A cure for Global Warming

[TE999]

I didn't believe this when I read it...and no...it's not from the Onion.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/NO6427635.htm.

Just when you thot it couldn't get any more bizarre...

 

[Zeb_Carter]

They removed the page...must have been too good to be true or it was actually true and therefore pulled because it doesn't follow the precept of political opinion.

 

[TE999]

They removed the page...must have been too good to be true or it was actually true and therefore pulled because it doesn't follow the precept of political opinion.

Grrrr......it's moved to the front page: http://www.alertnet.org

It's the 3rd story under the column 'Focus: Climate Change'...'Track the Wealthy'.

This idea is totally whacko!

 

[DesertPirate]

Grrrr......it's moved to the front page: http://www.alertnet.org

It's the 3rd story under the column 'Focus: Climate Change'...'Track the Wealthy'.

This idea is totally whacko!

It's true in a way. Gore's place in TN is over 10,000 SQ FT and uses more gas and electricity than a dozen normal folks homes.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I only create what I breath out and what my short five mile ride to work emits from the tailpipe of my car.

Although I use electricity, I don't make it. So my carbon footprint is relatively small.

 

[TE999]

It's true in a way. Gore's place in TN is over 10,000 SQ FT and uses more gas and electricity than a dozen normal folks homes.

True enough. Neretheless, the idea of some governmental agency tracking everyones emissions is uncomfortably like a police state.

I only create what I breath out and what my short five mile ride to work emits from the tailpipe of my car.

Although I use electricity, I don't make it. So my carbon footprint is relatively small.

Maybe so...but they'll get down to you in time. All must respect the environment.

 

[DesertPirate]

True enough. Neretheless, the idea of some governmental agency tracking everyones emissions is uncomfortably like a police state.

Maybe so...but they'll get down to you in time. All must respect the environment.

Just like trying to mandate GPS in cars and tax you by the mile. Anything that can be programed, can be cracked! Who should get your tax bill, mines going to Pelosi.

 

[TE999]

Just like trying to mandate GPS in cars and tax you by the mile. Anything that can be programed, can be cracked! Who should get your tax bill, mines going to Pelosi.

Send mine to Harry Reid...or Barney Frank...or Chris Dodd.

 

[Huckleman2000]

Grrrr......it's moved to the front page: http://www.alertnet.org

It's the 3rd story under the column 'Focus: Climate Change'...'Track the Wealthy'.

This idea is totally whacko!

I thought Conservatives were all about personal responsibility. If wealthy people consume disproportionately, why shouldn't they bear the brunt of the consequences of their actions? What makes them exempt from their fair share? Surely you don't think that their wealth makes those people exceptional somehow, do you?

 

[ericahope]

I didn't believe this when I read it...and no...it's not from the Onion.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/NO6427635.htm.

Just when you thot it couldn't get any more bizarre...

I don't think what they're proposing is to actually "track" the rich people and how much carbon each individual uses or puts out. I think what they're proposing is to figure out how many "rich" people live in each country and then require each country to reduce carbon output by a certain percentage depending on how many rich people live there. If this is what they're proposing, it's not that bizarre...

Erica

 

[ericahope]

I thought Conservatives were all about personal responsibility. If wealthy people consume disproportionately, why shouldn't they bear the brunt of the consequences of their actions? What makes them exempt from their fair share? Surely you don't think that their wealth makes those people exceptional somehow, do you?

I think the easiest way to do this would be to increase taxes on energy consumption. Those that use more would pay more. The increased taxes could go into a fund for clean energy or replacing old power plants or something. There's no "tracking" needed. I definitely agree with your premise Huckle!

The proposal highlighted by this news article wouldn't actually promote personal responsibility at all because the costs of the behavior of rich people would fall on the population of an entire country. So rich people in the U.S. could go on consuming all they want while the middle class and poor pay the price.

