While Obama sleeps

And so do companies like FirstSolar...ask Boilerman if they are takers and watch him use a different standard than he uses for DuPont

First Solar is a taker. They take a dollar and provide 50 cents of value. DuPont takes a dollar and provides $1.50 of value. DuPont is how wealth, value, and jobs are created. FirstSolar sucks wealth, value, and jobs from the economy.

If First Solar created value, their customers wouldn't required government subsidies prior to deciding to buying their products. If First Solar provided value, the government wouldn't require that utilities subsidize First Solar customers.

I'm certain that PJ has viewed the solar farm at our local International Airport. Our local utility has been MANDATED by the government to pay the airport 20 times the going value on any unused electricity. Local Liberals cry happy tears for the free electricity, yet this free electricity is in reality very expensive.

Is there an E-85 fuel buyer in the United States that knows the true cost of this stuff? I think not. My buddy received $210,000 in government subsidies to install three E-85 tanks and pumps at his three gas station. These facilities now go virtually unused. FURTHERMORE, every gallon of gasoline is taxed at about 50 cents per gallon. Every gallon of E-85 gets a 50 cent government subsidy (that's where the free part comes in for Liberals). Your car travels 100 miles on four gallons of gasoline, yet your car travels 75 miles on four gallons of E-85.

I've done some math:

A car owner in Indy will pay $3.60 to drive his gasoline powered car 25 miles.

After the tax/subsidy differential, in Indy it costs $5.33 to drive the same sized E-85 car the same 25 miles. As you can see, we turned $5.33 into $3.60! This DOES NOT take into account the $175,000,000 in tank/pump subsidies that the government gave to Indiana's 2500 E-85 gas station. It also doesn't take into account the many other subsidies that this industry enjoys.

Solar companies actually use their subsidies to create jobs. DuPont uses them to increase dividend checks.
I would say jobs are a better use of taxpayer funds.

But regardless...Boilerman has one standard of taxpayer funds going to companies he likes....and a different standard for companies he doesn't like. Thats a pretty common theme with the B-man

I have one standard. Companies which create wealth create jobs. It's very simple.

"DuPont uses them to increase dividend checks. "

Dupont pays about 30% of it's earnings as a dividend.; the balance is reinvested in the company. The largest stockholders are mutual and pension funds, so the beneficiaries of the profits is the middle class

Hip-Hip-Hooray! And part of those dividends comes from US Taxpayers!
The only thing it takes to make Hoops endorse welfare is to make DuPont a middle man.

Hip-Hip-Hooray! And part of those dividends comes from US Taxpayers!

What?

PJ, taking $5.33 and turning it into $3.60 does not create jobs. It simply removes $1.73 of wealth from the economy for every gallon of E-85 sold. The more gallons sold, the more wealth removed, and the fewer jobs required. Does paying a guy to dig a hole and another guy to fill in that very hole create jobs? Nope, it simply removes wealth, and costs jobs.

Making up math and employment statisitics on the fly does not create jobs...or make a remotely intelligent argument.

Earlier I said Boilerman will have different standards. He proved me right. And his rationalization is that its good for tax payers to give welfare checks to companies that are already profitable without those checks.

Feel free to check my numbers on gasoline taxes (50 cents per gallon), ethanol subsidies (50 cents per gallon, miles per gallon of E-85 vs gasoline (25% less MPG), and the price in Indiana of the two fuels (currently $3.00 for E-85 and $3.60/gallon on gas).

Do a little math and I challenge you to tell me where I'm wrong.