Cap And Trade

[JOhnWaters 0]

this is just further use of force against private citizens and companies by the government.

[SAM_Hard8 50]

Oh, my turn, my turn:So it turns out that a bill aimed at reducing carbon emissions will end up hurting oil companies. Who could have possibly seen that one coming?

Yes oil companies shutting down American oil production and refining and making us even more dependent on foreign oil than ever is great for our country and economy.

[hblask 1]

Yes oil companies shutting down American oil production and refining and making us even more dependent on foreign oil than ever is great for our country and economy.

And the environment, too!!!Nope, no unintended consequences there.I think we may have to start calling Obama the "Unintended Consequences President", except I'm not sure it's unintended anymore, because nobody is this dumb.

[Sal Paradise 57]

you know what's hilarious? seems to me the best bet for the oil companies, i.e. mainly the refineries, is to now move overseas to places where it will be cheaper, like india or china, who also have next to zero environmental regulations, meaning this will lead to more pollution. that would be hilarious. staggering job losses plus more pollution than before.

[Balloon guy 158]

you know what's hilarious? seems to me the best bet for the oil companies, i.e. mainly the refineries, is to now move overseas to places where it will be cheaper, like india or china, who also have next to zero environmental regulations, meaning this will lead to more pollution. that would be hilarious. staggering job losses plus more pollution than before.

And then after a couple years the next president is faced with one of these unstable countries having so much control over the oil production for us and the world that it becomes necessary to invade this country to keep the flow of oil going for the good of the global economy.So now we have more pollution, more war and we're too broke to care because at least the massive military complex is keeping people employed

[hblask 1]

You'd think that someone in the administration would call up an oil executive and say, "Hey listen, we're thinking of taxing you to the point where you are uncompetitive in order to decrease pollution. What do you think will happen next?"Or they could ask an economist (not that guy pretending to be one in the NYT).Or use their brain.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

You'd think that someone in the administration would call up an oil executive and say, "Hey listen, we're thinking of taxing you to the point where you are uncompetitive in order to decrease pollution. What do you think will happen next?"Or they could ask an economist (not that guy pretending to be one in the NYT).Or use their brain.

Or maybe they're thinking bigger than a few losses at some oil companies. Maybe the rightly realize that oil is the way of the past, not the future. For the US to continue to be the most important nation in the world for the next century (not just the next 4 years) it will have to be a leader in whatever forms of alternative energy emerge. And at the same time, they are attempting to reduce the unhealthy amount of carbon that we pump into our atmosphere every year. Of course there legislation like this makes temporary jolts to the economy. But people adjust, and that's the point. I'm sure people were complaining about being uncompetitive when child labor laws were enacted, or when the clean water and air act was passed, or when a lot of other necessary regulatory legislation was passed. The point is that the US adjusts, the US evolves, and we will always be on top of the world. Our main advantage over the rest of the world isn't our cheap labor or our laissez-faire economic policy. It's the fact that, throughout the last century, we've been THE leader in technological, industrial, and academic advancement in the world. Green energy (along with incredible advances in biology and medicine, and possibly robotics) will be the driving forces of the next technological boom (in my opinion). I'm proud that our administration recognizes that and chooses to be a leader.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

Also, my earlier point was that it's ridiculous to access Cap and Trade based on the oil companies. It would be like a newspaper headline reading: "Anti crack legislation: crack heads don't like it."

[Balloon guy 158]

Or maybe they're thinking bigger than a few losses at some oil companies. Maybe the rightly realize that oil is the way of the past, not the future. For the US to continue to be the most important nation in the world for the next century (not just the next 4 years) it will have to be a leader in whatever forms of alternative energy emerge. And at the same time, they are attempting to reduce the unhealthy amount of carbon that we pump into our atmosphere every year. Of course there legislation like this makes temporary jolts to the economy. But people adjust, and that's the point. I'm sure people were complaining about being uncompetitive when child labor laws were enacted, or when the clean water and air act was passed, or when a lot of other necessary regulatory legislation was passed. The point is that the US adjusts, the US evolves, and we will always be on top of the world. Our main advantage over the rest of the world isn't our cheap labor or our laissez-faire economic policy. It's the fact that, throughout the last century, we've been THE leader in technological, industrial, and academic advancement in the world. Green energy (along with incredible advances in biology and medicine, and possibly robotics) will be the driving forces of the next technological boom (in my opinion). I'm proud that our administration recognizes that and chooses to be a leader.

