As the Obama administration works hard to kill tobacco farmers by making the legal act of smoking tobacco illegal to do every where, so to include your home, this is a token life line to find an alternative use for tobacco.
Plus they can rebrand the farm subsidies for tobacco and call them renewable energy subsidies.
Discussion on:
Top
Rated
Rated
The beltway 2 step.
Posted by Hates Idiots
30th Sep 2011
Just
In
In
Another email dump
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
3rd Oct 2011
Show:
+4
Votes
The beltway 2 step.
Posted by Hates Idiots
30th Sep 2011
+3
Votes
They also found time to hand out a cool quarter-billion...
...to a company partially owned by Nancy Pelosi's brother-in-law and Argonaut Private Equity, which lost money on the Solyndra deal.
"It's increasingly hard to tell the government's green jobs subsidies apart from the Democrats' friends and family rewards program."
"It's increasingly hard to tell the government's green jobs subsidies apart from the Democrats' friends and family rewards program."
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
30th Sep 2011
0
Votes
R's too
John, I could dig out any number of deals like this from politicians on both sides of the aisle. Solyndra is just the flavor of the moment because the Republicans can make hay out of it to dis Obama. But Solyndra was favored by the Bush administration as well.
Posted by riverat1
30th Sep 2011
+2
Votes
I am sure you could.
And yet, Bush hasn't been President for quite some time now.
Barack Obama spent the better part of 2 years campaigning against "business as usual" Washington as the "change" part of "hope and change". The crony capitalism that is the hallmark of his green agenda is hardly what we were promised. Defending something just because "Bush did it" is hardly a decent argument, would you not agree?
Barack Obama spent the better part of 2 years campaigning against "business as usual" Washington as the "change" part of "hope and change". The crony capitalism that is the hallmark of his green agenda is hardly what we were promised. Defending something just because "Bush did it" is hardly a decent argument, would you not agree?
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
30th Sep 2011
+3
Votes
Beg to differ.
The Bush administration had closed the book on the Solyndra deal because their homework predicted down to the month, Sept 2011, that the company would go bankrupt.
No blaming Bush here. This one is all Obamas.
You are also forgetting the rigged bid process for $4 billion in solar utility projects in California. Solyndra only won them because they had an in state manufacturing plant.
Once they secured the loan, which was supposed to be used to expand the California plant to meet the $4 billion in project orders, they used the loan money to buy Photon Solar in India. Then they allocated the $4 billion in work to that plant.
Declaring bankrupcy on the California operations to avoid paying back the loan was the icing on a fat cake paid for by taxpayers.
No blaming Bush here. This one is all Obamas.
You are also forgetting the rigged bid process for $4 billion in solar utility projects in California. Solyndra only won them because they had an in state manufacturing plant.
Once they secured the loan, which was supposed to be used to expand the California plant to meet the $4 billion in project orders, they used the loan money to buy Photon Solar in India. Then they allocated the $4 billion in work to that plant.
Declaring bankrupcy on the California operations to avoid paying back the loan was the icing on a fat cake paid for by taxpayers.
Posted by Hates Idiots
Updated - 3rd Oct 2011
+3
Votes
Another email dump
From ABC News:
...an email exchange between top White House economic advisor Larry Summers and Solyndra investor Brad Jones, of Redpoint Ventures. In December 2009, Summers sought advice from Jones about the administration's economic policy.
Jones reply included a harsh assessment of the Energy Department's loan program.
"The allocation of spending to clean energy is haphazard," he wrote. "The government is just not well equipped to decide which companies should get the money and how much. ??? One of our solar companies with revenues of less than $100 million (and not yet profitable) received a government loan of $580 million; while that is good for us, I can't imagine it's a good way for the government to use taxpayer money."
Summers accepted the critique, saying, "I relate well to your view that [government] is a crappy vc [venture capitalist]???"
Indeed.
...an email exchange between top White House economic advisor Larry Summers and Solyndra investor Brad Jones, of Redpoint Ventures. In December 2009, Summers sought advice from Jones about the administration's economic policy.
Jones reply included a harsh assessment of the Energy Department's loan program.
"The allocation of spending to clean energy is haphazard," he wrote. "The government is just not well equipped to decide which companies should get the money and how much. ??? One of our solar companies with revenues of less than $100 million (and not yet profitable) received a government loan of $580 million; while that is good for us, I can't imagine it's a good way for the government to use taxpayer money."
Summers accepted the critique, saying, "I relate well to your view that [government] is a crappy vc [venture capitalist]???"
Indeed.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
3rd Oct 2011
+2
Votes
carbon sequestration?
View this with a jaundiced eye, but it does offer a transition for a lot of tobacco farmers from something that is pretty much exclusively damaging to public health to something less so, and if the process is used for sequestration only, i.e., the biodiesel not used for transportation fuel, this is a pure win. We do need to make certain it's not a boondoggle like using our food supply for ethanol (and I firmly support ethanol if we're not getting off hydrocarbon fuels anytime soon, but we need to derive it from non-food sources>)
Posted by ticthak@...
30th Sep 2011
+2
Votes
Substitute subsidies.
All we are doing is replacing a farm subsidy with an energy subsidy.
They are doing that because people have started to question why the US government is giving farm subsidies to tobacco farmers they like to say are growing a crop that is killing Americans by the millions.
They are doing that because people have started to question why the US government is giving farm subsidies to tobacco farmers they like to say are growing a crop that is killing Americans by the millions.
Posted by Hates Idiots
3rd Oct 2011