Posted on 02/10/2015 3:46:43 PM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
Are Americans worried about climate change? Do they want their government to regulate greenhouse gases? A recent survey - from Stanford University, The New York Times and Resources for the Future - found that strong majorities say "yes" to both questions.
But there's a big catch, which isn't getting the attention it deserves: A strong majority also say that they oppose increasing taxes on either gasoline or electricity in order to reduce climate change. That's important, because any serious effort to lower emissions is going to raise prices.
At the same time, a majority said they would oppose the Kyoto Protocol if it would cost them personally $50 per month. When that hypothetical monthly cost was raised to $100, almost 90 percent said they would oppose it.
How can most Americans be unwilling to pay to reduce a problem that they believe will damage them personally?
The recent survey does provide a clear lesson for national political campaigns: Candidates will have trouble if they decline to acknowledge climate change or say that they don't want to address it. At the same time, they have to be wary of favoring initiatives that would impose significant costs on American consumers.
It's much more effective to stress the potential benefits of new forms of clean, American-made energy - and to celebrate the money-saving advantages of energy-efficient appliances and fuel-efficient cars. But effective campaigning is one thing; adult conversations are another, and they cannot avoid the question of cost.
(Excerpt) Read more at mcclatchydc.com ...
Pay all you want watermellon. I,m not paying though.
What Cass doesn’t understand is the people responding to the survey are giving the PC answer that they feel is expected of them. When you put a price tag on it it makes it real and the PC crap goes put the window.
eff off Cass
bingo...bttt
Hey Cassie. Use your OWN money for that commie bull****. Americans aren’t buying it you moron!!!!
Isn’t it just too, too quaint? Only residents and industries of the U.S.A. are required to be restrained and re-directed in order that the planet and all its people be saved from a slightly warmer atmosphere surrounding our planet.
Cass, NOTHING YOU CAN DO TO AFFECT THE CLIMATE!!!!
So, I’m paying NOTHING, because that’s the result you’ll get.
Even with documented proof that this is all a hoax, they continue to “make news” about it. These people are the new “flat earthers.”
Who rattled his cage? I thought we were done with him. Don’t tell me they’re all going to be recycled for the last two years!!!!
“At the same time, a majority said they would oppose the Kyoto Protocol if it would cost them personally $50 per month. When that hypothetical monthly cost was raised to $100, almost 90 percent said they would oppose it.”
Problem is the costs would far exceed those amounts. We’ve been told that global warming is caused by the increases in carbon dioxide that began in earnest right after WWII. In order to combat global warming we’d have to reduce our emissions to the level of 1945. But, we have three times the population so per capita, we’d have to reduce our individual levels to one-third of 1945. Standards of living are directly proportional to energy usage. Means we’d have to reduce our standard of living to something along the lines of 1850. Who wants to sign up?
I thought the scumbag was off somewhere counting the money he made during Obama’s reign of terror.
That's a stupid question!
Based on my reading, let me say with some confidence that human caused global climate change is not happening.
Falsification of data, recently reported, and also separately undertaken in the East Anglia Climategate scandal are strong indications that the government is not telling us the truth.
The fact that ALL of this is always associated with taking money from people should be a blaring alarm to any thinking person that it is another excuse to transfer money to the powerful.
The reason I’m rejecting your proposal, Mr. Sunstein, is that adopting it will cost me far, far more than any purported “climate change” ever can or will. That, and your curious reluctance to issue “money-back” guarantee, backed by your own funds, if necessary, reveals with absolute certainty that you don’t even believe in this fraud yourself. Yet you are attempting to sell it to us, for reasons you have yet to plausibly explain.
I hear climate change and I think folks should read The Clan of the Cave Bear series. Lots of climate change during the ice age.
Pitching Cass Sunstein into a volcano would be a highly apropos and efficacious sacrifice. I suggest we do so.
1. Climate change is a hoax based on cooked data
2. If there was goal warming, the impact of human solutions is <1%
3. It’s all about increasing the power of socialist bureaucrats over us.
The people who answered yes to both questions are like that lady from California who thought Obamacare was great. She just didn’t realize SHE was going to paying for it.
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.