Wind industry hops on the strugglebus without assurance of their precious tax credit

posted at 3:21 pm on September 20, 2012 by Erika Johnsen

Question: If a new technology really holds boundless potential to not only meet the raucous, clamoring demand for a viable source of ‘green’ energy than can fit in with our infrastructure at a worthwhile expense, but also to turn a profit due to its efficient reliability as a smart alternative to traditional energy sources, then why would said technology be so dependent on a wildly generous federal subsidy for its survival?

Answer: It wouldn’t.

I know things work a little differently in the corrupted, rent-seeking, reality-denying la-la-land of eco-idealism, but here in the real world, when a new technology or idea presents real potential to turn into something that people actually want to buy, people invest in it. In the private market. Voluntarily. With their own money. That endeavor may succeed, or it may fail, but the risk is isolated to the people who chose to take a chance on it, and their interest in the project is about producing something consumers want to purchase — not about winning over votes by playing political favoritism and trying to engineer society’s makeup in the way that you deem more virtuous than another.

Wind energy has been afforded more opportunities than you can shake a stick at, à la the U.S. taxpayer, and they’re ability to compete in the free market is still pretty pathetic. Now that one of their biggest and longtime sources of federal support — the production tax credit — is in jeopardy, and the lobbyists and advocates are all of a dither trying to convince everyone that this subsidy is absolutely crucial for our country’s energy future, or something. From the NYT:

Many of those jobs have disappeared since, as wind companies have been buffeted by weak demand for electricity, stiff competition from cheap natural gas and cheaper options from Asian competitors. Chinese manufacturers, who can often underprice goods because of generous state subsidies, have moved into the American market and have become an issue in the larger trade tensions between the two countries. In July, the United States Commerce Department imposed tariffs on steel turbine towers from China after finding that manufacturers had been selling them for less than the cost of production.

And now, on top of the business challenges, the industry is facing a big political problem in Washington: the Dec. 31 expiration of a federal tax credit that makes wind power more competitive with other sources of electricity.

The tax break, which costs about $1 billion a year, has been periodically renewed by Congress with support from both parties. This year, however, it has become a wedge issue in the presidential contest. …

“Big Wind has had extension after extension after extension,” said Benjamin Cole, a spokesman for the American Energy Alliance, a group partly financed by oil interests that has been lobbying against the credit in Washington. “The government shouldn’t be continuing to prop up industries that never seem to be able to get off their training wheels.”

Competition from Chinese manufacturers who can underprice their products because of generous state subsidies? Yes, because we wouldn’t know anything about that, would we?

Sorry, wind — you’ve had more than your fair share of government “investments” in your future, and your continuing failure to get in the game on your own merits should tell us just about everything we need to know.

And before anybody points out that traditional energy sources are also on the receiving end of federal subsides, yes, I know this — and I unequivocally support an end to all types of energy subsidies, as subsidies always and necessarily serve to distort and interfere with free-market signals. In fact, when I can think of a good reason to support any type of subsidy across any economic sphere… I’ll be sure to let you know.


Related Posts:

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

But but but… Green Energy is the wave of the future, Obama told me so, and you know Obama would never lie to me

SWalker on September 20, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Wind the power of the future… circa 1980.

If it is so efficient, then why does it need to be subsidized?

ajacksonian on September 20, 2012 at 3:24 PM

Strugglebus? I think I like that. I think I’ll use that.

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Out: Windmills.
In: Unicorn farms.

Archivarix on September 20, 2012 at 3:29 PM

believe it would be thrown UNDER the strugglebus.

t8stlikchkn on September 20, 2012 at 3:29 PM

I hope ethanol is in the same boat. Be gone with it!

You’re not lumping traditional business write downs like equipment costs and depreciation in your subsidy corral are you? If the standard deductions for that kind of thing isn’t allowed for energy companies it should not be allowed for any industry.

Anybody else for a 10 page tax code?

DanMan on September 20, 2012 at 3:30 PM

believe it would be thrown UNDER the strugglebus.

t8stlikchkn on September 20, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Clever.

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

cheap natural gas is going to kill wind and solar.

