Things you want the government to subsidize or stop subsidizing

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Stop subsidizing things that do not have any ROI.
At the same time, we need to stop thinking about worth in pure $$$. that's a very cynical, reductionist measure, excludes positive externalities and unquantifiables.

For example, green open spaces, we all like them, we go to them, we enjoy them in lots of ways.

ROI says that we should tax the land of all the national parks, for example. Or heck, sell it all off for $1 an acre to ranchers, miners, loggers, gross polluters, let them make some ROI on it!

Not.
 
ROI says that we should tax the land of all the national parks, for example. Or heck, sell it all off for $1 an acre to ranchers, miners, loggers, gross polluters, let them make some ROI on it!

Not.

The Bull Moose did that move to stop that from happening, but as you know BLM "now" can go too far.

edit: for those that do not know, BLM stood for Burrao of Land Management, not what you see on the news.
 
The Bull Moose did that move to stop that from happening, but as you know BLM "now" can go too far.

(Art means Bureau of Land Mismanagement here, not any other BLM.). Yep, like any bureaucracy.

Just yesterday, talking with mom mom, we both said at the same time, Where's Teddy Roosevelt when we need him!?!?!!

He's the last president to climb a mountain, the only one to hike with John Muir, and the only one to hike 5 Mile trail from Yosemite Valley to Glacier Point.
 
if you read it all, it encompasses all forms of fossil fuels, not just ICE fuels.
As it should, since the original post encompasses the "fossil fuel industry" not just ICE fuels.
To recap:
Yes, and at the same time pull all support like subsidies, tax deductions and credits, and especially military support, for the fossil fuel industry.

Care to support that statement with factual quotable data?
Done.

Furthermore, it only reports on North America as a aggregate and not the United States alone.
Yes, North America is a global region. Your point?
Furthermore, figure 7 appears to state that North America has no direct subsidies but calculates costs based on air pollution, global warming, "other local factors" and "foregone consumption tax revenue."
Read figure 7 again. Explicit means direct.
And externalities (that is the term) should be counted as a societal cost that taxpayers will have to pay billions for.
there's also a large cost in mining the resources needed for lithium batteries, which have a large cost to the world in pollution
LOL. You state that externalities should not be counted for fossil fuels but you include them when discussing the minerals needed for battery production. Can't have it both ways and be objective.
no mention of required transmission lines and other larger infrastructure upgrades.

The Infrastructure Act allocates money to modernize the grid.
Fossil fuel is reported to have a $20 billion subsidy in total, and this is not broken down into type of fuel (typically coal, oil and natural gas)https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fa...-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs
Read the link you cited. $20 billion is the figure for DIRECT subsidies. When accounting for all subsidies and externalities the figure is $649 billion. An order of magnitude more than EV subsidies, I would say.

a report gives a true cost of ev filling at $17.33 per equivalent gallon of which the consumer pays 7% of that. quite a deal.
Your link makes that statement without offering data. Any credible citations?
Speaking of credible, let's see what a few factchecks say about some of your links:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/heritage-foundation/
  • Overall, we rate the Heritage Foundation Right Biased based on conservative policy positions and funding from right-leaning organizations. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to promoting misleading claims regarding global warming and the health dangers associated with tobacco.
https://www.texasobserver.org/revea...that-fund-the-texas-public-policy-foundation/Pay to play and enhance your agenda.
Not very objective, is it?

To summarize from one of your own citations:

Conclusion​


In seeking fiscal reforms that have the potential to save taxpayer dollars while simultaneously addressing greenhouse gas emissions, phasing out subsidies for the fossil fuel industry should be a priority for federal policymakers. These subsidies aid an industry that is mature, well-established, and with an abundant private financing stream. Reducing the subsidies fossil fuel stakeholders receive can help correct inefficient economic interventions into energy markets, save billions of taxpayer dollars, and reduce negative social and environmental impacts.
 
Last edited:
(Art means Bureau of Land Mismanagement here, not any other BLM.). Yep, like any bureaucracy.

Just yesterday, talking with mom mom, we both said at the same time, Where's Teddy Roosevelt when we need him!?!?!!

He's the last president to climb a mountain, the only one to hike with John Muir, and the only one to hike 5 Mile trail from Yosemite Valley to Glacier Point.

