A PR Disaster for ‘Green Jobs’

Gunner

Potential Star
Registered
Another Fail for centralized government!!


http://www.nationalreview.com/


A PR Disaster for ‘Green Jobs’
September 1, 2011 12:50 P.M.
By Veronique de Rugy
President Obama has a serious problem on his hands. First, in August, the New York Times printed an acknowledgement that the administration’s “green jobs” initiative — which the president promised would create 5 million green jobs over ten years — had failed. The backdrop for the story was California’s Bay Area, where green jobs have actually been lost, not gained:

In the Bay Area as in much of the country, the green economy is not proving to be the job-creation engine that many politicians envisioned . . .

A study released in July by the non-partisan Brookings Institution found clean-technology jobs accounted for just 2 percent of employment nationwide and only slightly more — 2.2 percent — in Silicon Valley. Rather than adding jobs, the study found, the sector actually lost 492 positions from 2003 to 2010 in the South Bay, where the unemployment rate in June was 10.5 percent.

Now, as this great NR homepage editorial shows, things are getting even worse for the administration with the failure of Solyndra. As the editors write:

Solyndra was an irresistibly juicy piece of bait for stimulus-happy progressives. President Obama, like all Democrats, labors under a special challenge when it comes to economic affairs: His economically illiterate base spends its time decrying “corporations,” but urban-gardening cooperatives don’t create a lot of jobs, and community-based nonprofits by definition don’t create any profit, and therefore no investment capital, and therefore no economic growth. You want to see some real, sustainable, long-term jobs created, your best bet is to look to a “corporation”—“corporation” simply being the word for a business that has grown large enough or profitable enough to require the legal organization of its affairs. But if you’re Barack Obama, not just any corporation will do: It has to be just the right sort of corporation.

Solyndra was one of the administration’s favorite companies to point to as a green-jobs success, which is why its failure should prove to be a PR disaster.

The Washington Post has an equally devastating story about the Solyndra failure, which points out its potential $535 million cost to taxpayers.

A company that served as a showcase for the Obama administration’s effort to create jobs in clean technology shut down Wednesday, leaving 1,100 people out of work and taxpayers obligated for $535 million in federal loans.

Solyndra, a California solar panel maker, had long been an administration favorite. Over the past two years, President Obama and Energy Secretary Steven Chu each had made congratulatory visits to the company’s Silicon Valley headquarters.

Although Wednesday’s announcement came as a surprise, House Republicans and government auditors had questioned the wisdom of the administration’s loan guarantees to the company, backed by capital from billionaire Democratic fundraiser George Kaiser. In July, a House subcommittee subpoenaed White House documents related to the guarantee, and after Wednesday’s developments, Republican lawmakers vowed to continue investigating.

Interestingly, the Post makes the case that Solyndra failed because of uncertainties brought about by the policy and regulatory environment.

“This was an unexpected outcome and is most unfortunate,” Solyndra chief executive Brian Harrison said in a statement. “Regulatory and policy uncertainties” made it impossible to raise capital to quickly rescue the operation, he said.

This story shows once again that the government can’t pick winners and losers and successfully create green jobs — or any other kind of jobs. Government can’t create sustainable jobs, and when they do, or even when they try and fail, it is at the expense of taxpayers, who are left footing the bill. Unfortunately, administration after administration refuses to learn the lesson.

I know next week is a big week for the president, with the launch of his new job-creation program, so I hope he’ll take a little time to think about the process of job creation before he gives his big speech. He might realize that creating jobs is a complex process, and that one thing we do know about job creation is that government isn’t good at it.

The good news is that there are things the president can do to create jobs. For instance, he can pursue fundamental tax reform by harmonizing the tax base and lowering the marginal rates; reform the corporate income tax by lowering the rate and moving to a territorial tax system (which would allow him to get rid of loopholes); and get rid of the Alternative Minimum Tax. He can also reform the regulatory regime in place in today, which imposes costs and uncertainties on companies.
 

