Government subsidization of O&G goes to cover the externalities and is more than simple cash. Protection from being sued for polluting. Providing a military to invade foreign countries to capture, secure, and defend oil resources. Protection from liability in an inherently dangerous and destructive enterprise. Silence, manipulation, and restitution of those sick from the toxic processes of fossil fuel production.

In the free market, solar and wind have already won.

Typically, we don't go to war over sunlight. We don't need to build battleships, tanks, aircraft carriers, fighter jets, HUMVEEs, APC's, landmines, rifles, Apache helicopters, mortars, ATGMs, rocket launcers, surveillance satellites, or cruise missiles to secure sunlight resources.

We don't need to pump millions of gallons of toxic chemicals in the ground, or build pipelines, refineries, oil tankers, or tanker trucks.

If we're talking about O&G competing with solar on the free market, solar has already won.

I think all subsidies in all industries should be completely eliminated.

However, in the real world, I am going to concede that the ITC should not be eliminated immediately. It needs to be stepped down to give solar companies time to adapt.

Especially when there are much easier places to reduce spending such as completely ludicrious ethanol subsides that are backing a product that is net energy negative.

My major point of contention is that taxation is theft. The government steals our money and uses it in wasteful, idiotic, and destructive ways. We really have no say in how this money gets spent. I do not support subsidies for solar because it is involuntary. People should be able to choose where they spend their money, whether it's oil, solar, or coal. I think when given the right information, consumers will make the right choice. But since it is involuntary and taken by force, it's immoral to subsidize any industry no matter if it is good or bad. It needs to be voluntary.