Skip to comments.Why Environmental Policies Don't Kill Jobs
Posted on 09/10/2011 1:02:00 PM PDT by dila813
President Obama unveiled his jobs proposal last night and among many strong points, he rebuffed the naysayers who disparage the key role that clean technology jobs have in Americas revival.
If we provide the right incentives and support, he said, we can be the ones to build everything from fuel-efficient cars to advanced biofuels to semiconductors that are sold all over the world.
And he really came out swinging on the need for environmental policies.
I reject the argument that says for the economy to grow we have to roll back [regulations]. We shouldnt be in a race to the bottom, where we try to offer the cheapest labor and the worst pollution standards.
Obama is right on both fronts. Clean policies not only offer necessary protections, they stimulate jobs.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Contributor Mindy Lubber
I'm the president of Ceres, a national non-profit that works with Fortune 500 companies and institutional investors to integrate sustainability into day-to-day business practices. In my job I bring diverse economic players together to find common ground on the immense sustainability challenges we face and the scalable solutions we need. I joined Ceres in 2003 and have worn many different hats in my 30+ career--from activist to litigator to founder of the first green mutual fund to the Northeast Regional Administrator of the EPA. Despite the constant churn of gloomy news, I am unswervingly bullish and optimistic about the prospects for building a sustainable global economy. The trends are irrefutable; clean tech solutions are here. And study after study shows sustainability is profitable. It's a matter of time--but we've got to move fast.
Sure, we can build anything - we're Americans. The problem is no one wants to buy these cr*ppy cars except self-absorbed libs and Hollywoodites who also have a big gas guzzler in the garage.
Wow, this woman is a bullshit artist. Anybody know if she is activley working hand in hand with the hard line enviro-commies or does she believe her own bullshit?
That's a long-winded way to say someone is a liberal ditz.
Give 'em up, and you can do all the green you want, Sweetie.
Oh, you mean like ethanol subsidies? It is not the government's place to try and shape the free market. If there is a market for something , the market will fill the need. How's that solar plant you showcased working out for ya, Mr Obama? You know, the one that just filed bankruptcy after getting millions in subsidized loans and is now under investigation my the FBI.
She’s not confused. She knows her gravy train is about to dry up.
Case closed. Go get a real job.
At least 12,000 years. You fur shur didn’t get to set up your family totem at that old temple site in Turkey without paying off the local shamen and their chieftains.
Yep, her entire livelihood depends on this snake oil
“That solar panel deal worked out just fine for me. I got $500 million of YOUR money into the hands of MY peeps, come what may.” -Obama
I did some quick scanning.
She appears to be a professional go between.
Kind of a interface between all the green NGOs and the nexus of Public Pension Investments by the States and Big Business.
So now you know why big business didn’t yell in scream as much this time then when Carter tried to pull all this green dream stuff in the past.
They had the majority of their investors pushing them to comply.
Well, that isn’t fair, I mean, it was the Pension Fund Administrators representing the Pensioners that actually did this.
Soros Private Equity Partners.
Shocked, aren't you?
OH I AM
I had no idea!
Never even thought to look
Mindy Lubber can waste her own damned money.
That's a nice "free-market" screed, but unfortunately, the facts of history don't agree with you. The USA has acted to "shape the free market" since Washington's administration. Canals and roads, and later railroads and air travel (and many, many other activities). Government at all levels has participated in those "shaping" activities. Where current thinking goes wrong is that government should directly CONTROL the direction of the market by passage of laws restricting activity to a government mandated single solution, rather than placing multiple "bets" in a general direction.
and this is a business magazine?
Mindy Lubber is a libber and a fibber too.
Resources are to be extracted, refined and developed to make a better world and like petroleum, far more will be discovered for future use. We are trapping our descendents in a ridiculously ridgid world with "sustainability" while playing with alternatives that have never done anything but limit and make mankind miserable.
We live in a world of abundance and can employ all people willing to work with employment in the achievable environment of responsible resorcefulness!!!
Yes, the sustainable part of this green fantasy, we have been practicing for thousands of years.
These guys think when they make you pay to have your recycling picked up at your house, sorted, graded, processed for resale, and then the recycler sells it to industry, that is sustainable.
No, we just paid for it, if we refuse to pay for it, it isn’t sustainable.
Please someone enlighten me. Is there ANY “green company” that turns an actual profit? One that ISN’T government subsidized? As people have pointed out if there is a demand, some enterpreneur will fill it and make big bucks.
The thing that kills me, Cali is the one that has the biggest set of hand cuffs on companies from fighting these regulations.
They use their pension to beat them up.
It is like the mafia without actually owning the assets you are using to bash peoples head in with.
It is Forbes Business Editorial
Don’t forget to also require importers to meet the same standards or pay an equivalent tariff as an offset until compliance is achieved! :-)
I think this is a different one on these links:
Here are all the companies they they have signed up right now, but this doesn’t list the pension funds of states they have signed up,.
It is the government side that is most disturbing,
How about the government hires 10,000,000 folks, 50% of them dig holes, the other 50% fill them in. We could tax all the profitable businesses and people with real jobs for whom there is a demand, since they need to pay “their fair share” (whatever that means to a bureaucrat and politician). The economic reasoning behind “green jobs.”
What liberals don't realize is that these jobs and even industries require a restrictive frame work of rules that all but mandates their existence, subsidizes or through special tax incentives makes these otherwise economically not viable businesses possible... The failed solar firm in California is a perfect example. Had “Cap and Trade” passed into law, this firm indeed would have taken off and some people tauting this green nonsense would be happy to use those jobs created as an example. Unfortunately what they fail to see is the effect on all those that loose their jobs because of the increased costs to do business. Those people that love to use the word “sustainable” are often the ones who believe in false economic constructs that exist at the expense of others.