What a garbage non-factual bullshit article! - but I expect nothing more from National Review, a RepubliKlan circle-jerk rag, who promoted palin as a policy wonk on energy isuses:lol:

Gunner you posted the wrong article.
Read the two articles below to learn what really happened.

It is correct that Obama's 'green jobs' initiative failed - but why? Was it because 'green jobs' was a bad policy idea? No it wasn't a bad idea, there is going to be tremendous growth in green technology over the next decade. So, what happened? The one word answer is - China. The two word answer is - free trade.

As long as both major political parties, Wall street,and the business elite embrace a no significant tariffs 'free trade' economic policy,the United States will continue to get its ass kicked by China, South Korea, & others.<div align="right"><!-- MSTableType="layout" --><img src="http://i.min.us/iytqE5QCfe7rb.JPG" align="right"></div> Read the 2008 book In The Jaws Of The Dragon , its analysis of the situation has been 100% right.

We invent the technology here, the Chinese take the US technology to China, financially subsidize that technology making US manufacturing uncompetitive, which results in the US companies going out of business and China dominating the market in an area where the US invented the technology! That's what 'free trade' with NO tariffs gets you. How can you create high paying 'green jobs' in the US when the Chinese are completely subsidizing $$$$$ their 'green technology' and paying their workers $300. A MONTH????



gazette-logo1.png


U.S. Solar Company Bankruptcy,
Courtsey of China’s State Capitalism


September 1, 2011

by Michael Stumo


http://www.tradereform.org/2011/09/u-s-solar-company-bankruptcy-courtsey-of-chinas-state-capitalism/

Solyndra, a flagship U.S. solar power company, is filing for bankruptcy, despite substantial federal loan guarantees, highlighting the fact that Washington’s concept of “free trade” is a hallucinogenic utopian fantasy. This is not American companies vs. foreign companies. It is American companies against the full power and weight of the Chinese government – a non-free market scenario. We need to neutralize foreign protectionism/ mercantilism and produce more of what we consume.

<SPAN STYLE="background-color:YELLOW"><b>The bankruptcy of three U.S. solar power companies in the past month, including Solyndra of California on Wednesday, has left China’s industry with a dominant sales position, almost three-fifths of the world’s production capacity and rapidly declining costs.</b></span>

<SPAN STYLE="background-color:YELLOW"><b>China is ascendant in solar due to state-managed capitalism. Free land, tax breaks, currency manipulation, VAT export subsidies, and other government assistance. Courtesy of the Chinese government, their companies can predatory price companies from other countries out of the market and into bankruptcy court.</b></span>

The recent strength of Chinese solar stocks “truly reflects the low cost base of the Chinese solar manufacturers, and it is great to see their positioning, particularly relative to their American and European counterparts,” said K.K. Chan, the chief executive of Nature Elements Capital, a Chinese clean energy investment company based in Beijing. He attributed the Chinese industry’s low costs not to inexpensive labor in China, as solar panel manufacturing is a high-technology industry that is not very labor-intensive, but rather to free or subsidized land from local governments, extensive tax breaks and other government assistance.

U.S. programs to help purchase solar panels for homes and businesses often sends the money to China, the same result as many infrastructure projects (CALTRANS Bay Bridge built with Chinese subsidized steel).

The United States and the European Union have tried to build demand for solar power by subsidizing buyers of solar panels, but increasingly those subsidies are being used to purchase solar panels from China. Chinese government policies have differed in that they have been tightly focused on building the competitiveness of the country’s manufacturers; China exports 95 percent of the solar panels it produces.

Whatever the merits of government stimulus, it cannot work if much of the benefit leaks out to finance trade rivals that don’t create jobs and wealth here. We need to capture full supply chains. Subsidizing sectors may help, but cannot win alone. Neutralizing foreign trade cheating and predatory practices is paramount.