Unfortunatly for many workers it’s also killing coal.

gerrym51 on September 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Wind energy has been afforded more opportunities than you can shake a stick at, à la the U.S. taxpayer, and they’re [sic] ability to compete in the free market is still pretty pathetic.

Not just subsidies, but regulatory breaks. Like zoning exemptions, eminent domain seizures, and exemptions from EPA laws when the turbines slice and dice endangered birds.

Socratease on September 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Tilting at Windmills

redguy on September 20, 2012 at 3:32 PM

Strugglebus? I think I like that. I think I’ll use that.

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 3:26 PM

Ditto.

As someone with knowledge of this industry, let me just say that they cannot accurately predict how much electricity they’ll be able to produce in two hours time. A 500 MW wind farm could produce 10MW at that point or 400MW. Their best bet now is to estimate that it will be almost exactly the same as it is currently and just hope for the best.

It could also go from 100MW to 450MW to 50 MW over a two-three hour period. If any of our lefty trolls can inform us how you’re supposed to provide consistent power with that, I would be delighted to hear it.

At least solar is fairly predictable, even if it is expensive.

strictnein on September 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

If wind was the answer, our Navy would be a bunch of Clipper Ships.

Jabberwock on September 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Anybody else for a 10 page tax code?

DanMan on September 20, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Nope… make it 1 page, 1 line and you got a taker…

Personal Federal Income tax, 10% Corporate income tax 15% no exemptions, no loopholes.

SWalker on September 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

cheap natural gas is going to kill wind and solar.

Unfortunatly for many workers it’s also killing coal.

gerrym51 on September 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

But you can ship and sell coal…..

The arabs will become our best customer once their wells go dry….

On second though – screw em….

Heh, heh

redguy on September 20, 2012 at 3:34 PM

…General Electric in shock!

KOOLAID2 on September 20, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Anybody else for a 10 page tax code?

DanMan on September 20, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Its 9 pages too long.

ajacksonian on September 20, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Oil companies (that should more accurately be called energy companies), are continously researching new sources of energy to broaden their markets but also to exploit new forms of energy for profit (Gasp!!!)

When these companies figure out how to make alternative energy viable and profitable in our markets you can bet the farm on the fact that they’ll trot it out. Until then, our government should just sit still and let them do it, however long it takes. By trying to force a premature market for energy sources that are not yet viable, all the govt is doing is wasting taxpayer money.

NapaConservative on September 20, 2012 at 3:36 PM

If China is throwing away its money on unprofitable industries, then it will eventually run out of money and/or resources and collapse. One might be tempted to think that the correct course of action for the US in that case is to let China continue to bleed money. But if you’re a Democrat the answer seems to be to join in the economic suicide pact.

Socratease on September 20, 2012 at 3:37 PM

This dovetails nicely with the past collaborations between government and business as practiced by a younger Obama, according to the excellent piece in today’s Examiner.

It amazes me that run-of-the-mill Obama supporters haven’t yet figured out how little room there is at the top, and how unlikely it is that they will ever get anywhere near it.

BKeyser on September 20, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Master Resource just released an excellent and detailed analysis of the costs of wind power, with the conclusion that the true costs of wind generated electricity is as high as 38 cents a kilowatt hour (versus ~ 12 cents normal cost). The main point is straightforward: wind plant implementations cannot be sustained because they divert a large portion of national wealth into unproductive debt-laden investments. My comment:

Exactly. Look at Europe, on the verge bankruptcy after spending bundles of money on heavily-subsidized green energy. So, when the Democrats passed their cap & trade bill in the House in 2009 that mandated insane 83% CO2 cuts by 2050, if the bill had made it to Obama, we wouldn’t have seen wind and other fanciful green energies making up more than an iota of this lost energy. Our country, already in a fiscal mess, could not maintain such prodigal spending.
Moreover, as far as the full cost to society of wind power, consider also the documented health problems and loss in property values in the vicinity of windmills. And the thousands of pretty little birds, and Bald Eagles, killed by these monsters. Wind power is truly a monstrous proposition.

anotherJoe on September 20, 2012 at 3:38 PM

It takes so much energy to build these things, maintain them, replace them, they are useless…it’s like saying battery power saves energy…
You can’t create something out of nothing (unless you are an atheist)…

right2bright on September 20, 2012 at 3:44 PM

I’m against all the subsidies. Not just to wind but all power sources. And agriculture. And insurance. And medical care. Heck, toss all the subsidies, givebacks, kick-backs, write-offs, the whole schmiel out. No help to industry of any sort, including banks and especially on mortgages so the entire Fannie/Freddie/Ginnie/Sallie part goes. Cut off ever single quasi-government agency. And the EPA, Agriculture, Energy… a whole raft of things the federal government has no business in should be abolished as agencies.