Erica

 

[trysail]

Let us hope that common sense and cooler heads will prevail ( but I'm not going to hold my breath ). It's extremely frightening to have a front row seat as a nation contemplates economic seppuku. The general public's near complete lack of understanding of economics is mind boggling.

... Climate Measure Won’t Pass U.S. Senate

"... the U.S. 'cannot put ourselves in a position where our manufacturing base,' relocates to countries that don’t limit carbon dioxide emissions."

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=am.dgogr6OI4

 

[DesertPirate]

Let us hope that common sense and cooler heads will prevail ( but I'm not going to hold my breath ). It's extremely frightening to have a front row seat as a nation contemplates economic seppuku. The general public's near complete lack of understanding of economics is mind boggling.

... Climate Measure Won’t Pass U.S. Senate

"... the U.S. 'cannot put ourselves in a position where our manufacturing base,' relocates to countries that don’t limit carbon dioxide emissions."

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&sid=am.dgogr6OI4

Based on what I've seen in the 11 years I've lived in NC, I have to say; "What manufacturing base"? I have watched over 500,000 jobs in textiles and furniture move overseas. Thomasville Furniture closed their last factory in Thomasville, NC last year. There are now 5 huge, empty buildings 10 miles from me.
Of course if the Thundering Herd of Dumbass (common sense is not allowed inside the Beltway) passes Crap & Tax and utility bills go up 40% plus, we won't have any jobs in this country, since nobody will be able to buy anything.

 

[TE999]

I thought Conservatives were all about personal responsibility. If wealthy people consume disproportionately, why shouldn't they bear the brunt of the consequences of their actions? What makes them exempt from their fair share? Surely you don't think that their wealth makes those people exceptional somehow, do you?

They may be...not being one I can't say for sure.

All this climate responsibility kerfuffle rests on the presumption that if it is done, it will make a difference vis a vis global warming...the jury is still out on that matter.

In re: the wealthy being exceptional, I applaud anyone who accumulates wealth by whatever legitimate means available... they provide jobs for others, take risks in various ventures and generally help the economy grow.

I'm curious, what is ones 'fair share' of something?

 

[DesertPirate]

"The head of the Environmental Protection Agency is admitting that an EPA study shows U.S. efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions will have no impact on the climate unless China and India do the same.

Lisa Jackson told a Senate hearing today: "I believe the central parts of the [EPA] chart are that U.S. action alone will not impact world CO2 levels, but the race is on for us to enter into a clean energy future.""

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,530503,00.html

 

[Huckleman2000]

[...]In re: the wealthy being exceptional, I applaud anyone who accumulates wealth by whatever legitimate means available... they provide jobs for others, take risks in various ventures and generally help the economy grow.

I'm curious, what is ones 'fair share' of something?

The wealthy also consume resources and produce waste at much higher than average rates. What the idea you ridicule so dismissively attempts to do is to align the brunt of the costs with those who have benefited the most. (At least on the country level)

You're so fond of making fun of Al Gore's house; but the man strives to be carbon-neutral. That means that he tries to reduce carbon emissions as much as he consumes. It's the idea of sustainability in our lifestyles.

You seem to buy into the idea of consumption as the ultimate goal of the economy. I don't see things so Darwinian.

 

[DeeZire]

...In re: the wealthy being exceptional, I applaud anyone who accumulates wealth by whatever legitimate means available... they provide jobs for others, take risks in various ventures and generally help the economy grow....

Unless they work on Wall Street, in which case they didn't help the economy grow, they crashed the economy. Your applause for anyone who accumulates wealth is puzzling. Wealth does not imply integrity, or honesty, or any other human trait we would hope to aspire to. However, in a free market economy, it does imply a willingness to ignore human values by paying non-livable wages, and it does indicate a tendency to ignore environmental degradation in favor of a cost benefit analysis.