Ceres stock prices shows at arount $300/share when Obama took office. It’s $37 today. Haha.
What is going on here is that she is pushing for Obama to get what he asked for, more green jobs spending.
Look at all the companies that they have ties to.
It is pretty frighting.
LOL. We have a recycling program in our city, but it requires extra trash bins and more trucks coming by to empty the contents. One of these days I might file a FOIA request with the city to see if we break even on "recycling".
They'll probably just say "we're being green so profit/loss is not an issue".
Sometimes is it simply what they say and the words they use that define them completely. Any single one of these code phrases and words is not, in and of itself, problematic, but the sum total shows her to be an enviroweenie libtard of the highest order.
They have now completely infested our government with a fervently held religious belief that is worse than Communism and has complely negated the principle of "seperation of church and state!!!"
The GovernMental EnviornMental Communutty is now feverishly forging ahead, using the force of government exactly like the extremist fundamentalist Muslim terrorists!!!
At the present time Green energy is so much bull**** and does not fertilize nearly as well. Anyone who insists that it is nicer and “cleaner” to look at those giant bird dicers lined up mile after mile than to look at a drilling rig for a few months or a year then have a pumper on less than a city lot for the rest fo the wells life is kidding themself.
Ive been thinking about it and Ive decided that the real reason politicians are so resistant to elimination of corporate taxes and regulation has nothing to do with concern for funding of government.
When you remove corporate taxes and regulation, you remove the incentive for corporate donors and lobbyists to fund politicians.
Stossel’s Microsoft example is a good one. Before government interference, Microsoft didn’t pay a dime in lobbying money. After government interference Microsoft pays $100 million per year in lobbying.
Mindy Lubber is wrong. She and Obama and the left can be factually proven to be wrong on this subject.
Key findings from the Spanish green jobs study:
For every green job financed by Spanish taxpayers, 2.2 real jobs were lost as an opportunity cost;
9 out of 10 green jobs created by Spain over the past 10 years are no longer in existence today;
Since 2000, Spain has spent 571,138 ($753,778) to create each green job, including subsidies of more than 1 million ($1,319,783) per wind industry job;
Those programs resulted in the destruction of nearly 113,000 jobs elsewhere in the economy and;
Each green megawatt installed destroyed 5.39 jobs in non-energy sectors of the Spanish economy.
Every time Americans say they are going to go green, the Chinese applaud.
There is nothing better for China than to see the Western World hamstring themselves with onerous environmental regulations or build uneconomic alternative energy sources like solar panels.
If this is true you dont need regulations and incentives to get corporations and individuals to go green.
But if you mean that If we provide the right incentives and support, sustainability is profitable then sustainability is not really profitable because it requires government aid to be fiscally viable and can only lead to disruptions in the market place and exaggerated booms and bust in the business cycle.
Incentives are particularly disruptive to the politics in the country as different market sectors seek advantage by seeking government dollars through lobbying legislators for incentives for their company or sanctions against their competition.
Sustainability may or may not be a profitable business strategy but only a freely competitive market place can prove it so.
Especially because China build most of the Solar Panels.
So a using green as a means rather then an end for an ever bloated beaurocracey. If it isn’t one thing with some people, it is another. She can go soak her head
I think that when it comes to canals, roads, bridges and other infrastructure it should be the "free-market" that shapes the government and has done so much in the past.
What is wrong with Steve Forbes??? Why is he letting this woman polute his magazine?
In other words, a professional parasite. She makes her phat living providing “greenwashing” to companies who want to look good. “Ceres” might even have a blackmailng operation. No doubt revolving-door types like dear Mindy maintain their connections with their government colleagues and can threaten corporations with making a phone call to bring down investigations, fines and audits.
Hers seems the very model of the career path of a professional lefty activist/lawyer “cashing in”. Some youthful years working for the Eco-activist outfits (Greenpeace, Environmental Defense Fund, Wilderness Society, Friends of the Earth, Natural Resources Defense Counsel, Audobon Society, etc.), some years as a lawyer filing endless environmental obstruction lawsuits for same. Then a stint in gummint (EPA of course!) and now for the big money...
Didja know that here in Arlington, VA the Nature Conservancy HQ is practically next door to the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service? Coincidence? Conspiracy? Aliens? You be the judge.
By the way, Ceres the “non-profit” should not be confused with the other Ceres—the agricultural bio-genetics firm, although they too, seem to have gone whole hog in recent years to cash in on the biofuel scam.
The taxes he levies to provide that support and incentive before he starts his argument is the killer. Nothing these people do EVER stands up to even cursory scrutiny.
Several recent news accounts (see here and here) point to a lack of clear policy in the U.S. and its presence elsewhere as a central reason other countries clean tech industries are swiftly eclipsing U.S. firms market share.And when American Electric Power this summer abandoned its pioneering effort to capture carbon dioxide from an existing coal-burning power plant, the New York Times reported: The technology had been heralded as the quickest solution to help the coal industry weather tougher federal limits on greenhouse gas emissions. But Congressional inaction on climate change diminished the incentives that had spurred A.E.P. to take the leap.
Who's going to want to spend research money developing coal fired energy, clean or otherwise, while the President is promising to use federal regulations to bankrupt the coal industry?
This is one stupid woman.
Like the resident Political Officers in the red army under Stalin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.