Everybody's favorite hoax is back!

[locobob]

Do you believers see any correlation in existing global warming governmental policies and the current U.S. economy? Is it possible many businesses outsourced jobs due to silly ideas like carbon credits and emission markets?

I don't consider protecting our environment silly, what good is man-made "progress" if we destroy our home in the process?
Sadly our government has allowed business to do an easy end run around environmental and labor laws by outsourcing. We should instead be using tariffs to discourage foreign behavior that we ourselves have outlawed.
An analogy: We have outlawed burglary in the U.S. but are gladly buying the stolen property from burglaries perpetrated in other countries. Out of sight - out of mind right?

 

[rufus]

So tariffs would fix this? How can making almost everything even more expensive solve global warming and/or the economy? Makes no sense.

 

[locobob]

So tariffs would fix this? How can making almost everything even more expensive solve global warming and/or the economy? Makes no sense.

The cost is always there, its just a matter of how, when and by who it is paid. In business school a cost not directly born by the business is referred to as an externality. Our "free trade" policies are simply a way of externalizing costs onto less developed nations - they breath the polluted air instead of us, their people work in sweatshop conditions instead of ours. Problem is these are short sited policies - the ill effects of them are already coming home to roost.
There are two ways to deal with this:
1. A race to the bottom i.e. throw out all the rules and everyone plays dirty. We have been there before so we know what this looks like, the l800's - early 1900's.
2. Hold others to the standards we have deemed just and proper for ourselves. Want to do business with us? Then you will either play by our rules or we will slap a premium on your goods to restore a level playing field.

 

[rufus]

2. Hold others to the standards we have deemed just and proper for ourselves. Want to do business with us? Then you will either play by our rules or we will slap a premium on your goods to restore a level playing field.

So just about everything imported into the US goes up in price. That will fix it. Wal-Mart hikes prices accordingly, causing the poor disproportionate suffering and anguish. Is that what you want?

 

[dmancornell]

So how exactly will giving more money to the government fix the environment?

 

[Bigfoot]

The alarmists act as if the cost of acting on GW is just monetary. No the cost is in human lives.

For instance.

Burning corn in our cars has doubled it's price and poor people in third world countries die.

Driving up the price of energy by banning carbon based fuels and substituting expensive windmill power that doesn't work in excessively cold or windy conditions kills poor people.

Britain has hundreds of years of their energy needs in coal. The greens in the government banned it. They're also trying to shut down the nuclear plants and poor people die. They call it Fuel Poverty.

This isn't just a fun game of choosing sides and arguing.

Tell me this alarmists, why do you hate poor people?


Cold kills 180 British pensioners a day during winter - Yahoo!

180 pensioners died every day as a result of cold conditions during the 2010-11 winter months in England and Wales.

The annual ‘Excess winter mortality' report found that an estimated 21,800 people over the age of 65 died as a result of adverse conditions, on top of the average mortality rate for the same period of time (4 months from December 2010 to March 2011).

Over-65s accounted for 84% of the overall 25,700 ‘excess' deaths during the winter months.

"The numbers of excess winter deaths are a disgrace," said Michelle Mitchell, charity director of Age UK. "We like to think of ourselves as a civilised society which protects the most vulnerable but the numbers of older people who do not survive the winter here is far higher than most European countries where the weather is far colder.

"These deaths are the tip of an iceberg of illness, misery and anxiety which grips Britain every winter," she added. "The Government must do more to tackle fuel poverty and ensure that housing is better insulated."

Latest estimates from the Hills Review suggest that 4.1 million homes in Britain are living in fuel poverty – being forced to spend over 10% of household income to keep a "satisfactory" heating condition. Fresh concerns have also emerged over the rise of energy prices over recent months as EDF, British Gas, npower, Scottish Power, Scottish and Southern Energy and E. ON have all hiked prices- taking the average household energy bill up £161.

"Many of our poorest pensioners, families and disabled people, put their health at risk by having to choose between heating their homes or putting food on the table this winter," said Audrey Gallacher, director of energy at Consumer Focus. "This is one of the most pressing and neglected concerns facing the government's energy strategy.

"Recent energy price hikes have left fuel poverty levels soaring, with energy bills almost double what they were five years ago," she added. "With around nine million people in England living in fuel poverty under the current measure, this has been a running sore for successive governments and we desperately need a coherent plan to address it."

Consumer Focus estimates that the spike in energy prices could see 5.1 million homes facing fuel poverty.

 

[CharonPDX]

Do you believers see any correlation between existing global warming governmental policies and the current U.S. economy? Is it possible many businesses outsourced jobs due to silly ideas like carbon credits and emission markets?

