However, the general premise is dishonest… modest, yea, if we are talking about a Playboy video/photo shoot compared to a Hustler one… yea, maybe. But “modest climate policy” is hardly accurate.
I would love to know what their not-so-modest policy would have been? Taking away everyone’s cars that ran below 25mpg avg? Raising gas prices artificially while putting millage limiters or extreme carbon tax penalties for going over millage limits? Forcing everyone to update their homes to green standards or lose them? Enacting a 1 child per household rule (except for those in the elite oligarchy and their associates… and illegals)? Placing cutoff switches on our electricity so that we are limited in what we can use a day? Limiting our hot water heaters to 1 hr a day? Forcing us to only purchase a single choice in light bulbs, despite their implicit dangers, great expense and limited reliability? Limiting our cooling and heating use?
Some times it’s hard for me to figure out what kind of person is making decisions anymore… the person of extreme greed and/or a passion for power or a childlike person who is limited to whimsical fanciful Utopian dreams and/or 1st stage thinking and emotionalism. Or some combination of the two.
Even one of the most prominent Global Warming believers and advocates (from Holland nonetheless - though I pitifully have forgotten his name) strongly stands opposed to gov’ts hedging their entire economies against the fear of climate changes that wouldn’t really be a worry for a hundred years or so and even if EVERY potential fix/restriction was put into place… the potential for actual correction would be less than the rate of error within the warming models. However, the advent of economic devastation would be certain and nearly immediate. BRILLIANT!
And the ones who will suffer the most for this hysterical overreaction, me and other middle-lower class people who live paycheck to paycheck just barely getting buy but still have the blessings of some conveniences which would soon become either unaffordable due to cost of use or required replacement, etc. Not to mention the increase in job losses due to businesses closing by not being able to afford the transition to green… and those let go to offset the costs of going green. But hay, what’s the point of fore-sight anyway.
And show me where that mere threat ACTUALLY CAUSED a US company to ship jobs overseas.
My question to you was NOT:
“Can you please change the subject?”
I asked about productivity being moved overseas and I asked you to name specific examples of when this has happened, not to come back with straw man arguments, ( “Some say….” ) blog entries and op-ed pieces.
You know what I think?
You were just parroting back what you heard on right-wing radio when you made that statement about Obama…and then when you couldn’t back it up, you went on Google and just grabbed desperately at anything that ‘looked good.’
Harley and DjG, maybe a CO2 tax is overkill at this momment and maybe cap and trade isn’t the best mechanism to solve the problem, but why do we always have to wait until there is a crisis - economic, environmental or geo-political - before we can be bothered to deal with it? If we can see a problem looming on the horizon (climate change, for instance, or energy shortages), why can’t we agree to deal with the issue before it becomes a life-and-death crisis. God forbid we should impact some multi-national corporation’s profits because of some silly national disaster that might not happen for another ten or twenty years.
A CO2 tax would be immensely beneficial to the U.S. Not only would it reward companies that get off foreign oil, it would help lessen the accelerating human-caused global warming that is starting to destroy our ability to grow our own food and provide basic water to our cities.
Are republican politicians really ignorant, vain, and pompous fools, or do they just act this way to get the votes of people who watch reality shows, (and think they are real)?
Simon_Jester about 13 years ago
How about a specific example of how he traded American productivity away harley?
Bluejayz about 13 years ago
harley, I’ll bet you’ve got a signed poster of James Watt hanging in you office, don’t you.
Simon_Jester about 13 years ago
Link harley…let see some proof of that claim about the CO2 tax.. Or are we all supposed to believe that just because you said so?
And show me where that mere threat ACTUALLY CAUSED a US company to ship jobs overseas. I asked you for examples, not abstract speculation
Last but not least, “I bet” is not a fact, jack.
Dtroutma about 13 years ago
Harley goes from drinking the “Rush flush” to injecting it.
DjGuardian about 13 years ago
The toon is quite funny actually.
However, the general premise is dishonest… modest, yea, if we are talking about a Playboy video/photo shoot compared to a Hustler one… yea, maybe. But “modest climate policy” is hardly accurate.
I would love to know what their not-so-modest policy would have been? Taking away everyone’s cars that ran below 25mpg avg? Raising gas prices artificially while putting millage limiters or extreme carbon tax penalties for going over millage limits? Forcing everyone to update their homes to green standards or lose them? Enacting a 1 child per household rule (except for those in the elite oligarchy and their associates… and illegals)? Placing cutoff switches on our electricity so that we are limited in what we can use a day? Limiting our hot water heaters to 1 hr a day? Forcing us to only purchase a single choice in light bulbs, despite their implicit dangers, great expense and limited reliability? Limiting our cooling and heating use?
Some times it’s hard for me to figure out what kind of person is making decisions anymore… the person of extreme greed and/or a passion for power or a childlike person who is limited to whimsical fanciful Utopian dreams and/or 1st stage thinking and emotionalism. Or some combination of the two.
Even one of the most prominent Global Warming believers and advocates (from Holland nonetheless - though I pitifully have forgotten his name) strongly stands opposed to gov’ts hedging their entire economies against the fear of climate changes that wouldn’t really be a worry for a hundred years or so and even if EVERY potential fix/restriction was put into place… the potential for actual correction would be less than the rate of error within the warming models. However, the advent of economic devastation would be certain and nearly immediate. BRILLIANT!
And the ones who will suffer the most for this hysterical overreaction, me and other middle-lower class people who live paycheck to paycheck just barely getting buy but still have the blessings of some conveniences which would soon become either unaffordable due to cost of use or required replacement, etc. Not to mention the increase in job losses due to businesses closing by not being able to afford the transition to green… and those let go to offset the costs of going green. But hay, what’s the point of fore-sight anyway.
DjGuardian about 13 years ago
I pray that is my only rant of the day. lol.
Simon_Jester about 13 years ago
Harley, my question to you was this:
And show me where that mere threat ACTUALLY CAUSED a US company to ship jobs overseas.
My question to you was NOT:
“Can you please change the subject?”
I asked about productivity being moved overseas and I asked you to name specific examples of when this has happened, not to come back with straw man arguments, ( “Some say….” ) blog entries and op-ed pieces.
You know what I think?
You were just parroting back what you heard on right-wing radio when you made that statement about Obama…and then when you couldn’t back it up, you went on Google and just grabbed desperately at anything that ‘looked good.’
Bluejayz about 13 years ago
Harley and DjG, maybe a CO2 tax is overkill at this momment and maybe cap and trade isn’t the best mechanism to solve the problem, but why do we always have to wait until there is a crisis - economic, environmental or geo-political - before we can be bothered to deal with it? If we can see a problem looming on the horizon (climate change, for instance, or energy shortages), why can’t we agree to deal with the issue before it becomes a life-and-death crisis. God forbid we should impact some multi-national corporation’s profits because of some silly national disaster that might not happen for another ten or twenty years.
ARodney about 13 years ago
A CO2 tax would be immensely beneficial to the U.S. Not only would it reward companies that get off foreign oil, it would help lessen the accelerating human-caused global warming that is starting to destroy our ability to grow our own food and provide basic water to our cities.
HappyPhil about 13 years ago
Are republican politicians really ignorant, vain, and pompous fools, or do they just act this way to get the votes of people who watch reality shows, (and think they are real)?