Posted on 12/19/2005 6:46:25 PM PST by NormsRevenge
Last week, the Governor’s “Climate Action Team” released a report on how to stop global warming. Next week, we expect a report on how to stop earthquakes, tidal waves, the changing of the seasons, and the tilt of the earth.
Let’s start with the title of the government unit that issued the report: the “Climate Action Team.” That title suggests the arrogance of those participating. What climate action is the team going to take? I’ve got an idea, why don’t they get rid of the winter fog in the Central Valley, and those hot Palm Springs summers, that would be a climate action that would have some positive benefit to someone. The fact is the climate action team can’t take any action on the climate, because nothing we humans do affects the climate. Global warming, if it is occurring at all, is occurring because of natural phenomenon, not because you drove your kids to school last week.
Next, let’s look at the team’s suggestions to reduce “greenhouse gases.” (By the way, every time you breathe you emit greenhouse gases). First, the report recommended mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas emissions. Second, the bureaucrats wanted a “public goods charge on petroleum products” (a gas tax for those of you who don’t speak bureaucrat). Third, the report said that the state should “reshape” its investment strategy (this by the folks whose current investment strategy led to an $8 billion deficit) to invest in businesses that create greenhouse gas emission reduction technology. Finally, these bureaucrats wanted to make sure we got credit for reducing greenhouse gases.
So, the way to solve global warming is to raise taxes. For goodness sake, is there no problem that the bureaucrats think could not be solved with a tax increase? Plagued by crime – raise taxes and start a preschool. Mental illness a problem – raise taxes on the rich. The globe gets too hot – raise taxes on gasoline.
Forget that the one organization that makes the most money off of gasoline is government, (today, government makes 44-55 cents per gallon of gas depending on the price of gas) they want more. Forget that a tax on gas will do absolutely nothing to reduce global warming. Give the bureaucrats more money; they will cure what ails ya.
In light of this recommendation, I have some suggestions for future studies and reports. First, we should form an “Earthquake Action Team” to study the cause of earthquakes. They could recommend a tax on all construction as a means of reducing earthquakes. After all, the more dirt we move, the more likely it is that we might disturb some fault, and cause an earthquake.
Next, we should form a “Tsunami Action Team,” to study the cause of tidal waves. That team might recommend a tax on all watercraft, since the more boats there are on the ocean, the more water is displaced, thus leading to higher tides and danger on shore.
How about a “Hurricane Action Team,” which would study the cause of hurricanes. The tax for that? A tax on helicopters. Can you imagine just how much wind is generated in order to lift one of those heavy machines off the ground?
I could go on and on, but the absurdity of their recommendations is obvious. I think if we are going to institute a system of mandatory reporting of greenhouse gases, we should probably start with reporting the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by blowhard-bureaucrats, who issue meaningless reports, the obvious purpose of which is to build their bureaucratic empire, and increase their power and control over our lives. If we actually limited those emissions, or taxed their reports, we might really accomplish something beneficial for all Californians.
THAT needs a barf alert.
You need to STFU! Stop giving them ideas!
You need to make THEM actually THINK up their own new taxes! (If YOU don't tell them, and make THEM think, they'll come up with...
("got any more weed, man")
nothing)
If everyone of our Liberal politicians would take a chill pill and sleep an extra 10 hours a day, I imagine we'd save a lot of energy, money, and still manage to get more work done.
I meant the picture in post 3.
Common sense is so refreshing.
Sounds like the bloom is off the romance between Haynes and The Arnold after last weeks meeting...
and of course, that means a DUMBASS Tax
Naynes will probably be at the head of the dumbass list.
I suspect that Schwarzenegger and the Democrats have something far more pervasive up their sleeves.
Yesterday Dan Weintraub reported that:
It is mostly our transportation system that has fallen behind the growth curve as the gasoline tax, the major source of funding for new roads and transit, has been eroded by inflation and the trend toward more fuel-efficient vehicles. That revenue source now delivers about one-third of the buying power per mile driven as it did in 1970, according to the Public Policy Institute of California.
A few more pennies of advalorum tax isn't going to get the job done.
Weintraub's sources are within the executive.
I'm wondering about his statement. Is he including the increased revenues resulting from Prop 111, or is he counting it separately? And... I would guess that the cost has been driven sky high by union labor and environmental impact reports (among other factors). And how does the "buying power per mile driven" take into account bike-trails and other projects that they choose to spend the money on? Weintraub seems to be jumping to the "need more revenue" solution instead of looking at the other elements in the equation.
You seem to be disagreeing with Haynes, is that correct? Why?
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
Exactly. I was in Arcata last week working, having gone to college there, I was familiar with the place, but have bot been back in several years. As you know, the green party controls the Arcata City Council, and what do you think they spend their road dollars on? Thats right, agenda 21 style traffic calming structures.
We went through several European style intersections that had been turned into these circular merry-go-round affairs with yield signs instead of stop signs. I told my co-worker, you watch, as soon as we get away from the intesection, the pavement will be full of potholes, sure enough, that is what happened. When one has a limited budget, one most prioritize. When one believes that there is an endless source of money, one spends accordingly.
Another example. Our little town used its gas tax revenue to repave one of the main streets in town. Part of the funds came from another State agency, so we could not simply repave the road - the town had to bring the road into compliance with ADA and all the other regs, like sidewalk setbacks and curbs and gutters. Don't get me wrong, they did a nice job, and we have curbs and sidewalks now instead of a dirt path. My point is that the town only had so much money, and all the regulation restricted their ability to spend it (ie strings attached). The end result is we got ½ mile of really nice road, and five miles of really bad, deteriorating road.
This isn't a money problem, this is a systemic budget problem caused by a micro-managing legislature and bureacracy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.