Skip to comments.Windfall of cash could hit state treasury from global warming program
Posted on 04/08/2012 7:48:38 AM PDT by SmithL
click here to read article
Now, where is all the loot gonna really come from?
Utility companies that will bill consumers - especially all those businesses looking to locate to California?
Or maybe adding the “costs to pollute” to the other costs of starting and staying in business?
Farmers! yeah, go after agriculture! Farming pollutes!
Airlines? Make ‘em pay to fly.
The US military! Fine all those military bases - they pollute.
Bundle up $450,000 in untraceable small dollar donations to obama and you’ll be “in like flynn”
Talk about buying a license to pollute ...
That is the effect. Emissions trading schemes and carbon taxes (as well as EPA regs) are taxes on capital. They reduce the value of a company's assets because of a reduced future revenue stream and will cause what businesses that do remain in California to cease capital improvements.
Our rising standard of living is directly due to capital improvements and accumulation. The end result of cap-and-trade will be to reduce living standards and to increase the very income inequality the liberals profess to despise.
Of course, they'll just blame the capitalists.
They must be on black tar heroin.. crack.. prescription drugs.. who knows.. legislators and the electorate are out of their freakin minds.. politics is whack in california if this happens..
You can bet there is going to an “unexpected” shortfall in this revenue stream soon.
Take a number and get to the back of the line. There's thousands ahead of you. Hussein has to fill his kickback pockets first.
As if pigs could fly. And bring your umbrella, too, ‘cause the skittle-pooping unicorn is scheduled for an over-flight.
I engineer at a radio station on the weekends for a number of talk shows. One of the shows is hosted by a guy who is all over the UN Agenda 21 scam and its related tentacles. My spidey senses tell me Cap & Trade is one of those tentacles.
You can get a feel for his show by going to his website http://www.edtalkradio.com and click on the MYSYTV LIVE link.
If you're willing to be interviewed in-studio or on the phone, FReepmail me and I'll set it up.
Yes and yes, but be aware, my work goes far beyond the patent.
The free market environmental management system was first proposed in my first book, Natural Process: That Environmental Laws May Serve the Laws of Nature. (Reviews here).
Of interest to you also is that I have restored our property to perhaps the purest native plant landscape in North America. It has taken us 22 years, a project of scope, intensity, and duration far beyond anything ever attempted by the university/government/foundation cabal. You can read about that here.
ALSO of interest is the discovery of the original purpose and intent of the Biblical Sabbath for the Land, lost for 3,500 years. You can read about that here.
For more on where I'm coming from in general, there is an interview here.
I know you know that I've been around here for a long time. If you need one, I can supply a list of FReepers who can vouch for what I've just said.
In the normal world, yes, it is. Unfortunately, here in CA, it's not.
Perhaps someone can explain it to me In a certain area of the Nation there are air quality problems, assume part to be particulate matter (PM). There are many sources ,large and small, some of both in violation of set emission standards for PM. Let us look at source A which is large and doing very well in having it’s emissions well under what the generalized or specific standard allows. Then we look at a source B, large or small, that has problems with emissions above the generalized or specific standard. B goes to A and says I will pay you a certain amount of dollars as allotted by the EPA for an emission credit from your operations to get my company under it’s generalized standard/allowance. A says good deal you can have some of my unused/unneeded emissions allowances. As such we will both be under the our allowed emissions and free of agency bother. Emissions haven’t changed. Air quality remains the same. However, A has made some money and B has saved some money. Apparently there was little need for making standards more stringent but this comes later on when EPA needs to justify the desires of some bureaucrat to keep government on the backs of employers.
Yup, just like the "tobacco settlement" money was only supposed to be for "smoking cessation programs". Meanwhile, the states were selling bonds backed by future tobacco revenue.
That may help explain the results of a recent Washington Post poll. Asked whether "recent price increases in gasoline caused any financial hardship for you or others in your household," 63% of the respondents said yes. That's well below the 77% that answered yes during the price surge of 2008, and it was the lowest affirmative response to the same
One part of me is outraged by the blatant spin they put on the gas price hike. The other part says that these libs are whistling past the graveyard, thinking 0bama won't get tagged with the recession that, not might but WILL, result from energy prices "skyrocketing". They're actually cheering the fact that, in a sense, it's only 63% who HATE this regime.
Bookmark this fraud for later
Will the Martin Luther of the Enviromental Climate Reformation please stand up!