’t seem to understand the implications of this point or why it’s largely explain by China’s infrastructural shortcomings. In other words, it makes number if pointless.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM

I really don’t know what that was supposed to be, but English would work just as well. Dude.

hillbillyjim on October 6, 2011 at 2:05 PM

There are green jobs for pot trafficers in Juarez Mexico. You might even get a sweet semi-automatic rifle out of the deal.

kirkill on October 6, 2011 at 2:07 PM

You don’t seem to understand the implications of this point or why it’s largely explain by China’s infrastructural shortcomings. In other words, it makes number if pointless.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Que?

Del Dolemonte on October 6, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Bayam got schooled, big time!

Vince on October 6, 2011 at 2:11 PM

You don’t seem to understand the implications of this point or why it’s largely explain by China’s infrastructural shortcomings. In other words, it makes number if pointless.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Que?

Del Dolemonte on October 6, 2011 at 2:07 PM

Quite telling, no?

Heh. English is good.

hillbillyjim on October 6, 2011 at 2:15 PM

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 1:55 PM

lol, you’re STILL clinging to the Solar dream. If you want solar energy, subsidize your own solar panels.

Daemonocracy on October 6, 2011 at 2:22 PM

Is he done talking yet?

forest on October 6, 2011 at 2:27 PM

Collect the photons in orbit and microwave the energy down. . . fine, I’ll support that plan on a 50 year timescale, blanket the soil with panels intercepting photons “to save the planet?” Not hardly.

You would need a huge solar collector or parabolic mirror in geo-synchronous orbit that never gets between the sun and earth (which would create a man-made eclipse of the sun).

Gee, how do we get it there, now that Obama has cut off funding for the space shuttle? :<)

Steve Z on October 6, 2011 at 2:31 PM

I heard only one minute of the speech but still, wow, I imagined for a moment I was back in the 19th century listening to Abe Lincoln deliver the Gettysburg Address.

Bishop on October 6, 2011 at 12:00 PM

Obama:

Four dozen less eleven months ago I set forth incontinent spending, conceived in puberty and predicated on the supposition that all men are created equally stupid to be saved by my eloquent audacity of hopeyness. Government of your people by my people, and for people who shall forever cherish my birth.

Steve Z on October 6, 2011 at 2:56 PM

Steve Z on October 6, 2011 at 2:31 PM

Or more than one smaller collectors, orbiting in paths that do not come between the Sun and Earth while that side of the planet is lit.

The concept is more solid than PV panels blanketing huge swaths of soil. It’s not my first or even in top 25 of large-scale energy projects I would support, but it beats the crap out of terrestrial PV solar panels for actually “saving the planet”.

I’m not going to invest any more in this particular throw-away sub-argument, but here’s an informational link.

http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/

We’ll return to space on our own terms withing a few years of getting rid of Obama, and eventually we’ll have a space elevator or something with similar benefits.

We digress. . . continue if you wish, I’m bowing out of this sub-argument.

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 3:02 PM

Pttttttthhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

hillbillyjim on October 6, 2011 at 3:13 PM

I knew he would use Jobs to get some scren time again. Let him RIP. Stop the Jobs killing policies.

anikol on October 6, 2011 at 3:22 PM

Image of next White House presser about Solyndra, Fast & Furious, etc.

fred5678 on October 6, 2011 at 3:37 PM

I know there are other things that we have every right to be irritated about. More important matters too. But I have to tell you, I am so sick of seeing Hussein Obama, the non-Muslim, raised by socialists, tutored by Marxists, using that yellow silk Arabian curtain as his backdrop at his pressers without an American flag within camera shot.

To me, he is spitting in the face of America, and doesn’t have a problem doing it either.

As a patriot and a veteran, this turns my stomach.

fogw on October 6, 2011 at 3:53 PM

We need to make a commercial of all this Harvard graduate’s phoney patter to the masses.

Deanna on October 6, 2011 at 12:24 PM

That would be very amusing!

disa on October 6, 2011 at 4:54 PM

We’ll return to space on our own terms withing a few years of getting rid of Obama, and eventually we’ll have a space elevator or something with similar benefits.

We digress. . . continue if you wish, I’m bowing out of this sub-argument.

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 3:02 PM

Check out Heinlein’s The Moon is a Harsh Mistress - I highly recommend it. A sort of Lunar Tea Party.

disa on October 6, 2011 at 4:57 PM

disa on October 6, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Agreed, highly recommended.

