Don't forget the UN Motto. I mean besides "Just because somebody is committing genocide doesn't make him a bad person," there is "from each according to ability to each according to need." America is the rich country that needs to be taken down several notches. Poor China is doing her best. Why, the USA should be taxed for China's carbon contributions - they can better afford it than China.
Step One: Any republicans that voted for this need to be purged from the party as soon as practical. Bono Mack, Mary (CA-45) Castle, Mike (DE) Kirk, Mark (IL-10) Lance, Leonard (NJ-7) LoBiondo, Frank (NJ-2) McHugh, John (NY-23) Reichert, Dave (WA-8) Smith, Chris (NJ-4)
China should be taxed for importing to the US, things that are cheaper to build because they can use high carbon fuels WITHOUT the tax. It is called a level playing surface. Didn't say anything about what they build for themselves.
Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) had a few choice words about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) landmark climate-change bill after its passage Friday. When asked why he read portions of the cap-and-trade bill on the floor Friday night, Boehner told The Hill, "Hey, people deserve to know what's in this pile of s--t." I love this guy. He needs to run for Pres
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/will062509.php3 Tilting at green windmills By George Will The Spanish professor is puzzled. Why, Gabriel Calzada wonders, is the U.S. president recommending that America emulate the Spanish model for creating "green jobs" in "alternative energy" even though Spain's unemployment rate is 18.1 percent â more than double the European Union average â partly because of spending on such jobs? Calzada, 36, an economics professor at Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, has produced a report that, if true, is inconvenient for the Obama administration's green agenda, and for some budget assumptions that are dependent upon it. Calzada says Spain's torrential spending â no other nation has so aggressively supported production of electricity from renewable sources â on wind farms and other forms of alternative energy has indeed created jobs. But Calzada's report concludes that they often are temporary and have received $752,000 to $800,000 each in subsidies â wind industry jobs cost even more, $1.4 million each. And each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation â sub-optimum in terms of economic efficiency â of capital. (European media regularly report "eco-corruption" leaving a "footprint of sleaze" â gaming the subsidy systems, profiteering from land sales for wind farms, etc.) Calzada says the creation of jobs in alternative energy has subtracted about 110,000 jobs elsewhere in Spain's economy. The president's press secretary, Robert Gibbs, was asked about the report's contention that the political diversion of capital into green jobs has cost Spain jobs. The White House transcript contained this exchange: Gibbs: "It seems weird that we're importing wind turbine parts from Spain in order to build â to meet renewable energy demand here if that were even remotely the case." Questioner: "Is that a suggestion that his study is simply flat wrong?" Gibbs: "I haven't read the study, but I think, yes." Questioner: "Well, then. [Laughter.]" Actually, what is weird is this idea: A sobering report about Spain's experience must be false because otherwise the behavior of some American importers, seeking to cash in on the U.S. government's promotion of wind power, might be participating in an economically unproductive project. It is true that Calzada has come to conclusions that he, as a libertarian, finds ideologically congenial. And his study was supported by a like-minded U.S. think tank (the Institute for Energy Research, for which this columnist has given a paid speech). Still, it is notable that, rather than try to refute his report, many Spanish critics have impugned his patriotism because he faulted something for which Spain has been praised by Obama and others. Judge for yourself: Calzada's report can be read at http://tinyurl.com/d7z9ye. And at http://tinyurl.com/ccoa5s you can find similar conclusions in "Yellow Light on Green Jobs," a report by Republican Sen. Kit Bond, ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee's subcommittee on green jobs and the new economy. What matters most, however, is not that reports such as Calzada's and the Republicans' are right in every particular. It is, however, hardly counterintuitive that politically driven investments are economically counterproductive. Indeed, environmentalists with the courage of their convictions should argue that the point of such investments is to subordinate market rationality to the higher agenda of planetary salvation. Still, one can be agnostic about both reports while being dismayed by the frequency with which such findings are ignored simply because they question policies that are so invested with righteousness that methodical economic reasoning about their costs and benefits seems unimportant. When the president speaks of "new green energy economies" creating "countless well-paying jobs," perhaps they really are countless, meaning incapable of being counted. For fervent believers in governments' abilities to control the climate and in the urgent need for them to do so, believing is seeing: They see, through their ideological lenses, governments' green spending as always paying for itself. This is a free-lunch faith comparable to that of those few conservatives who believe that tax cuts always completely pay for themselves by stimulating compensating revenue from economic growth. Windmills are iconic in the land of Don Quixote, whose tilting at them became emblematic of comic futility. Spain's new windmills are neither amusing nor emblematic of policies America should emulate. The cheerful and evidently unshakable confidence in such magical solutions to postulated problems is yet another manifestation â Republicans are not immune: No Child Left Behind decrees that by 2014 all American students will be proficient in math and reading â of what the late senator Pat Moynihan called "the leakage of reality
Still, one can be agnostic about both reports while being dismayed by the frequency with which such findings are ignored simply because they question policies that are so invested with righteousness that methodical economic reasoning about their costs and benefits seems unimportant. Take a nice steamy pile of shit put it into the box, wrap it up with "goodness" and we all know Norman is gonna buy it regardless of the stench. Excellent article thanks.
There was/is (?) a clause that calls for tariffs on high carbon import like steel, IF that the producing country does not have similar caps on carbon. Its called a trade war. http://www.atr.org/atr-opposes-tariff-language-h-r-a3444
Its actually Wesley Mouch, but I like your use of reference here. Obama is merely keeping true to his campaign promises regardless of what dire affect they will have on U.S. citizens. I read along time ago that someone said that a country gets the leader they deserve. How true this is proving to be. The two rarest items to be found right now are gold coins and ammunition (bullets). And yet people still believe Obama is doing a great job. I'll see you in the soup lines Comrade.
Hey since there was a mention of "Atlas Shrugged" in this thread I have to ask. Has anyone considered that Alan Greenspan has been playing the part of "Francisco d'Aconia. Anyone knowing his history knows what I mean. Anyway just some fun conspiracy theory.