Government bad, corporations good?

Seems to be the battle cry of republicans that want to dismantel our democracy.

Is there anything less patriotic than trying to destroy our democracy.

I thought our government was the envy of the world and we needed to
spend billions to invade other countries so we could spread it to them.

__________________

When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
Jimi Hendrix

The government is in the business of encouraging people to do things which need doing but are too risky to do without assistance.

The government encourages folks through tax breaks, guaranteed loans and in many other ways I am sure.

Just making business expenses tax deductable is an encouragement. Meals being deductable supports our food industry. Mortgage interest being deductable supports loans......and so forth.

__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.

I know that is what the government has been doing. But because the government has been doing something is not reason alone to keep doing the same thing. I believe with a moment's reflection you and I will agree with that premise and conclusion.

Now, government is, by definition, a political process. Thus, whichever political entity is in power at the moment gets to choose the winners and losers of government beneficence.

Currently, the cause du jour is solar panels. Some proportion of people will like government 'helping' get the industry started.

Previously, it was ethanol. There is a strong contingent that thinks ethanol is a fine idea, worthy of government subsidy.

Maybe next week it will be windmills. Or sail-assist maritime vessels.

Has any of this crap been proven to work, without a pre-ecisting market? And if a market already exists, why is the gov subsidizing private business in a money-making venture?

Well ethanol, as you well know is a total bust. It costs MORE than the gasoline its supposed to save, AND it is harmful to the rubber components of fuel systems, AND it drives up the price of food.
Bad, bad and worse.

I can almost see helping a fledgling industry get started. But if it fails, cut off the support.

__________________
1982 300SD " Wotan" ..On the road as of Jan 8, 2007 with Historic Tags

Bernie Sanders was talking about that very subject just the other day [edit: he was was not talking about ethanol, but the more general subject of the government picking winners and losers]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDrgaGqUMIg

As Senator Sanders said, this picking of winners and losers is inevitable. I think where Congress gets in trouble is when they try to be scientists and engineers instead of policy makers. As a general matter, they should set goals and try to avoid telling private industry how to achieve those goals.

Yes.

Set goals, do not force them.

That's what we have capitalism for! People who think there is some value in "helping" a fledgling industry can take their own money pool it with other like minded people and risk it on the idea that at some point the market will develop and reward their foresight. Why should every taxpayer bear the brunt of confirming failures the market has already identified.

Yes.

The gov should say, "It would be nice if somebody invented a commercially competitive power source not dependent on petroleum." It should not say, "We need to subsidize the manufacture of solar panels by an American company".

Heck, I'd be okay with a substantial no-strings prize offering.

I'm sure we can count on the GOP to turn over every stone and stretch every fact to find corruption. Rep. Garder (R - Colorado) tried a bit too hard on Wednesday and wound up looking like a fool: http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/LoanGuaran [Gardner is at 2:29:50 to 2:34:00.] Rep. Bilbray (R - California) was doing a much better job for the GOP side just before yielding back to Gardner.

Based on a bit of googling on Rep. Gardner, I'm guessing this isn't the first time he's made a fool of himself. I'm sure it won't be the last.

Sigh.

Don't you just hate congressional oversight? There should be a law against it.

Is that what Gardner was doing? That's what you call oversight?

Yes, reward a result not an asspiration! We've got the Nobel committee for that!

"Honus" Are you so blinded by your partisanship that you fail to see the same farcical pretension is played, regardless of party is or principal?

In this instance it is entirely appropriate that the congress exercise it's constitutional prerogative. If there's no "there" there, well that's good, too. Regardless, it keeps the administration jumping to dot 'i's' and cross 't's' and to stay within the parameters of the law and good sense.

I hope more congressional investigations follow. I'd like to see one get into defense contracting. Also union activities in gov installations. Etc.

More, please.

No.Did anyone suggest otherwise?Definitely. Now, if we can only find someone willing and able to do so honestly.

If you can discern honest intentions from dishonest, you are a marvelous soul to be reckoned with.