posted
We dont have the money to spend our way into "going green" right now folks. Sorry...reports are coming out and it is worse than they thought. Home sales fell in March, jobless claims went up higher than expected...
and Obama wants to raise taxes to pay for all this new green future. Well lets get there when we have money to do such, not pretend investing money into it will creating millions and billions of "green jobs"
Right now its all about economics and natural resources are the best bet cost wise for us right now.
Do the green project in a few years when we have money. "infrastructure jobs" like building bridges will do what...make some road improvements and then the work is done..then what?
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.
IP: Logged |
posted
...IMO "go green" should be in EVERYONES face, everyday. People, (especially Americans), need a constant reminder of how wasteful we are on a day to day basis.
IMO, it is our poor decisions that have lead to both the economic and environmental crisis we face at the current time and therefore I believe it should be us that suffer the hardships that have resulted from our actions. It is neither right nor just for our decendants to suffer from our mistakes.
In addition, I believe it should be our actions that lead to the resolution of both these conflicts we face. To walk away now is simply walking away from our responsibilities. Is that how we want our children to remember us? Personally? I support Obama's plan.
NR.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
there will be many new jobs created by going green.
the economy is a big wheel, people need jobs. i understand the concern about affordability and low taxes, i've been beaching here for years about the spending without collecting the taxes.
people get rich by providing someone who can pay with something of value. people without money can't pay for valuable things.
there is nothing more valuable than a good place to live. we are seeing the destruction of our living space happen before our eyes all you have to do is look.
the idea behind low taxes is that "the people" know best how to spend their moeny. that is not a fact, that is n opinion, and my opinion on it has cahnged drmatically over the last few years.
bubbles, whether real estate or stock or what have you are caused by people who spend like idiots...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: We dont have the money to spend our way into "going green" right now folks. Sorry...reports are coming out and it is worse than they thought. Home sales fell in March, jobless claims went up higher than expected...
and Obama wants to raise taxes to pay for all this new green future. Well lets get there when we have money to do such, not pretend investing money into it will creating millions and billions of "green jobs"
Right now its all about economics and natural resources are the best bet cost wise for us right now.
Do the green project in a few years when we have money. "infrastructure jobs" like building bridges will do what...make some road improvements and then the work is done..then what?
Stop Mooing... and everyone who posted this far have been right except you of course lol ... This should of been done ages ago and going "green" now like Glass said will create present and future jobs... and industries...
-------------------- Let the world change you... And you can change the world.
posted
In my opinion "Going Green" needs to be renamed so folks like CCM don't get put off by the jargon. Think if it as 'full cost' economics.
Harvesting wind may indeed be a little more expensive than what the energy company charges for burning coal on the front end, but that isn't the full cost your community has to pay for that electricity.
There are no Superfund sites to be cleaned up after a wind turbine has been active for 10 years. No toxins leaching into the soil and water. No air quality worries for those who work on or live near a wind farm.
There are no lakes with elevated Mercury levels 500 miles away from a wind turbine, bio-accumulation worries don't exist.
There is no black-lung for workers at windmills. No wasting illnesses that rob a man of his strength and dignity.
In the long run "clean electricity" has the potential to be MUCH cheaper than the 'full cost' of what we are doing now.
Oh...as to those infrastructure jobs...the whole point is to provide jobs for a few years until the country's economy finds its equilibrium and can start creating jobs again without government intervention.
-------------------- No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Bigfoot: In my opinion "Going Green" needs to be renamed so folks like CCM don't get put off by the jargon. Think if it as 'full cost' economics.
Harvesting wind may indeed be a little more expensive than what the energy company charges for burning coal on the front end, but that isn't the full cost your community has to pay for that electricity.
There are no Superfund sites to be cleaned up after a wind turbine has been active for 10 years. No toxins leaching into the soil and water. No air quality worries for those who work on or live near a wind farm.
There are no lakes with elevated Mercury levels 500 miles away from a wind turbine, bio-accumulation worries don't exist.
There is no black-lung for workers at windmills. No wasting illnesses that rob a man of his strength and dignity.
In the long run "clean electricity" has the potential to be MUCH cheaper than the 'full cost' of what we are doing now.