<hr noshade color="#0000FF" size="8"></hr>

iHuLYTECpUpPv.gif


The New Sputnik


by Thomas L. Friedman

September 27, 2009
<font face="arial unicode ms, verdana" size="3" color="#000000">

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/27/opinion/27friedman.html

Most people would assume that 20 years from now when historians look back at 2008-09, they will conclude that the most important thing to happen in this period was the Great Recession. I’d hold off on that. If we can continue stumbling out of this economic crisis, I believe future historians may well conclude that the most important thing to happen in the last 18 months was that Red China decided to become Green China.

Yes, China’s leaders have decided to go green — out of necessity because too many of their people can’t breathe, can’t swim, can’t fish, can’t farm and can’t drink thanks to pollution from its coal- and oil-based manufacturing growth engine. And, therefore, unless China powers its development with cleaner energy systems, and more knowledge-intensive businesses without smokestacks, China will die of its own development.

What do we know about necessity? It is the mother of invention.
<SPAN STYLE="background-color:YELLOW"><b>And when China decides it has to go green out of necessity, watch out. You will not just be buying your toys from China. You will buy your next electric car, solar panels, batteries and energy-efficiency software from China.</b></span>

I believe this Chinese decision to go green is the 21st-century equivalent of the Soviet Union’s 1957 launch of Sputnik — the world’s first Earth-orbiting satellite. That launch stunned us, convinced President Eisenhower that the U.S. was falling behind in missile technology and spurred America to make massive investments in science, education, infrastructure and networking — one eventual byproduct of which was the Internet.

Well, folks. Sputnik just went up again: China’s going clean-tech. The view of China in the U.S. Congress — that China is going to try to leapfrog us by out-polluting us — is out of date. It’s going to try to out-green us.
<SPAN STYLE="background-color:YELLOW"><b>Right now, China is focused on low-cost manufacturing of solar, wind and batteries and building the world’s biggest market for these products. It still badly lags U.S. innovation. But research will follow the market. America’s premier solar equipment maker, Applied Materials, is about to open the world’s largest privately funded solar research facility — in Xian, China.</b></span>

“If they invest in 21st-century technologies and we invest in 20th-century technologies, they’ll win,” says David Sandalow, the assistant secretary of energy for policy. “If we both invest in 21st-century technologies, challenging each other, we all win.”

Unfortunately, we’re still not racing. It’s like Sputnik went up and we think it’s just a shooting star. Instead of a strategic response, too many of our politicians are still trapped in their own dumb-as-we-wanna-be bubble, where we’re always No. 1, and where the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, having sold its soul to the old coal and oil industries, uses its influence to prevent Congress from passing legislation to really spur renewables. Hat’s off to the courageous chairman of Pacific Gas and Electric, Peter Darbee, who last week announced that his huge California power company was quitting the chamber because of its “obstructionist tactics.” All shareholders in America should ask their C.E.O.’s why they still belong to the chamber.

China’s leaders, mostly engineers, wasted little time debating global warming. They know the Tibetan glaciers that feed their major rivers are melting. But they also know that even if climate change were a hoax, the demand for clean, renewable power is going to soar as we add an estimated 2.5 billion people to the planet by 2050, many of whom will want to live high-energy lifestyles. In that world, E.T. — or energy technology — will be as big as I.T., and China intends to be a big E.T. player.

“For the last three years, the U.S. has led the world in new wind generation,” said the ecologist Lester Brown, author of “Plan B 4.0.” “By the end of this year, China will bypass us on new wind generation so fast we won’t even see it go by.”

I met this week with Shi Zhengrong, the founder of Suntech, already the world’s largest manufacturer of solar panels. Shi recalled how, shortly after he started his company in Wuxi, nearby Lake Tai, China’s third-largest freshwater lake, choked to death from pollution.

