What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

$200 million green-tech subsidy results in -100 jobs

ScienceRocks

Democrat all the way!
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
59,455
Reaction score
6,765
Points
1,900
Location
The Good insane United states of America
$200 million green-tech subsidy results in -100 jobs
Hot Air ^ | 10/4/11 | Ed Morrissey
$200 million green-tech subsidy results in -100 jobs « Hot Air
What happens when job-stimulus funds get spent on a company that reduces its workforce? It looks like Barack Obama and Energy Secretary Stephen Chu made another “bad bet” in 2009, sinking $200 million into the non-profit National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado. NREL isn’t going under, but it’s cutting back staff after getting a big taxpayer subsidy from Porkulus:

President Barack Obama’s “green jobs” initiatives suffered another major blow late Monday, as the nonprofit National Renewable Energy Lab in Golden, Colorado, announced a plan to lay off roughly 10 percent of its staff through a voluntary buy-out plan.

According to the Denver Post, the lab plans to eliminate between 100 and 150 of its 1,350 jobs. The Obama administration supported the NREL in 2009 with roughly $200 million in stimulus grants. Energy Secretary Stephen Chu visited Golden in May 2009 to promote the NREL as a beneficiary of those funds.

Are you getting the impression that a visit from Obama or Chu might be the kiss of death for green-tech companies? Obama shows up to promote Solyndra and the company sinks into bankruptcy, taking over a half-billion taxpayer dollars with it. Chu personally delivers the jobs-stimulus check to NREL, which then starts trimming jobs.


....
I've come to the conclusion that most of green energy when we try to go large scale just isn't going to be economic within our market place. I'm not saying that at a microscale that solar and wind don't have a place at the table, but never as the main energy source. The only reason that China has done what it does is that the "commie" one system party pretty much made it law to force the energy corpartions to buy the energy from the "green energy" producers. No matter the cost, either. Must be nice having the power to screw over your people.
 
Last edited:

zonly1

Probie still throwin'em
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
1,255
Reaction score
152
Points
48
Location
on the map
Gov't can't create demand base on those numbers.
Definitely not a low cost producer.
 

editec

Mr. Forgot-it-All
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
41,421
Reaction score
5,662
Points
48
Location
Maine
In start up high tech companies, that probably isn't so bad.

To really know if this is untoward, we'd need a forensic accountant to break down the spending.
 

TruthSeeker56

Silver Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2011
Messages
2,899
Reaction score
488
Points
98
Location
New Hampshire
So what is the federal government doing in the quasi-IPO business? This is no different than Obama playing the stock market with taxpayer money. This is also no different than the dot com craze of the late-90s and early 2000s.............thousands of dot com startup companies who had a bunch of ideas for a product, but no actual product to produce and sell.
 

likeabird03

Active Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2011
Messages
413
Reaction score
61
Points
28
Location
Sacramento
No no this is a lie, green means jobs. The only way we can create jobs and get America back to work is to spend more on green energy!

Trust me - I'm from the government.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$505.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top