Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Cap and Trade


Recommended Posts

This is crap. How is this going to help? Not only is it going to cost you $1700, it is going to kill jobs, lots of them.

 

LINK

 

"When it comes to energy, Washington Democrats, I think, are poised to make matters worse by imposing a job-killing energy tax, courtesy of Speaker Pelosi. This is going to force small businesses and their workers and families to pay more for electricity, gasoline, and other products that are made in America that have high energy content."

 

They are raping us people. Change my ass. Yea change for the worse.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really am starting to wonder...

 

uemployment is growing, and the AP has a report that that may be the new normal.

 

The assaults on major industries.

 

You'd think dismantling industry and launching unemployment higher,

 

fits in with making Americans completely dependent on big brother government

 

to completely take over.

 

Which, as an added benefit, they won't have to leave office in 3+ years...

 

And Obama is angry that the socialist Selaya in Honduras was not allowed to

 

become dictator for life.

 

And Obama likes Chavez.

 

I'm thinkin that's a direction most folks would think would be impossible to ever be thought about.

 

Now, we have the pres and czars and some in Congress who are leftists... I don't know, but I don't like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh and when Obama said change, did he mean for the worse?

 

"All people must go to school". Tuition goes up big time. How the hell do you expect people to go back to school when tuition RISES? Let alone that, pay back the loans.

 

Tuition up

 

1 in 6 Americans in Poverty.

 

Poverty

 

It's getting to where these are not problems associated with Bush, Obama is now accountable.

 

Both presidents allowed the American people to get raped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most common measure of poverty in the United States is the "poverty threshold" set by the U.S. government. This measure recognizes poverty as a lack of those goods and services commonly taken for granted by members of mainstream society.[1] The official threshold is adjusted for inflation using the consumer price index. Poverty in the United States is cyclical in nature with roughly 13 to 17% living below the federal poverty line at any given point in time, and roughly 40% falling below the poverty line at some point within a 10 year time span.[2] Most Americans (58.5%) will spend at least one year below the poverty line at some point between ages 25 and 75.[3] There remains some controversy over whether the official poverty threshold over- or understates poverty

 

Website

 

Will we see more than 50% under the Obama Machine?

 

 

Cap and trade is meant to be used for redistribution of wealth, These Idiots Must Hate America. Their Moto "damn it sucks to be a greedy american"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kosar, this was from last month and we addressed it last month. It's not going to cost you $1700+. This is not something you have to worry about. This figure is not talking about the bill that's before Congress. It's a research paper done for the White House, one among many.

 

If you want to know how the CBO scored the Waxman-Markey climate bill, it's about a tenth of that figure. About as much as a family spends on their cell phone bill ...for a month. Less than what they spend on ice cream. It's not going to kill the economy, and anyone who tells you that it will is lying to you for a reason, either ignorance or mendacity.

 

It's a tax, yes. Some industries will be negatively affected, yes. Others won't pay the tax at all - the ones that produce clean or cleaner energy - and will be positively affected.

 

And I'd love to hear from you about how the Obama administration is responsible for the collapse in housing prices. Or the rise in college tuition.

 

What did you expect him to have done or changed in the last ten months that he hasn't?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What did you expect him to have done or changed in the last ten months that he hasn't?

 

For one, not to send MORE troops to Afghanistan. And don't give me that shit about the Republicans are making him do it. He is ultimately the decision maker. And if that was the case, why isn't he backing down from the Republicans about health care.

 

Are you going to be saying "he needs more time" 3 years from now?

 

Siding with a "party" is childish. It's like 5th grade recess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to know how the CBO scored the Waxman-Markey climate bill, it's about a tenth of that figure. About as much as a family spends on their cell phone bill ...for a month. Less than what they spend on ice cream. It's not going to kill the economy, and anyone who tells you that it will is lying to you for a reason, either ignorance or mendacity.

 

What a stupid analogy. It doesn't matter how much money it is, it's a money for nothin'. The climate and temp have gotten cooler over the last 6 years. I'm not taking sides here Heck, they already raped us, and they are doing it again. Stop taking sides and take off the blinders.

 

And what is this. American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. What the f*ck do they have to do with each other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a stupid analogy. It doesn't matter how much money it is, it's a money for nothin'. The climate and temp have gotten cooler over the last 6 years. I'm not taking sides here Heck, they already raped us, and they are doing it again. Stop taking sides and take off the blinders.

 

 

Two options.

Heck is right and the cost will be minimal..

That means there's no real impetus for changing anything.

Therefore it's just another excuse to grind away at the taxpayer.

Or

Heck is wrong and the costs are substantial.

Since there is no magic green energy the costs are passed onto John Q who is already on his second round of unemployment.

 

(well there's option three...

