Posted on 03/28/2009 2:55:30 PM PDT by neverdem
Those unfamiliar with the term "cap and trade" and the tremendous economic burden this program would place on society if implemented may first want to consider a couple definitions. The Center for American Progress, in its report, "Cap and Trade 101," states:
The cap: Each large-scale emitter, or company, will have a limit on the amount of greenhouse gas that it can emit. The firm must have an "emissions permit" for every ton of carbon dioxide it releases into the atmosphere. These permits set an enforceable limit, or cap, on the amount of greenhouse gas pollution that the company is allowed to emit.... The trade: It will be relatively cheaper or easier for some companies to reduce their emissions below their required limit than others. These more efficient companies, who emit less than their allowance, can sell their extra permits to companies that are not able to make reductions as easily.... Companies unable to meet their emissions quotas could purchase allowances from other companies that have acquired more permits than they need to account for their emissions. The cost of buying and selling these credits would be determined by the marketplace. Another explanation appears in an article appearing on the Congressional Budget Office website: "Another approach would be to establish a 'cap-and-trade' program: The government would set gradually tightening limits on emissions, issue rights (or allowances) corresponding to those limits, and then allow firms to trade the allowances." A cap and trade system would introduce a new market fabricated by government to regulate the entire economy of mundane markets. Cap and trade is based on the political invention of scarcity. But the problem of determining the ideal supply of emission permits is much like the Federal Reserve's problem of determining the ideal quantity of government money. In both cases, bureaucrats must appeal to dubious mathematical models and pronounce on questions that remain the subject of raging scientific controversy.... The reality of cap and trade will be a typical political market: an expensive ramshackle compromise of competing forces. Another article, "The Costs of Cap-and-Trade," by Raymond J. Keating, chief economist with the Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council, cited the November 8, 2007 testimony of Anne E. Smith, Ph.D. (a nationally known expert in environmental policy assessment and corporate compliance strategy planning) before the Senate's Committee on Environment and Public Works. In her testimony, Dr. Smith presented the findings of a study done by CRA International assessing the economic costs of the "America's Climate Security Act of 2007" (S. 2191) cosponsored by U.S. Senators Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) and John Warner (R-Va.). Among Dr. Smith's findings:
We could cite other sources, but the above sampling makes an excellent case that the economic costs of cap and trade would be substantial. Even so, some would argue that any economic cost is worth enduring, if global warming can be forestalled. However, this argument ignores one critical factor: credible scientific evidence has not been presented to prove that any increase in the average temperature of the Earth is anthropogenic — caused by man's activities. |
|
Who is Todd Stern? And, why should you care?
We are coming upon a time when the global community will be reviewing, reevaluating and rewriting the Kyoto Protocol. This is the document that each and every country will have to agree to in our win over climate change.
Todd Stern is the man who is representing YOU in those talks.
Hillary Clinton appointed him yesterday to head a larger group of people responsible that will be known as the Global Climate Change Envoy, stating:
As we take steps at home, we will also vigorously pursue negotiations, those sponsored by the United Nations and those at the sub-global, regional and bilateral level, that can lead to binding international climate agreements, Clinton said. No solution is feasible without all major emitting nations joining together and playing an important part.
Todd Stern was a senior White House advisor under President Clinton, so maybe it wont surprise you that Hillary Clinton appointed him to his latest position. However, please do not assume this is just nepotism. His credentials do justify this role.
Time Magazine has published some facts about Mr. Sterns:
Law degree from Harvard in 1977 and After completing his law degree, Stern served as an attorney for the Legal Aid Society for two years, followed by more than a decade working for private firms
Under President Clinton, he was the senior White House negotiator at the Kyoto Protocol negotiations, which called for the stabilization of greenhouse gas emissions.
Currently a senior fellow at the think tank Center for American Progress, where he focuses on climate change and environmental issues. He is also a member of the (Council on Foreign Relations) and a vice chair of public policy for the law firm Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr.
Evaporation and rainfall are increasing; glaciers are retreating; sea ice is shrinking; sea level is rising; permafrost is melting; wildfires are increasing; storm and flood damage is soaring. The canary in the coal mine is singing for all shes worth. on reading the signs of climate change (Center for American Progress, May 28, 2004)
AMERICA IS BEING SET-UP
YES SHE IS! CO2 HAS nothing TO DO WITH GLOBAL CLIMATE!!!!
They are not interested in facts or science. Any politician that votes for any of this stuff should be jailed immediately,they will be enabling the rape of the nation. Whenever someone tells me about all of the green jobs that will be created I ask them to prove it. They can't because it is utter nonsense. At least the way these bozos are going about.
It won’t be regressive. Obama et al will provide a fixed-sum kick-back to everyone. It appears to penalize the central states more than the coastal states, though.
That’s his game plan; destroy, destroy, destroy.
Subject: Dear Prez..........
Thank you for helping my neighbors with their mortgage payments. You know, the ones down the street who in the good times refinanced their house several times and bought SUVs, ATVs, RVs, a pool, a big screen, two Wave Runners and a Harley. But I was wondering, since I am paying my mortgage and theirs, could you arrange for me to borrow the Harley now and then?
Richard Ford
Queen Creek AZ
P.S. They also need help with their credit cards, when do you want me to start making those payments?
P.P.S. I almost forgot - they didnt file their income tax return this year. Should I go ahead and file for them or will you be appointing them to cabinet posts?
Thanks for the link!
I am thinking about writing a book, called Rebellion
The theme of the book will be civil disobedience, aimed at the Marxist environmentalists.
