Another Obama Business Dies

If Obama lauds it, it will die – from NBC Bay Area:

Solyndra, a major manufacturer of solar technology in Fremont, has shut its doors, according to employees at the campus…

…Solyndra was touted by the Obama administration as a prime example of how green technology could deliver jobs. The President visited the facility in May of last year and said  “it is just a testament to American ingenuity and dynamism and the fact that we continue to have the best universities in the world, the best technology in the world, and most importantly the best workers in the world. And you guys all represent that. ”

The federal government offered $535 million in low cost loan guarantees from the Department of Energy. NBC Bay Area has contacted the White House asking for a statement…

Government can’t deliver jobs – it can’t even pick which company will be solvent a year later.  The only proper role of government in the economy is as a facilitator of a honest and free market…after that, it is up to the people to decide what works and what doesn’t.  Maybe Solyndra’s technology will eventually catch on or maybe it will remain a white elephant…but there is no way for government to know, and any attempt by government to make it work only ensures it will fail…because if you subsidize something, you’re just going to ensure that it never developes enough strength to make it on its own.

Please learn the lesson, liberals…you can’t control the market.  Sure, you can make certain that everyone is being honest; sure you can make the paths of the inventor, manufacturer, investor and consumer smooth…but you can’t choose the path and you can’t force people on to it.  Leave it alone – it will all be ok; it happens all of its own accord, if you just leave it alone.

9 thoughts on “Another Obama Business Dies

  1. RetiredSpook September 1, 2011 / 6:10 am

    sure you can make the paths of the inventor, manufacturer, investor and consumer smooth

    Or not,

  2. bagni September 1, 2011 / 8:13 am

    we can now stop subsidizing the ag and oil business
    and see if they make it on their own

    • Cluster September 1, 2011 / 10:33 am


      An oil company subsidy is in the form of tax breaks, and simply allows the company to keep more of their own money. A loan is actually giving money to the business, which Solyndra received and needed more of to continue. I am pretty sure the oil companies can continue doing business if they are allowed to keep more of their own money. Solyndra on the other hand, had no customer base or viable product. It was simply propped up by a stupid politician with an agenda

    • tiredoflibbs September 1, 2011 / 11:51 am

      babbydrone, oil companies receive NO TAXPAYER FUNDS!!!

      The erroneously called “subsidies” oil companies receive are those of tax credits and deductions on capital equipment, which any business or corporation can claim.

      Stop with the dumbed down talking points designed for the ignorant masses.

    • Mark Edward Noonan September 2, 2011 / 12:45 am


      The problem you have – and it is problem a lot of people share – is an inability (or, in some, a purblind unwillingness) to look at the whole picture. Your first question here should be “why are there subsidies and tax breaks?”. They didn’t just go “poof” in to existence…a series of decisions were made over years, almost none of these decisions ever having been related to any other decision made elsewhere. Once you start to consider the “how” of our current condition, you’ll start to see that railing against just some aspect of it – agricultural subsidies, for instance – doesn’t get to the heart of the problem and, indeed, if you were just to attack one or a few of the elements of the problem you’ll probably just make things worse.

      A bit more than a century ago “Jacky” Fisher was put in charge of Britain’s Royal Navy with the intent that he would reform and strengthen it…but a bit of happy luck, Fisher had a period of a few years where no one would challenge him and he was able to, as he put it, implement “the scheme, the whole scheme and nothing but the scheme”. At the end of the day, he provided Britain with a vastly more powerful Navy at lower cost…because he didn’t just attack one bad element but decided on a program of complete overhaul…and every aspect of his plan (“scheme”, in his words) was related to every other part of it…none of the elements would work unless all of them were done.

      This is the sort of thinking we need in order to reform America. If you really want to end “corporate welfare” then you’re going to have to reform the whole system…the whole corrupt, fiat money, usury-based, overly-taxed, overly-regulated, family-destroying system…there is no other way to do it.

  3. bagni September 1, 2011 / 2:35 pm

    wish you’d stop with the dumbed down talking points designed for the ignorant masses retorts

    • CharlieSays September 1, 2011 / 3:53 pm


      If a an argument is true, simplification does not make it untrue. Here’s a thought: Why don’t you simply disprove the point Cluster and tiredoflibs make?

    • tiredoflibbs September 1, 2011 / 4:28 pm

      hey baggs, if the shoe fits…….

      It is not my fault you regurgitate proven liberal lies.

      • neocon1 September 1, 2011 / 5:28 pm

        nanu nanu dork from ork

        what do you expect from some short bus loon that thinks he is an alien?
        almost as funny as the forkers who think they are demons.

Comments are closed.