upvote
> Think about people who could not afford the initial investment.

This is what loans and installment plans are for, the payments for which come out of the savings on the utility bill.

> It's beneficial for society here if the government redistributes wealth for the benefit of all.

Which has nothing to do with batteries. If you want to do that then provide them with a refundable tax credit that allows for a negative tax rate in cases where that's deemed desirable.

And even that doesn't apply to the majority of people who are currently paying a non-negative amount of tax. Why attach strings to the money going to a middle class homeowner who should have just been allowed to keep that portion of their own salary?

reply
Why should they? In my mind it's all a coordination problem. Sometimes loans work better, sometimes subsidies work better.

Neither loans nor subsidies are dirty words IMHO.

reply
> In my mind it's all a coordination problem.

But that's the point. It isn't. Electricity costs more in the evening than during the day and there is a technology that can profitably be used to arbitrage the difference. There is no coordination problem at all, people have the direct individual incentive to buy the technology, on credit if necessary, without any form of government subsidy or involvement whatsoever.

reply
That cow is looking too spherical for my tastes. Credit is another thing which is highly intertwined with goverment involvement.
reply