Groom -

I found you a mantra - 'past performance is no predictor of future gains'

We just see things differently. I hope I am right and somehow I also believe that my viewpoint is more likely to be of use in solving the problem. Just my opinion.

I think you are too limiting when you keep the energy discussion aligned with Oil and the resulting pollution. That exponential increase in energy demand will bring about new technologies we have yet to even imagine. Like the horse riders 100 years ago could not have imagined our Porsches blazing along at 200mph. Energy will be cheap and it will not pollute.

I totally disagree that the tax incentive needs to be off-set by a tax increase. If it is a useful technology you are aiding with your tax incentive then the resulting industry advancements will result in a stronger economy which will increase tax receipts. Perhaps you would like to review the result of the recent American tax cut on the growth of the economy and the increase in revenue. It's been done time and time again.
Your thinking is exactly backwards yet it sounds so logical that it appeals to many. Those with millions to protect end up leaving the EU - hello Andorra. Anytime you think you will need to raise taxes as a result of such a tax incentive you have basically admitted that you expect your 'tax investment' to be a net failure.

Stop giving the 10 cent on the $ outfit any more money!

And yeah they build a good road. That's an excellent example of a great investment that really helped the economy and brought in lots of resulting revenue. I have noticed that the US commissions private companies to build the roads and they are built FAST. State road projects in Austria (where I grew up) took years to complete. That was in the 70's, maybe it's changed now.

Take care Groom - hope we are amusing the other members.