Posted on 03/03/2008 1:32:46 PM PST by calcowgirl
WASHINGTON -- Imagining how John McCain, the Navy war hero, would play the role of commander in chief has been easy. Imagining how John McCain, the policy maverick, would lead as chief executive of the U.S. economy has been tougher.
In a wide-ranging interview last week, Sen. McCain offered the most-detailed account to date of his thinking on economic issues.
(snip)
Climate Change
Sen. McCain's biggest regulatory effort is likely to come in the field of climate change. Along with independent Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman, who was then a Democrat, Sen. McCain introduced the earliest version of a cap-and-trade system in 2003, and the pair have refined their ideas since. Under their plan, the government sets emissions goals. Companies that can't meet their targets must buy permits to produce carbon dioxide, either from companies that produce less CO2 than they are permitted, or from the government.
The system may require a large regulatory apparatus. In the latest McCain-Lieberman version, the government would auction off carbon-emission permits. According to Harvard economist Robert Stavins, such sales could raise $50 billion to $100 billion a year.
An Energy Department analysis says Sen. McCain's plan raises energy prices so much that it would reduce economic growth.
"I hear this interesting argument that somehow this would cost more money to our economy," says Sen. McCain. But, "I am absolutely convinced that innovation, technology, and using the entrepreneurship of America will come up with technologies which will save money, be a boon to our economy, and clean up our environment." He's unlikely to get much argument on this from his Democratic opponents; Sens. Obama and Clinton co-sponsored Sen. McCain's legislation.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
“Companies that can’t meet their targets must buy permits to produce carbon dioxide, either from companies that produce less CO2 than they are permitted, or from the government.”
And those companies will absorb that cost and not raise prices to cover it, right? LOL
Is he freaking INSANE????
My God this country is going to hell in a handbasket
Gee, we Americans have a great choice this year. We either vote for a tax and spend Democrat who believes in junk science or we vote for a tax and spend Republican who believes in junk science. We are so screwed.
Like McCain said ‘don’t know much about economics’.
Gee, we Americans have a great choice this year. We either vote for a tax and spend Democrat who believes in junk science or we vote for a tax and spend Republican who believes in junk science. We are so screwed.
Ok its clear McCaniac is 51-50.
Thoroughly stupid.
“How anyone can vote for this quy on this issue alone, even with the “Lessor of Two Evils” game, is beyond me. “
Yeah I hate to say it but if it was Hillary v. McCain, the lesser of two evils would be Hillary.
Obama is another story.
But...but... there are freepers telling me I have no choice and I’m an idiot if I don’t vote for mccain! Oh whatever shall I do?
At least I’m not the only one who thinks we’re actually in a no-win situation. I’m shocked at how many on FR think we’re going to get out of this with mccain.
I like how they call them "sales" and that they will "raise" $$$. They are TAXES and FEES, nothing more.
Is he freaking INSANE????
Based on his Amnesty and Global Warming positions, I think the answer is yes.
ROFLMAO!!!
Hey John, why don't you try this caveat on for size --- reduce spending.
Yeah, I know it's an alien concept to most Republican politicans these days (including our current President -- a prime offender), but it's the only responsible (read: conservative) course of action.
And campaigning on such a platform is smart politics. The last President to emphasize reducing the size and scope of gov't while campaigning for President won two landslide victories (in '80 and '84).
Well....I think we now have proof....America has been DUMBED DOWN!
Yes, he is quite insane.
Heating up the Global Warming Debate, If There Still Is One
Everyone from Al Gore to Yvo de Boer, the head of the United Nations climate program, has said that the debate over global warming is over. The folks at the Heartland Institute didn’t get the message.
With the slogan, “Global Warming Is Not a Crisis,” the think tank (which between 1999 and 2005 was funded by ExxonMobil) kicked off a two-day conference this morning in New York to debunk what it calls a “fake consensus” on the human causes of global warming.
The conference program, featuring a slate of scientists and politicians, is a familiar litany of arguments against climate change orthodoxy, and includes panels exploring everything from the Medieval Warm Period to the failures of the Kyoto Protocol to the impact urban heat islands have on temperature change. Today, the conference released its rebuttal of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, arguing that global warming isn’t as bad as commonly made out, isn’t caused by humans anyway, and doesn’t merit expensive schemes to combat it.
But the real heat comes from the conference taking place at all. Many in the blogosphere consider global-warming skeptics like those on parade in midtown Manhattan to be at best flat-earthers and, at worst, paid shills for the oil industry.
If the USA is going to have a flaming idiot for President, then it just as well be a vigorous young one such as Obama, instead of a dried up old white man. At least the former can give a decent speech.
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.