Supposedly, Tim Minear (X-Files, Firefly – works with Josh Whedon frequently) has a licensed screenplay he’s shopping to studios. Haven’t heard anything about it in a while tho’.

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 5:26 PM

Mr. President, are you planing to attend any of the funerals of the hundreds of Mexicans that you killed with your “Fast and Furious” terrorism?

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on October 6, 2011 at 5:39 PM

Bayam, what percent of your energy do you get from solar?

rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Don’t go away mad, bayam.

Del Dolemonte on October 6, 2011 at 6:16 PM

Bayam got schooled, big time!

Vince on October 6, 2011 at 2:11 PM

As ususal.

galvestonian on October 6, 2011 at 6:39 PM

Listened to this speech at work. Our president is a complete embarrassment.

hawkdriver on October 6, 2011 at 6:40 PM

RASMUSSEN: GENERIC REPUBLICAN 47%, OBAMA 41%

CW on October 6, 2011 at 6:43 PM

Listened to this speech at work. Our president is a complete embarrassment.

hawkdriver on October 6, 2011 at 6:40 PM

Uh uh uh uh which President?

CW on October 6, 2011 at 6:44 PM

Uh uh uh uh which President?

CW on October 6, 2011 at 6:44 PM

How many do we have?

hawkdriver on October 6, 2011 at 6:46 PM

Check out Heinlein’s The Moon is a Harsh Mistress – I highly recommend it. A sort of Lunar Tea Party.

disa on October 6, 2011 at 4:57 PM

It;s an excellent book, along with his “The Cat Who Walked Through Walls.”

Blert!

dogsoldier on October 6, 2011 at 6:58 PM

Bayam, what percent of your energy do you get from solar?

rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Pretty much 100% because I don’t know that I buy food that’s grown in greenhouses, it’s pretty much all from the farm.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 7:09 PM

Bayam, what percent of your energy do you get from solar?

rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Pretty much 100% because I don’t know that I buy food that’s grown in greenhouses, it’s pretty much all from the farm.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 7:09 PM

So what’s better to run your computer on? Bell peppers or tomatoes?

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 7:17 PM

This thread is much to long to read. I’ll just weigh in with a hearty, “Eat poopy, Mr. President”

Mason on October 6, 2011 at 7:26 PM

Bayam, what percent of your energy do you get from solar?
 
rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 5:48 PM

 
Pretty much 100% because I don’t know that I buy food that’s grown in greenhouses, it’s pretty much all from the farm.
 
bayam on October 6, 2011 at 7:09 PM

 
I’m guessing that’s a poorly constructed/phrased attempt at being clever and taking the “your” literally even though you knew what the question was really asking.
 
I’m also guessing most readers, and yourself, know why you chose that route.
 
Let’s try again, shall we?
 
Bayam, what percent of your total external/non-corporal energy consumption
(home heating & AC, personal care, home lighting, water treatment and pumping, transportation, food prep, computer power, entertainment, etc.)
is met by solar power?

rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 7:54 PM

rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 7:54 PM

And here I was collecting up 650 pennies and nails getting ready to make a battery. . . . my bet was on the tomato.

———————–

OT: Any hotair folks have any kids doing the Science Olympiad this year?

Jason Coleman on October 6, 2011 at 8:09 PM

Bayam, what percent of your energy do you get from solar?

rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Pretty much 100% because I don’t know that I buy food that’s grown in greenhouses, it’s pretty much all from the farm.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 7:09 PM

“Winny and I lived in a house that ran on static electricity…If you wanted to run the blender, you had to rub balloons on your head. If you wanted to cook, you had to pull off a sweater real quick.”

Steven Wright

Del Dolemonte on October 6, 2011 at 10:39 PM

Mr.President …..do you have any comment on the senate democrats refusing to pass your jobs bill

Aggie95 on October 6, 2011 at 11:12 PM

Bayam, what percent of your energy do you get from solar?

rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 5:48 PM

Pretty much 100% because I don’t know that I buy food that’s grown in greenhouses, it’s pretty much all from the farm.

bayam on October 6, 2011 at 7:09 PM

I’m guessing that’s a poorly constructed/phrased attempt at being clever and taking the “your” literally even though you knew what the question was really asking.

I’m also guessing most readers, and yourself, know why you chose that route.

Let’s try again, shall we?

Bayam, what percent of your total external/non-corporal energy consumption

I have no idea, but why does that matter? What does the present have to do with the future?