That is ‘fair’ by giving all of it equal treatment: no perks, no protection, no payola, and NO REASON TO LOBBY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. You wanna see the various letter street lobbyists out of business? End the interference in those industries. Tumbleweeds will soon be blowing down them the moment that happens. Let them find something productive to do with their time, rather than mooch off the federal government.

ajacksonian on September 20, 2012 at 3:46 PM

But you can ship and sell coal…..

we do ship a lot of coal overseas. However it’s not making up for lost coal revenues here. theres no question that cheap natural gas has created jobs-however it has cost some coal related jobs.

Just a fact.it’s the marketplace. I’m not criticizing it.

gerrym51 on September 20, 2012 at 3:48 PM

DaVinci thought submarines were doable but did he run around begging the government for subsidies? Of coarse not. It wasn’t it’s time. So goes the wind technology. When the earth spins faster, then maybe wind power will be viable. As submarines were not doable during DaVinci’s time, so is the practical harnessing of wind power not ready for prime time today.

Just thinking outside the box.

timberline on September 20, 2012 at 3:49 PM

If wind was the answer, our Navy would be a bunch of Clipper Ships.

Jabberwock on September 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

FTW

Rio Linda Refugee on September 20, 2012 at 3:51 PM

When government invests in business ventures like Green Energy, it doesn’t pick winners and losers, it picks losers.

The winners don’t need to feed at the public trough because investors are quite eager to lay down their own cash to support them.

PackerBronco on September 20, 2012 at 3:52 PM

It could also go from 100MW to 450MW to 50 MW over a two-three hour period. If any of our lefty trolls can inform us how you’re supposed to provide consistent power with that, I would be delighted to hear it.

At least solar is fairly predictable, even if it is expensive.

strictnein on September 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

In my state of less than full employment these last few months I’ve had time to study some of this. Another generation of solar, as in increased efficiency, then it (solar) will make sense at the retail level – my rooftop, installed by me, without a subsidy. But that is probably at least 10 years away – and it depends on battery technology taking a step or two forward – batteries are a huge limit to the whole green thing.

Wind is just blow. I don’t ever see it as productive for anyone. If it is free power, GM and every other factory in the world would be knocking at every ranchers door in Amarillo to locate their facilities, and placing orders with GE for turbines.

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Just thinking outside the box.

timberline on September 20, 2012 at 3:49 PM

That is actually thinking inside the box as wind still remains outside of it.

Rio Linda Refugee on September 20, 2012 at 3:53 PM

You need to get moving… it’s shruggle, not struggle

faraway on September 20, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Personal Federal Income tax, 10% Corporate income tax 15% no exemptions, no loopholes.

SWalker on September 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

whats considered income? dividends? interest? what about net profit from self-employment? what do you deduct to GET to net? how about rental income? net or gross? can you deduct rental property expenses to arrive at taxable net? if so, that net is it taxed for social security? what about s-corp shareholders? do they pay fica tax? they dont now on distributions, but LLC members do. how does that work? what if you are a passive investor in an investment partnership that has a loss, can that be subtracted from your income to arrive at your taxable income? oh, wait, what about capital gains? is it all income? taxed like everything else? but then what about losses? some folks lost hundreds of thousands in 2008-2009. can they subtract ALL those losses from all their other icnome to arrive at taxable income? they cant now. how would that work. how many pages are we up to. ya know what i think, curing cancer should take 2 weeks and one pill. thats what i think.