Or storm San Juan Hill "Included among the U.S. ground troops were the Theodore Roosevelt-led “Rough Riders,” a collection of Western cowboys and Eastern blue bloods officially known as the First U.S. Voluntary Cavalry."
 
FYI Teddy Got Shot with a Pistol in the Chest and he then stated [at the speech he got driven to after being shot] it's going to take more then that to put down a Bull Moose. Turns out the pistol was a tiny ~32 caliber that lodged into his chest but did not hit anything vital.
 
For decades, the Republicans have talked about the line item veto in an effort to rein in pork barrel spending. I would like to see that become a reality, but it will always remain just a talking point, because the truth of the matter is both parties love to stick their snouts in the trough.
 
Continue to subsidize things that have net + return on investment, $1 subsidy returns >$1 to the economy. Stop subsidizing things that do not have any ROI.
I like the concept but implementation is tricky. How is ROI measured, and over what time scale?

For one example, if the yearly NASA budget is $20B, does NASA generate >$20B / yr in direct revenues? No. But, historically, have we derived more out of what NASA has done than we have invested in it? Absolutely.

I am a pragmatist, so it may be that rather than some absolutist measurement of ROI, subsidies should be capped at more rational values and a system of justification based on both economic and outcome metrics could be determined.
 
Yes, North America is a global region. Your point?
maybe a geography lesson? North America consists of countries other then the United States, at least the last time I checked,
Let's see:

  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Bahamas
  • Barbados
  • Belize
  • Canada
  • Costa Rica
  • Cuba
  • Dominica
  • Dominican Republic
  • El Salvador
  • Grenada
  • Guatemala
  • Haiti
  • Honduras
  • Jamaica
  • Mexico
  • Nicaragua
  • Panama
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
  • Saint Lucia
  • Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
  • Trinadad and Tobago
all of which were NOT included in my discussion of the United State's subsidies of EV, nor was the tread suggesting that we would pick things we wish that ALL governments in a region would stop subsidizing. Nor was my data on EV's a regional outlook, just the USA. Let's try to compare apples to apples.

btw I don't care if you own a EV, you do you. I do care if you remove my choice to NOT have a EV, which I do not want due to it's range limitations especially when towing and the environmental impact of mining of lithium and cobalt, as well as the increased danger if (not when, I wouldn't suggest it happens all the time) a EV catches fire. I am looking forward to solid state or proton batteries and if they will eliminate my concerns. They may.....who knows?
 
maybe a geography lesson? North America consists of countries other then the United States, at least the last time I checked,
Let's see:

  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Bahamas
  • Barbados
  • Belize
  • Canada
  • Costa Rica
  • Cuba
  • Dominica
  • Dominican Republic
  • El Salvador
  • Grenada
  • Guatemala
  • Haiti
  • Honduras
  • Jamaica
  • Mexico
  • Nicaragua
  • Panama
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
  • Saint Lucia
  • Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
  • Trinadad and Tobago
Take another look at Figure 7.
Latin America and the Caribbean are listed as a separate region.
Yes, someone needs a geography lesson, but it's not me.
Perhaps also graphic interpretation lessons as well?

Interesting read. if you read it all, it encompasses all forms of fossil fuels, not just ICE fuels. Furthermore, it only reports on North America as a aggregate and not the United States alone.

Yes, and at the same time pull all support like subsidies, tax deductions and credits, and especially military support, for the fossil fuel industry. The real cost of all that is $trillions per year.

Care to support that statement with factual quotable data?
The title of the study is A Global Update of Fossil Fuel Subsidies.
It was cited as a response to a question about citations.
Which was posted in response to a post about fossil fuel subsidies.
Nowhere did anyone mention US only or ICEs only.
That was your construct, and not part of the discussion.
btw I don't care if you own a EV, you do you
Actually I don't, since I'm retired and will foreseeably be only driving for a few more years.

