Surprise! Money dedicated to reducing carbon emissions used for state budget deficit

[101mpg]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101219/ap_on_he_me/us_pollution_fund_raids

Two of the 10 Northeast states that agreed to dedicate millions of dollars to reduce carbon emissions and promote green energy have reneged on their promise, instead diverting substantial funds to saving their budgets.

New York took $90 million last fall — roughly half of its fund; New Jersey zeroed out its fund, taking all $65 million; and New Hampshire, a much smaller state, took $3.1 million in June. In all three states, the money was used to pay the state's bills.

These cap-and-trade programs will go down in history as the biggest scam ever. It's not about global warming, it's not about saving the environment, it's always been about finding another source of revenue, and expanding control.

 

[feralkid]

That's an odd conclusion you jumped to.

 

[DominionSeraph]

And where does it say that taxes were raised?

Idiot.

 

[101mpg]

And where does it say that taxes were raised?

Idiot.

Oh my mistake, that money that was meant to go to reducing emissions was free money, just magically appeared, it wasn't money that was taken away from something else like roads or schools or police and fire, it was just money that a magical unicorn shit out of it's ass and keebler elfs distributed it out to the states because they couldn't manage their budgets.

 

[feralkid]

Oh my mistake, that money that was meant to go to reducing emissions was free money, just magically appeared, it wasn't money that was taken away from something else like roads or schools or police and fire, it was just money that a magical unicorn shit out of it's ass and keebler elfs distributed it out to the states because they couldn't manage their budgets.

WWYBYWB?

 

[DominionSeraph]

Oh my mistake, that money that was meant to go to reducing emissions was free money, just magically appeared, it wasn't money that was taken away from something else like roads or schools or police and fire,

And how is taking the money out of the fund and paying for the deficit spending on ROADS AND SCHOOLS AND POLICE AND FIRE "an additional source of revenue"?

If I have 1 billion in income, I spend 2 billion on basics and "put aside" 100,000,000 for energy for a total spending of 2.1 billion/deficit of 1.1 billion, then I decide not to go 1.1 billion in the hole but to only go 1 billion in the hole by raiding the energy fund, how have I increased revenue?

You can replace your opening post with, "Edit: NM, I'm an idiot," now.

 

[sandorski]

Protip- Times are tough and I suspect this is not the only Tax/Fee meant for something else that has been used in this fashion at this time.

 

[feralkid]

Protip- Times are tough and I suspect this is not the only Tax/Fee meant for something else that has been used in this fashion at this time.

Like the Social Security trust fund.








Oh, wait!.............That means S.S. was never about promoting the general welfare. It's always been about finding another source of revenue!





Oh, yeah...and expanding control.

 

[CycloWizard]

Protip- Times are tough and I suspect this is not the only Tax/Fee meant for something else that has been used in this fashion at this time.

Ah, so since this sort of thing happens all the time, we should just shrug our shoulders and welcome the increased burden on the taxpayer so our huge government can keep getting bigger.

 

[sandorski]

Ah, so since this sort of thing happens all the time, we should just shrug our shoulders and welcome the increased burden on the taxpayer so our huge government can keep getting bigger.

lolfail

 

[Dr. Zaus]

If something like a carbon emissions tax were to go into effect and it was sold by saying that the money would be dedicated to funding green energy... well then I could see how we'd see the funds misappropriated.

But generally simply taxing carbon emissions will reduce them, thus performing the 'green' activity desired.

And specifically, this situation has nothing at all to do with the above... Some stats wanted to spend what they have raised as taxes on 'green' things, because this is what the voters want, but instead they spent it on paying required bills... because even stupid hippies would rather have a fire fighter show-up a their door than have solar panels on the state-house.

... Why do I need to explain this?

 

[fskimospy]

Hahahaha, so perfect.

"I CAN'T BELIEVE MONEY WAS TAKEN FROM ROADS AND POLICE AND THEN SPENT ON ROADS AND POLICE"

 

[CycloWizard]

lolfail

/yourself

 

[piasabird]

Government is good at inventing problems.

 

[Fingolfin269]

I'm confused. Did they raise taxes or decide to tax something specifically to raise money for a green initiative? Or did they just budget for it, realize they couldn't actually afford it, and reallocate the 'funds' (that don't actually exist) to another budget?