<![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for The green tax credits are good ideas, but not good stimulus ideas]]> Grist Comment Feed en Comment #1 by Biodiversivist http://www.grist.org/article/stimu-lie/ Tue, 05 Feb 2008 15:30:34 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/stimu-lie/1 True that

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> True that

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

]]> Comment #2 by EnergyGuy http://www.grist.org/article/stimu-lie/ Tue, 05 Feb 2008 23:32:38 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/stimu-lie/2 Some suggestions and feedback...

I generally agree that most of these proposals are not very good as a stimulus.  But pretty much all stimulus bills are window dressing anyway.  I think that dropping another $2 billion into fuel assistance (LIHEAP) would be a good stimulus and you could also add to the low income weatherization program (HWAP), but probably only about $200 million at most could be absorbed quickly (and even that wouldn't be very fast).  BTW, the new Bush budgets eliminates the weatherization program...

I do have to disagree with some of your claims:

Things like tax credits for more efficient homes and appliances fail the test for a couple of related reasons. The biggest problem is that they shift consumption, from buying inefficient equipment to more efficient equipment. They tend not to generate new consumption, which is what we need.  Typically the more efficient item being subsidized is more expensive.  When buying a new gas furnace, you can spend an extra ~$800 to get a more efficient unit or not.  If a $300 rebate helps you decide to make that upgrade, that is actually leveraging even more dollars than the rebate amount.  The biggest problem with the rebates is the time it takes for them to have an impact.

if we stop using renewable electricity, we'll start using more of other types of electricity, so we may end up replacing all those lost renewable jobs with other ones in the traditional energy sectorI guess you don't know much about the labor intensity of renewables versus traditional generation.  Renewables are more labor intensive and provide more jobs per kwh than standard power generation. I thought that was pretty well know -- at least for a "green economist".

]]> Some suggestions and feedback...

I generally agree that most of these proposals are not very good as a stimulus.  But pretty much all stimulus bills are window dressing anyway.  I think that dropping another $2 billion into fuel assistance (LIHEAP) would be a good stimulus and you could also add to the low income weatherization program (HWAP), but probably only about $200 million at most could be absorbed quickly (and even that wouldn't be very fast).  BTW, the new Bush budgets eliminates the weatherization program...

I do have to disagree with some of your claims:

Things like tax credits for more efficient homes and appliances fail the test for a couple of related reasons. The biggest problem is that they shift consumption, from buying inefficient equipment to more efficient equipment. They tend not to generate new consumption, which is what we need.  Typically the more efficient item being subsidized is more expensive.  When buying a new gas furnace, you can spend an extra ~$800 to get a more efficient unit or not.  If a $300 rebate helps you decide to make that upgrade, that is actually leveraging even more dollars than the rebate amount.  The biggest problem with the rebates is the time it takes for them to have an impact.

if we stop using renewable electricity, we'll start using more of other types of electricity, so we may end up replacing all those lost renewable jobs with other ones in the traditional energy sectorI guess you don't know much about the labor intensity of renewables versus traditional generation.  Renewables are more labor intensive and provide more jobs per kwh than standard power generation. I thought that was pretty well know -- at least for a "green economist".

]]> Comment #3 by JosephThePoet http://www.grist.org/article/stimu-lie/ Wed, 06 Feb 2008 00:46:49 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/stimu-lie/3 The US Stimulation Package (2)

If a pile of checks are sent out, then a huge chunk of the money will go to food and inexpensive goods (Walmart type stores), and to expensive life-style buys (overseas supplied too).

The employment in other countries will be given a massive assistance by the purchases coming from the "US Stimulation Package".

The politicians would have done better by, for example:

1    Giving out in food stamps that get spent locally and help the poor.
2    Setting aside more to extend Unemployment Insurance that also helps locally (including to take retraining).
3    Include using $10-20 billion for maybe clean fuels research, or redesign rebating to clean up dirty coal power plants.
4    And by taking a whopping $100 billion of it, and telling the American public that the money is up for grabs for the full cost of their purchase and operational installation of wind and solar power collectors, of all sizes, on a first come first served basis. Exclude large power farms from this stimulation package but not the bulk purchases of with-in city limits units that cities may wish to install.  Many American people, cities and companies would jump in to get their chunk of the .

Engaging these few things would cause instant effects and the money will be invested to promote the "US economy".

The continuing effect would be us becoming world leaders in these and other clean power technologies, many Americans finding permanent good employment, the US becoming a little more energy secure, and investment in the US stock market would also be assisted upward by the effect of American companies gearing up for the manufacturing, sales, and educational needs.

Giving us poor and suffering a few dollars won't help us.  The availability of many good jobs would be better.  Sort of like being given a fish as opposed to being helped to become a fisherman.

My first blog on "The US Stimulation Package" can be found at: http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/JosephThePoet

My first book "Life is a Puzzle" was recently published by PublishAmerica.com, under my pen name of JosephThePoet.




]]> The US Stimulation Package (2)

If a pile of checks are sent out, then a huge chunk of the money will go to food and inexpensive goods (Walmart type stores), and to expensive life-style buys (overseas supplied too).

The employment in other countries will be given a massive assistance by the purchases coming from the "US Stimulation Package".

The politicians would have done better by, for example:

1    Giving out in food stamps that get spent locally and help the poor.
2    Setting aside more to extend Unemployment Insurance that also helps locally (including to take retraining).
3    Include using $10-20 billion for maybe clean fuels research, or redesign rebating to clean up dirty coal power plants.
4    And by taking a whopping $100 billion of it, and telling the American public that the money is up for grabs for the full cost of their purchase and operational installation of wind and solar power collectors, of all sizes, on a first come first served basis. Exclude large power farms from this stimulation package but not the bulk purchases of with-in city limits units that cities may wish to install.  Many American people, cities and companies would jump in to get their chunk of the .

Engaging these few things would cause instant effects and the money will be invested to promote the "US economy".

The continuing effect would be us becoming world leaders in these and other clean power technologies, many Americans finding permanent good employment, the US becoming a little more energy secure, and investment in the US stock market would also be assisted upward by the effect of American companies gearing up for the manufacturing, sales, and educational needs.

Giving us poor and suffering a few dollars won't help us.  The availability of many good jobs would be better.  Sort of like being given a fish as opposed to being helped to become a fisherman.

My first blog on "The US Stimulation Package" can be found at: http://community.myfoxstl.com/blogs/JosephThePoet

My first book "Life is a Puzzle" was recently published by PublishAmerica.com, under my pen name of JosephThePoet.




]]> Comment #4 by stevenearlsalmony http://www.grist.org/article/stimu-lie/ Thu, 07 Feb 2008 20:45:24 -0800 http://www.grist.org/article/stimu-lie/4 ECONOMISTS (& politicians) are obsessed...

......with their widely-shared and consensually validated belief in a future of endless economic globalization.  In a finite world like the one we inhabit, this belief is nothing more than specious and magical thinking, is it not?

Steven Earl Salmony
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population, established 2001
http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/

]]> ECONOMISTS (& politicians) are obsessed...

......with their widely-shared and consensually validated belief in a future of endless economic globalization.  In a finite world like the one we inhabit, this belief is nothing more than specious and magical thinking, is it not?

Steven Earl Salmony
AWAREness Campaign on The Human Population, established 2001
http://sustainabilitysoutheast.org/

]]>