lol
whats unconstitutional about this? are you saying that the government doesn't have the right to issue permits?
lol
whats unconstitutional about this? are you saying that the government doesn't have the right to issue permits?
It is just part of the plan of the democratic party to make everyone Dependant on the government. First it will be UHC and its crippling tax on the middle class. Then it will be cap and trade to finish off what is left of the middle class and to crush the poor. Then people will have to turn to the government to make ends meet when they are spending thousands more a year for energy. The big winner besides the government will be china. We will be forced to import basically every good because they will cost to much to make her thanks to devastating energy costs.
In a global economy where much of our competition doesnt adhere to the same self imposed regulation I believe it is a valid argument.
I understand our desire for clean air, water, and land. But we also have to be pragmatic about it and realize when we enact this regulation like this it sends jobs to countries who dont care.
The net effect on a global scale is 0 yet we just hurt our economy. And it could even be a net negative on a global scale if current factories up and leave to countries with worse envrionmental regulation than we currently have.
of course if you take that to its inevitable end, you end up with every country behaving like china. The end is that noone is going to implement these policies if we don't do it first. Value added taxes add far more to the cost of production to european goods, yet somehow there has not been an enormous flight of capital from europe and massive loss of manufacturing jobs.
The manufacturing that is centered in the United States, Japan, and Europe is not going to flee to india or china or venezula or whereever, the governments are too corrupt and unpredictable, they don't have the infrastructure or the localized access to resources. On top of it, the local populations are uneducated and largely diseased, and not really the kind of employees that these firms are interested in hiring.
I will agree that there is a risk of firms moving to pollution zones and increasing global pollution, however.
We have already seen flight of manufacturing to these countries?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? For instance 25 years ago my dad was able to purchase locksets(door handles, levers, deadbolts) from manufacturers in this country. Today everything comes from China. Not a single one left. Why? Cheaper to run a factory there.
I dont think shocking our manufacturing sector with cap and trade is going to do much except increase the flight of these jobs overseas. And like I mentioned earlier. The net global result might actually be negative in terms of pollution if that factory ends up in the wrong country.
Doc Savage Fan
Lifer
- Nov 30, 2006
- 15,456
- 389
- 121
Cap and trade would be an absolute disaster for what little industry we have left in the US. But hey...if you could care less about millions of people having decent paying jobs, then by all means support it.
Rustler
Golden Member
- Jan 14, 2004
- 1,253
- 1
- 81
Cap and trade is about fleecing the people.
Billions for Euro Power Generators from Carbon "Cap and Trade"
May 19 (EIRNS)--European "Power generators will make tens of billions in profit from the second phase of the European Union's emissions trading scheme..." according to the Carbon Trust, which did a government-funded study of the flow of money in the first phase of the carbon-trading scheme, which was part of the Kyoto Protocol. In the first phase, electricity generators profited to the tune of over $1.4 billion, by passing on phantom costs of carbon to consumers in the highly de-regulated industry. They have positioned themselves to do even better in the second phase, aided and abetted by national governments themselves, Financial Times reports today.
This is the scheme Al Gore and his dupes are promoting for the U.S. under the slogan of "carbon cap and trade."
Billions for Euro Power Generators from Carbon "Cap and Trade"
May 19 (EIRNS)--European "Power generators will make tens of billions in profit from the second phase of the European Union's emissions trading scheme..." according to the Carbon Trust, which did a government-funded study of the flow of money in the first phase of the carbon-trading scheme, which was part of the Kyoto Protocol. In the first phase, electricity generators profited to the tune of over $1.4 billion, by passing on phantom costs of carbon to consumers in the highly de-regulated industry. They have positioned themselves to do even better in the second phase, aided and abetted by national governments themselves, Financial Times reports today.
This is the scheme Al Gore and his dupes are promoting for the U.S. under the slogan of "carbon cap and trade."