That would be an interesting causation, considering we HAVE no carbon credits and emissions markets at the moment, other than for specific already-heavily-regulated industries like mercury emissions from coal power plants. In fact, there are THRIVING markets for carbon credits outside the US, where companies are MAKING money by trading and dealing in them. Companies that can improve their emissions beyond the requirements due to high technology (creating more jobs,) can earn even MORE money by trading their excess credits.

And in most of the foreign plans (and in at least one that was proposed in the US) it would NOT be a revenue generator for the government. It would be pure money transfer between private companies. Yes, I am a bit biased - I live in Oregon, one of the states that would benefit most on a financial and job basis from improved pick-up of so-called "green" technologies. But it's still just plain good business sense.

 

[locobob]

So just about everything imported into the US goes up in price. That will fix it. Wal-Mart hikes prices accordingly, causing the poor disproportionate suffering and anguish. Is that what you want?

Yes that is what I want. Eliminating the externalities by putting them back into the cost of a good will re-balance the system and bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. This will result in higher wages for American workers which will offset the higher price tags. It would also have the beneficial effect of a decrease in carbon emissions - stemming from a more localized economy.

 

[Jamie6.5]

So what "green technologies" will help?

Solar panels have proven to cost more electricity to make than they produce over their service life. The bulk of the electricity used to make them is coal based, but the greenies seem to think that's okay, as long as it's China's coal fired electricity.
As if China doesn't reside on the same globe.

Windmills don't cut it, since the wind doesn't always blow. (they're hideous too)

Hydro is REALLY effective but the fish-folks claim it endangers anadromous fish runs.

Nuclear is really efficient, but costly, and the spent fuel is hazardous, and has a rather long half-life.

You greenies can't stand the thought of "drill baby drill," even though that's what paid for your way of life.

The best choice seems to be natural gas, but again, the greenies are paranoid that some evil "petro-monster" will make money off of it.

At the root of this whole issue is the desire to turn back the clock and insist that Americans give up their standard of living and abandon our consumeristic and capitalist ways.

To resurrect my favorite quote from the early '80s:

"Freeze to death in the dark you environmental b@stards!"

If you really want to offset carbon releases, (they don't make the stuff, they just release it from where nature "sequestered" it) just insist that corporations plant a grove of trees if they are engaged in a carbon dioxide releasing industry.
It's that simple.

And as for those that would make money off of others by trading carbon credits?
They are the same people wearing trench coats and selling "Rolex" watches in inner cities.

Hey buddy! Wanna buy a watch?

And the political influence they buy is worse than the political influence the petro-monsters buy IMO.

 

[Both Eyes Open]

The scientists have always been wrong!!! Global warming doesn't exist... Oh and the Earth is flat too.

 

[Jamie6.5]

The scientists have always been wrong!!! Global warming doesn't exist... Oh and the Earth is flat too.

"The scientists" can't seem to agree, so that means only some of them are wrong.
Global warming does exist,... Otherwise we'd still be in the grip of the last ice age. But if you think some insignificant little pizz-ant like man, that only inhabits about 2% of the earth's surface can change that, I believe you are sorely mistaken.

And sorry BEO, but the earth being round isn't subject to your opinion, or anyone else's for that matter.
Don't mix established fact with speculation.

The same people that can't tell you with certainty whether or not it will rain on your house next month, are telling you that the "climate" 100 years from now will be the end of life as we know it, if we don't move away from carbon based fuel.

And you have obviously "bought in" to that theory/speculation.
And you are prepared to kick an entire culture/society into the dustbin of history in your effort(s) to support that.

That's just wrong. Every bit as wrong as the "flat earthers."

 

[rufus]

Yes that is what I want. Eliminating the externalities by putting them back into the cost of a good will re-balance the system and bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. This will result in higher wages for American workers which will offset the higher price tags. It would also have the beneficial effect of a decrease in carbon emissions - stemming from a more localized economy.

Good luck with that. Luring manufacturing back into the US by dangling draconian eco-regulations and budget busting health-care mandates is not going to get it done. For a company (corporation!) to invest in manufacturing here again, they are going to need market and regulatory stability. Your tariff might artificially supply market stability for a while, but (are you listening CharonPDX?) even talking about emission markets and carbon credits is enough to send them packing. By declaring carbon dioxide a dangerous pollutant, the EPA can and will micro-manage every aspect of manufacturing. See the wood stove thread for example. This is anything but regulatory stability, and no one in their right mind is going to invest ten cents in manufacturing in the USA. Have you seen pictures of Detroit lately? That is what manufacturing in the USA looks like, and a good deal of it is due to eco-regulations and big brother EPA.

 

[chemist]

You go on right ahead and believe what you want - there are plenty of talk-radio gasbags who will happily tell you whatever you want to hear in exchange for piles of cash.