I do care if you remove my choice to NOT have a EV, which I do not want
Do what you want.
I don't care.

due to it's range limitations especially when towing and the environmental impact of mining of lithium and cobalt, as well as the increased danger if (not when, I wouldn't suggest it happens all the time) a EV catches fire
Valid concerns.
As battery technology rapidly progresses in the next 5 to ten years I think those issues will be mitigated, if not eliminated completely.
Question: How does the negative impact of mineral mining for EV batteries compare to the negative impact of drilling for oil? And BTW battery manufacturers are moving away from using cobalt in their battery production. There are alternatives.
What is the per capita rate of EV fires compared to ICE fires?
Does the range of an ICE go down as well when it is towing?
Apples to apples, as you say.
The answers might surprise you.
 
  1. Subsidize - things I like.
  2. Stop Subsidizing - things I don't like.
  3. Don't listen to anyone else's opinion, except mine. Otherwise things will get confusing and my whimsical preferences for #1 and #2 will get diluted with the opinions of the others.
  4. If #3 doesn't fly, then revert to representative democratic process to collectively debate and prioritize what should be in #1 and #2, regardless of my, or anyone else's, individual whimsical preferences or opinions.
  5. Since $$ equals free speech, use $$ to influence #4 to re-define what #1 and #2 should be.
  6. When my preferences for #1 and #2 change, or someone else's preferences conflict with my own, re-apply #5, as needed.
    • As necessary, find buddies who share my preferences for #1 and #2 to amplify #5.
    • As necessary, apply $$ to distract opponents with some other meaningless causes that don't interfere with my #1 and #2, to maximize the ROI on #5.

Did I miss anything?

1700440368906.png
 
Last edited:
What is the per capita rate of EV fires compared to ICE fires?
Not important. I'm a fireman and I put out a ICE fire and it's out. Period. No drama. Rarely is it the fuel cell or engine. Generally it's contents fires. I guess it's possible for the ICE battery to burn, but I've yet to see that in the 43 years I've been a fireman. I have seen them smashed, crushed and cracked. Lead-acid batteries just aren't exciting.
The current guidelines from the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection in my state is let the battery fire burn out. Why? Because on average it takes 10,000 gallons to put it out, and then all 10,000 gallons are lithium contaminated Hazmat. (good luck getting 10,000 gallons anywhere there isn't a hydrant. Our tanker is 2,500 gallons) After it goes out, it has to be towed to a isolated area because it could spontaneously rekindle for up to 2 weeks later (due to stranded voltage). The concerns of EV fires have gotten them banned from many parking structures in NYC...

Does the range of an ICE go down as well when it is towing?
I loose about 2 mpg with my diesel towing my 10k trailer. No big deal, a 3 minute stop at the truck stop solves this problem, easy-peazy. No prolonged re-charge stops. EV trucking is even more problematic. Watch this video:
 
You would "regulate" evil?! Hence the nd or freedom of religion, not abolishing it.
If sex between consenting adults is legal, then why should it be illegal to charge a fee for giving that consent? Because you think it's evil? Hence the need for freedom from religion (the establishment clause) an not the notion that freedom of religion (the free exercise clause) means the ability to impose one's personal morality on others.
 
maybe a geography lesson? North America consists of countries other then the United States, at least the last time I checked,
Let's see:

  • Antigua and Barbuda
  • Bahamas
  • Barbados
  • Belize
  • Canada
  • Costa Rica
  • Cuba
  • Dominica
  • Dominican Republic
  • El Salvador
  • Grenada
  • Guatemala
  • Haiti
  • Honduras
  • Jamaica
  • Mexico
  • Nicaragua
  • Panama
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
  • Saint Lucia
  • Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
  • Trinadad and Tobago
all of which were NOT included in my discussion of the United State's subsidies of EV, nor was the tread suggesting that we would pick things we wish that ALL governments in a region would stop subsidizing. Nor was my data on EV's a regional outlook, just the USA. Let's try to compare apples to apples.

btw I don't care if you own a EV, you do you. I do care if you remove my choice to NOT have a EV, which I do not want due to it's range limitations especially when towing and the environmental impact of mining of lithium and cobalt, as well as the increased danger if (not when, I wouldn't suggest it happens all the time) a EV catches fire. I am looking forward to solid state or proton batteries and if they will eliminate my concerns. They may.....who knows?
I'll give you the national vs. regional apples-to-apples point. Can you show any data on vehicle fires per vehicle mile for EVs vs.ICEVs. To the best of my knowledge, EVs are no worse, despite the hype from EV detractors.
 