I want to open the book with the protest being acted out, in one city, but the book will make clear that the protest is being repeated in every single State, in as many cities as possible.
A tire will be placed in a trash can, and soaked with gasoline. Then, a match will be thrown into the trash can. This will, of course, cause smoke that will be seen for miles. The use of the trash can will be for purposes of safety, it will not be the intent of any protester to cause any danger to life or property.
The signal of course, will be seen for miles and miles.
As people notice, and emergency vehicles respond, fliers will be passed out, which state the obvious falsehoods of the global warming hoax.
A United States Flag will be flying upside down, in distress mode, close to the burning tire.
In hundreds of cities, in all 50 states, hundreds or even thousands of people repeat this act of civil disobedience, simultaneously. Volunteers will pass out fliers with the pertinent political justifications.
In some cases, nobody will be arrested. In some cases, the authorities will realize that we are setting them up for a court battle that they do not want.
However, in those cities where an arrest is made, we swing into LEGAL action:
This is Free Speech which you have upheld, at the United States Supreme Court, where a United States Flag was involved. In this case, we did not burn the flag, we burned an old, useless car tire, in order to draw attention to our upside down flag. The United States Flag, in distress mode, was an integral part of our protest.
The use of the car tire was deliberate, as this protest, itself, is against the tyranny of the environmental movement, its lies and its power hungry grab for power.
Our protest is a protest you do not have to agree with, but our protest is one that the United States Supreme Court MUST uphold! After all, if it is a Constitutional Right to burn the flag, it is entirely conceivable that someone could burn thousands upon thousands of flags, at the same time, and STILL be protected by the Supreme Court of the United States, is it not? (Even if those flags, collectively, would produce as much smoke and CO2 as a burning tire!)
And, we will also remind the liberals, in this book, that they have limited our rights to free speech and dissent, through the fairness doctrine or clones there of.
In each city, all across the country, the person who handles the car tire, the gasoline and the matches will agree, ahead of time, to go all the way to the Supreme Court, if needed, to assert our Free Speech protections.
Smoke signals have been around for centuries.
Smoke is all they have left us!
The purpose of the smoke signal was to make a political statement and to generate a crowd.
How best to protest against the EPA than to make smoke?
And, once we get the Courts to understand that we have free speech rights, to burn tires, just like the flag burners have free speech rights, to burn flags, we let the liberals know:
We will burn tires, in every city of the country, until they back off on any carbon tax!
________________________________________
What do you think of my book idea?
How about we get someone in Congress to propose a TAX!
A TAX on NEWSPRINT!
Whereas the production of newspapers causes trees to be cut down, hauled by polluting trucks to polluting paper mills, and hauled from paper mills to publishers and
Whereas the production of newspapers requires toxic ink and solvents and energy wasting machinery and
Whereas the distribution of newspapers requires the use of dirty internal combustion engines and
Whereas a large portion of every landfill is used for discarded newspapers,
Therefore:
Be it resolved that a Newsprint tax, of $1,000.00 per pound, be charged to EVERY newspaper with a daily subscription, within the United States!
________________________________________
We should get some Republican to propose THIS as an amendment to any cap and trade or carbon tax proposal that comes up!
Maybe we can make it like Cap and Trade and use the revenue generated, from this tax on dirty dinosaur newspapers, to subsidize a tax credit for home computers and digital devices?
Or, we could use the money to subsidize talk radio! Well, those guys really dont need any help!
You are wrong my friend. America is setting herself up.
We are being set up by the people we elected to represent us.
They have bit on this Global warming trash ,hook, line and sinker and they see millions going in the pockets of those smart enough to set themselves up to be recipients of this theft.
Where I live commercial fishermen put out pound nest for fish. Now: these fish they catch have to be tagged. They are allowed so many tags per net, so what they do is buy additional permits for nets they have no intention of setting up. They go out and drive the stakes and they get the tags, but they never put a net on these additional sites. I can see how this same ploy can be used easily to sell cap and trade credits. It will not clean the environment in any way, but it will make some companies rich while others pay and down the line you and I are the recipients of another royal screwing courtesy of the Obamalamadingdong rape em while you got em administration.
There is some good news on this cap & trade bull crap.
For any treaty to be ratified, it needs 2/3’s of the senate to concur. Maybe most of the senators want to sign on to a global treaty, but I doubt 2/3’s can be achieved.
Considering the economic ramifications on the midwest and the plains states alone, any of those senators voting for it are signing away their political careers.
TERM LIMITS FOR ALL!!!
Your joking right? Their intention is to make it as expensive as possible as they think this will curtail usage and to a very large extent it certainly will as well as curtail economic activity. These are very foolish people and as true believers that don't care about the consequences.
Are you sure? I just checked his website; all about opposing taxes on gas and oil, etc.
He is the one who originally debunked global warming in the Senate.
We will be forced to sue their asses off if they enact this. A class action suit could be a possibility—use their tools against them.
Not joking. They will take (say) $5000 from the poor folks and (say) $10000 from the more-affluent folks, and give everybody $6000. I wouldn’t buy an older house, though.....
Almost like you see this as being a good thing, a necessary evil? Actually that is not how it will work because being a tax based on usage the poor will pay the largest amount. Apartment dwellers will pay less but again based on usage the poor & middle class (especially the elderly) will again pay the most. It is a truly stupid idea and will pretty much destroy the most productive parts of the economy.
No, I don’t think it’s a good thing. I think the whole thing is a big stupid scam and will put us into a recession. I’m just pointing out how all these policies will include “spreading about the wealth”.
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.