Cap and trade equals pack up and move out

[Skull Pilot]

California's 'Green Jobs' Experiment Isn't Going Well - WSJ.com

Now, as the Golden State prepares to implement this regulatory scheme, employers are howling. It's become clear to nearly everyone that the plan's backers have underestimated its negative impact and exaggerated the benefits. "We've been sold a false bill of goods," is how Republican Assemblyman Roger Niello, who has been the GOP's point man on environmental issues in the legislature, put it to me.

The environmental plan was built on the notion that imposing some $23 billion of new taxes and fees on households (through higher electricity bills) and employers will cost the economy nothing, while also reducing greenhouse gases. Almost no one believes that anymore except for the five members of the California Air Resources Board (CARB). This is the state's air-quality regulator, which voted unanimously in December to stick with the cap-and-trade system despite the recession. CARB justified its go-ahead by issuing what almost all experts agree is a rigged study on the economic impact of the cap-and-trade system. The study concludes that the plan "will not only significantly reduce California's greenhouse gas emissions, but will also have a net positive effect on California's economic growth through 2020."

One can only wonder if the federal government's version of this will be as bad or worse than the great state of California's.

My money is on worse because we all know the federal government does things bigger and more expensively than anyone else.

But hey it's a necessary adjustment so we can be green right? So what if businesses go bankrupt and people lose their jobs it's for the planet.

But when people say the economy needs to readjust to the bubble and recession is the price to pay, you proponents of cap and trade that have no problem sacrificing jobs as long as it's for a "green" reason rail that people can't be allowed to lose their jobs because of this recession and the taxpayers should prop up failing companies.

Smells like hypocrisy to me.

 

[editec]

I wish I understood this issue better.

I have been highly dubious all along that market forces (imposed by government fiat, at least) can make this nation greener.

Looks like the above is proving me right.

 

[dilloduck]

I wish I understood this issue better.

I have been highly dubious all along that market forces (imposed by government fiat, at least) can make this nation greener.

Looks like the above is proving me right.

Going green is someone's agenda to make themselves rich--they know full well it won't help the economy.

 

[Lycurgus]

California's 'Green Jobs' Experiment Isn't Going Well - WSJ.com

Now, as the Golden State prepares to implement this regulatory scheme, employers are howling. It's become clear to nearly everyone that the plan's backers have underestimated its negative impact and exaggerated the benefits. "We've been sold a false bill of goods," is how Republican Assemblyman Roger Niello, who has been the GOP's point man on environmental issues in the legislature, put it to me.

The environmental plan was built on the notion that imposing some $23 billion of new taxes and fees on households (through higher electricity bills) and employers will cost the economy nothing, while also reducing greenhouse gases. Almost no one believes that anymore except for the five members of the California Air Resources Board (CARB). This is the state's air-quality regulator, which voted unanimously in December to stick with the cap-and-trade system despite the recession. CARB justified its go-ahead by issuing what almost all experts agree is a rigged study on the economic impact of the cap-and-trade system. The study concludes that the plan "will not only significantly reduce California's greenhouse gas emissions, but will also have a net positive effect on California's economic growth through 2020."

One can only wonder if the federal government's version of this will be as bad or worse than the great state of California's.

My money is on worse because we all know the federal government does things bigger and more expensively than anyone else.

But hey it's a necessary adjustment so we can be green right? So what if businesses go bankrupt and people lose their jobs it's for the planet.

But when people say the economy needs to readjust to the bubble and recession is the price to pay, you proponents of cap and trade that have no problem sacrificing jobs as long as it's for a "green" reason rail that people can't be allowed to lose their jobs because of this recession and the taxpayers should prop up failing companies.

Smells like hypocrisy to me.

Hmmmm ............... It may go as well as Hawaii's experiment with Nationalized Healthcare for children.