Unintended Consequences

[alan1]

And yet again we find that government stupidity screws things up
Report: Ethanol raises cost of nutrition programs
Snip,

Food stamps and child nutrition programs are expected to cost up to $900 million more this year because of increased ethanol use.

Higher use of the corn-based fuel additive accounted for about 10 percent to 15 percent of the rise in food prices between April 2007 and April 2008

Just in case you didn't know it, government regulations force fuel suppliers to put ethanol in gasoline.
As is typical of government mandates, the result is another unintended consequence, this time the result is an increase in food costs. And just exactly who is hit hardest by increased food costs?
If you said the poor, step to the front of the class and collect your gold star for the day.
All these law makers in Washington are constantly telling us how they are trying to take care of the poor and the children, yet they exacerbate the problems the poor have by forcing things like ethanol usage in gasoline. Then they turn around and insist they need more tax money to help the poor people that they just fucked over with their stupid mandate.
Never underestimate the collective power of congressional stupidity.

 

[American Horse]

And yet again we find that government stupidity screws things up
Report: Ethanol raises cost of nutrition programs
Snip,

Food stamps and child nutrition programs are expected to cost up to $900 million more this year because of increased ethanol use.

Higher use of the corn-based fuel additive accounted for about 10 percent to 15 percent of the rise in food prices between April 2007 and April 2008

Just in case you didn't know it, government regulations force fuel suppliers to put ethanol in gasoline.
As is typical of government mandates, the result is another unintended consequence, this time the result is an increase in food costs. And just exactly who is hit hardest by increased food costs?
If you said the poor, step to the front of the class and collect your gold star for the day.
All these law makers in Washington are constantly telling us how they are trying to take care of the poor and the children, yet they exacerbate the problems the poor have by forcing things like ethanol usage in gasoline. Then they turn around and insist they need more tax money to help the poor people that they just fucked over with their stupid mandate.
Never underestimate the collective power of congressional stupidity.

Ask youself: which side of the political spectrum misjudging unintended consequences benifits?

 

[KittenKoder]

Um .. people warned them of this long before now, unintended my ass. More like ignorance ...

 

[Meister]

And yet again we find that government stupidity screws things up
Report: Ethanol raises cost of nutrition programs
Snip,

Food stamps and child nutrition programs are expected to cost up to $900 million more this year because of increased ethanol use.

Higher use of the corn-based fuel additive accounted for about 10 percent to 15 percent of the rise in food prices between April 2007 and April 2008

Just in case you didn't know it, government regulations force fuel suppliers to put ethanol in gasoline.
As is typical of government mandates, the result is another unintended consequence, this time the result is an increase in food costs. And just exactly who is hit hardest by increased food costs?
If you said the poor, step to the front of the class and collect your gold star for the day.
All these law makers in Washington are constantly telling us how they are trying to take care of the poor and the children, yet they exacerbate the problems the poor have by forcing things like ethanol usage in gasoline. Then they turn around and insist they need more tax money to help the poor people that they just fucked over with their stupid mandate.
Never underestimate the collective power of congressional stupidity.

Good post...but it just didn't go far enough. If Barry gets his 'Cap & Trade" passed...once again the poor will be hit the hardest. I don't think the poor can afford to have the democrats looking out for them.

 

[Old Rocks]

And yet again we find that government stupidity screws things up
Report: Ethanol raises cost of nutrition programs
Snip,

Food stamps and child nutrition programs are expected to cost up to $900 million more this year because of increased ethanol use.

Higher use of the corn-based fuel additive accounted for about 10 percent to 15 percent of the rise in food prices between April 2007 and April 2008

Just in case you didn't know it, government regulations force fuel suppliers to put ethanol in gasoline.
As is typical of government mandates, the result is another unintended consequence, this time the result is an increase in food costs. And just exactly who is hit hardest by increased food costs?
If you said the poor, step to the front of the class and collect your gold star for the day.
All these law makers in Washington are constantly telling us how they are trying to take care of the poor and the children, yet they exacerbate the problems the poor have by forcing things like ethanol usage in gasoline. Then they turn around and insist they need more tax money to help the poor people that they just fucked over with their stupid mandate.
Never underestimate the collective power of congressional stupidity.