“After this disaster,” explained Shi, “the party secretary of Wuxi city came to me and said, ‘I want to support you to grow this solar business into a $15 billion industry, so then we can shut down as many polluting and energy consuming companies in the region as soon as possible.’ He is one of a group of young Chinese leaders, very innovative and very revolutionary, on this issue. Something has changed. China realized it has no capacity to absorb all this waste. We have to grow without pollution.”

Of course, China will continue to grow with cheap, dirty coal, to arrest over-eager environmentalists and to strip African forests for wood and minerals. Have no doubt about that. But have no doubt either that, without declaring it, China is embarking on a new, parallel path of clean power deployment and innovation. It is the Sputnik of our day. We ignore it at our peril.

</font>

<hr noshade color="#ff0000" size="8"></hr>
 
:lol::lol::lol::lol:


I keep telling Gunner to get out of his conservative bubble for his information but he refuses and get exposed time after time.

China clearly believes in picking winners and losers and they keep winning.
 
:lol::lol::lol::lol:


I keep telling Gunner to get out of his conservative bubble for his information but he refuses and get exposed time after time.

China clearly believes in picking winners and losers and they keep winning.

Don't you understand he is a paid shill?
 
Damn, that's the problem right there.......A Most-Telling Post

It is correct that Obama's 'green jobs' initiative failed - but why? Was it because 'green jobs' was a bad policy idea? No it wasn't a bad idea, there is going to be tremendous growth in green technology over the next decade. So, what happened? The one word answer is - China. The two word answer is - free trade.

As long as both major political parties, Wall street,and the business elite embrace a no significant tariffs 'free trade' economic policy,the United States will continue to get its ass kicked by China, South Korea, & others.
Read the 2008 book In The Jaws Of The Dragon , its analysis of the situation has been 100% right.

We invent the technology here, the Chinese take the US technology to China, financially subsidize that technology making US manufacturing uncompetitive, which results in the US companies going out of business and China dominating the market in an area where the US invented the technology! That's what 'free trade' with NO tariffs gets you. How can you create high paying 'green jobs' in the US when the Chinese are completely subsidizing $$$$$ their 'green technology' and paying their workers $300. A MONTH????

This sh*t is too comical. We got these muhfuckaz allocating money, that we don't have, to an industry that has been strategically set up to fail. And on top of that, the Dems is mad cause some citizens don't want their taxes raised so the govt can pursue more of this nonsense! :lol:

I don't have an "lol" big enough for this comedy. Good $$$ goin after bad:smh:

Nice synopsis muckraker10021
 
Damn, that's the problem right there.......A Most-Telling Post



This sh*t is too comical. We got these muhfuckaz allocating money, that we don't have, to an industry that has been strategically set up to fail. And on top of that, the Dems is mad cause some citizens don't want their taxes raised so the govt can pursue more of this nonsense! :lol:

I don't have an "lol" big enough for this comedy. Good $$$ goin after bad:smh:

Nice synopsis muckraker10021

I agree. Funny how the National Review (and Gunner) missed that in their effort to smear Obama. I guess they would hate to go after the trade agreements that benefit them so well.
 
I agree. Funny how the National Review (and Gunner) missed that in their effort to smear Obama. I guess they would hate to go after the trade agreements that benefit them so well.

Lol Blame the Chi-coms. Who allocated the money?
 
Solar will never take off if it is about putting panels on your roof desecrating your house. The people that have money aint sticking that shit on their roof.
 
I guess they would hate to go after the trade agreements that benefit them so well.

Until the Pres & Congress are willing to address the underlying imbalances in our economy, we will be in this same situation next year, if not worse. The only issue I had with Muck's write-up was he said it was because of "free trade". It's "managed trade" that has led us to this point, we don't need the govt to intervene in "free trade" / that can happen between two willing parties.

NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO, GATT etc. are not advocating "free trade" arrangements, let's get real.
 
