..just after 25 years of use. It was made by a private company - Gruman Aircraft, using good quality materials. I think this was the subsidy that Barack Obama is talking about - the government would coordinate power projects and components for alternative energy production, and not design the details.

I saw Friedman talking this morning, and his plan to somehow motivate private industry to create alternative energy components by raising the gas tax is pretty strange - maybe they could use the tax to pay for research, but otherwise the tax would enrich the Fed's budget without providing direction for that money, and would be a regressive tax on the poor and middle class. Taxing gasoline higher would only force the automobile manufacturers to produce autos with higher gas mpg ratings, not create a series of alternative energy products. Building big electricity projects requires government involvement - think TVA, or the Hoover Dam.

I suggest that the government might want to increase the tax on home fuel for mega-homes - maybe subtract the utility bill from the home interest/property tax deduction, after a nominal energy deduction (say, a $200/month energy tax cutoff). Or just boost the tax when the monthly total goes above some basic amount. I'm sure the Friedman's can fund the innovation to invent energy technology to lower their cost. Market forces rule!

But raising gasoline taxes is letting the market work- by adjusting for the externalities. And it is working. Finally, people are starting to take into account MPG when they're looking to buy cars. They're driving less and looking for alernatives such as public transportation and bicycles.

We've seen the short-term inflation caused by higher energy prices. But the markets will also work here as it forces companies to look for cheaper alternatives and reduce their energy costs.

But that extra money is going to the Middle East, not to us, in any form. My solar panels have saved me and the people before me approximately $30/month over 25 years - that's $9000 - the panels cost $2500, the government invested half of that. That's $6500 that didn't go to another country, or turned into CO2. Pretty good investment, but a lot of money up front for a small return every month.

When the question is either/or the best answer is often both/and. I'm all for solar panels and government subsidies to help people get them. I also like the idea of a gas-tax that acts as a floor and ensures gas-prices never go below $3 or so[something Friedman proposed in his Op-Ed column, though I thought of it first!]

If we can use a gas-tax to provide more subsidies to people like the one you got, isn't that a win-win? More solar panels AND less use of gasoline!

Me first!

a subsidy being a tax write off on the installation? how is letting people keep more of the money they earn a subsidy? it could only be termed a subsidy if you think the government is entitled to all your money.

please call it a tax break and not a subsidy, because that is what it is.

You say tomato, I say tomato...

call it what you want, but the government isn't 'giving' you anything. they are letting you keep more of the money you earned.

you better learn the meaning of words. they don't mean what you want them to mean. oh! wait a minute! you're a liberal so i guess they do.

We've already talked about this Irving. The economic effect, which is what's important, is the same whether you want to call it a subsidy or a tax break. It makes no difference at all, especially since some of these alt energy "tax breaks" at times end up pushing companies and individuals into effective negative tax rates.

'We've already talked about this Irving. The economic effect, which is what's important, is the same whether you want to call it a subsidy or a tax break. It makes no difference at all, especially since some of these alt energy "tax breaks" at times end up pushing companies and individuals into effective negative tax rates.'

goddamned fucking public education system in this country. i pray for the day when we have a voucher system like the frenchies.

Money which you couldn't possibly earn without the existence of government and the taxes you pay -- yah, I understand how it goes.

BTW, since when are conservatives word police?

'Money which you couldn't possibly earn without the existence of government...'

money they print? i guess you can say that but i think you know what i mean and are just being obtuse. believe it or not, i don't need the government to hold my hand and wipe my ass as you appear to need. dependent weenies abound in your crowd i'm sure.

Public investment helps create wealth is actually what I meant.