Personally, I don't believe everything that I THINK. Part of growing up is accepting that there are plenty of smart, educated, experienced, sincere, and hardworking specialists out there whose views derive from actual data, not trivia, non sequitur, and ad hominem attack.

It's certainly no mystery how we ended up with such craven, corrupt, venal governance in a nation that demands to be lied to - in a country swayed by superstitious belief in angels or ghosts, and a rejection of simple observations of the natural world.

Joe Cocker - Lie To Me (1999) - YouTube

 

[Both Eyes Open]

"The scientists" can't seem to agree, so that means only some of them are wrong.
Global warming does exist,... Otherwise we'd still be in the grip of the last ice age. But if you think some insignificant little pizz-ant like man, that only inhabits about 2% of the earth's surface can change that, I believe you are sorely mistaken.

And sorry BEO, but the earth being round isn't subject to your opinion, or anyone else's for that matter.
Don't mix established fact with speculation.

The same people that can't tell you with certainty whether or not it will rain on your house next month, are telling you that the "climate" 100 years from now will be the end of life as we know it, if we don't move away from carbon based fuel.

And you have obviously "bought in" to that theory/speculation.
And you are prepared to kick an entire culture/society into the dustbin of history in your effort(s) to support that.

That's just wrong. Every bit as wrong as the "flat earthers."

I actually never stated that I believed 100% in global warming. That is YOUR speculation. And you are "sorley mistaken". I just think that you anti's are hilarious with your opinions. You want to be right so bad that you are willing to dismiss entirely the chance that 7 billion (7,000,000,000) people have an affect on the planet. Yes, unlikely that 2% are making that big of a difference but some well educated people think that there is a chance. Why not consider the possiblity and make some minor changes that will only help. As for your Precentages, less than 30% is even land and less than half of that is wilderness, so where are all the carbon suckin trees at? They only cover around 10% of the planet! Not so different. Again, I am not a firm believer in anthropological global warming but I DO feel it necessary to accept the possibility! What I can't do is close my eyes and blindly believe that we can continue doing what we are doing and that things will all be just dandy!

 

[Jamie6.5]

"Simple observation of the natural world" here:
http://thoughtsoftheguru.com/2011/11/global-warming-cools/


Those solar decadal oscillations are a b*tch eh?

 

[Trlsmn]

You go on right ahead and believe what you want - there are plenty of talk-radio gasbags who will happily tell you whatever you want to hear in exchange for piles of cash.

Personally, I don't believe everything that I THINK. Part of growing up is accepting that there are plenty of smart, educated, experienced, sincere, and hardworking specialists out there whose views derive from actual data, not trivia, non sequitur, and ad hominem attack.

It's certainly no mystery how we ended up with such craven, corrupt, venal governance in a nation that demands to be lied to - in a country swayed by superstitious belief in angels or ghosts, and a rejection of simple observations of the natural world.

Joe Cocker - Lie To Me (1999) - YouTube

So you are saying man made global warming is a proven fact now?

 

[rufus]

Those solar decadal oscillations are a b*tch eh?

Yeah, that bright thing up in the sky does indeed have a lot to do with the temperature of Earth and the other planets orbiting around it. Stop it, stop making sense! lol

 

[Trlsmn]

I actually never stated that I believed 100% in global warming. That is YOUR speculation. And you are "sorley mistaken". I just think that you anti's are hilarious with your opinions. You want to be right so bad that you are willing to dismiss entirely the chance that 7 billion (7,000,000,000) people have an affect on the planet. Yes, unlikely that 2% are making that big of a difference but some well educated people think that there is a chance. Why not consider the possiblity and make some minor changes that will only help. As for your Precentages, less than 30% is even land and less than half of that is wilderness, so where are all the carbon suckin trees at? They only cover around 10% of the planet! Not so different. Again, I am not a firm believer in anthropological global warming but I DO feel it necessary to accept the possibility! What I can't do is close my eyes and blindly believe that we can continue doing what we are doing and that things will all be just dandy!

Wake up and smell the coffee, the people challenging that Global warming is not proven aren't doing it out of irresponsibility they are doing out of the understanding that any proposed " fix" will mean oppressive control and huge cost in taxes to us little people.

That push to profit from Global warming comes from the people that you OWS types are complaining about. It is the 1%'rs that will rake in the cash if you 99%'rs ignorantly allow yourselves to be hearded in to this Global warming scheme.

What's funny is none of you GW people see is that you are all unpaid propagandists for the very people that polute the most.

I don't need laws and taxes to make me live a frugal low carbon footprint life, I've been doing so long before most people complaining were born because it makes economic sense to me.

 

[Both Eyes Open]

Thank you TRLSMN for proposing a valid argument to the topic! This has much more merit than just denying that there is any possibility its happening. AND you're right. I don't think that it has been proven just as it hasn't been disproven.

 

[Nutty4Guns]

:cigar: