|
My overall thought is that if corn ethanol were a good idea, the free market would be implementing it on their own accord. Some might say that's not enough to reduce dependence on foreign oil, or to slow global warming, or to reduce pollutants, which is fine. In that case, you raise the tax on the thing you want consumption to reduce on, and let the free market come up with the solution.
Subsidizing corn is a corrupt and arrogant way to attempt to solve a problem. Our politicians aren't energy experts. They can't determine what the most efficient way to solve a problem is. They should be legislating as unobtrusively as possible, but instead they take the opposite approach and become as intrusive as possible.
I can't believe we don't immediately laugh our politicians out of office as they come up with stupid ideas like "I'm going to dictate the size of the cup you can be served at places that sell soda pop".
|