Good post...but it just didn't go far enough. If Barry gets his 'Cap & Trade" passed...once again the poor will be hit the hardest. I don't think the poor can afford to have the democrats looking out for them.

Tell that to the millions that are out of work due to the deregulation of financial transactions. A la Phil Gramm and the Republicans.

And Bush pushed food based ethanol as hard as anybody. Many, myself included, thought it stupid from the start. Cellulostic, or algea based, but not food based.

 

[PubliusInfinitum]

And yet again we find that government stupidity screws things up
Report: Ethanol raises cost of nutrition programs
Snip,


Just in case you didn't know it, government regulations force fuel suppliers to put ethanol in gasoline.
As is typical of government mandates, the result is another unintended consequence, this time the result is an increase in food costs. And just exactly who is hit hardest by increased food costs?
If you said the poor, step to the front of the class and collect your gold star for the day.
All these law makers in Washington are constantly telling us how they are trying to take care of the poor and the children, yet they exacerbate the problems the poor have by forcing things like ethanol usage in gasoline. Then they turn around and insist they need more tax money to help the poor people that they just fucked over with their stupid mandate.
Never underestimate the collective power of congressional stupidity.

Good post...but it just didn't go far enough. If Barry gets his 'Cap & Trade" passed...once again the poor will be hit the hardest. I don't think the poor can afford to have the democrats looking out for them.

Tell that to the millions that are out of work due to the deregulation of financial transactions. A la Phil Gramm and the Republicans.

And Bush pushed food based ethanol as hard as anybody. Many, myself included, thought it stupid from the start. Cellulostic, or algea based, but not food based.

ROFLMNAO... Yes, GW bit hard on the Leftist notion of Ethanol... He was a uniter... often lending credience to leftism... He really felt it important; he beleived that leftists are Americans and that their ideas were just as worthy of consideration as anyone elses...

Which is the formula for 27% popularity... try to please everyone and NO ONE is pleased.

Of course GW was wrong then and he's wrong today... Leftists, such as you Rocks, are idiots. There's nothing remotely worthy in your feelings... You're a moderate, so you're feelings change with the wind, what you think is a great idea today, will be a TERRIBLE IDEA NEXT WEEK... and you'll have absolutely NO recollection that you ever stood FOR that terrible idea... it will have always been a terrible idea, and there will be no telling you otherwise. It's the perogative of the ladies.... although not all Ladies take it; just the irrational ones.

But the fact remains that ethanol is a fine alternative to gasoline... or a decent supplement to it... of course that doesn't mean it's a good idea AS A REPLACEMENT for gasoline, or that we should dedicate massive quantities of agriculture towards such... it simply means that IF one is low on gasoline, and has access to the means to sufficient quantities of such that one can use ethanol to get you TO THE GAS STATION.

Left-think is the search for the easier way friends... and the easier way ALWAYS COMES AT A PREMIUM... WITHOUT EXCEPTION. Children spend a LOT of time searching for an easier way... because they lack the experience to know that the time they spend searching for the easier way is time they could have used to have simply done the job right, the first time, which would have resulted in that positive self esteem that they are chronically missing... BECAUSE OF ALL THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES which resulted FROM THEIR CHRONIC SEARCH FOR THE ETHEREAL "MIDDLE WAY."

I'd list some of the means by which leftists have screwed themselves, but to do that would turn this post into something that required effort to read through, so they'd never see it anyway.

Maybe we'll just make a new thread...

 

[editec]

Here's a thought...good regulatory policy works well and bad regulatory policies don't.

Pretty radical, huh?

As to Ethanol?

People on sides of the aisle supported it, and people on both sides of the aisle objected to it.

Who was enthanol's most obvious supporter?

Bob Dole.

Don't you all remember when he was the spokeman for it?