t8stlikchkn on September 20, 2012 at 3:53 PM

AH! An opportunity to vent on another hidden cost of wind energy. Here in North Texas, I have 3 new 384kv routes within 5 miles of my house, devoted to shipping wind “electricity”. Each route runs hundreds of miles from West Texas to the DFW metroplex. Each route has been selected from several options, pitting neighbors against neighbors as arguments ensue to prevent the line from crossing near your property. Sure, if it runs over your property you may be compensated, but if it runs next to your property, you can just enjoy the new view and the loss of property value. The land owner that hosts the windmill may sell his “wind rights”, but for the rest of us in the 200 mile corridor from Sweetwater to DFW, it becomes a massive loss of wealth and well-being.

chigger76 on September 20, 2012 at 3:57 PM

DaVinci thought submarines were doable but did he run around begging the government for subsidies? Of coarse not. It wasn’t it’s time. So goes the wind technology. When the earth spins faster, then maybe wind power will be viable. As submarines were not doable during DaVinci’s time, so is the practical harnessing of wind power not ready for prime time today.

Just thinking outside the box.

timberline on September 20, 2012 at 3:49 PM

You are correct.

Over 100 years ago, human beings determined that wind was NOT a viable and reliable souce of energy. Thus began the evolution from sails to steam to nukes to power seafaring craft.
Nothing has changed to challange a decision that was made a long time ago.
Wind is not reliable.

Jabberwock on September 20, 2012 at 3:58 PM

t8stlikchkn on September 20, 2012 at 3:53 PM

Whoah … lighten up Francis. I think the basic point goes like this:

1) Tax net earnings
2) Get rid of taxes either designed to encourage behavior the government “likes” or discourage behavior that government disapproves of. The legal system should be used for that; not the tax system.
3) Definitely get rid of taxes designed to implement “fairness”.

Are there gray areas? Sure. But those are guiding principles nevertheless.

Oh, and …

4) If you don’t pay taxes, you don’t get a tax break!!!

PackerBronco on September 20, 2012 at 3:59 PM

Obama to Windfarms: “Blow me.”

portlandon on September 20, 2012 at 4:00 PM

Wind is not reliable.

Jabberwock on September 20, 2012 at 3:58 PM

Come on. Give wind a break.

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 4:00 PM

It takes so much energy to build these things, maintain them, replace them, they are useless… it’s like saying battery power saves energy…

right2bright on September 20, 2012 at 3:44 PM

They are also really ugly and, as anotherJoe stated, they kill birds including bald eagles. I hates them.

Fallon on September 20, 2012 at 4:01 PM

What a horrible sight driving through the Columbia River Gorge and looking up to see the hundreds of huge windmills on the top. There’s a lot of those huge windmills along I70 in western Iowa/eastern Colorado, too. My electric bill still seems to be skyrocketing.

Kissmygrits on September 20, 2012 at 4:01 PM

Years ago when windpower was just being named as the next big new thing I mentioned to my dad (who grew up on a dairy farm) that everyone was saying that it had the potential to replace a substantial portion of our energy needs. “Really?” he said, “The people who say that are people who have never spent every afternoon hand pumping a well to fill up a stock tank because the wind hadn’t blown in three weeks and the cows were going to die of thirst otherwise. Wind is great when there is some, but don’t bet the farm on it.”

Lily on September 20, 2012 at 4:03 PM

If you could spend just $1B more to get rid of Obama and save this country, would you do it?

I would.

Wind energy is a huge issue in Iowa and Colorado. That wind energy tax credit could be the make or break issue in two states that may decide whether Obama stays and continues his destruction or goes back to Hawaii and into retirement.

It could also decide control of the Senate.

I vote retirement. I vote for Senate control. I vote one more year of $1B to save this country.

Carnac on September 20, 2012 at 4:03 PM

So with this news about wind, will we see the headline: “Breaking, Wind” on the nightly news tonight?

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 4:03 PM

Wind power should make it on its own.

Where it makes sense it will be used because the advantages, in a given situation, outweigh the disadvantages.

If it is necessary, aside from tax credits, to put special exemptions on things like land use regulation, zoning, visual esthetics impacts, etc. perhaps the arena of land regulation should be examined and changed instead of having things exempted from it.

