|
|
|
|
|
by radu_floricica
1611 days ago
|
|
Yes. That's a very good point. But when you find something that exposes the flaws in a system, you can try to blame the thing which exposes it, or you can try to fix the system. In this case the situation is not even overly complicated. Subsidies are bad, because: 1. they waste money - everybody is paying the subsidized price, whether they need to or not 2. they utterly fuck up incentives - there's no point to invest in higher energetic efficiency (at any level) when the price is kept artificially low. What problem are subsidies fixing? That some people don't afford paying for electricity. Well, completely novel notion: give them money and let them chose what they spend them for. Once you do that quite a few of them will realize that investing $400 in an AC with inverter is a better investment long term than just paying for more electricity to heat the home. Or a huge array of solutions that subsidies don't make just unlikely - they make plain stupid, as long as electricity is cheap. |
|
Long term I’m all for removing subsidies but this is political suicide if done to offset the impact of crypto mining.
Crypto mining benefits an exceedingly tiny percentage of people while using massive amounts of power.