 

[Meister]

And yet again we find that government stupidity screws things up
Report: Ethanol raises cost of nutrition programs
Snip,


Just in case you didn't know it, government regulations force fuel suppliers to put ethanol in gasoline.
As is typical of government mandates, the result is another unintended consequence, this time the result is an increase in food costs. And just exactly who is hit hardest by increased food costs?
If you said the poor, step to the front of the class and collect your gold star for the day.
All these law makers in Washington are constantly telling us how they are trying to take care of the poor and the children, yet they exacerbate the problems the poor have by forcing things like ethanol usage in gasoline. Then they turn around and insist they need more tax money to help the poor people that they just fucked over with their stupid mandate.
Never underestimate the collective power of congressional stupidity.

Good post...but it just didn't go far enough. If Barry gets his 'Cap & Trade" passed...once again the poor will be hit the hardest. I don't think the poor can afford to have the democrats looking out for them.

Tell that to the millions that are out of work due to the deregulation of financial transactions. A la Phil Gramm and the Republicans.

And Bush pushed food based ethanol as hard as anybody. Many, myself included, thought it stupid from the start. Cellulostic, or algea based, but not food based.

I agree with you on this Old Rocks. That was a lame brain idea with the ethanol. See, I can rip Bush for stuff he did wrong, always have. On the other hand, why can't the liberals do the same with Obama? Obama has made mistakes, but the liberals will never call him out on it. That's just an observation.
Now, having said that...what the hell does that have to do with Cap and Trade hurting the poor? The poor are going to get hit with rising costs, and "fees" because of the current administration. The liberals will not stand up to the administration. This would be known as indoctrination, by the way.

 

[slackjawed]

Isn't this yet another example of government interference with private industry causing problems?
If the private sector had been left alone to make a profit, would they have used ethanol fuels if it was profitable?
We did not reelect one of our governors out of office for perpetrating a scam on the citizenry concerning propane powered cars. Governor Hull pushed through laws that actually paid thousands of dollars to cover the cost of owning a propane powered vehicle. The state lost so much money, it put our budget into the red, just that one program.
It does seem like a lot of the "green" scams,.....er laws, have usually run way over budget, and have not achieved the desired results. It does make people feel good though, and gives the government more control, maybe that is the real purpose.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

Um .. people warned them of this long before now, unintended my ass. More like ignorance ...

^^^ That's right... We've known this for ever now. They must've surely known... they just don't care.

 

[midcan5]

And a single fighter plane can cost over 100 million, so which values do we choose death or life.

 

[KittenKoder]

Um .. people warned them of this long before now, unintended my ass. More like ignorance ...

^^^ That's right... We've known this for ever now. They must've surely known... they just don't care.

When they first put ethanol on the table proponents mentioned that this will impact food prices (cannot remember the year but it was some years back) and were all called defeatists instead of taken seriously ... well ... now what's happening? It's amazing on how short sighted "green" and people who push for this are.

 

[Meister]

And a single fighter plane can cost over 100 million, so which values do we choose death or life.

??

 

[mash107]

Here's a thought...good regulatory policy works well and bad regulatory policies don't.

Pretty radical, huh?

As to Ethanol?

People on sides of the aisle supported it, and people on both sides of the aisle objected to it.

Who was enthanol's most obvious supporter?

Bob Dole.

Don't you all remember when he was the spokeman for it?

Most 'good' regulatory policies have dire unintended consequences as well, ala the housing bubble and collapse of many banks.

But it's not ignorance. It's not that they don't care. It's that they can be convinced to support regulation that destroys competition by those that benefit from such regulation. Obviously, this whole system is immoral and anti-free market, but that's why we're in the shape we're in.

 

[editec]

Um .. people warned them of this long before now, unintended my ass. More like ignorance ...

^^^ That's right... We've known this for ever now. They must've surely known... they just don't care.

When they first put ethanol on the table proponents mentioned that this will impact food prices (cannot remember the year but it was some years back) and were all called defeatists instead of taken seriously ... well ... now what's happening? It's amazing on how short sighted "green" and people who push for this are.

