The cost of Cap and Trade

[alan1]

It's going to be about a million lost jobs.
It's going to hit the poor the hardest.

Read the factual research here, http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/wp6.pdf

 

[alan1]

More here, The Economic Impact of the Waxman-Markey Cap-and-Trade Bill

 

[immto]

Even if we use the ultra low estimate of "a postage stamp a day or $170 a year", That amounts to $7000 per household by the year 2050. Many sources have confirmed that if the Act works it will reduce the climate by a few tenths of a degree by that same year. Does 7 Grand sound like a good deal for a few tenths of a Degree?

If the Heritage Foundations estimates are correct it could double the average homes electricity bill and increase gas bills by over 50%. That would be allot more than $7000 by 2050. These figures don't say anything about the job situation. The Obama administration would have us believe that Green Jobs are going to save us. What about the jobs we will lose when big Manufactures move out to avoid this new huge cap and trade expense?

 

[alan1]

The real cost is another governmental grab of control and power over the people.
But, don't worry, the added bonus is more taxes that adversely affect those that can least afford it, the poor.

 

[WillowTree]

It's going to be about a million lost jobs.
It's going to hit the poor the hardest.

Read the factual research here, http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/wp6.pdf

I keep telling you people that the obamalama ding dong is going to subsidize the poor aka parasites with the earnings of the middle class aka supporters of the parasitic sector!

 

[alan1]

It's going to be about a million lost jobs.
It's going to hit the poor the hardest.

Read the factual research here, http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/wp6.pdf

I keep telling you people that the obamalama ding dong is going to subsidize the poor aka parasites with the earnings of the middle class aka supporters of the parasitic sector!

If you read the articles, you will see that the wealthy are hurt less by it.
On the flip side, the poor will become more dependent upon government. Thus creating more need for governmental control.

 

[Maple]

Austraili threw their cap and trade to the curb, Spain tried it and failed, they have an unemployment rate of 18 1/2 %, it does not sound like a good idea because it simply will not work. China and India are not going to do this. .More and more scientists are stating that there is no proof to this global warming theory.

We as humans release CO2 simply by exhaling, maybe we could get congress and this administration to hold their breaths, we would all be much better off as a country if they did.

 

[alan1]

Austraili threw their cap and trade to the curb, Spain tried it and failed, they have an unemployment rate of 18 1/2 %, it does not sound like a good idea because it simply will not work. China and India are not going to do this. .More and more scientists are stating that there is no proof to this global warming theory.

We as humans release CO2 simply by exhaling, maybe we could get congress and this administration to hold their breaths, we would all be much better off as a country if they did.

Don't give them any ideas. Do you want to be taxed for exhaling?

 

[Vel]

This is the press release/news article put out by our 6th district representative. We're in a region powered by TVA coal plants so I know there is NO way Bart Gordon can believe the crap that spewed out of his mouth on this. We will watch the "9000 new jobs" he mentions sprout wings and fly off south to Mexico if this legislation passes.

*****************************

Gordon applauds House passage of energy bill
WASHINGTON — Congressman Bart Gordon applauded the U.S. House’s passage of an energy bill that he believes will create jobs in new industries and put the United States on a clear path toward energy independence.
“I have given this legislation a lot of thought, and I am convinced it will not only benefit working families in Middle Tennessee, but is essential to our region’s economic future,” Gordon, D-Murfreesboro, said in a news release. “Jobs have been leaving our country and most of them aren’t coming back. This bill will create new industries in the energy sector for blue-collar workers. These new industries will have a ripple effect, creating new additional businesses that will supply parts and create even more jobs.”
“Nissan’s Smyrna plant and the new solar-technology plants in Clarksville and Cleveland, Tenn., are examples of the new energy industries this bill will bring about,” said Gordon. “Each plant will create thousands of new direct and indirect jobs. Nissan is a great example. Its new electric car plant will employee 1,300 people, but supply companies — the primary metal, electrical equipment, and plastics companies — will open up shop in the surrounding communities, and they are estimated to create more than 9,000 additional jobs.”




Gordon applauds House passage of energy bill | www.dnj.com | The Daily News Journal

 

[Navy1960]

It never ceases to amaze me that when people hear nonsense lfrom one line in a CBO report they don't bother to say to themselves " I wonder what else is in the report" So here's some food for thought...

