• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump admin slaps solar, wind operators with retroactive rent bills


What is left off....

The Interior Department had stopped charging the rents at the end of 2018 to review company complaints that former President Barack Obama’s administration had increased them too much, making them uncompetitive with rents on private property.
 
Cattle = food. Should we be raising costs for cattle farmers, thereby raising the price of beef at the grocery store? That doesn't make much sense. Does it?

Solar panels = energy. Should we raise the costs of energy? Doesn't make sense, does it?
 
Solar panels = energy. Should we raise the costs of energy? Doesn't make sense, does it?

Solar generated electricity costs twice as much per watt as fossil fuels.
 
Solar generated electricity costs twice as much per watt as fossil fuels.

And cars will never replace horses because you have to buy the fuel in cans at the general or hardware store.
Hydro power costs less than half what fossil fuels cost.

If cost is really what matters. But it isn't. Protecting the investments of already very wealthy people is what matters.

Did you know that hydro is basically solar power? Another reason to reject it.
 

In what year do you see a prediction that Wind/Solar can power the world? Not happening in your lifetime.
 
Kind of a tenuous connect to the sub-forum topic, eh?
 
Solar generated electricity costs twice as much per watt as fossil fuels.

That's exactly the kind of statement that screams for a citation. Was that something you read ten years ago? Solar energy costs have been plummeting. Does it exclude subsidies for both the solar and the fossil fuels? (See the article I referenced that you didn't read).

Here's something I found on the internet just now:


And this:


Don't trust the source? How about Forbes?

Looks like your datapoint is out of date.
 
Last edited:
Subjective, Trump may not have anything to do with the completion of the review,
just like he likely had nothing to do with stopping collecting the rent in the first place, at the end of 2018.


Quite possible. But we do know that Trump hates wind farms, especially if they are near his golf courses. November 21, 2016 right after the election he pressures a UK leader to oppose wind farms in their country. Kind of self serving use of his new found power. Don’t ya think!


Trump urged UK leader to oppose wind farm near his golf course: report | TheHill


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Why should they get a free ride? Another case of the federal government giving money to alternative energy schemes that will not provide enough energy to power the earth without carbon fuels.
 
One is a cash subsidie and one isn't. Without welfare, the green companies wouldn't exist. When did you become so fond of corporate welfare?

I can promise you the lobbyists prefer tax breaks, because people like you think there's a difference (spoiler - there isn't - a tax break is as good as cash), and tax breaks don't get appropriated every year like cash subsidies so they're under the radar. Pass the tax break one time and it's there forever, or until it gets zeroed out, which might be a decade or more.
 
Ahh! You're all for corporate welfare as long as it's something you like.

Yeah, that's kind of how life works in government. We subsidize things we want more of. If we want more strip mining, more mountain top removals, more filthy coal ash pits like the one that burst near my hometown, more air pollution, more lung disease, we can subsidize coal and other fossil fuels.

This is a house flooded with toxic coal ash. Nice work TVA!



The good part about that spill is the clean up is going to kill 100 or so workers who were poisoned by the ash and were forced to work in the cleanup without adequate protective gear, while being lied to about the dangers of what was included in that ash they breathed for weeks or months. It just came out recently that the State of TN changed a bunch of readings on the nuclear elements in that ash - deleted them or reduced them by 97% or so, which was nice. I'm so proud of my state government for that.

MORE OF THAT PLEASE!!
 
If it woasn't for fossil fuels, most of the planet's population would starve to death

So if their product is life or death, why do they need subsidies?
 

Also this seems relevant:


 
Solar generated electricity costs twice as much per watt as fossil fuels.

Climate change: Coal now more expensive than wind, solar energy


You got any figures for us, or are you a decade or so out of date with your talking points?
 
Why should they get a free ride? Another case of the federal government giving money to alternative energy schemes that will not provide enough energy to power the earth without carbon fuels.

It's not an either/or deal here. Until storage is solved in a big way, we will use fossil fuels, and/or nuclear energy (which wouldn't exist without subsidies). And no one is talking about a free ride for solar, but having fossil fuels pay the full freight. Fossil fuels have been subsidized for as long as they've existed as a power source in one way or another.
 
Does the same regulations apply to all the oil rigs, a d cattle ranchers on public land???


Show proof that it hasnt then.
 
Not surprising, Trump has gone full in on anything that benefits fossil fuel at the expense of everyone else.

There’s Wall Street. They have their own man in the Trump Administration. And his job is to keep teh bonuses flowing.
 
Show proof that it hasnt then.

I dont know but I doubt it.

With the Interior Department in the Trump regime entirely in the hand of openly corrupt oil and coal lobbyists, I doubt it.

Similarly, under cover of the COVID relief legislation, the Treasury Department has shifted money to the oil industry, particularly the flagging fracking business. Free Federal money so that the frackers could prop up the payments on the junk bonds that finance their business.

The Trump policy is essentially the same as the Harding Adminstrations. It gives away Federal land at bargain basement prices for oil and coal companies. That is one thing that the Trump regime has in common with the Bush and Reagan Administrations.

But times are different now. The rapidly falling cost of solar power generation, and electricity storage are changing the business model of the electric power industry. Which is a direct threat to coal and oil.

Rather than embrace the future, as our global competitors do, the Trump regime fights a well funded rear guard action to keep the fossil fuel industry subsidized and competitive.

Wall Street knows better. The money isnt going into big oil as it once did. Its going into technology.

Just another example of the way the Trump regimes obsession with their outdated vision of the future.
 
No comment on the government retroactively billing private businesses without oversight?

1. was there a lease

2. were the tenants using the property during said lease

3. why werent rents being collected WAY before COVID-19

4. if they are 2 years behind, they should have been out on their asses LONG AGO....covid or no covid

how many here live 2 years free with no mortgage payment or lease payments due?
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…