What it really is is congress and such trying to gain controll of american people doing what we are supposto. Grow, expand, learn, and achieve. Its some of the reasons we came to america. Now congress and the govt wants to take them away every chance they get, with these over priced fuel prices. Now they want to controll and regulate bio diesel. So they can make a profit, when they are public servants!!!!!!!!!!!
They need to learn their place, but its to late, we waited to long. So much harder to defend your liberty now days.
They attacked liberty dollar, they are attacking bio diesel. Anything they can do to put us down, and make us scared.
Dont run. defend your rights.
Talyn (AKA: der Schafen Führer)
1994 F250 XLT 4x4 Standard Cab - T-444E Direct Injection Turbo Diesel, 5 SPD M/T Z/F S5-420, Rosewood 160cc Stage 1's, PHP Tuner, 6637, Short Throw Shift Kit, Valair Kevlar/Ceramic, 140V IDM, T-500, 285/75/16 Cooper Discoverer ATR. Steyr C9-A1. You can get more with a kind word and a 2x4 than you can with just a kind word.
Subsidies represent government policies that benefit particular sectors of the economy. Government subsidies are common in most countries and benefit many industries.
Subsidies are not just cash. A great deal of market activity involves controlling and sharing the risks and rewards of economic activities. Subsidies are government-provided goods or services, including risk-bearing, that would otherwise have to be purchased in the market. Subsidies can also be in the form of special exemptions from standard required payments (e.g., tax breaks).
Defining the baseline. Subsidies must often be measured against some baseline. What would taxes owed have been in the absence of this special tax break? How much would industry have had to pay in interest to build that new facility if the government had not guaranteed the loan? Our baseline assumes standard corporate tax rates and no special agency programs to finance or absorb market risks for particular energy-related endeavors.
Subsidy targeting. One issue related to defining a baseline is that of narrowly targeted subsidies versus more broadly targeted programs that benefit one form of energy as well as some other industries. Industry representatives inevitably conclude that only subsidies directly targeted at the a particular fuel should count as benefits to producers or consumers of that fuel. In fact, many other subsidies tilt the energy playing field towards a particular fuel even if other fuels or non-energy industries also benefit. It is useful to consider a handful of common subsidy targeting approaches.
Single sector. The clearest and easiest subsidies to identify and allocate are those directly targeted to the particular industry, such as government financing of oil-related research and development programs through the U.S. Department of Energy.
Multiple sectors. Other subsidies are beneficial to a number of economic sectors. For example, the oil, gas, and hard rock minerals industries are all eligible for the percentage depletion allowance, a tax break that allows them higher than normal tax deductions. Since many other energy sources do not benefit from this provision (and the rates vary even for those that do benefit), the policy contributes to inter-fuel market distortions.
Geographic region. Most state/provincial and local subsidies are targeted to particular geographic regions (i.e., the state/province or locality). To the extent that natural resource intensive industries are located in the region receiving the subsidy (for example, corporate tax rate reductions in a large, oil producing region), policies can encourage incremental pollution and the development of “subsidy clusters” that rely on continued subsidization to survive.
Factor of production. Some subsidies are targeted at a particular factor of production (e.g., labor, capital) instead of specific industries. Although broadly available to all industrial sectors, subsidies affecting factors of production can cause market distortions nonetheless. Accelerated depreciation provisions, for example, allow any industry using capital equipment to deduct the capital from taxes more quickly than the anticipated service life of the capital asset. These provisions give capital intensive energy types a competitive advantage over types that require less capital investment, such as some demand-side management options. In addition, sector-specific depreciation rules in the tax code can create additional distortions between different capital-intensive energy sectors.
Linkage between subsidy levels and resource prices in the marketplace. In the aggregate, subsidies throughout the world to any particular form of energy will tend to depress prices and thereby encourage overconsumption of the resource. However, not every individual subsidy has an impact on energy prices. Many subsidies to domestic producers, for example, simply keep these producers competitive with less expensive imports (which are themselves subsidized through a variety of mechanisms). Subsidies that have little or no effect on commodity prices will not likely change consumption patterns for the affected fuel. However, removing even these subsidies will affect the market behavior of that fuel's producers. Their removal will also save taxpayers billions of dollars.
Tax credits and exemptions for ethanol and biodiesel
Sparking the imagination for oil independence, farm prosperity, and "green fuels," ethanol and biodiesel energy have been showered with subsidies around the world. They commonly include production tax credits and special treatment under motor fuel excise tax schedules. More than 200 policies are now in place in the United States alone, at a cost of more than $500 per metric ton of CO2-equivalent displaced. Subsidies to water and farmers combine with those directly to the fuels to further accelerate the expansion of production. The downside of biofuels in the form of habitat loss, land conversion and erosion, water depletion and pollution, and food-fuel competition have received insufficient attention. Biofuels production is now a major risk to the world's remaining rainforests, threatening both habitat and biodiversity. The volumetric ethanol excise tax credit (VEETC) in the United States exemplifies much of what is wrong with this market. It is a production-linked subsidy without any cap or linkage to the price of the fuels ethanol is supposed to compete with. It duplicates incentives already provided by federal mandates purchases of "renewable" fuels, needlessly increasing the cost of achieving a particular level of market penetration. Though ethanol is promoted as a clean fuel, the blenders subsidy is the same even if the ethanol plant relies on coal rather than a cleaner energy source to convert the corn into fuel. Worth $4.5 to $6.4 billion per year in the US and growing rapidly, the VEETC also appears to be exempt from taxation, increasing its distortionary effect. There is also growing concern that a companion credit for biodiesel is being gamed by market participants who collect the credit in the US before shipping fuels abroad to collect downstream biofuels subsidies elsewhere.
Mark...that was really a thorough response and I really appreciate the time you took to express your thoughts and knowledge on this issue. Obiviously, you have thought a lot about this. With that in mind, I would assume you have also spent a lot of time thinking about solutions to our future fuel needs in this country and the world for that matter. I'd love to hear your ideas.
Does all this have anything to do with your occupation...if you're willing to share that info with us??
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.