The carbon cap would limit production of carbon-based fossil fuels and would cause the price of those fuels to rise--with price increases reflecting each fuel's allowance requirements and, hence, its carbon content.(6) Those price increases would raise firms' and households' costs, encouraging them to decrease their consumption of fossil fuels and energy-intensive goods and services. (For example, households might drive less, and utilities might replace coal with lower-carbon-emitting fuels, such as natural gas or renewable sources of energy.) As a result, households and businesses throughout the economy would have an incentive to reduce all forms of carbon consumption and thus carbon emissions. Higher prices would not only encourage the use of existing technologies but would also provide an incentive for innovations to improve energy efficiency. (Similar economic incentives would result from a tax on the carbon content of fossil fuels.)

In contrast, a sector-specific (or otherwise limited) downstream trading program would confine incentives for cutting carbon emissions to one sector, although potentially lower-cost reductions could have been obtained from sources outside that sector. For example, a downstream system that was limited to electricity generators would not encourage emission reductions in the transportation sector, which accounts for roughly one-third of carbon emissions. Furthermore, as noted earlier, the cost of implementing a comprehensive downstream trading program could be prohibitive.
An Evaluation of Cap-and-Trade Programs for Reducing U.S. Carbon Emissions

Never heard those lines when they were quoting the CBO report did you! Let me see here, as long as it's not a direct tax, and prices go up anyway that doesn't count is the current method of thinking!

 

[alan1]

It never ceases to amaze me that when people hear nonsense lfrom one line in a CBO report they don't bother to say to themselves " I wonder what else is in the report" So here's some food for thought...

The carbon cap would limit production of carbon-based fossil fuels and would cause the price of those fuels to rise--with price increases reflecting each fuel's allowance requirements and, hence, its carbon content.(6) Those price increases would raise firms' and households' costs, encouraging them to decrease their consumption of fossil fuels and energy-intensive goods and services. (For example, households might drive less, and utilities might replace coal with lower-carbon-emitting fuels, such as natural gas or renewable sources of energy.) As a result, households and businesses throughout the economy would have an incentive to reduce all forms of carbon consumption and thus carbon emissions. Higher prices would not only encourage the use of existing technologies but would also provide an incentive for innovations to improve energy efficiency. (Similar economic incentives would result from a tax on the carbon content of fossil fuels.)

In contrast, a sector-specific (or otherwise limited) downstream trading program would confine incentives for cutting carbon emissions to one sector, although potentially lower-cost reductions could have been obtained from sources outside that sector. For example, a downstream system that was limited to electricity generators would not encourage emission reductions in the transportation sector, which accounts for roughly one-third of carbon emissions. Furthermore, as noted earlier, the cost of implementing a comprehensive downstream trading program could be prohibitive.
An Evaluation of Cap-and-Trade Programs for Reducing U.S. Carbon Emissions

Never heard those lines when they were quoting the CBO report did you! Let me see here, as long as it's not a direct tax, and prices go up anyway that doesn't count is the current method of thinking!

Of course not, the MSM is in lockstep with the big government control crowd.

 

[oreo]

It's going to be about a million lost jobs.
It's going to hit the poor the hardest.

Read the factual research here, http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/wp6.pdf

I keep telling you people that the obamalama ding dong is going to subsidize the poor aka parasites with the earnings of the middle class aka supporters of the parasitic sector!

In this bill they have already accomodated the dirt poor--by taking more from the middle class to pay for them.

But the real scary part to this bill is the 310 pages that democrats added at 3:09 am. in the late late night prior to the vote the next day.

In this 310 page amendment--they added several new governmental agencies--that will invade every local building department in this country. FOR WHAT? I don't know because as a builder myself we are already under the jurisdiction of the UBC (Uniform building code). This is nothing more than an unneccessary--deliberate power grab. They will also be re-training "local" real estate appraisors--in order--so these appraisors will be able to value any insulation//energy efficient systems. Give me a break!!!! Appraisors already know the value of these items & already include it in their appraisals.

To add--this amendment adds money to people who own forest land--who will be paid to NOT cut down trees--along with money going to foreign countries to do the same, plus we will be paying for foreign countries to re-forest.

THIS BILL ENDS UP COSTING BILLIONS! It's a piece of crap bill--that is full of political pay-offs--in order to bribe democrat congressmen who were not orginally going to vote for this piece of junk. One congressmen from Florida will receive 50 MILLION dollars for a new hurricane center. They bought his vote with our money.

 

[oreo]

This is the press release/news article put out by our 6th district representative. We're in a region powered by TVA coal plants so I know there is NO way Bart Gordon can believe the crap that spewed out of his mouth on this. We will watch the "9000 new jobs" he mentions sprout wings and fly off south to Mexico if this legislation passes.