Russ808 on September 20, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Maybe: “Breaking, Wind Stinks”?

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 4:04 PM

Or even: “Breaking, Wind Stinks Without Obama”…. you all see where this is going.

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 4:07 PM

t8stlikchkn on September 20, 2012 at 3:53 PM

All of those categories were created by Amendment XVI.

Perhaps it was made by Progressives to be able to grab ALL of the money that could be garnered from ANY source of income, which makes that the most pernicious Amendment ever passed next to Prohibition.

In fact it was passed in part to get the government another revenue stream by Progressives who wanted to put Prohibition into the Constitution because the government was funded by taxation of alcohol to a large degree before then. This was by far too wide a power to hand to the federal government, and the lure of all that money in places it couldn’t get too was just too much for politicians who saw an opportunity to ‘soak the rich’ and ‘make the nation sober’ at one blow. They then blew out the income tax from 7% to 70% in 7 years.

You want a cleaner tax code?

Get rid of the Amendment XVI. Or try and elect politicians who will NOT try to go beyond the old limits prior to it. Good luck on either of those… although the people finally did get Prohibition removed, so maybe getting XVI done away with after a century of abuses isn’t impossible, either.

People are looking for solutions, not excuses to do nothing.

ajacksonian on September 20, 2012 at 4:07 PM

PackerBronco on September 20, 2012 at 3:59 PM

there are lots of issues that need working out in those principles, and they take more than 10 pages. less than what we have now certainly.

what kind of “taxes” though are designed to implement fairness?

if someone doesnt pay “taxes” what kind of taxes count? is SS and medicare “taxes”? and what kind of “break” do people get now for not paying “taxes”? are we talking EITC?

oh, and if you touch my stuf…i’ll kill ya.

t8stlikchkn on September 20, 2012 at 4:08 PM

cheap natural gas is going to kill wind and solar.

Unfortunatly for many workers it’s also killing coal.

gerrym51 on September 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

EPA’s outright war on mercury isn’t helping coal. It’s not just natgas being cheap.

JRCash on September 20, 2012 at 4:09 PM

It could also go from 100MW to 450MW to 50 MW over a two-three hour period. If any of our lefty trolls can inform us how you’re supposed to provide consistent power with that, I would be delighted to hear it.

At least solar is fairly predictable, even if it is expensive.

strictnein on September 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

I live in SW ND & even though it’s windy as hell a lot of the time, it just isn’t windy all of the time.
And of course solar wouldn’t work as well here bcs we’re so far north.
After driving through parts of Iowa for that past couple of years & seeing the massive amount of wind turbines freaking everywhere, I say no just based on the fact it makes everything so damned UGLY.
Then add in the realities of this situation & it becomes a huge waste of time.
Wind power is nice when you want to take advantage of it. But it should not be mandated. You cannot mandate how much wind blows.

Now:

That endeavor may succeed, or it may fail, but the risk is isolated to the people who chose to take a chance on it, and their interest in the project is about producing something consumers want to purchase — not about winning over votes by playing political favoritism and trying to engineer society’s makeup in the way that you deem more virtuous than another.

Farmers feel that it is right for the Federal Govt to augment their failures due to poor planning or mother nature.
They say things like “What if there’s a drought? That’s not in my control!”
“What if my fields flood? That’s not in my control!”
To which I say, as a person involved in agriculture where I am at the mercy of mother nature, “SUCK.IT.UP.”
We ALL have to deal with things out of our control.
It is called life.

Badger40 on September 20, 2012 at 4:11 PM

And I do know what it’s like to depend upon wind power.
We switched all of our stock water tanks to be driven by wind mills bcs we were spending too much $$ on electricity to drive the pump.
But there are times when the wind doesn’t blow & the tank goes dry.
That’s when we haul & small engine up there for a couple of days or we have to drive the cows to another pasture.

Badger40 on September 20, 2012 at 4:14 PM

Badger40 on September 20, 2012 at 4:14 PM

What kind of depth, casing size, horsepower, and gallons per hour are you talking?

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM

Oofff… pump and drop size also….

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 4:21 PM

Crony corrupt enviro-gladhanding aside the headline, specifically

strugglebus

made me LOL…good one.