I have seen the light.Hopefully this administration will also outlaw all internal combustion engines tomorrow, because it also is the way of the past.Until we take the leadership role of forcing people to walk, they will never get around to inventing the gravi-car which will manipulate gravity via magnets and fusion and will allow us to 'drive' anywhere for free at 4-5 mph.I think everyone should follow this government's lead and quit their job now, because your current job is a thing of the past and your next job could be much better. No reason to have any groundwork in place before you do this, just quit your job and then you'll have more time to look for a better one.

[Balloon guy 158]

Also, my earlier point was that it's ridiculous to access Cap and Trade based on the oil companies. It would be like a newspaper headline reading: "Anti crack legislation: crack heads don't like it."

You are focusing on oil companies too much.There are also coal, natural gas and electricity companies that will be affected.Oh and everyone who uses those products

[LongLiveYorke 38]

There are also coal, natural gas and electricity companies that will be affected.

One of my hopes is that the new law will inspire both old and new coal plants to utilize new technology that can virtually limit their emissions. This is a nice article:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/opinion/...coal&st=cse

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

And at the same time, they are attempting to reduce the unhealthy amount of carbon that we pump into our atmosphere every year. Of course there legislation like this makes temporary jolts to the economy. But people adjust, and that's the point. I'm sure people were complaining about being uncompetitive when child labor laws were enacted, or when the clean water and air act was passed, or when a lot of other necessary regulatory legislation was passed. The point is that the US adjusts, the US evolves, and we will always be on top of the world. Our main advantage over the rest of the world isn't our cheap labor or our laissez-faire economic policy. It's the fact that, throughout the last century, we've been THE leader in technological, industrial, and academic advancement in the world. Green energy (along with incredible advances in biology and medicine, and possibly robotics) will be the driving forces of the next technological boom (in my opinion). I'm proud that our administration recognizes that and chooses to be a leader.

I think you are really really downplaying the actual results of this legislation. You seem to be ignoring that this affects more than just oil companies. Removing $9 trillion from the US economy isn't a temporary blip, especially at the expense of a statistically insignificant decrease in emissions. Let's suppose green technology is actually as on track as people claim. No matter where the oil companies are, if you don't incentivize them to help the process, green technology will take over at the same time, correct? So if the time horizon for switching to green power is the same, and you have the option to hurt the economy by moving those companies overseas - which actually will probably have a greater negative impact on the environment as they are less regulated before green energy comes - or keep them here, why would you do something that will make them leave?You don't speed up our time to green energy, you give the polluters incentive to move to a place where they have the ability to pollute more, you hurt the economy, and you don't actually reduce global emissions. How is this a good plan?

[hblask 1]

Or maybe they're thinking bigger than a few losses at some oil companies. Maybe the rightly realize that oil is the way of the past, not the future. For the US to continue to be the most important nation in the world for the next century (not just the next 4 years) it will have to be a leader in whatever forms of alternative energy emerge. And at the same time, they are attempting to reduce the unhealthy amount of carbon that we pump into our atmosphere every year. Of course there legislation like this makes temporary jolts to the economy. But people adjust, and that's the point. I'm sure people were complaining about being uncompetitive when child labor laws were enacted, or when the clean water and air act was passed, or when a lot of other necessary regulatory legislation was passed. The point is that the US adjusts, the US evolves, and we will always be on top of the world. Our main advantage over the rest of the world isn't our cheap labor or our laissez-faire economic policy. It's the fact that, throughout the last century, we've been THE leader in technological, industrial, and academic advancement in the world. Green energy (along with incredible advances in biology and medicine, and possibly robotics) will be the driving forces of the next technological boom (in my opinion). I'm proud that our administration recognizes that and chooses to be a leader.