You can whine all day about a risky investment that failed, and shouldn’t have been made in the first place- but that doesn’t change the fact that China is massively subsidizing its solar industry and flooding the market with cheap panels to kill US competition.

I’d recommend you write Bill Gates to help him better realize his general idiocy, a trait shared with nearly all tech industry leaders in this country, compared to those on the right. Never mind that the industry is investing in alternative energy generation almost across the board- the far right is that much smarter than our business leaders.
http://www.thegatesnotes.com/

bayam on October 7, 2011 at 12:44 AM

but that doesn’t change the fact that China is massively subsidizing its solar industry and flooding the market with cheap panels to kill US competition.

So what! Let them! They aren’t making a real profit. They create money by fiat as it suits them, they rape resources from their own sources without regard to costs of extraction or market value. They can raise their subsidies every time we raise ours. WE CAN’T WIN THAT GAME AND IT IS FOOLISH TO TRY. They can win, because they can order their companies to stay in business, they can order laborers to continue working even when the business has no money to pay them. They can force suppliers to continue to deliver raw materials even if the business cannot pay them. So . . .

LET THEM DO THIS! It’s unsustainable. If they are going to give away their resources and products for less that what it would cost us to make it, LET THEM, buy from them and pocket the savings.

Two wrongs don’t make a right.

If they are going to lose money on a product, that is folly.
If we decide to also lose money ON THE SAME PRODUCT, that is compounded folly.

Copying your competitors unsustainable business model just because you WANT to stay in business is STUPID. A business with an unsustainable/unprofitable business model is not a business at all, it’s a hobby.

Manufacturing Solar Panels will not become a viable business in the United States in the foreseeable future, because no matter what you do, the ROI just isn’t there. That’s irregardless of what the Chinese do or how much we give it in subsidy, the ROI is just not there.

Artificially creating demand (subsidy for the buyer) and artificially creating supply (subsidy for the manufacturer) doesn’t change the ROI of the entire system for the better, it makes it worse, it takes money out of the economy and burns it.

It’s the “if they jumped off a bridge, would you” scenario.

Making cheap subsidized solar panels just because the Chinese make cheap subsidized solar panels is a flawed idea. That is why the solar panel industry (for primary, distributed power) has to rely on the “save the planet with cheap clean solar power” mantra for it’s very existence.

Take away the bogus mantra and the industry could develop a sustainable business model by focusing on what solar is actually good for, things like spot power, off the grid applications, supplemental power and emergency/back-up/disaster, yes, that would mean that the industry would be smaller, much smaller, but it would be profitable and it would be sustainable.

Solar power is unsustainable, it is not cheap, it’s not clean and it won’t save the planet.

It will however, bankrupt anyone who tries.

If the Chinese want to do it. I say let them go for it, we can focus on things that actually work, and on which we can turn a profit on our resources used.

Jason Coleman on October 7, 2011 at 4:04 AM

Never mind that the industry is investing in alternative energy generation almost across the board- the far right is that much smarter than our business leaders.

You also try to keep using business investment in Solar as evidence that it works. You need to get this through your head.

With subsidy, there is profit to be made for companies investing in PV solar.

Without subsidy, there is no profit to be made for companies investing in PV solar.

As long as there is subsidy, there will be investments that follow it. When the subsidy ends, the profits go away, and so will the investments.

—–

You might be tempted to claim that business making profit with subsidy is a good thing because profit is made? That would be faulty logic, because in order for there to be subsidy, the money for the subsidy would have to be taken from someone else’s profit.

Profit with subsidy is not profit in the sense that the general economy profits, in this case it’s only confiscating profit from one person/entity and handing it over to another. Better known as the government picking winners and losers.

Jason Coleman on October 7, 2011 at 4:16 AM

Let’s try again, shall we?
 
Bayam, what percent of your total external/non-corporal energy consumption… is met by solar power?
 
rogerb on October 6, 2011 at 7:54 PM

 
I have no idea, but why does that matter? What does the present have to do with the future?
 
bayam on October 7, 2011 at 12:44 AM

 
So we’ll mark you down for “0% (zero percent) personal investment in solar.”
 
Thanks for that bolded part, btw. I never expected that to come out.
 
You’re a bright fellow. You still can’t see the problem?

rogerb on October 7, 2011 at 6:00 AM

Gosh, I hope bayam is okay.

rogerb on October 7, 2011 at 6:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5