In other words, wealth accumulation is generally a detriment to society and the environment, which is why the government is forced to step in and regulate it for the sake of the common good. I think that's the point of the article in the first post - a point lost to those who can't see past their own wallets.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Unless they work on Wall Street, in which case they didn't help the economy grow, they crashed the economy. Your applause for anyone who accumulates wealth is puzzling. Wealth does not imply integrity, or honesty, or any other human trait we would hope to aspire to. However, in a free market economy, it does imply a willingness to ignore human values by paying non-livable wages, and it does indicate a tendency to ignore environmental degradation in favor of a cost benefit analysis.

In other words, wealth accumulation is generally a detriment to society and the environment, which is why the government is forced to step in and regulate it for the sake of the common good. I think that's the point of the article in the first post - a point lost to those who can't see past their own wallets.

WHOA! Hoss!

Just cuz I pee dont mean that I piss in the punch bowl.

Scarcity creates value. Salt water and air are virtually free for the taking; gold and diamonds are scarce and expensive to acquire. It takes, what?, 15 minutes to train a burger flipper, and 15 years to make an MD. So, of course, burger flippers should make what MDs make.

If you think about it Minimum Wage is an excellent return for the miniscule investment a burger flipper makes in her vocation.

And just in case you overlooked it, almost every member of government is wealthy and an elite.

 

[trysail]

Unless they work on Wall Street, in which case they didn't help the economy grow, they crashed the economy. Your applause for anyone who accumulates wealth is puzzling. Wealth does not imply integrity, or honesty, or any other human trait we would hope to aspire to. However, in a free market economy, it does imply a willingness to ignore human values by paying non-livable wages, and it does indicate a tendency to ignore environmental degradation in favor of a cost benefit analysis.

In other words, wealth accumulation is generally a detriment to society and the environment, which is why the government is forced to step in and regulate it for the sake of the common good. I think that's the point of the article in the first post - a point lost to those who can't see past their own wallets.

Chester Carlson, Edwin Land, Thomas A. Edison, Jack Kilby, Robert Noyce, George Westinghouse, George Eastman, David Packard, William Hewlett, Alfred P. Sloan, Craig Venter, Alonzo Decker, Charles Kaman, Igor Sikorsky, Orville Wright, Wilbur Wright, Juan Trippe, Cyrus McCormick, Henry Ford, William E. Boeing, Friedrich Jacob Merck, Earl Bakken, Palmer Hermundslie, Elisha Otis, Willis Carrier, James McDonnell, Louis Upton, Howard Hughes and hundreds of thousands of others—

each and every one of them took enormous risk and created enterprises that contributed to the betterment of humanity. They mobilized capital and established organizations that produce products that make life easier and are used daily by hundreds of millions ( if not billions ) of people.


What's your opinion of George Harrison, Leonard Bernstein, Bono, Steven Spielberg, Mick Jagger, Barbra Streisand, Paul McCartney, Michael Jackson, Pete Townsend, Tom Hanks, Carlos Santana, David Byrne, Andrew Lloyd Webber, James Levine, Steve Martin, Luciano Pavarotti, Robert DiNiro, John Travolta, Jim Carrey et al?

 

[DesertPirate]

Come on Trysail, you know if someone gets rich, they stole it from the downtrodden and must give it back.

 

[TE999]

Come on Trysail, you know if someone gets rich, they stole it from the downtrodden and must give it back.

Unless you're in the entertainment industry...then you care more than those greedy business types...so you can keep your millions and have a concert for the Cause of the Week.

 

[DesertPirate]

Unless you're in the entertainment industry...then you care more than those greedy business types...so you can keep your millions and have a concert for the Cause of the Week.

Sounds like the creed of the left to me

 

[TE999]

Sounds like the creed of the left to me

Now that you mention it...there is an uncanny resemblance...I wonder why that is?

 

[DesertPirate]

Now that you mention it...there is an uncanny resemblance...I wonder why that is?

Can you spell hypocracy?

 

[Xelebes]

Can you spell hypocracy?

Apparently you can't.