Would anyone support more $$$ being spent by the Obama admin to boost the "green agenda"?

Or should the imbalances, which are undermining the productive sector of our economy, be addressed?

I mean, the Solyndra experiment costed taxpayers $535 million (that we don't have) and the repeal of NAFTA would cost absolutely nothin! Well, it'll decrease the bottom-line of the rich multi-national corps but...........f*ck em, we're talkin about "managed-trade" vs real "free trade"
 
Would anyone support more $$$ being spent by the Obama admin to boost the "green agenda"?

Or should the imbalances, which are undermining the productive sector of our economy, be addressed?

I mean, the Solyndra experiment costed taxpayers $535 million (that we don't have) and the repeal of NAFTA would cost absolutely nothin! Well, it'll decrease the bottom-line of the rich multi-national corps but...........f*ck em, we're talkin about "managed-trade" vs real "free trade"


I would support both.
 
Crony Capitalism! ! ! ! ! Solyndra Officials Made Numerous Trips to the White House, Logs Show

Not only does the now-bankrupt solar energy firm Solyndra have a cozy financial relationship with the Obama administration, company representatives also made numerous visits to the White House to meet with administration officials, The Daily Caller has learned.

According to White House visitor logs, between March 12, 2009, and April 14, 2011, Solyndra officials and investors made no fewer than 20 trips to the West Wing. In the week before the administration awarded Solyndra with the first-ever alternative energy loan guarantee on March 20, four separate visits were logged.

George Kaiser, who has in the past been labeled a major Solyndra investor as well as a Obama donor, made three visits to the White House on March 12, 2009, and one on March 13. Kaiser has denied any direct involvement in the Solyndra deal and through a statement from his foundation said he “did not participate in any discussions with the U.S. government regarding the loan.”

But the countless meetings at the White House seem hardly coincidental. Kaiser, in fact, is responsible for 16 of the 20 meetings that showed up on the White House logs.

In the meetings on March 12, Kaiser met with former Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors Austan Goolsbee at 11 a.m., Senior Advisor Pete Rouse at 3 p.m., and Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council Heather Higginbottom at 6:30 p.m. On the 13th, Kaiser met with Deputy Director of the National Economic Council Jason Furman at 9 a.m.

Other Solyndra officials that made the trek over to the White House include Chairman and Founder Christian Gronet on September 22, 2009, at 9:30 a.m.; and Board Members Thomas Baruch and David Prend.

Baruch went to the White House May 7, 2010, and September 20, 2010, at 8:40 a.m. and 1 p.m., respectively. Prend visited on September 21, 2010, at 9:15 p.m. (RELATED: Bankrupt solar company with Fed backing has cozy ties to Obama administration)

The visitor logs also show that a number of members of the administration though a loan guarantee for Solyndra was pressing enough to take meetings. Former Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel and Adviser Valerie Jarrett even took meetings with Kaiser.

As TheDC previously reported, Solyndra officials, including Kaiser himself, donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to Barack Obama.

Kaiser personally donated $53,500 to Obama’s presidential campaign in 2008. Ben Bierman, executive vice president of operations donated $5,500 to Obama, and Karen Alter, senior vice president of marketing gave $23,000, just to name a few.

In 2009, Solyndra secured a $535 million loan guarantee from the U.S. Treasury to produce solar panels. But on August 31, 2011, the company shut its doors and announced its intent to file for bankruptcy.

The revelation came after President Obama visited the plant in May 2010 and touted it as a shining light for the future of green jobs and a green-energy economy.

“The promise of clean energy isn’t just an article of faith — not anymore,” Obama said at the time. “The future is here.”

The future was bankruptcy.
 
Republicans Green Jobs Hypocricy

source: Huffington Post



Republicans Decrying 'Job Killing' Green Energy Agenda Have Sought Green Jobs For Their Own Districts


WASHINGTON -- The GOP-led House Oversight Committee may be accusing the White House of a "job killing" green energy agenda in a hearing Thursday -- but at least ten Republicans on the panel have signed letters seeking to land green energy jobs in their districts.

