Wind Energy Subsidies Discussion

I am taking a wind energy class this semester as an elective in my mechanical engineering degree program. I don't particularly like the class, but it was the only one that fit my schedule because it's online. I would love to write about how this class is a waste of my time, but I'll leave the subject of broken government funded schools and their degree programs for another post.
One of my classmates posted in on of the mandatory discussion forums about wind energy subsidies. My classmate was in favor of the subsidies. Here's my take on the issue, the original post by my classmate, and my response.

My Take on the Issue:

None of these industries should receive federal money. It is morally wrong, and WAY outside the enumerated powers granted the federal government by the states. Subsidies to wind or coal or gas are not authorized by Article 1, Section 8 of the US constitution. If an industry requires the forceful transfer of money from tax payers to survive, it’s a drain on the economy, not a boon. If no one will willfully buy into it at the current size and price, that’s good information! It means there’s not enough value there.

At any rate, the amount of money spent on all the subsidies is a drop in the bucket compared to the total spending of the federal government. It’s not on the top of my list of concerns.

The Original Post by My Classmate:

Wind Energy should continue to get Tax Benefits, the government understands that someday a natural resource such as coal will run out. There will need to be alternate ways to create power in the future, and wind energy is a good response to this problem. Coal is a major industry in places like West Virginia so it will always get huge tax support, as it keeps people employed. The wind turbine industry could also use the fact that constructing wind turbines and keeping them running also creates jobs.Wind turbines also can be set up very fast in many places should we ever decide to stop using coal. For now subsidies will be smaller for wind energy until there is a greater need.

My Response:

“the government understands that someday a natural resource such as coal will run out.” 

Yes, someday in a future so far away that we cannot imagine it. Our great great grandchildren will not be running short on oil. There is not a monopoly on knowledge in Washington. In fact, it’s just the opposite. Check these out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CPrPB6Mzvoo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHD4U2q_p4c 

About jobs, we could give everyone a job just like in the Soviet Union, but they would not be productive jobs. We need products and useful services. These things already are rewarded automatically by the market. If one needs to steal from tax payers to keep making things, one probably should stop making those things.

 “Wind turbines also can be set up very fast in many places should we ever decide to stop using coal.” 

Maybe, but power lines and substations take a long time to set up, and they are costly. Wind farms often need to be set up far away from grid connections.

I will post updates if my classmate replies.

I believe in the second amendment! (Not really)

Here's a quick post on Facebook and my response.

Original Post:

I strongly believe I the 2nd amendment! Strongly! But do we really need assault rifles. A shotgun handgun ok. The name alone speaks for itself ASSAULT!

My Response:

They gave us the 2nd amendment so that we could overthrow those in power when they became too corrupt and tyrannical for our liking, and also to form the basis of the national defense they envisioned. "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, ..."These so called "assault rifles" seem like some of the best tools for that purpose. (By the way, assault rifles have select fire, the capability to fire on fully automatic. The only difference between a "regular" rifle and the so called "assault" rifles is cosmetics. The function is exactly the same.)

Obamacrat on George W.

I saw a Facebook post about how much better Obama was compared to George W. Bush, and I had to respond. Bush was pretty bad, but I just wanted to point out that Obama is not that much better. I never really received a real answer. I put this out on the web as a resource for others. This was on Facebook just before the election.

Original Post:

George W. Bush inherited a strong economy, a budget surplus, and a nation at peace.Eight years later, he left Obama with a shattered economy, a trillion dollar deficit, and two useless wars.Obama saved the country from another Great Depression, rebuilt GM, reformed healthcare, reformed Wall Street, doubled the stock market, created 12 straight quarters of GDP growth, created 32 straight months of private sector job growth, got Bin Laden, got Gaddafi, and got us out of Iraq.And now with the automatic spending cuts and the expiration of the Bush tax cuts in 2012, Obama has solved the deficit problem as well.Obama has done a very good job.

My Response:

I'm not defending Bush at all (he was a terrible leader), but I don't think you have all your facts straight. I don’t think that there’s much of a difference between team Red and team Blue.

• “George W. Bush inherited a strong economy”
• He inherited the .com bubble. I think you imply in your comment that the president directs the economy. The president does not direct the actions and choices of over 300 million people.
• “a budget surplus”
• This is true, albeit a small one ($236 billion in FY 2000).
• He also inherited a stated debt of over $5.8 trillion.
• “a nation at peace”
• This is mostly true. He did take us into two useless wars. However, Obama has not taken our forces out of Afghanistan, we still have a giant embassy in Iraq the size and cost of a small city, and he has deployed more U.S. resources to the Middle East and Africa. His policies are pretty much the same; he just uses mostly drones and the CIA to kill innocent civilians and harass countries instead of solely with ground troops. Technology is a wonderful thing. 
• “he left Obama with a shattered economy”
• Again, the housing bubble was caused by the same policies that are still in effect, stemming from the federal reserve, imposed lowered lending standards, and government housing “assistance.” 
• “a trillion dollar deficit”
• This is true, and he’s helped keep it up. 
• “saved the country from another Great Depression”
• How? We have a great recession and an ever looming sovereign debt crisis. The bailouts, started under Bush and continued and expanded under Obama, only have prolonged and increased the coming pain, and they are a moral hazard encouraging risk that otherwise would not have been taken.
• “rebuilt GM”
• Really? 
• “reformed healthcare”
• We have yet to see the full effects and costs of this legislation. What, specifically, makes it good in your mind? Most American workers and businesses will see little or no change in their skyrocketing insurance costs, while millions of others, including younger workers and those who buy insurance on their own through the nongroup market will actually see their premiums go up faster as a result of this legislation. It will increase taxes by more than $569 billion between now and 2019.
• “reformed Wall Street”
• Really? Read this and this.
• “doubled the stock market”
• It’s almost doubled in nominal dollars, sure, but what does that mean? Is it a good thing? Did the president single-handedly do this? What role does the FED play? The stock market was pretty high before the 2000 and 2008 crashes. What’s the true inflation rate? Is this real wealth?
• “created 12 straight quarters of GDP growth”
• Again, what is the true inflation rate? The growth has been really tiny. If you stray even a little from the government’s figures, we've contracted many times. Again, how does the president “create” this? What specific policies have caused this?
• “created 32 straight months of private sector job growth”
• Again, how? Give me the source of your information so I can see. Here's something to consider on this subject.
• “got Gaddafi”
• Why did we need to do that? Are things better now that that’s done?
• “Obama has solved the deficit problem as well”
• Man, this is good news if it’s true. Again, gimme a source. Where do you get this? Show me the numbers.