But we're not talking about a few losses at a few oil companies, we are talking about tens of thousands of jobs shipped overseas for years to come, and not just in the oil industry, but in industries that use oil.And we're not talking about reducing CO2 -- there is no economic model by which replacing cheap, relatively clean oil with dirty polluting oil from overseas can reduce CO2. It's like Obama saying "we must reduce worldwide child prostitution, therefore, all people who attempt to use a child prostitute will be sent to live in the Thailand red light district". Even if the bill did as it's proponents claim (a claim that has no scientific or economic support), it would still only reduce the total atmospheric CO2 by fractions of a percent over the next 20 years -- not enough to make any meaningful difference to global warming by even the most generous models.Reality matters.So to sum up: we will lose tens of thousands of jobs during a recession for a program that, at best, will have neglible ecological impact but more likely will increase overall worldwide pollution, all the while causing a sudden increase in prices that will hit the poor the hardest. And people say libertarians lack compassion? Really? I think it would be difficult to create a less compassionate program than this one.

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

lol at henry and i make similar posts right on top of each other.

[hblask 1]

One of my hopes is that the new law will inspire both old and new coal plants to utilize new technology that can virtually limit their emissions. This is a nice article:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/29/opinion/...coal&st=cse

You may want to look up the history of government investment in alternative energy projects. Calculate the total amount spent and look at the actual results. You can start with the oil embargo of the 70s if you'd like, although that's not technically the beginning.Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

You may want to look up the history of government investment in alternative energy projects.

Did you read the article? It's highly critical of past US attempts at subsidizing energy technology.

[hblask 1]

Did you read the article? It's highly critical of past US attempts at subsidizing energy technology.

Of course the current attempt has to criticize the failed attempts of the past. If they just said "yeah, we're going to repeat the previous mistakes", they don't get funding. Part of the history of failed attempts is that each failed attempt was critical of all the previous failed attempts. And the reason why the continue to fail is they don't know the real flaw is not in the technology but in the process. The problem is deeper than throwing the bucket of money in the right direction, as the article shows. When economic decisions are made for political reasons, the results tend to be pretty terrible. This technology sounds too promising to be destroyed by political turf battles. Let's hope the government gets out of their way and lets it happen.

[gobears 0]

Doesn't matter who's in charge, you can bet the administration in charge will influence independent studies.EPA may have suppressed report skeptical of global warmingAs for Cap & Trade, since I didn't read the 300 pages I'll defer judgement. However, slamming it thru in the dead of night without discussion is obviously a huge minus.

[hblask 1]

However, slamming it thru in the dead of night without discussion is obviously a huge minus.

That didn't happen; Obama promised us 5 days to read the bill. He wouldn't lie to us.

[Naked_Cowboy 0]

Doesn't matter who's in charge, you can bet the administration in charge will influence independent studies.EPA may have suppressed report skeptical of global warming

i've been following this for a few days waiting for it to blow up, but it seems to not be getting a lot of play, which seems weird considering how absurd and yet likely the story is as more comes out about it.

[JOhnWaters 0]

the republican viewpoint is almost always right in regards to economics. this is a terrible plan. but isnt it interesting that the same republicans who rightly advocate freedom and individual rights in economics, like BalloonMan and Braveheart, turn their backs on freedom and individual rights when it comes to morals? isnt it funny that they revert to force by way of religious governmental action on that issue?the democrats are the opposite. here they want to force their religion (environmentalism) and socialism on economics. but when it comes to morals they are all about freedom and individual rights. they both agree, the initiation of force should be used. they are both wrong. the second option is freedom from force, in all regards. both sides of this argument need to see where they fail. you have to take democrats on morals and science, and republicans on economics.

[JOhnWaters 0]

i've been following this for a few days waiting for it to blow up, but it seems to not be getting a lot of play, which seems weird considering how absurd and yet likely the story is as more comes out about it.

people are more concerned with deaths of dancing pedophiles.

[Sal Paradise 57]

EPA may have suppressed report skeptical of global warming

jesus tap dancing christ, that was printed on the 26th. I regularly look at cnn and yahoo news. how am I hearing about this on a freaking poker forum??

[El Guapo 8]

lol at henry and i make similar posts right on top of each other.

I didn't see anything about underage thai hookers in your post.To LLY: You are a smart dude, like really really smart, how is this concept evading you so much?

[strategy's_touch 0]

I didn't see anything about underage thai hookers in your post.To LLY: You are a smart dude, like really really smart, how is this concept evading you so much?

I gotta say, if I had to pick the person most likely to be correct on global warming, my money is on the career scientist, as opposed to the accountant and IT nerd. but that's just me... however I am still squarely on the fence with cap'n trade.