The Ethanol Papers - Paperturn manuscript - Flipbook - Page 400
subsidy..." Consequently, by definition, the use of the verb automatically inserts
the word "subsidy" or "subsidies" into the reading of your article. I suggest that
in an effort to find some fault with my criticism that you felt semantic subterfuge
would suffice.
In any event, you are incorrect, especially referring to the real issue (not just the
use of the words subsidies or subsidize). The Renewable Fuel Standard doesn't
mandate the use of ethanol, it mandates the use of a renewable substance, of
which ethanol is just one possibility - although it is the best currently available.
You say that the subsidy is (or was) "...a direct support of the product" (meaning
ethanol). However, the subsidy wasn't in support of ethanol, it was in support of
gasoline. The subsidy went to the blenders to make up for what they lost by
having to blend in what is for them an unprofitable non-petroleum ingredient.
As I wrote in my earlier initial response to you, that subsidy should really have
been passed along to the consumer to make ethanol-gasoline blends even
more affordable than ethanol-free gasoline.
The general anti-ethanol argument that cites subsidies is quite preposterous
because if subsidization is just the issue, then the subsidies that go to the oil
industry, which are many times greater than any subsidies of any kind that could
be said to benefit ethanol, should be the true object of your enmity.
If you dislike subsidies and think that subsidies are a restriction to a free market,
then you should hate all the subsidies that go to the oil industry. In looking over
your other published articles I don't see any that are critical of all the subsidies
that go to the oil industry. If you don't like standing outside when it drizzles, why
do you like standing outside in a downpour?
Incidentally, at the bottom of your reply, you included a link to a website called
"IHateEthanol.com." I thought it would have some information in support of your
position. I was anxious to read it. It doesn't, in fact the link doesn't work. Investigating a bit further, I found that it is simply a URL that you purchased a few
years ago to display your dislike for ethanol and "ethanol subsidies." So, if you
hate subsidies so much, do you also own the URL "I Hate Gasoline?"
Now let me address your comments about free market: Having restrictions
doesn't necessarily mean that a market isn't free, it may mean that in order to
insure a free market that some regulations are required. Stop lights and stop
signs at street corners don't restrict the free flow of traffic, they insure the orderly
and safe free flow of traffic. Putting age restrictions on the purchase of alcoholic
beverages or tobacco products are considered by most members of society as
