I don’t think these people understand what “123,000 GWh from coal” really means. I’m not even going to start on ‘intermittent source’ and ‘grid balancing’. It’s pointless.

Creating jobs is a bug, not a feature.

The whole point of using electricity instead of rubbing two sticks together is to eliminate work and therefore, necessarily, jobs. The whole point of an economy, of trade and commerce, of bankers, lawyers, miners, fishers, farmers, bakers, candlestickmakers and yes, even UAW members, is so I don’t have to do the work.

What possible point is there in increasing the amount of work, therefore jobs, we need to do to maintain our current level of wealth and comfort? What kind of nut would advocate this?

Leftists all think the amount of our money and our free time is infinite. Their own money and time? Not so much. Ask Tim Geithner.

Is everyone this damned ignorant about what an economy is? I was for sure until I got to Tim Worstall’s blog.[/quote]

Jobs are like waste heat and money is fuel.

They’re a by-product and an expensive one, but if your engine isn’t producing any heat it’s probably not producing much work either.

Now I have no idea what Gibbs interpretation was.

But my belief is that the study implied that the windmills were an inefficient means of producing electricity. And this inefficiency caused a loss of money, which meant a loss of work (and jobs) further down the line.

Now I suspect the study is more correct than Mr Gibbs on the virtues of windmills, but I counter he’s not necessarily guilty of the flawed reasoning you suggest.

Creating jobs is a bug, not a feature.[/quote]

Well said!

Creating jobs is a bug, not a feature.

The whole point of using electricity instead of rubbing two sticks together is to eliminate work and therefore, necessarily, jobs. The whole point of an economy, of trade and commerce, of bankers, lawyers, miners, fishers, farmers, bakers, candlestickmakers and yes, even UAW members, is so I don’t have to do the work.

What possible point is there in increasing the amount of work, therefore jobs, we need to do to maintain our current level of wealth and comfort? What kind of nut would advocate this?

Leftists all think the amount of our money and our free time is infinite. Their own money and time? Not so much. Ask Tim Geithner.

Is everyone this damned ignorant about what an economy is? I was for sure until I got to Tim Worstall’s blog.