NY Conservative on September 20, 2012 at 4:23 PM

Wind power has always been a marginal source at best and was NEVER a significant potential energy source. And it NEVER will be until cheaper means of battery storage are found – wind blows sporadically, and mainly during the daylight hours, so it is undependable.

Like solar, it’s a big subsidy scam. Ethanol, which hurts engines and the environment and causes food costs to rise, is another example.

Take away the subsidies and mandates, and see how well these products do in the marketplace.

Adjoran on September 20, 2012 at 4:23 PM

there are lots of issues that need working out in those principles, and they take more than 10 pages. less than what we have now certainly.

what kind of “taxes” though are designed to implement fairness?

One example: In a debate with Hillary it was pointed out to the Bamster that raising the capital gains tax would result in a loss of revenue. The Bamster still supported the tax increase because it would be more “fair”.

The debate over the Buffet Rule is focused solely on the fairness issue as well.

if someone doesn’t pay “taxes” what kind of taxes count? is SS and Medicare “taxes”? and what kind of “break” do people get now for not paying “taxes”? are we talking EITC?

Supposedly SS and payroll taxes are “down payments” on SS and Medicare entitlements later in life. I know – and you know – that’s nonsense but there it is. I don’t see a reason to give a tax refund on those taxes unless the entitlement benefits are similarly adjusted.

Yeah, I’m talking about EITC. And I feel the same way about mortgage deductions and all of that.

Which means my whims will never become law b/c people of all stripes and political persuasion want to be able to deduct not just the costs of doing business but the costs of life.

t8stlikchkn on September 20, 2012 at 4:08 PM

PackerBronco on September 20, 2012 at 4:27 PM

NEXT we need to DE-REGULATE:

1. All penalties for using/not using “preferred” power generation methods.

2. Ethanol mandates should be TOTALLY REPEALED.

3. REPEAL ALL LIGHT BULB MANDATES AND BANS. Not only has the government unnecessarily increased the price of light bulbs to TEN TIMES what they should be, but it has managed to promote the ONLY technology which is clearly dysfunctional and dangerous: CFL. This is more proof that government is best at picking LOSERS!!!

4. REPEAL ALL CAFE STANDARDS. Not only are these unnecessary, but they are totally irrelevant to alternatives such as Natural Gas, and machines which use hydraulic energy storage like much of our heavy equipment.

5. REPEAL ALL MEASURES which make competing technologies pay for transmission of electric power generated by “politically preferred” technologies. These horrible abuses of government power prevent us from using resources efficiently and blockade use of better power sources. Transmission of power from the generating station should always be part of the cost of a power generating technology: the cost of transmission lines and transmission controls should NOT be pawned off on others.

6. REPEAL ALL MEASURES which require power companies to prevent and/or control customers’ usage of their power. Power companies should be 100% focused on low cost POWER GENERATION, and we don’t need government-mandated shortages, blackouts, etc. just so politicians can make political points.

landlines on September 20, 2012 at 4:29 PM

Why subsidize wind and solar when there is at least a 1,000 year supply of energy from thorium? The ‘safe’ nuclear fuel

http://www.triplepundit.com/2012/04/liquid-fluoride-thorium-power-pros-cons/

kirkbride on September 20, 2012 at 4:37 PM

“… The tax break, which costs about $1 billion a year…”

Wait, wait, wait: so, the oil industry gets “subsidies” that “must be eliminated”, even though they are actually depreciations as part of the tax code, but big wind actually gets a check from the government but they are considered “tax breaks”?

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?!!!

ptcamn on September 20, 2012 at 4:38 PM

PackerBronco on September 20, 2012 at 4:27 PM

agree re: cap gains. but dont take obamas babblings as anything other than what they are ya know? he’s an idiot and everyone knows it. no responsbile adult would do anything he suggests. but yep, he did say that. amazing huh? and it was even piinted out when he di that that would reduce revenues.

agree: re buffet rule 50 bil a year. reducing borrowing from 1200 billion per year to 1150 billion per year. excuse me? yeah my wife has cancer and the doctor says he’ll cure 5% of it. thanks doc. i’ll get the doc who’ll cure all of it if you dont mind.

EITC – bad idea. and “we” thought it up,. the way all wonderful ideas are thought up. people who are working, the working poor, get a break. to incentivize working, rather than the dole. great idea in principle, unitended consequences all over the place. and look where we are with it now. its the most iften cited scam at IRS. hundreds of million per year per year. down a rathole in EITC fraud.

i gotta disagree with ya on mortgage int though…casue…um, i have a mortgage! ha ha.

actually i think we CAN do this. paul ryans right. we CAN do this. we can simplify this. we get rid of all the crap, annd the dumass credits and layered on bullsh$t. no ones gonna do anything because of fairness cause no one takes obama seriously and adults write this crap. but its gonna take more than 10 pages, i just wanted folks to understand that. and think about what it takes to DO this. principles and frameworks are nice, and necessary, but theres a whole lotta crap in the details thats gotta be worked out. and i think doing that, working thru the details of how we DO DO this, is better than talking about repealing the 16th amendment. no matter how nice that would be. yes, foreign tarrifs on whale oil should cover the deficit. if we just get rid of medicaid.

and if you touch my mortgage deduction…i’ll kill ya.

t8stlikchkn on September 20, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Meanwhile…Obama stops natural gas, the cheapest, and cleanest effective way to create energy…and we have an abundance of it.

right2bright on September 20, 2012 at 4:42 PM

Now that those eyesores litter the landscape, they can extort money from us forever because they know we won’t let them just sit there not spinning.

Maybe if China was selling them to us at less than cost, they built them to break piece by piece and constructed them so that only they can provide the replacement parts. This way they get to effectively be our utility company along with everything else. They couldn’t run power lines here from China, so this is how they had to go about it.

Buddahpundit on September 20, 2012 at 4:44 PM

Anybody else for a 10 page tax code?

DanMan on September 20, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Its 9 pages too long.

ajacksonian on September 20, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Even at 10 pages, at least we’d be able to know what’s in it before they pass it.

Marcola on September 20, 2012 at 4:46 PM

Even at 10 pages, at least we’d be able to know what’s in it before they pass it.

Marcola on September 20, 2012 at 4:46 PM

good luck – those 10 pages are written by attorneys. and legislative aids. not legislators and CPAs. or folks who actually DO any of the work involved complying with those words.

t8stlikchkn on September 20, 2012 at 4:50 PM

And before anybody points out that traditional energy sources are also on the receiving end of federal subsides, yes, I know this

I don’t know if it’s what you were referring to, Erika, but oil companies getting subsidies is a huge lie, pushed by the left.

Oil companies get the same standard tax deductions that other business get, nothing more. But the subsidy lie just keeps popping up, unchallenged.

iurockhead on September 20, 2012 at 5:02 PM

Heavens, even the German government is sick of underwriting wind power – sink or swim on your own dime.

Hill60 on September 20, 2012 at 5:04 PM

Wind energy has been afforded more opportunities than you can shake a stick at, à la the U.S. taxpayer, and they’re [sic] ability to compete in the free market is still pretty pathetic.

Not just subsidies, but regulatory breaks. Like zoning exemptions, eminent domain seizures, and exemptions from EPA laws when the turbines slice and dice endangered birds.

Socratease on September 20, 2012 at 3:31 PM

A+

I have been watching this unfold all summer here in New Hampshire. A Spanish company is currently building a 24 turbine wind farm just south of the White Mountain National Forest. In fact, the southern boundary of the WMNF is right across the valley. As is one of the only Peregrine Falcon Nesting Sites in New Hampshire. In addition, a MOA (Military Operating Area) for primarily A-10 Warthogs also has its southern boundary across the same valley.

Each of the towers for the wind turbines is nearly 400 feet tall, or 4 times taller than the transmission towers for the proposed Northern Pass project, which would use existing transmission rights-of-way to being CHEAP hydro power down here from Quebec. The tree huggers are not at all bothered about this hypocrisy as Wind is Good. (and also God).

