Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
there is a ton of corruption and manipulations. but to the above, I don't see why we need to set a fair market price on co2 emissions. the goal isn't to create a new investment market for speculating, the goal is theoretically to reduce emissions. so just set limits.
Setting limits isn't the issue, the issue is how to allocate CO2 emissions within those limits, which is what you haven't suggested any alternative for other than federal agency fiat.
Quite amazing that rather than heed their warnings and advice some just think its all some big conspiracy and rather than support action to resolve the situation they sit around and bicker calling the scientists liars and cheats perpetrating some giant hoax on humanity evidently just for the money.
There will come a time in our future when the scientists can say we tried to ring the alarm but not enough people took us seriously enough to act.
Quite amazing that rather than heed their warnings and advice some just think its all some big conspiracy and rather than support action to resolve the situation they sit around and bicker calling the scientists liars and cheats perpetrating some giant hoax on humanity evidently just for the money.
There will come a time in our future when the scientists can say we tried to ring the alarm but not enough people took us seriously enough to act.
What's the plan?
Is it to raise prices in the US and lose jobs as China and India ramp up and the industries that were fairly regulated in the west are replaced by industries in countries that won't regulate them at all?
I am always amazed that the global warming crowd's solutions are ALWAYS a collectivist solution that incorporates mostly Marxist economic theory to address the man made portion of global warming - that most estimates show are between .1 and 1 percent of the overall impact on global warming.
To shut down the advanced economies (specifically the US), or even to centralize them, will create more problems than it will address. The Soviet union, as a centralized economy for example, had a terrible record on environmental issues.
Germany is more "litter free" than the US, but has a far dirty environment from a chemical/toxin standpoint, but is still far cleaner than the developing countries. Clean looking is not always the same thing as clean!
On CO2, jury is still out if the CO2 is the cause of warming, or increases as a percentage of the atmosphere because of warming. Coorellation is not necessarily causation. H2O is THE greenhouse gas, nothing else even comes close, but the emporer would truely be revealed as naked if the environmentalist movement started pushing for water vapor control!
Do you actually believe the oil tycoons aren't going to make their millions even if you enact all of the CO2 laws you want?
Is your plan essentially to stop all modern manufacturing? Without oil, we won't be producing new computers, modern batteries, electric cars, many medical devices, cell phones and practically most goods that you have become accustomed. Well, I take that back, we'll be producing some, but you won't be able to afford them.
That's just not going to happen. We are not going to stop using oil. Sure, we can cut back, but everything you buy will jump dramatically in price, and the oil barons will continue to be rich. They just won't have to run as big of companies as they do today.
We're going to stop using oil when it's all gone. It's not a renewable source of energy.
Oil barons partly are rich because the gas and oil industry is heavily government subsidized. Why not stop those subsidies and subsidize renewable energy more?
Is it to raise prices in the US and lose jobs as China and India ramp up and the industries that were fairly regulated in the west are replaced by industries in countries that won't regulate them at all?
You take action, like the U.S. Department of Agriculture is. Here's the link to their plan to deal with climate change.
Or how about the Southeast Florida Regional Compact, a joint effort of Broward, Miami-Dad, Monroe and Palm Beach counties to mitigate the causes and adapt to the consequences of climate change.
Or you can go to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, which lists hundreds of climate events, and initiatives to deal with climate change, including those involving major corporations and big business:
Like cap and trade, the idea to trade pollution permits on the market championed by famous Marxist President George Bush.
In this case, he was precisely that. Cap and trade is a collectivist Marxist solution whose goal has NOTHING TO DO WITH CLIMATE, and everything to do with redistributing wealth from productive societies to primitive societies.
In fact the whole climate change movement is really a wealth expropriation movement, thinly window dressed with junk science to make it appear legitimate. So thinly, as a matter of fact, that most rational people see it for what it is - a money grab.
Is it to raise prices in the US and lose jobs as China and India ramp up and the industries that were fairly regulated in the west are replaced by industries in countries that won't regulate them at all?
A major cutback in the global use of fossil fuels would be a better solution than sitting around bickering about money. However i doubt anything will be done as people just dont get the implication of what the scientists are warning us about the resultant ignoring of the problem will ensure the Earths climactic conditions will continue to deteriorate.
The atmosphere is what keeps us alive on this planet,its very thin and very fragile
In this case, he was precisely that. Cap and trade is a collectivist Marxist solution whose goal has NOTHING TO DO WITH CLIMATE, and everything to do with redistributing wealth from productive societies to primitive societies.
In fact the whole climate change movement is really a wealth expropriation movement, thinly window dressed with junk science to make it appear legitimate. So thinly, as a matter of fact, that most rational people see it for what it is - a money grab.
How does a national cap and trade program redistribute wealth to primitive societies?
Also, the federal government can print money whenever it wants to; why would they resort to subterfuge to implement a "money grab"?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