Does the range of an ICE go down as well when it is towing?
Of course it does. But, if we're to debate honestly, we must concede the "fill up" for an EV is a lot greater than that for an ICEV, and the fill up time becomes a bigger issue when the rages of both types of vehicles are reduced.
 
Of course it does. But, if we're to debate honestly, we must concede the "fill up" for an EV is a lot greater than that for an ICEV, and the fill up time becomes a bigger issue when the rages of both types of vehicles are reduced.
Can an ICE fill up from a station in your garage while you sleep?
How many miles does the average driver go every day?
How does that compare to the average range of an EV?
Not talking about long haul trucks or special occasions when something needs to be towed.
Average day to day driving, which the vast majority of us do.
Apples to apples, not special conditions or vehicles.
(I ask these questions but I already know the answers).
BTW I never said that there aren't pros and cons to EVs.
Surprise! They aren't perfect.
Like everything else.
Who knew?
But depending on your personal driving profile they could be a very good match.
Laters.
 
Back to the topic of SUBSIDIES:
Lets talk about the COTS program, which was basically the US government subsidizing fledgling space companies to develop the commercial space industry.
Those against subsidies and the government picking winners and losers, how do you feel about this program?
Would Space X and Blue Origin be just footnotes in history if not for COTS?
Would we be still renting space aboard Russian Soyuz vehicles to get to the ISS?
Input please!
 
Can an ICE fill up from a station in your garage while you sleep?
No and neither can an EV. Like many people in a condo our insurance carrier explicitly prohibits EV charging in any form as one of their new conditions of coverage.
 
Can an ICE fill up from a station in your garage while you sleep?
No.
How many miles does the average driver go every day?
I don't know; not a whole lot.
How does that compare to the average range of an EV?
An overnight charge will probably do for most people most of the time.
Not talking about long haul trucks or special occasions when something needs to be towed.
I took @cbrarick's comment about towing to be about special occasions, or that he is one of the rare people who tow trailers with their cars/pickups routinely. If EVs weren't so epensive, I'd own one now, and rent and ICEV for those special occasions on which I need to tow something,
 
Last edited:
Back to the topic of SUBSIDIES:
Lets talk about the COTS program, which was basically the US government subsidizing fledgling space companies to develop the commercial space industry.
Those against subsidies and the government picking winners and losers, how do you feel about this program?
Would Space X and Blue Origin be just footnotes in history if not for COTS?
Would we be still renting space aboard Russian Soyuz vehicles to get to the ISS?
Input please!
Point of fact: I don't think Blue Origin ever had a contract for ISS resupply. There were two US companies awarded those: SpaceX and Orbital Sciences (which was well established but small, and the COTS program allowed it to expand its not so well developed launch business). Blue Origin, on the other hand, is just a footnote.

Otherwise, yes, COTS subsidized development of two new viable launch providers, which is absolutely a good thing and well worth doing. And thank figure of speech that we no longer need to depend on Soyuz.
 
No and neither can an EV. Like many people in a condo our insurance carrier explicitly prohibits EV charging in any form as one of their new conditions of coverage.
The objective response would be something like "Not if you don't own a home and garage".
Not "neither can an EV".
Because, of course, homeowners can charge an EV in their garage overnight.
In the case of condo owners, there is an alternative:
Charging at a public charging station.
Not as convenient but viable.
And there are some states that actually make it illegal for a condo association to prohibit or restrict the use of EV charging stations on their property:
https://afdc.energy.gov/laws/12953I guess you don't live in one of those states.
My condolences.
EDIT: link to a HOA trade article.
It seems the trend among state laws is to PREVENT condo associations from banning charging stations on their properties. Including Florida, California and Colorado.
https://www.hoaleader.com/public/EV...s-in-Common-Condo-Garages-There-Risk-Fire.cfm
 
Last edited:
EDIT: link to a HOA trade article.
It seems the trend among state laws is to PREVENT condo associations from banning charging stations on their properties. Including Florida, California and Colorado.
https://www.hoaleader.com/public/EV...s-in-Common-Condo-Garages-There-Risk-Fire.cfm
If you read your cite closely it says that in those sates the owner is responsible for insurance. Top rated insurance carriers have recently begun making no EV charging a condition of continuing coverage for multifamily complexes. They have also begun making the elimination of gas BBQs a new condition of coverage. When faced with an alternative of no insurance HOA's are free to ban EV charging, and BBQs for that matter.

