Solar Panel Conspiracy?

joeyd999

Joined Jun 6, 2011
5,234
Really? $58000 per person at loan rates that are mostly influenced by actions of the federal reserve - an entity that would fail if the US government would go bankrupt. I would call you a quitter.
You make the bad assumption that there are 300,000,000 productive citizens in the US.
 

joeyd999

Joined Jun 6, 2011
5,234
...When I came out to NC for my job, I drove a federal highway, and was happy to do it. Not a mile one was paved by an individual
Yes, of course. You didn't build that. I know.

But I never tried to make the case for zero government spending, or no government. In fact, I specifically stated that government is necessary.
 

JoeJester

Joined Apr 26, 2005
4,390
I agree the genesis of the Internet was ARAPANET, but you asked specifically about the economic activity of ARAPANET. There was no economic activity, other than possibly government grants going to the universities, on that network.

I agree the Internet changed the world. We had the .com boom and the .com bust. The big players are diversifying. What doesn't the bookstore "Amazon" sell? Very little.

Government can make a positive change. Government is people after all.

When I came out to NC for my job, I drove a federal highway, and was happy to do it. Not a mile one was paved by an individual
If you drove on the Eisenhower Interstate Highway system, that system was "designed" to be used in moving troops and equipment, to rectify a logistics problem that arose in WWII.

I will be using a lot of roads, state and federal, on my trip to Las Vegas this week.
 
Last edited:

joeyd999

Joined Jun 6, 2011
5,234
Really? $58000 per person at loan rates that are mostly influenced by actions of the federal reserve - an entity that would fail if the US government would go bankrupt. I would call you a quitter.
Also, when a business borrows money (which is quite difficult these days), a plan is usually required that details how and when it is going to be paid off, aside from actually demonstrating that it has the means to do so...
 

Brownout

Joined Jan 10, 2012
2,390
I agree the genesis of the Internet was ARAPANET, but you asked specifically about the economic activity of ARAPANET. There was no economic activity, other than possibly government grants going to the universities, on that network.
Without the investment in ARPANET, there is no internet as we know it. And thus there is not the economic activity as a result, as we know it. Conclusion: investment in ARPANET is a major driver of the resulting economic activity.
 

joeyd999

Joined Jun 6, 2011
5,234
Without the investment in ARPANET, there is no internet as we know it. And thus there is not the economic activity as a result, as we know it. Conclusion: investment in ARPANET is a major driver of the resulting economic activity.
Unfortunately, I have no way of proving it. But, I believe there would have been something similar by now regardless of the existence of ARPANET. This is not something I wish to argue, as no facts exist to back my assertion. I admit this freely.
 

Brownout

Joined Jan 10, 2012
2,390
Unfortunately, I have no way of proving it. But, I believe there would have been something similar by now regardless of the existence of ARPANET. This is not something I wish to argue, as no facts exist to back my assertion. I admit this freely.
I severely doubt it would be as far along on the evolutionary path. There was nothing else like ARPANET when it was developed.
 

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,415
Don't forget there were other networks out there before the internet really took off in a public way. CompuServe, QLink, and others. It helped a lot having the lack of commercial interest directly linked to the internet though, I just hope that doesn't change long term.
 

BocasOne

Joined Aug 12, 2014
2
Maybe. But it wasn't just a US decision, the international trade commission also dinged them. As for the installers and importers, they are also treated unfairly if their business requires long-term access to Chinese government subsidized solar panels imported into the US at prices that are not sustainable. That is, what happens to installers that invest in cranes, training personnel and other tools and then the door is slammed shut by the Chinese. The same is true for US-subsidized value chains. The key difference is, the subsidy is public knowledge in the US whereas the Chinese were hiding the fact that subsidies and subsequent dumping was happening.
As a consumer, I don't have a problem with sucking money out of the Chinese government, rather than paying extra so that another "foreign corporation" can make money. I think it's wonderful of the Chinese government to help subsidize US consumers....I'd love to see everyone be able to afford solar. :D I haven't paid for electricity for the past 26 years and now solar is finally getting cheap enough to become mainstream. I've been using water power as solar was too expensive...
 

JoeJester

Joined Apr 26, 2005
4,390
There was no "profit" to invest in the ARAPANET R&D. It was all government money.

What business spends 30 years to bring a product to market? That is an enormous amount of cash carry someone on the "promise" of a product.

ARAPANET was never a product, nor a service. Nothing was "sale".
 

GopherT

Joined Nov 23, 2012
8,009
As a consumer, I don't have a problem with sucking money out of the Chinese government, rather than paying extra so that another "foreign corporation" can make money. I think it's wonderful of the Chinese government to help subsidize US consumers....I'd love to see everyone be able to afford solar. :D I haven't paid for electricity for the past 26 years and now solar is finally getting cheap enough to become mainstream. I've been using water power as solar was too expensive...
Thanks for the additional information. Mark Twain was right.
 

Brownout

Joined Jan 10, 2012
2,390



JoeJester said:
There was no "profit" to invest in the ARAPANET R&D. It was all government money.

What business spends 30 years to bring a product to market? That is an enormous amount of cash carry someone on the "promise" of a product.

ARAPANET was never a product, nor a service. Nothing was "sale".
Businesses spend the entirety of their existence bringing their products to market. When did R&D stop for the computer? When did R&D stop for the automobile? ARPANET isn't a product, and neither in the internet. A building or a road isn't a product or service, but they are both necessary to the conduct of modern business. How is the economy of countries that don't have roads, bridges, ports, etc? The internet is just infrastructure, but it generates billions of dollars worth of business. But it wouldn't without the research and development that came before it.
 

joeyd999

Joined Jun 6, 2011
5,234
Ling-Temco-Vaught?

Enron?
Do you have a point?

Badly run and/or non-profitable businesses ultimately belly-up -- the shareholders, bond holders, and bankers take the hit*. This frees up resources for more productive use elsewhere.

Badly run governments tend to double-down on badness...

*Please do not counter with taxpayer financed government bailouts. I am as much against them as I am anything.
 

studiot

Joined Nov 9, 2007
4,998
Do you have a point?
Hey I thought we were just shooting the breeze over a pint.

There's well run businesses and badly run businesses.

There's well run 'governmint' and badly run 'governmint' and sometimes the abdly run governmint gets the noble order of the boot.

There are also finer distinctions in both business and goverment.
 

joeyd999

Joined Jun 6, 2011
5,234
Hey I thought we were just shooting the breeze over a pint.
Don't I wish. I'll be working till midnight trying to generate some obscene profits...

I am enjoying the discussion, though. It's a good escape from the drudgery of the technical document writing that I've been doing for the last week, aside from the other 20 hats that I wear.
 
Top