What do you think about "Cap and Trade" and how will it effect Wyoming? (neighborhoods, buying)

[wyoman]

Originally Posted by sunsprit

NVDave ... I think I got your point quite loud and clear. I may have been facetious in taking it a little bit further ... to criminalize what is otherwise now routine, normal, and legal activity. Kinda' like many in the present administration have tried to do in the past with so many other activities ... see 1st and 2nd amendment issues/concerns by Emanuel, Clinton, and others at the top of the prez's advisors and counselors, or cabinet, or attorney general.

ClayLady ... as a manufacturer's rep actively involved in the coatings industry for emissions controls for coal fired power plants ... I'm not seeing any new plants being built. On the contrary, the power generation industry is finding it far more cost effective to retro-fit existing licensed plants than to go through all the hoops of environmental studies and all the other requirements to build a new plant. Existing plants have lower standards to do this than an entirely new plant has.

You folks may "pooh-pooh" the legitimate concerns that some of us have as "fear" and "gloom and doom", but you've apparently missed the point of what "cap and trade" is all about in the way it's planned transfer of wealth from the producing countries to the ones that don't have the development and hence, have "carbon credits" to sell. It's clearly a planned transfer of wealth, and as I don't believe in the anthropogenic concept of global warming ... it's strictly all about political and economic power. Follow the money .... which will affect everything that you might purchase that is manufactured or grown or processed or transported. No human activity will escape the taxation burden of "cap and trade", except for your dreams ... and you get those while you sleep.

Fortunately, for the most recent of moments, Congress has indicated that they'll not be favorable to "cap and trade" legislation as part of the "budget" process. But given the unbalance of power in the US Congress these days, and a very loud "green" movement with the ear of the President ... that could change in a heartbeat. The current amendment doesn't preclude considering and implementing cap and trade as a new issue to be considered under it's own banner. Especially in light of the prez's comments that he'd destroy the coal power industry as part of his campaign platform ... I'm taking him seriously on that point.

As far as the "fears" about better fuel economy vehicles ... I voted for improved fuel economy for my transportation needs all the way back into the 1960's ... when I drove under 1 liter cars, 1.3-1.5 liter cars (Sprites, MGA's, TR's, Alfa's, Porsche's), and in the 1970's, when I started driving MB 2.2 liter diesels and Peugeot Diesels that got in the low-mid 30 mpg range, and a 1972 BMW 2002 that turned in the high 20's until the 55 mph limit went in and I dropped 6 mpg at the lower rpm in 4th gear that was off the breathing range of the cam. IMO, that was a "better" way to "vote in" fuel economy/efficiency standards than Federal Regulation. I still drive 30 mpg and up cars, although I now need diesel 3/4 ton pick up trucks for my farm/ranch operations ... even then, I use them only when hauling a load, and can use my Subie wagons for livestock ... yes, we're the folks you've seen going down the road with goats or sheep in the back of the station wagon. So ... what were you driving through all those years, ElkH? Did you "vote" for "progress" or did you wait until the Fed's rammed it down your driveway?

The elk was probably in the service defending your rights to be a smart .....s" Your opinions are welcome-lets not get in each others faces -or we will become unprodutive and of no use to each other

[sunsprit]

Originally Posted by wyoman

The elk was probably in the service defending your rights to be a smart .....s" Your opinions are welcome-lets not get in each others faces -or we will become unprodutive and of no use to each other

As well as some of the rest of us volunteered for service, too.

It doesn't pay to make "assumptions" about other's skills, experience, and background ... does it wyoman.

I'm not the one who started called folks names around here ....

[Clay Lady]

This article was sent to me today after asking someone to educate me about cap and trade. I picked this article because it presents the variety of ideas being discussed beyond just shutting down the use of a natural energy.

Debating Cap-and- _____ (Fill in the Blank) - Green Inc. Blog - NYTimes.com

[NorthPoleMarathoner]

^^^^^^ Doesn't matter what it is called. It will still lead to a worldwide depression.

I wish some of these Congressmen would look at the Constitution once in awhile. It clearly states that they don't have the right to regulate energy. At All. Under any circumstances. But why let something like that get in the way. They only want other people to follow the Constitution.

I would argue that if left alone the energy industry, and manufacturing in general, would do a better job at not polluting than they do with feddle gummit involvement. Our environment would be better without feddle gummit intervention. And Global Warming, if it exists, is a good thing. We should welcome and exploit it, not try to stop it.

