Funny how 'subsidies' is a bad word and 'VC funding' isn't.
The idea, in this case, is exactly the same: Invest enough to achieve the economy of scale, and get the actually-better solution to the point where it's cheaper than the happens-to-be-currently-dominant solution.
(obvs, subsidies can also be used for other purposes, like protectionism or ensuring that a vital-for-national-security industry isn't outsourced. But I believe that for solar it's about investment, more than these other uses.)
I like this comparison, actually. But realize that it is expected that most VC fundings fail. Subsidies is a bad word because it is often an attempt at rigging the game. With the assumption that we fully know what the answer should be.
So, if we can move subsidies to be more like experiments where it is expected that a significant percentage fails, I'm all for it.