In dozens of letters obtained by The Huffington Post, the lawmakers, led by Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), argue convincingly about Department of Energy funding going to their favored projects, often touting the job-creating potential of numerous endeavors.

The issue erupted earlier this month when reports broke that the bankrupt solar manufacturer Solyndra, which got $535 million in loan guarantees from the stimulus bill, was raided by the FBI.

Although the guaranteed loan project began under the Bush administration, many Republicans were quick to hammer the deal as evidence of "cronyism" -- and proof that Obama's key green jobs effort was a huge bust.

As it turns out, many of the committee members set to grill Obama administration officials Thursday were plenty eager to help constituents cash in on the efforts.

Fred Hill, a spokesman for Issa, said the fact that lawmakers sought approval of their own projects misses the point.

"The Obama administration appears confused about the nature of the controversy," he said in a statement.

"The issue isn’t that members of Congress from both parties have signed letters supporting some green projects, it’s that roughly $90 billion set aside for efforts handpicked by the administration haven’t had a meaningful impact on lowering unemployment and that some companies -- like Solyndra -- appear to have received special treatment," he said, referring to the overall amount the president's Council of Economic Advisers put toward the green push.

Issa's letters seeking projects in his sunny California district were first reported by Bloomberg after he was especially critical of Obama's efforts.

But other harsh critics seeking funding are Reps. Dan Burton (R-Ind.), Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) and Raul Labrador (R-Idaho).

Burton, the second-ranking Republican on the committee, slammed the Obama effort on Fox News, saying the Solyndra mess looks just like part of a Democratic pattern, and arguing that "the green thing is a scam in the first place."

But he signed seven letters seeking green projects -- often with the rest of the Indiana delegation -- including for Abound Solar, which, like Solyndra, is aiming to manufacture solar panels.

"Abound Solar plans to create almost a thousand full-time jobs that the company and state officials estimate will generate several hundred million dollars in revenue," Burton and other Hoosier-state lawmakers wrote, employing similar language as the White House to justifiy such projects.

Abound secured a $400 million guaranteed loan from the same program as Solyndra.

Chaffetz took to Fox News to complain the whole program could be corrupt. He went to bat advocating for geothermal research and the Intermountain West Geothermal
Consortium, arguing along with others that, "if we truly want to meet the president's challenge to bring more renewable energy online, to stimulate industry and create jobs, and bolster our education and research intrastructure, then this is the type of group that can do so and do so quickly."

Labrador sought a resolution back in May ending all such energy subsidies, grants and loans. But just two weeks later, he signed a letter with three other Republicans asking the Department of Energy's loan program to speed up a loan approved for the Idaho-based U.S. Geothermal.

Other members of the committee who sought green energy projects include, Reps. Connie Mack (R-Fla.), Tret Gowdy (R-S.C.), Patrick McHenry (R-S.C.), Blake Farenthold (R-Texas), John Mica (R-Fla.) and Todd Platts (R-Pa.).

Update: 10:30 p.m.
Democrats on the committee were unable to comment immediately Wednesday night, but a committee staffer found the revelations stunning.

“The Republicans actually don’t seem to understand their hypocrisy," the committee aide said. "They trash the entire clean energy program after writing glowing letters to commend it. The truth is the program works, which is why they want the money for their districts.”
 
The companies failed because of poor investment strategy by the government. These startup green companies shouldn't be burdened with huge loans off the start. If the government wants to help they should 'own' stock in the company. They could provide money to an intermediary that could give the money on their behalf.

That is how most tech companies are started and allowed to grow. I think Microsoft never had debt on their balance sheet and probably would have failed if they were just given a huge loan as a startup.

These companies need investors, not a loan to grow their business...

:hmm::hmm::hmm:
 
Back
Top