Many of the residents in the town directly to the north of this wind farm were bitterly opposed to it, but the Activist NH Supreme Court wouldn’t even grant them a hearing. In addition, these residents can’t do much, because the towers themselves are just over the town line and aren’t in their town. They are in a town that does not have any zoning regulations. Since this boondoggle was rammed thru, all of the other towns bordering that town that do have zoning have passed very strict zoning law changes regarding proposed wind farms.

But the biggest boondoggle of all is that none of the electricity generated at this new wind farm will even be staying in New Hampshire! It will all go to…Massachusetts.

I tipped Mark Steyn off to this brouhaha a few weeks ago (he lives in northern New Hampshire and in the past when guest hosting for Rush has mentioned driving down that particular valley) but haven’t checked his website recently to see if he’s jumped on this story yet.

Del Dolemonte on September 20, 2012 at 5:25 PM

“Cuisinarts of the Air”

mittens on September 20, 2012 at 5:29 PM

If you build a better mousetrap people will beat a path to your door.

The entire green energy scam would not exist unless “government” filled its coffers with our money.

State planning never works…ever.

Yes, we can and should find workable, cost-effective energy alternatives. But, let the actual risk takers take risks, and reap the profits should they be successful. All of us will be better off that way.

coldwarrior on September 20, 2012 at 5:39 PM

Wind energy is a huge issue in Iowa and Colorado. That wind energy tax credit could be the make or break issue in two states that may decide whether Obama stays and continues his destruction or goes back to Hawaii and into retirement.

Carnac on September 20, 2012 at 4:03 PM

Don’t look now, but there are several big wind farms in Hawai’i; in fact there is a huge one now going up in Haleiwa (you WW 2 buffs will remember that as the place where the radar station was that spotted a huge flight of planes coming in early on December 7th. The radar operators were told it was a flight of B-17s inbound from the Mainland).

What the wind power lobby won’t tell you is that another wind farm on the same island has only been able to generate 15% of its forecast output since being built.

Del Dolemonte on September 20, 2012 at 5:58 PM

Anybody else for a 10 page tax code?

DanMan on September 20, 2012 at 3:30 PM

Nope… make it 1 page, 1 line and you got a taker…

Personal Federal Income tax, 10% Corporate income tax 15% no exemptions, no loopholes.

SWalker on September 20, 2012 at 3:33 PM

+1000

Even communist Russia today has a flat 13% tax across the board. Not even a one pager, one statement tax code.

riddick on September 20, 2012 at 6:04 PM

In July, the United States Commerce Department imposed tariffs on steel turbine towers from China after finding that manufacturers had been selling them for less than the cost of production.

Why in the world would you impose tariffs when one of your world competitors is doing that? What you should do is double down and order as many of them as you can possibly need.

AZfederalist on September 20, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Nope… make it 1 page, 1 line and you got a taker…

Personal Federal Income tax, 10% Corporate income tax 15% no exemptions, no loopholes.

Put the tax code on one side of a 3″ x 5″ index card, one side, a single sentence, and I’m in.

hawkeye54 on September 20, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Put the tax code on one side of a 3″ x 5″ index card, one side, a single sentence, and I’m in.

hawkeye54 on September 20, 2012 at 6:38 PM

do folks who receive social security income pay tax on it? what if they have 10 million dollars of interest income? what if thats their only income. do dependents get you a deduction? if someone makes 50Gs and is single and has no kids does he pay the same as someone who is married spouse doesnt work and he has 6 kids then? what cuonts as a dependnet? can you claim your parent as dependnet if they live with you and you support them? what if they have money in savings and earn some interest income, but dont spend the money in their bank that they COULD spend to support themselves? good luck with the card. adults have to figure this stuff out. platitudes are nice. just not for grownups.

t8stlikchkn on September 21, 2012 at 7:25 AM

What kind of depth, casing size, horsepower, and gallons per hour are you talking?

oldroy on September 20, 2012 at 4:20 PM

That question is above my paygrade.
It’s a small Honda engine & that is ALL I know.
That’s why there’s a husband around here!
I do know our wells are very shallow.
Maybe 75-80 feet.

Badger40 on September 21, 2012 at 8:05 AM

Windmills were abandoned in the 19th century for very good reasons.

starman on September 21, 2012 at 10:58 AM