Remember when Reagan took the solar panels off the White House?
Dolt.
Filed under: Misc | Tagged: Reagan, Thought of the day |
Author
Recent Comments
The Sauciest Duck on Chauvin and Rittenhouse Michael on Chauvin and Rittenhouse Stephen Moreton on Chauvin and Rittenhouse Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Merry Christmas Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Mele Kalikimaka somdeblahiriyahoocoi… on Thought of the day Michael on Wuhan virus and one last… Quick correction | F… on The A-Unicornist, Bernie Bro… The A-Unicornist, Be… on When I know I’ve beat… Somdeb Lahiri on Thought of the day
For the Sake of Science 
I would. I mean symbolism is useful and all, but when I’m president I’m taking them off and I’m going to build a shooting range on the site of the White House garden.
Small scale is almost always a waste of money, and unlike your much beloved wind turbines, photovoltaic cells rarely, if ever, pay for themselves during their lifespan. They have a long ways to go. I’m sure they will get there, but the solar industry already imploded once in the 90’s because the government subsidized and encouraged a technology that wasn’t cost effective yet.
Large scale solar collectors, an entirely different beast, seem to be somewhat efficient, but commercial installations don’t use panels like this for just that reason. (but than there are the protestors that try and vandalize them and stop projects because they are afraid for some desert tortoises. Tortoise – old indian word for dusty turtle.)
How can one forget? Reagan started the disastrous policies that are turning the US into a third world country and Dumbya Bush, with his massive tax cuts for the rich cause it to accelerate. We had a little sanity under Clinton but now the problems have become too large to fix and we are head for the economic fate Of Greece and Italy.
You are partly right Bob. But those countries have high tax rates on nearly everyone and especially the rich, which really drove the situation out of control when the markets took a dive and tax revenue fell from the people that pay a majority of the taxes. It didn’t work out well over there.
As every rational person knows, if you create programs and benefits that benefit one group at the expense of another, you incentivise people to take measures to keep the cash cow producing.
However as history shows, with very few exceptions, any government will spend at least as much as it takes in.
And I think you mean under Clinton and Newt Gingrich. The rest of your rhetoric isn’t worth going through, since it is almost a cookie cutter copy of what you say in every comment.
The us was prosperous for about 3 decades with higher taxes on the wealthy. Raegan changed that and the decline began. Cookie cutter is what describes your anti-everything-the-government-does Libertarianism statements.
Sigh. Aside from you needing a history lesson, i can’t see much hope for you.
I lived through it. I saw the changes and watched people feel the pain. You are incredibly obtuse. I gave up on your dogma long ago.
I will not bother with your dogma any more on this thread.
It’s just sad when you run away.
Hey Bob, the poorest of the poor had a 20 percent tax rate until 1964. Then it went down to 16%, then 14%.
Today it’s at 10% and there was less “wealth distribution” at the time, no earned-income tax credit, etc.. Do you want to bring that too?
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/151.html