As the Treasurer of the HOA where I live I have personally been dealing with this new issue for the past three months. I also do consulting for several multifamily lenders who have been dealing with this emerging issue.
 
Last edited:
Back on the subject of subsidies, I really with there were government subsidies for HOAs, just so we could take them away.
Im curious. How would you recommend managing and maintaining a condo complex where everyone owns a fractional interest in the common assets ( in my case pools, garages, covered docks, Pickleball courts, parking and building exteriors) without an HOA?
 
I'm not after destroying them utterly. I'm interested in eliminating the gross offenses against decency and sense that a great many of them commit. I don't know about yours; I know about the one I used to suffer under, and the many, many tales of woe from others. Anything that shakes up the business model and forces reform, so that they all need to behave responsibly and do only the very narrow thing they must do, maintain common assets, is something that I would love to see done.

When I was in the position of needing to move out of my apartment and into someplace larger because the baby was coming, I ended up with an HOA that stuck its nose into many places that it had no business. Yes, they maintained the pool and other common things. They were responsible for maintaining sidewalks, and did such a poor job of it that the insurance company demanded a higher premium unless the association agreed to a waiver of liability when people are injured by tripping on them. The association agreed to this, because another $5/month from owners to keep people safe was unacceptable. I'm pretty confident that they could have reduced the monthly fee by more than that simply by eliminating the Busy Body department. Anyone who tells me what color siding I'm allowed to put on my house in the name of the High and Holy Property Values can go to hell. An HOA, which needs to exist in order to maintain the common areas and common functions (like paying life guards for the pool) should do just that and otherwise STFU.
 
I'm not after destroying them utterly. I'm interested in eliminating the gross offenses against decency and sense that a great many of them commit. I don't know about yours; I know about the one I used to suffer under, and the many, many tales of woe from others. Anything that shakes up the business model and forces reform, so that they all need to behave responsibly and do only the very narrow thing they must do, maintain common assets, is something that I would love to see done.

When I was in the position of needing to move out of my apartment and into someplace larger because the baby was coming, I ended up with an HOA that stuck its nose into many places that it had no business. Yes, they maintained the pool and other common things. They were responsible for maintaining sidewalks, and did such a poor job of it that the insurance company demanded a higher premium unless the association agreed to a waiver of liability when people are injured by tripping on them. The association agreed to this, because another $5/month from owners to keep people safe was unacceptable. I'm pretty confident that they could have reduced the monthly fee by more than that simply by eliminating the Busy Body department. Anyone who tells me what color siding I'm allowed to put on my house in the name of the High and Holy Property Values can go to hell. An HOA, which needs to exist in order to maintain the common areas and common functions (like paying life guards for the pool) should do just that and otherwise STFU.
HOA’s in my state are only allowed to do what the by-laws permit them to do. Since by-laws are known and agreed to upon purchase and since HOA board members are elected by owners it’s ultimately up to the owners as to how there complex is managed and maintained.

While not without disagreements and some issues our complex is gorgeous, extremely well maintained, and units are highly sought after (they sell in hours). I think that’s because we work hard to get owners involved and sincerely listen to their ideas and suggestions.
 
Back to the topic of SUBSIDIES:
Lets talk about the COTS program, which was basically the US government subsidizing fledgling space companies to develop the commercial space industry.
Those against subsidies and the government picking winners and losers, how do you feel about this program?
Would Space X and Blue Origin be just footnotes in history if not for COTS?
Would we be still renting space aboard Russian Soyuz vehicles to get to the ISS?
Input please!
Too late for that. The government (people) is getting a bargain with SpaceX. All the gov does now for access is just pay. Also, the other associated industries (albeit small) benefit as well. It's always "cheaper" to subcontract service if you can so in a sense, it's not a subsidie. No way has the gov spent directly on SpaceX the value it has received from having SpaceX.
 
Back
Top