Oh...as to those infrastructure jobs...the whole point is to provide jobs for a few years until the country's economy finds its equilibrium and can start creating jobs again without government intervention.
true dat...good post.
or maybe even sumpin like "clear costs" vs "hidden costs." Or maybe "delayed cost."
btw, and I know this is pedantic--but is a pet peeve of mine, so please bear with me: "toxins" refer to only a certain class of toxic compounds, biological in nature, containing proteins, such as snake venom, spider venom, plant poisons, etc. Does not include, for instance, heavy metals, PCBs, etc.
Ya, "hidden costs" is a huge overlook for society, not only for Superfund sites but also the local garbage dump...and everything in between.
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
Im not saying that being environmental stewards is bad. Im saying its getting out of control with people using severe disaster scenarios to scare people. People are making a killing off of this, and they will make even more off cap and trade if it goes through. Of COURSE we should have done this a long time ago. That is a no brainer. Love how this gets twisted.
-------------------- It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.
IP: Logged |
posted
Some are making a killing off of this green issue but no where near the killing the fossil fuels people mnake and have made the reason we have not went green years ago is because of the giant profits that there is to be made in fossil fuels and going green would hurt thoes financially to much that are in the fossil fuels industry.
A political change is what it is going to take and the end of lobbist then our politicians could start doing what is right for this country to do and become an example to the world such as france is when it comes to health care.
-------------------- Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Im not saying that being environmental stewards is bad. Im saying its getting out of control with people using severe disaster scenarios to scare people. People are making a killing off of this, and they will make even more off cap and trade if it goes through. Of COURSE we should have done this a long time ago. That is a no brainer. Love how this gets twisted.
Not to diminish your valid point but to juxtapose...some would say our last President took us to war over oil. Instead of people making a killing (and some were) people were killing, period. That's a mite bit worse than scaring people with what could be our future if we don't change our ways.
-------------------- No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.
IP: Logged |
April 27, 2009 U.S. will 'lead the way' on int'l climate plan, Secretary Clinton says By LISA FRIEDMAN, Greenwire
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called on leaders of the world's largest economies today to rein in greenhouse gas emissions and pledged that the United States will "lead the way."
In opening remarks to the Major Economies Forum on Energy and Climate, Clinton called climate change a "clear and present danger to our world" and told environment ministers from the world's 17 largest economies that the Obama administration is "fully engaged in negotiations toward a global emissions treaty."
"I assure you that the United States will work tirelessly toward a successful outcome of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change negotiations," Clinton said.
Seated around a table in the State Department's Loy Henderson Auditorium were ministers from Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, South Africa and the United Kingdom.
Officials from Denmark, which is hosting the U.N. climate conference in December, also are attending, as is U.N. climate chief Yvo de Boer.
As the world's biggest economies -- and the world's largest greenhouse gas emitters -- they and the United States have a "special responsibility" to address climate change, Clinton said. And, she said, that includes fast-growing countries like China and India, which so far have resisted calls to slash greenhouse gas output.
Together the gathered countries create more than 80 percent of the world's emissions. China and the United States alone are responsible for 41 percent of global greenhouse gas pollution, and last year China surpassed the United States as the world's largest contributor to global warming.
Clinton assured China and other emerging nations that the United States "wants you to grow" and is intent on finding solutions that will allow countries to combat climate change without stunting development.
"Of course, each economy here is different. Some, like mine, are responsible for past emissions; others for fast-growing current emissions," she said. "We may be at different stages of development ... but we all have to do our part."
Todd Stern, the Obama administration's climate envoy, will be leading the two days of discussions. The talks are expected to cover a range of issues, including how far nations will be willing to go in reducing emissions, and some bilaterial partnerships that could be established to spur low-carbon technology development.
President George W. Bush originally spearheaded the gatherings, calling them the Major Economies Meetings -- though many referred to them as the "major emitters meetings." Through the Bush years, though, many critics accused the administration of using the forum to undermine global U.N. talks toward a treaty.
Clinton today said the Obama administration wants the meetings to help smooth discussions in treaty talks, which are expected to come to a head in December at a major summit in Copenhagen.
Kevin Curtis, deputy director of the Pew Environment Group, issued a statement hailing the talks as a "much needed momentum boost" to climate change talks and called on the United States to propose significant financial support to help developing nations cope with the effects of climate change and adapt to a low-carbon future.
"By working with China and India toward common goals on climate change, President Obama is sending a clear signal to Congress that his administration is committed to addressing global warming and he is asking other countries to join him," Curtis said.
Copyright 2009 E&E Publishing. All Rights Reserved.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