We all perish, starving or eaten by ferile domestic pets or displaced polar bears, on the tiny patches of 200+ degree desert earth not yet covered by floods from the melted icecaps. <_< but that'll be after 2016))

 

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also,

 

Amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow certain low income taxpayers a refundable energy tax credit to compensate such taxpayers for reductions in their purchasing power, as identified and calculated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), resulting from regulation of GHGs. Requires: (1) the Administrator to implement the Energy Refund Program to give low-income households a monthly cash energy refund equal to the estimated loss in purchasing power resulting from this Act; (2) the Secretary of State to oversee distributions of allowances from the International Clean Technology Account; (3) the President to establish within the United States Global Change Research Program a National Climate Change Adaptation Program; (4) the Secretary of Commerce to establish within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) a National Climate Service; (5) the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to publish a strategic action plan to assist health professionals in preparing for and responding to the impacts of climate change; (6) the President to develop a Natural Resources Climate Change Adaptation Strategy; and (7) the Secretary of State to establish an International Climate Change Adaptation Program.

 

Ummm, if the environment and climate is going to get better from the bill. Why is there an "action" plan for climate change? Is it, "well just IN CASE it doesn't get better". Meaning they have no definitive proof it's going to help. LOL

 

p.s. that of course was in the last line of proposed Amendment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two options.

Heck is right and the cost will be minimal..

That means there's no real impetus for changing anything.

Therefore it's just another excuse to grind away at the taxpayer.

Or

Heck is wrong and the costs are substantial.

Since there is no magic green energy the costs are passed onto John Q who is already on his second round of unemployment.

 

(well there's option three...

We all perish, starving or eaten by ferile domestic pets or displaced polar bears, on the tiny patches of 200+ degree desert earth not yet covered by floods from the melted icecaps. <_< but that'll be after 2016))

 

WSS

 

 

Dont worry Gore will write a new plan for the polar bear problem just the same.

 

 

ihaveakey-1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For one, not to send MORE troops to Afghanistan. And don't give me that shit about the Republicans are making him do it. He is ultimately the decision maker. And if that was the case, why isn't he backing down from the Republicans about health care.

 

Are you going to be saying "he needs more time" 3 years from now?

 

Siding with a "party" is childish. It's like 5th grade recess.

 

Well, for one thing, I don't agree with him on Afghanistan. But the point you keep bringing up is "change my ass" when, as I pointed out earlier, Obama openly vowed to send more troops to Afghanistan in the campaign. So did McCain. So it's not that he was being disingenuous. It was a campaign pledge that he followed through on - to change the Bush policy on Afghanistan.

 

And I've never said that Republicans are making him do it, so I don't know where you're getting that. Of course this is his decision.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, for one thing, I don't agree with him on Afghanistan. But the point you keep bringing up is "change my ass" when, as I pointed out earlier, Obama openly vowed to send more troops to Afghanistan in the campaign. So did McCain. So it's not that he was being disingenuous. It was a campaign pledge that he followed through on - to change the Bush policy on Afghanistan.

 

And I've never said that Republicans are making him do it, so I don't know where you're getting that. Of course this is his decision.

 

How is that change? He's changing America, just not in terms of war. I would say that's a pretty big aspect of life.

 

Check out my post on the cap and trade. I wasn't sure if you read the whole thing, I read the summary. And in the last line of the 80,000 page amendment...

 

Ta da.

 

The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to publish a strategic action plan to assist health professionals in preparing for and responding to the impacts of climate change;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Kosar, if you don't think global warming is real, then what do you want me to tell you?

 

But you should know that there has been no global cooling over the last six years. Saying so just means you can't read statistics, or know what a trend line is. There has only been a slowing of the increase in temperatures. The increase is still positive, and is expected to continue to rise. In fact, if you'd like to bet, I'll bet you $10,000 that the temperatures from the next decade will be warmer than the temps from the last decade. I'll even bet you that the temperatures for the next five years will be warmer than the last five.

 

For all the posturing from all the deniers I speak with, I can't get one of them to take me up on this bet. Maybe you'll be the first.

 

What you're doing - and what most global warming deniers are doing - is cherry picking the numbers, akin to saying that Derek Anderson is a great QB based on the one year he went to the Pro Bowl, and disregarding the rest of the years when he's been abysmal. You wouldn't do that, would you? Well, you're doing the same thing here.

 

And Steve can't do anything but oversimplify this stuff, so I wouldn't listen to him either. He doesn't know what's in the bill, no matter how many times he gets it explained to him. There are rebates for middle and lower income Americans to defray the cost of the program. The point is to change the behavior of producers, and to a lesser extent consumers. So the costs are significant for carbon-based energy producers, less so for consumers.

 

If you run a company that makes widgets and I put a price on the cost of producing widgets, you'll then pass that price on to the consumer. But if I then take some of that money I raised by taxing you and give it to the people who buy your widgets, the costs to your widget business is the same, but the cost to the widget buyer is less.

 

That's what the cap and trade bill does. It takes some of the money raised from attaching a price to carbon emissions and returns it to the consumer.

 

Steve has never understood this. You could explain it to him with puppets and he'd still not understand it because it's not an either/or. He simply can't grasp concepts more complicated than that. And I say this from years of experience listening to his crankery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How is that change? He's changing America, just not in terms of war. I would say that's a pretty big aspect of life.

 

Check out my post on the cap and trade. I wasn't sure if you read the whole thing, I read the summary. And in the last line of the 80,000 page amendment...

 

Ta da.

 

The Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to publish a strategic action plan to assist health professionals in preparing for and responding to the impacts of climate change;

 

Yeah. That's a good idea. What's your point?

 

We're going to have some climate change. We can't stop it all. No one is suggesting we can. We're trying to mitigate it. So they're preparing for the impacts that we will have.

 

I know you think you've caught them being inconsistent here, but you haven't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, Cheney says the Obama admin asked for an

 

overview of their plan for Afghanistan.

 

So, Cheney and Bush and staff gave it to them in a meeting.

 

The Obama admin asked that they keep it quiet. So,

 

Cheney says they complied to keep it out of politics.

 

And what Obama has been doing, sure looks like exactly

 

what Bush and Cheney and co. GAVE THEM.

 

Iow, the Obama admin has no clue, except for their socialist agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course in politics one must always advocate the opposite policy to one's opponent but.....

 

Since he did make that a key camaign issue what would you want him to do now Heck?

 

WSS

 

Honestly, I have no specific idea. 99.5% of the people publicly commenting on this don't either. I don't know what's going on on the ground in Afghanistan/Pakistan. I just have a general sense that the goals we want to accomplish need more than 40,000, or even 80,000 troops. I don't think that place is worth the costs, and I don't buy the "safe haven" argument to begin with. They don't need a country to plan this stuff. They need a room or a cave or an apartment in Germany.

 

So I'm all for keeping up the drone or special forces attacks and some troop level to maintain the intelligence capability to carry out those type of attacks.

 

Not that this is a good option either. It's just less bad, and from our point of view only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I have no specific idea. 99.5% of the people publicly commenting on this don't either. I don't know what's going on on the ground in Afghanistan/Pakistan. I just have a general sense that the goals we want to accomplish need more than 40,000, or even 80,000 troops. I don't think that place is worth the costs, and I don't buy the "safe haven" argument to begin with. They don't need a country to plan this stuff. They need a room or a cave or an apartment in Germany.

 

So I'm all for keeping up the drone or special forces attacks and some troop level to maintain the intelligence capability to carry out those type of attacks.

 

Not that this is a good option either. It's just less bad, and from our point of view only.

 

Can't really argue with that.

 

How badly do you think we've been painted into a corner?

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer to leave it to the Commanders on the ground. They know what they need. Obama promised Afganistan would be a priority. I doubt he will keep his word. He seems like a poll junkie to me. Lets just let Al Queda open up their training camps again and have some more terror attacks here. Then we can jump on the fuking merry go round and watch the shit happen over and over again. Americans main problem is that we have short memories and no patience. We want everything to happen now. That is a defeatist attitude when dealing with an enemy. If you think a few thousand special forces can cover an entire mountainous country like Afganistan, you are seriously mistaken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer to leave it to the Commanders on the ground. They know what they need. Obama promised Afganistan would be a priority. I doubt he will keep his word. He seems like a poll junkie to me. Lets just let Al Queda open up their training camps again and have some more terror attacks here. Then we can jump on the fuking merry go round and watch the shit happen over and over again. Americans main problem is that we have short memories and no patience. We want everything to happen now. That is a defeatist attitude when dealing with an enemy. If you think a few thousand special forces can cover an entire mountainous country like Afganistan, you are seriously mistaken.

 

Its a joke. We haven't done shit to help, other then the flourishing heroin trade. Do you think it's a coincidence that 90% of the world's opium supply comes out of Afghanistan and our military is there?

 

"Our objective are to fight and catch terrorists". Still Waiting.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a joke. We haven't done shit to help, other then the flourishing heroin trade. Do you think it's a coincidence that 90% of the world's opium supply comes out of Afghanistan and our military is there?

 

"Our objective are to fight and catch terrorists". Still Waiting.........

 

I know our military has nothing to do with the heroin trade if that is what you're suggesting. Bush fuked up in Afganistan. We have to take out Al Queda. If you think it's a fantasy, go on believing so. I know better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know our military has nothing to do with the heroin trade if that is what you're suggesting. Bush fuked up in Afganistan. We have to take out Al Queda. If you think it's a fantasy, go on believing so. I know better.

 

My brother's there man. Medic for the Marines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My brother's there man. Medic for the Marines.

 

So he is a Navy Corpsman. Look, I know there are all sorts of theories, and I damn sure am not in a position to know what the truth is on all this shit. I just hope to god what I think is going on is the right thing, and not some master diabolical plot. And being retired Navy I wish your brother god speed and a safe trip home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...