*****************************

Gordon applauds House passage of energy bill
WASHINGTON — Congressman Bart Gordon applauded the U.S. House’s passage of an energy bill that he believes will create jobs in new industries and put the United States on a clear path toward energy independence.
“I have given this legislation a lot of thought, and I am convinced it will not only benefit working families in Middle Tennessee, but is essential to our region’s economic future,” Gordon, D-Murfreesboro, said in a news release. “Jobs have been leaving our country and most of them aren’t coming back. This bill will create new industries in the energy sector for blue-collar workers. These new industries will have a ripple effect, creating new additional businesses that will supply parts and create even more jobs.”
“Nissan’s Smyrna plant and the new solar-technology plants in Clarksville and Cleveland, Tenn., are examples of the new energy industries this bill will bring about,” said Gordon. “Each plant will create thousands of new direct and indirect jobs. Nissan is a great example. Its new electric car plant will employee 1,300 people, but supply companies — the primary metal, electrical equipment, and plastics companies — will open up shop in the surrounding communities, and they are estimated to create more than 9,000 additional jobs.”




Gordon applauds House passage of energy bill | www.dnj.com | The Daily News Journal

DITTO---manufacturing in this country does not need a higher utility bill. They will be hit the hardest--& when costs go up--in order to compete in a global market--they will shut down operations here & head to friendlier nations to open up new plants.

 

[oreo]

Austraili threw their cap and trade to the curb, Spain tried it and failed, they have an unemployment rate of 18 1/2 %, it does not sound like a good idea because it simply will not work. China and India are not going to do this. .More and more scientists are stating that there is no proof to this global warming theory.

We as humans release CO2 simply by exhaling, maybe we could get congress and this administration to hold their breaths, we would all be much better off as a country if they did.

Here is a good article to further your comments on Australia:

Steve Fielding recently asked the Obama administration to reassure him on the science of man-made global warming. When the administration proved unhelpful, Mr. Fielding decided to vote against climate-change legislation.

If you haven't heard of this politician, it's because he's a member of the Australian Senate. As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is preparing to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme. Why? A growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again doubt the science of human-caused global warming.

Steve Fielding
Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers." The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S.

In April, the Polish Academy of Sciences published a document challenging man-made global warming. In the Czech Republic, where President Vaclav Klaus remains a leading skeptic, today only 11% of the population believes humans play a role. In France, President Nicolas Sarkozy wants to tap Claude Allegre to lead the country's new ministry of industry and innovation. Twenty years ago Mr. Allegre was among the first to trill about man-made global warming, but the geochemist has since recanted. New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.

The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief. Dr. Kiminori Itoh, a Japanese environmental physical chemist who contributed to a U.N. climate report, dubs man-made warming "the worst scientific scandal in history." Norway's Ivar Giaever, Nobel Prize winner for physics, decries it as the "new religion." A group of 54 noted physicists, led by Princeton's Will Happer, is demanding the American Physical Society revise its position that the science is settled. (Both Nature and Science magazines have refused to run the physicists' open letter.)

The collapse of the "consensus" has been driven by reality. The inconvenient truth is that the earth's temperatures have flat-lined since 2001, despite growing concentrations of C02. Peer-reviewed research has debunked doomsday scenarios about the polar ice caps, hurricanes, malaria, extinctions, rising oceans. A global financial crisis has politicians taking a harder look at the science that would require them to hamstring their economies to rein in carbon.

Strassel: The Climate Change Climate Change - WSJ.com


The audacity & ignorance of man to believe that since he has been on this planet-- a blink of an eye in earth terms-- can try to manipulate or control mother nature is simply incomprehensible. Let alone to go after CO2 emissions--a gas that this planet needs to survive. Without it--there would be no life on earth.

 

[Navy1960]

Most polluted US cities
(By ozone pollution)
1. Los Angeles, California
2. Bakersfield, California
3. Visalia, California
4. Fresno, California
5. Houston, Texas
6. Sacramento, California.
7. Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas
8. Charlotte, North Carolina
9. Phoenix, Arizona
10. El Centro, California
source: American Lung Association

Washington, DC - California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today signed on to an "historic agreement" between the Obama Administration, the State of California and automakers that will lead to the nationwide adoption of California's stringent vehicle emissions standards.

Under the agreement, the federal government will require a 30 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. This will mean that U.S. motor vehicles will be required to achieve a fleetwide standard of approximately 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016, four years earlier than federal law requires.

