Posted on 04/25/2009 8:51:28 PM PDT by neverdem
I'm sure it's wrong, too. It's probably too low.
Surmising the endless stream of available government money is translated by goverment bean-counters as likely the same for American households. They would be WRONG and severely underestimating the burden they will be creating.
I think glo-bull warming is one of the biggest pieces of crap to come down the pike in a long time - but - the first part of a book titled “how to lie with statistics” which was written in the 30s and which I got from my grand pa - deals with never letting yourself be roped into revealing the mean.
Always, always, always use averages if you intend to deceive.
There aren’t good enough numbers in this to evaluate it.
But the strict use of averages makes it highly suspect. Let the DUmmies do the spinning.
“ANYTHING that costs cash strapped (many unemployed and some fearing unemployment on a daily basis) citizens will be an excessive burden.”
But, of course, it will be a bigger burden for women and minorities.
With all the nObama prosperity that should be flooding the nation, it will be a mere pittance for each household to cough up another $260 a month!
Extreme Sarcasm.
put any number on it, still wont reduce the emissions that will still be allowed, they will just have to be bought and sold...
the rest of the dirtiest polluters will remain, and until the sun decided to change its cycle we'll warm or cool as it sees fit...
Well-informed voters must not allow laws for cap-and-trade
Don’t Waste Time Cutting Emissions NY Times guest OpEd
Will California Shuck Corn Ethanol?
Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
Great Post, everyone should read this.
This is still a huge understatement in the cost, Manufacturers aren’t going to get some of the money returned to them, and if they did it would be a world trade organization violation.
Bottom line, you can say bye to manufacturing.
Thanks for the ping!
A professor's view of Hillary's “We will take your money for the greater good” and the Great O’s “Redistribution of wealth” in action.
If I was a betting man that is where I would put my money. For example
Congressional Democrats have left the door open to spending the revenues to "invest in clean energy jobs and cost-saving energy efficient technology," as Rep. Markey's staffers have written.
Democrats trolling for campaign cash by sending tax dollars to useless start ups that could not make a profit with out government subsidy
Yes, that cap and trade program Europe sure has has been a real winner. One need only look to Europe to see both why America still needs coal, and how cap-and-trade policies are doomed for failure. The European Union’s cap-and-trade program is in complete collapse as much of Eastern Europe, Italy, and Germany are all demanding exemptions from their carbon limits. Not only has the EU’s cap-and-trade failed to actually reduce carbon emissions, but even if the reductions were met, they would have no impact on world temperatures. Meanwhile, Germany plans to build 27 coal-fired plants by 2020. Italy plans to increase its reliance on coal from 14% today to 33% in just five years. In all of Europe, 40 new major coal power plants are set to be built in the next five years.
While the rest of the world is adding power supply, we are subtracting it. Obama’s allies at the National Resources Defense Council have stopped construction on 65 coal plants and 13 natural gas plants nationwide. Right now, the U.S. has 760 gigawatts of power to meet consumption. We will need 135 gigawatts of new capacity over the next decade to keep the lights on, but right now only 57 gigawatts of power are planned. Coal supplies almost half of our nation’s electricity and more than 20% of our nation’s total energy consumption. We need more coal plants, not less. Despite decades of subsidies, alternative energies such as wind and solar power contribute only 1% of our nation’s energy needs. http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=9626
Now if you listen to Obama’s little SF spiel, he said that he would institute a “100%” system. That means no exemptions. None. OBAMA TELLS SAN FRANCISCO HE WILL BANKRUPT THE COAL INDUSTRY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hdi4onAQBWQ There’s a reason I consider Gore the most dangerous man alive. Here is Al Gore’s 5 step, economist sanctioned plan to save the world and America’s economy.
http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=9675
OBAMA: “So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted. … You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers.”
Here the links and reports of cap-and-trade in Europe. The European Union’s cap-and-trade program is in complete collapse as much of Eastern Europe, Italy [8], and Germany [9] are all demanding exemptions from their carbon limits. Not only has the EU’s cap-and-trade failed [10] to actually [11] reduce carbon emissions [12], but even if the reductions were met, they would have no impact on world temperatures [13]. Meanwhile, Germany plans to build 27 coal-fired plants by 2020 [14]. Italy plans to increase its reliance on coal from 14% today to 33% in just five years [15]. In all of Europe, 40 new major coal power plants are set to be built in the next five years [14].
http://blog.heritage.org/2008/11/03/morning-bell-he-left-the-truth-in-san-francisco/print/
Cap & Trade: Even More Expensive Than Thought The fact is, cap and trade is going to cost taxpayers significantly more than the measly $13/week tax cut that the Democrats and the left are so excited about. While the $3,900 cost cited by John McCormack is an accurate accounting of what Reilly’s study portends, even that is probably an unrealistically low estimate.
http://www.qando.net/?p=2214
I get it!
Taxes don’t cost anybody ANYTHING, because the government is going to SPEND the taxes on GOOD THINGS!
You got it! Taxes don’t cost anything. In fact, because the government spends the money it collects BETTER than you would have, the more you are taxed, the RICHER you get!
Whatever the true cost, this cap and trade baloney is like attaching a one pound or more weight to the leg of sprinter, and then claiming the runner can still run almost as fast as he or she could before the weight was put on. The question is: why put the weight on in the first place?
You'd be surprised at how many people believe that. Or maybe you wouldn't. I've talked to Dems who get absolutely apoplectic when I tell them that they can spend their money better than the government can. For these people, the government (in the hands of Dems of course) is all-wise and all-knowing.
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.