Nope, bad example. Retro fitting energy centers and meeting government standards has nothing to do with commodities speculation.
btw, who says we won't be paying $4 for gas again in 6 months to a year.
feralkid
Lifer
- Jan 28, 2002
- 16,990
- 5,067
- 136
It's a pretty good example, you just made a dopey statement about prices.
Sometimes they do come down. Check out wheat, corn and copper prices in the last year; up and down they went (in fact just about everything in the known Universe fluctuates in price).
I don't get this? Why are republicans against this and democrats in favor? That is absolutely backwards of how it should be. Cap and trade provides a market solution to the environment. I thought republicans were for market solutions and democrats against. Basically, the role of government would be the same as it is now, to set an acceptable level of pollution. The only difference would be that it would set the acceptable total amount, not a set amount per company, and then the free market would allow a company to determine where it most efficiently operated based on the now finite resource of pollution. Certainly everyone agrees that pollution should be a finite resource. It seems that since most democrats agree that cap and trade is a good policy, the only argument should be on where the cap is set. That seems a common misconception, however. Cap and trade doesn't necessarily mean more stringent environmental requirements. It is not an environmental policy, it is a free market policy. I think the real argument coming from conservatives must be that there shouldn't be any CO2 restrictions. But what if this wasn't about CO2, but rather pollutants that are already restricted. For example, what if this were about Sulfur emissions that are already controlled. Are conservatives still opposed to using cap and trade there? I'm just really confused by this whole issue, and the only conclusion I can come to is that conservatives aren't opposed to cap and trade if there must be regulation, but rather against any regulation at all. Is that it?
Cap and Trade is another method to Tax the Rich. This is what Democrats are all about!
Tax Tax Tax Tax Tax
Tax Tax Tax Tax Tax
let me tell you, i'm pretty heartbroken to hear that the untied states no longer producers such advanced technology as locksets. Seriously, i'm pretty upset here.
It's only cheaper to run a factory there for labor intensive goods, the government of china places a higher burden on its industry sector than cap and trade could ever do here.
Lets make one thing clear, industries that are leaving the united states are doing so because of labor costs, not government actions, pollution controls, etc. Thats not really something that's up for debate.
ProfJohn
Lifer
- Jul 28, 2006
- 18,161
- 7
- 0
No, this is not a market solution.
This is a government imposed solution.
A market solution is the Toyota Prius, or reusable shopping bags, or solar water heating etc etc.
People who want to save energy or the environment buy one of the above. A company that comes up with a means of satisfying 'green consumers' stands to make a lot of money with the right product.
Right now though the market for 'green' items isn't large enough to really propel companies in that direction, beyond lip service. i.e. when I buy my next computer I am not going to compare energy usage and buy the one that uses the least energy etc.
the manufacturing sector in the united states is enormous. Manufacturing is less of a share of GDP than previously because :
(1) we are very productive, and as such can have people doing other things like give massages for a living.
(2) undesirable manufacturing (textiles, simple goods like lock sets, etc) as rightfully left the country for places with cheaper labor costs. In need, these industries can easily be reestablished since they are not capital intensive or technologically advanced.
(3) people generally don't want to work in manufacturing.
if its a tax on energy, that would be a regressive tax. Capital owners will still get their returns.
World Bank
pay particular attention to table 1.2
clearly, businesses are leaving do to the difficulty of doing business here, and not because labor is 50% of their costs and if they go to china they can cut 40% of their expenses. The world bank (a very liberal institution there :roll
doesn't know whats its talking aboutYou live upto your handle with a comment like that. It was an example of one industry of many where policies like the ones you favor drive them overseas.
In what way?
That is a bunch of crap. I have worked for a manufacturing company. One of the biggest issues was the actual cost of running a factory due to envrionmental regulation along with labor costs.
not to jump in the middle of a debate, but arent businesses in the US also looking oversees becuase of the high tax rate in this country compared to others?
I agree that cheap labor is surely a driving force, but I believe taxes have been a big motivator as well.
I agree that cheap labor is surely a driving force, but I believe taxes have been a big motivator as well.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter