osamanobama said:
the article makes it sound like the government is giving out these grants, which im against no matter what it is. whether its art, energy efficient windows, subsidising ethonal, subsidising that material that WWII unimforms where made out of, whatever. government should pick favorites, choosing winners and losers. if this is private donors, i have nothing against it, but if it is from private rich people giving, then why does our government have to recognize it as art |
While I don't want to start a political skirmish, I must say that your stance on subsidies is far too black and white. Subsidies are proven, they make sense, and they work. The problem is that the government doesn't do enough to clamp down on the loop-holers. Similarly to the top 1% that don't pay nearly in taxes what they are supposed to pay due to loopholes, the best example comes from farming subsidies. I believe that farm subsidies, specifically corn, should end, or change.
However, subsidies are a great way to help bring certain things to sustainable levels. Like energy efficiency, or alternative energy like solar panels, the problem with the pricing is that the manufacturer hasn't reached a level of demand where the costs could greatly drop. However, for a lot of these energy alternatives, it is proven that they will ONE DAY have that demand, but really only when gas has reach like 8-10$ per barrel, then the demand wil go up, and the price will come down. Right now, solar panels and similar tech could be produced for the price the gasoline goes for, and we CAN get that relief either now, or when gas is double what it is now.
Bottom line is that for those technologies that could be producing at a very marketable level NOW, subsidies makes sense. The people who infringe and take advantage of subsidies give it a very bad name, and make people dislike it in general.
I will agree that subsidies are out of control.