Here is another link to an article about Cap and Trade:

Cap and Trade: A Huge, Regressive Tax (http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/930 - broken link)


What I fiind interesting is that not only will this transfer wealth form wealthy to poor countries it will transfer wealth from middle income America to wealthy America. Sounds like a typical feddle gummit scheme to me.

[msdmckee]

I would argue that if left alone the energy industry, and manufacturing in general, would do a better job at not polluting than they do with feddle gummit involvement. Our environment would be better without feddle gummit intervention. And Global Warming, if it exists, is a good thing. We should welcome and exploit it, not try to stop it.

While this whole thread is a hot button, I do see alot of respectful disagreeing going on.......That's what makes our country great! Any body Any time can express a contrary argument. History will be the judge of it all in the end.

For my part, I now consider the "feddle gummit" to be owned, run and committed lock, stock and barrel by industry. We do have a capitalist out look, no?

[NorthPoleMarathoner]

I have heard on the radio that Cap and Trade is meeting a lot of resistance in Congress. And no plans to consider it anytime soon.

This is kind of what I was hoping for. Some of these politicians campaign on this stuff becuase it gets them votes. When it is time to actually do something they find a reason why it can't be voted on. In this case democrats will blame republicans for blocking it. Sort of like republicans blame democrats for blocking any vote on abortion.

Either way, I hope the idea just completley goes away.

[yyz1]

Originally Posted by NorthPoleMarathoner

Either way, I hope the idea just completley goes away.

I think that's a pipe dream. They'll never let it go until they get what they want. They may change their strategy, but they won't drop it.

[NVDave]

Originally Posted by NorthPoleMarathoner

What I fiind interesting is that not only will this transfer wealth form wealthy to poor countries it will transfer wealth from middle income America to wealthy America. Sounds like a typical feddle gummit scheme to me.

In order to effect the "trade" portion of "cap and trade," there need to be markets set up in "emissions futures" and "swaps" and other derivative instruments.

Now, we've all seen just how wonderfully well the best and brightest MBA's from Harvard have run the banking system and economy into a ditch with debt/bond instruments and futures... think of what they can do to your utility bills with "carbon futures" and "swaps" on same?

It won't just be a transfer of wealth from rich countries to poor countries. It will be a transfer of wealth from your pocket, to your utility's pockets, to the pockets of Goldman Sachs, et al.

[sunsprit]

It's interesting as a "tax", because it's not being levied on the basis of so many dollars per unit of CO2, it's being proposed to go into the market on a bidding system.

So, if your business needs "carbon credits", you purchase them at an auction. Limited "supply" and large demand will undoubtedly drive the price up. The problem for any business, is how much will it drive the costs of doing business up? You have no way to forecast it and know if you'll be priced out of your marketplace.

Just the mere "threat" of these substantially increased costs of production is causing a ripple through the ag and ranching industries. Folks I know, trade associations, producer groups ... are cutting back their committments to production. The marginal difference in profitability will be eaten up by the increased energy costs, so why bother to plant or grow crops? I know of leased land that won't be farmed this year, it will be fallow ... and that's after some record high price spikes in 2008 for certain crops.

Put this in view of the water supply issue in CA, where the Fed has announced for the 2009 that they would not be delivering any water to ag users in the main crop producing areas. Orchards which had already been cutting back on tight water supplies of the last few years are now being cut down. Other crops will not be planted ... and CA supplies the lion's share of many vegetable crops in the USA, as well as garlic, artichokes, citrus, and other specialty crops.

Even though cap and trade has not been passed into law, the serious consideration of it by our congress and a president advocating it has already had a damaging effect upon domestic crop production and food supply for 2009. And I'm seeing it right here in Wyoming, right now.

[sunsprit]

In today's Wash Post ... a new report that Carol M. Browner, the assistant in charge of the prez's energy policy ... is working with congressional leaders to have an energy bill put together by Memorial Day.

The issue they're trying to resolve at this time is whether the "cap and trade" auction program will go in full effect immediately, or if they're auction off part of the credits and give a portion of them away over the next few years. The intent is to "phase in" the costs of the credits more gradually so that the power generation industry and major polluters can have some time to adjust to the new costs. In theory, it would also give them time to add more emission controls to their plants so that they would be less impacted by the cap and trade auction costs.

Browner has been meeting with almost all the cabinet level members of the president, as well as top energy committe members in congress to draft the bill.

So much for "their isn't a bill in congress right now" on this issue as a means of disregarding the impending goal of the president ....