The first half megawatt

[Desertphile]

Notice that bill ward didn't dispute the premise - hidden costs that
keep gas and oil artificially cheap - but if you can't come up with
an EXACT number your claim must be invalid, lol.

Royalties and taxes already figure into the price of gas at the pump of
course, they are direct costs and not hidden, so that challenge is bogus.

The amount of money paid to subsidize fossil fuels around the
world was $557 billion in 2008, which is up from $342 billion in
the previous year. This doen't include the cost of military actions
in the middle east and environmental damages resulting from the mining,
refining, and burning of fossil fuels.

http://www.iea.org/files/energy_subsidies.pdf

Nor does it reflect the non-payment of leases on American Indian
land; the Federal Government is supposed to collect that money for
the Indians, but it refuses to do so.

 

[Giga2]

Providing for the common defense is one of, and one might argue, the most
important of the enumerated powers. I view it as purchasing and
overseeing a necessary service, not as "redistribution". The same could
be said for providing a justice system. Redistribution is taking one
taxpayer's money and giving it to another because of some perceived
"entitlement" to certain goods others have produced, such as health care,
food, housing, windmills, and other unearned values.

Those are not included in the basic human rights of "life, liberty and
the pursuit of happiness" guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence,
and enforced by the Constitution. To guarantee them is to impose slavery
on those who must then provide them without compensation.

That is arguable of course, what is redistribution and what is not, what
alllowed to secure life, linerty, happiness and what is not.

What do you think is the difference between redistribution and socialism?

Socialism is more than just redistriution and may not even include it.

 

[Giga2]

Of course it is. That's why the Constitution limits the power of Federal
government to only those enumerated, leaving all others to the states and
people.

Government IS force.

No, force is force, government can and does use force but it is not itself
force.

Remember that when proposing new areas of
regulation. You could go to jail for using too much water flow in your
shower, even though you bought the water when it passed through the meter.

Or for using a 100W incandescent light bulb. Or for using a toilet that
uses more than the approved amount of water for a flush... Where does it
end?

That is not true in this country. Also the great thing in the UK is if I
don't like the laws here I am free to leave.

 

[Unum]

For me to believe that, you'd need to show evidence that the amount the
government receives due to oil related taxes and royalties is less than
that paid out in "subsidies". If the net income is positive, how can
there be a subsidy?

Haw! Let's examine this argument. You lease my land and extract minerals
that I own from it to sell, and pay me for the privilege. Then I should
turn around and hand the money back to you, but as long as I don't
give back every penny it isn't a subsidy. Lol, this must be some kind
of Tea Party arithmetic.

But you couldn't actually show any subsidy, and admit you don't even know
the "true price of oil" or any consistent, defendable way to calculate
it. Is it something you make up to scare people and collect rent?
http://www.iea.org/files/energy_subsidies.pdf


Looks like "economic justice" at work to me.

Yeah that's the form of "justice" where the rich get richer and
the poor get poorer, meanwhile the world gets more and more dirty.

That would be you making up the number, not me.

Obviously not, he gave justification for the estimates whereas bill
ward hasn't done anything but talk through his ass.

 

[Desertphile]

Socialism is more than just redistriution and may not even include it.

If you ever see anybody suggesting that, do let someone know,
m'kay?

 

[sno]

Haw! Let's examine this argument. You lease my land and extract minerals
that I own from it to sell, and pay me for the privilege. Then I should
turn around and hand the money back to you, but as long as I don't
give back every penny it isn't a subsidy. Lol, this must be some kind
of Tea Party arithmetic.


Yeah that's the form of "justice" where the rich get richer and
the poor get poorer, meanwhile the world gets more and more dirty.


Obviously not, he gave justification for the estimates whereas bill
ward hasn't done anything but talk through his ass.

zero federal taxes???.....I think you may be incorrect, at least
according to their annual report....

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/is?s=XOM

5 billion 811 million to me is a little more than zero....but then I may
not be in your income bracket...<grin>

have fun....sno

--
Correct Scientific Terminology:
Hypothesis - a guess as to why or how something occurs
Theory - a hypothesis that has been checked by enough experiments
to be generally assumed to be true.
Law - a hypothesis that has been checked by enough experiments
in enough different ways that it is assumed to be truer then a theory.
Note: nothing is proven in science, things are assumed to be true.

 

[Peter Franks]

I have heard that concentrating the sun like this can cause the cells to
heat up....greatly reducing their efficiency....I do not imagine one or
two sun power increases would cause much heating...

No, actually the most efficient cells operate at 300-400 suns.

 

[Peter Franks]

On 4/6/2011 12:15 PM, Giga2<Giga2 wrote:
On 4/6/2011 1:36 AM, Falcon wrote:

[..]
Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is a
reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
still
be worth quite a lot in 15 years?

No.

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of
the
price?

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price and
doing
so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher electricity
prices.

Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.

As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.

At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I install
them?


Maybe to do something for the general good?

I do. And I choose things that are far more effective than me spending
$50K on PV.

That is probably a matter of opinion.

Probably not.

How about this for a change: since you are so pro-environment for doing
things for the general good, why don't *you* pay for my PV system?

Send me the bill.

Are you good for $30K?