This is the first greenhouse gas emission limit by the federal government, and it is the direct result of California's action to control tailpipe emissions.
Imperial Valley News - Nationwide Adoption: California Vehicle Emissions Standards Endorsed by California Attorney General

Okay now we are going to adopt this wonderful standard that has been such a success, we are also going to adopt the CA. building codes across the nation. Had anyone happened to notice that Ca. is not exactly an example for how to manage Govt.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

We as humans release CO2 simply by exhaling, maybe we could get congress and this administration to hold their breaths, we would all be much better off as a country if they did.

Many celebrities have joined the Go Blue! movement lately. Environmentally conscious friends of the planet, on the cutting edge, taking the lead!

Stop Breathing Now!!!

 

[ScreamingEagle]

In this 310 page amendment--they added several new governmental agencies--that will invade every local building department in this country. FOR WHAT? I don't know because as a builder myself we are already under the jurisdiction of the UBC (Uniform building code). This is nothing more than an unneccessary--deliberate power grab. They will also be re-training "local" real estate appraisors--in order--so these appraisors will be able to value any insulation//energy efficient systems. Give me a break!!!! Appraisors already know the value of these items & already include it in their appraisals.

From what I'm hearing....there will now be a new Federal inspection/appraisal of your house before you can sell it....and then you must update it environmentally before you can sell it....

This is just another Federal tax you get to pay that will add to the coffers of government and the pockets of people like Al Gore...

and I'd like to know....where is the guy who lost his job now going to find the money to put in new windows in order to sell the home he can't afford anymore.....? ...maybe he will get a new job installing windows....since other businesses will be shutting down or leaving this country due to the cap and tax bill....

Also....what about all those old 100 year old homes with the desirable old-fashtioned wavy glass windows, leaded glass windows, etc.? Are they all going to be destroyed in this process? ....sure....why not....let's destroy more of our heritage...

Everybody's home is only a TARGET for more income for government......they just aren't satisfied with increasing annual home taxes and then more taxes when you sell.....you can own your home only if it is producing money for the government...

These new Federal inspections will probably be the point for installing monitoring systems of your energy usage.....another source of taxation.... should you use more than your alloted share....

ahhh....ain't Big Government grand....?

 

[Navy1960]

In the end, the president's furious lobbying -- coupled with a final push by allies including former Vice President Al Gore -- carried much weight. To a certain extent, the victory validated Obama's governing style -- and that could bode well for his other top domestic priority, health care. He faces an even more difficult test in shepherding the energy and climate legislation through the Senate.

Obama scores major, much-needed political victory on global warming: Analysis - cleveland.com

This is one of the factors I listed as the reasoning behind getting this disaster of a bill passed. Obama needed a political victory in congress to validate his agenda. The first one has been a disaster of epic proportions and his numbers have been slipping. So he was given one at the expense of the taxpayers. Let us hope that the Senate puts the American people before the political agenda of "enviro-business"

 

[Midnight Marauder]

Will this ridiculous and dangerous bill make it through the Senate, is the question before us now. That and how much MORE ridiculous and dangerous will they make it, in order to get it through?

 

[Navy1960]

Today's razor-thin vote in the House spells doom in the Senate," Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) predicted to the Associated Press of the American Clean Energy and Security Act ( a.k.a. “cap and trade&#8221 immediately after the narrow 219-212 vote.

The legislation contains $842 billion in new taxes over 10 years plus an unknown cost of massive new energy regulations.

Inhofe was counting on history repeating itself. A similar measure back in 1993 was one of the touchstones for setting the stage for the Republican revolution of 1994, when incumbent Democrats were swept out of office in record numbers. “A lot of Democrat members got burnt on that vote,” GOP House Minority Leader John A. Boehner of Ohio told The Hill after the House vote. Even some Democrats agreed. "A lot of people walked the plank on a bill that will never become law," moderate Mississippi Democrat Gene Taylor told The Hill. Taylor, a Democrat repeatedly reelected in a Republican leaning district, voted against the bill.

“Cap and trade” Tax Fight Expected in Senate

Washington (AP) - Eight Senate Democrats are opposing speedy action on President Barack Obama's bill to combat global warming, complicating prospects for the legislation and creating problems for their party's leaders.

The eight Democrats disapprove of using the annual budget debate to pass Obama's "cap and trade" bill to fight greenhouse gas emissions, a measure that divides lawmakers, environmentalists and businesses. The lawmakers' opposition makes it more difficult for Democratic leaders to move the bill without a threat of a Republican filibuster.

The budget debate is the only way to circumvent Senate rules that allow a unified GOP to stop a bill through filibusters.
CNSNews.com - 8 Democrats Call for ‘Appropriate Time’ to Debate Global Warming Bill

It would appear that the bill in the Senate has a much tougher road than was in the house.