 

[Peter Franks]

Not at all. As long as they go quietly to court and to prison, (eventually
if they really are that obstinate), then no need for any force.

So, what you are saying is that if someone doesn't have a "sense of
community", they should "go quietly to court and to prison", and if they
don't, force them.

?

 

[Peter Franks]

No, force is force, government can and does use force but it is not itself
force.


That is not true in this country. Also the great thing in the UK is if I
don't like the laws here I am free to leave.

And if the laws aren't just here, I can get them changed.

I'm not about to leave, but I am about justice and the protection of
rights, /including/ freedom.

 

[Peter Franks]

Why does it have to be one or the other? It's registered as a business
with the tax office and it's my start capital.

It makes a difference which it is. If a business (expense), it can be
used as a deduction; personal, no such thing. In the end, it can make a
sizable impact as to the total cost.

Secondly, an individual will probably finance the expense, meaning
interest, translating into a greater expense.

So, take your 11690 + VAT (2221) + interest (5900, 10yrs @ 7.5%) and you
come up w/ a total cost of 19811 which is approaching TWICE your
original net quote.

Not cheap bro, not cheap.

 

[Giga2]

On 4/7/2011 1:28 AM, Giga2<Giga2 wrote:
On 4/6/2011 12:15 PM, Giga2<Giga2 wrote:
On 4/6/2011 1:36 AM, Falcon wrote:

[..]
Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is
a
reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
still
be worth quite a lot in 15 years?

No.

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of
the
price?

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price
and
doing
so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher
electricity
prices.

Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.

As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.

At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I
install
them?


Maybe to do something for the general good?

I do. And I choose things that are far more effective than me
spending
$50K on PV.

That is probably a matter of opinion.

Probably not.

How about this for a change: since you are so pro-environment for doing
things for the general good, why don't *you* pay for my PV system?

Send me the bill.

Are you good for $30K?

I just want to see the bill.

 

[Giga2]

True enough, but they're assumed as self-evident axioms in the D of I.
If "rights" involve taking from one group of people and giving to
another, I'd argue that they're not rights, but goods, earned by some and
taken by others.


Then we may be working from different definitions of socialism. What's
your definition?

This is quite off topic now but I would say a strong social safty net,
social health care, state education designed to equalise opportunity across
social groups, relatively high tax and workers rights, union support.
Basically most modern European countries are socialist.

 

[Giga2]

Without force, it's not a government, simply an advisory committee.



Are you sure?

Yes. It is not allowed to *sell* 100w lightbulbs, using them is not illegal.
Again there are building rgulations but these effect only those suppling new
appliances not those using them.

Same here. You can tell a lot about a country from which way the barbed
wire on the border fence points.

On the other hand if I don't take the option to leave then I tacitly accept
the law of that country.

 

[Giga2]

And if the laws aren't just here, I can get them changed.

I'm not about to leave, but I am about justice and the protection of
rights, /including/ freedom.

That right is your under the law of the US or UK. You can object, complain,
campaign etc etc but you are still required to comply with the law in the
mean-time.

 

[Giga2]

So, what you are saying is that if someone doesn't have a "sense of
community", they should "go quietly to court and to prison", and if they
don't, force them.

?

That seems an extreme characterisation of what I said. Obviously nobody
knows whether someone really has a *sense* of community or not, it is their
actions that are relevant only.

 

[Giga2]

It makes a difference which it is. If a business (expense), it can be
used as a deduction; personal, no such thing. In the end, it can make a
sizable impact as to the total cost.

Secondly, an individual will probably finance the expense, meaning
interest, translating into a greater expense.

So, take your 11690 + VAT (2221) + interest (5900, 10yrs @ 7.5%) and you
come up w/ a total cost of 19811 which is approaching TWICE your original
net quote.

I bet in Germany you can put it on your mortgage, which is probably fixed
around 4%. In the UK you probably could as well, it is a home-improvement
with a 10years guarantee afterall.

 

[Giga2]

Wait for it.


Or change the offending laws. We're in that messy but necessary process
right now.

But during the process of change you still need to recognise that you are
tacitly accepting the law by remaining in the country, though you may not
agree with it, if you see what I mean.

 

[Peter Franks]

On 4/7/2011 1:28 AM, Giga2<Giga2 wrote:
On 4/6/2011 12:15 PM, Giga2<Giga2 wrote:
On 4/6/2011 1:36 AM, Falcon wrote:

[..]
Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is
a
reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
still
be worth quite a lot in 15 years?

No.

Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of
the
price?

Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price
and
doing
so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher
electricity
prices.

Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.

As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.

At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I
install
them?


Maybe to do something for the general good?

I do. And I choose things that are far more effective than me
spending
$50K on PV.

That is probably a matter of opinion.

Probably not.

How about this for a change: since you are so pro-environment for doing
things for the general good, why don't *you* pay for my PV system?

Send me the bill.

Are you good for $30K?

I just want to see the bill.

There is no bill to see. Are you going to buy me a PV system for the
"general good"?

 

[Peter Franks]

That seems an extreme characterisation of what I said. Obviously nobody
knows whether someone really has a *sense* of community or not, it is their
actions that are relevant only.

Not extreme, concise. Just putting it out there so that it is plain to
see and understand. You advocate force/compulsion; I advocate
freedom/liberty.