Yes it is.

I have often noted that my fellow conservation advocates don't think past immediate solutions.

However, this particualr GREEN movement (ethanol) was most heavily promoted by the agriculatural corproations and their shill was BOB DOLE.,, a SUPER REPUBLICAN.

 

[KittenKoder]

^^^ That's right... We've known this for ever now. They must've surely known... they just don't care.

When they first put ethanol on the table proponents mentioned that this will impact food prices (cannot remember the year but it was some years back) and were all called defeatists instead of taken seriously ... well ... now what's happening? It's amazing on how short sighted "green" and people who push for this are.

Yes it is.

I have often noted that my fellow conservation advocates don't think past immediate solutions.

However, this particualr GREEN movement (ethanol) was most heavily promoted by the agriculatural corproations and their shill was BOB DOLE.,, a SUPER REPUBLICAN.

You will notice I tend to avoid political affiliations on such matters, because I don't think it has much weight in it really. The people who pushed it were idiots for the reason that they're .... idiots.

 

[alan1]

When they first put ethanol on the table proponents mentioned that this will impact food prices (cannot remember the year but it was some years back) and were all called defeatists instead of taken seriously ... well ... now what's happening? It's amazing on how short sighted "green" and people who push for this are.

Yes it is.

I have often noted that my fellow conservation advocates don't think past immediate solutions.

However, this particualr GREEN movement (ethanol) was most heavily promoted by the agriculatural corproations and their shill was BOB DOLE.,, a SUPER REPUBLICAN.

You will notice I tend to avoid political affiliations on such matters, because I don't think it has much weight in it really. The people who pushed it were idiots for the reason that they're .... idiots.

Indeed.
My OP mentioned nothing about political affiliation, it was direct commentary to government at large and the idiots that run it.

 

[editec]

When they first put ethanol on the table proponents mentioned that this will impact food prices (cannot remember the year but it was some years back) and were all called defeatists instead of taken seriously ... well ... now what's happening? It's amazing on how short sighted "green" and people who push for this are.

Yes it is.

I have often noted that my fellow conservation advocates don't think past immediate solutions.

However, this particualr GREEN movement (ethanol) was most heavily promoted by the agriculatural corproations and their shill was BOB DOLE.,, a SUPER REPUBLICAN.

You will notice I tend to avoid political affiliations on such matters, because I don't think it has much weight in it really. The people who pushed it were idiots for the reason that they're .... idiots.

Fair enough.

I'm mostly responding to the asides many are putting into this which imply that Ethanol was a liberal/conservationist plot.

It was mostly something that multibillion dollars agricultural corporations paid whores like Bob Dole to shill for them.

 

[KittenKoder]

Yes it is.

I have often noted that my fellow conservation advocates don't think past immediate solutions.

However, this particualr GREEN movement (ethanol) was most heavily promoted by the agriculatural corproations and their shill was BOB DOLE.,, a SUPER REPUBLICAN.

You will notice I tend to avoid political affiliations on such matters, because I don't think it has much weight in it really. The people who pushed it were idiots for the reason that they're .... idiots.

Fair enough.

I'm mostly responding to the asides many are putting into this which imply that Ethanol was a liberal/conservationist plot.

It was mostly something that multibillion dollars agricultural corporations paid whores like Bob Dole to shill for them.

I won't argue that.

The point I was making is that this is an example of how environuts swallow this crap too easily without thinking long term (environuts tend to be more liberals but are not exclussively liberals, not are all liberals environuts).

 

[WillowTree]

Here's a thought...good regulatory policy works well and bad regulatory policies don't.

Pretty radical, huh?

As to Ethanol?

People on sides of the aisle supported it, and people on both sides of the aisle objected to it.

Who was enthanol's most obvious supporter?

Bob Dole.

Don't you all remember when he was the spokeman for it?

so why haven't the Dems who have ruled the roost since 2006 lifted the tariff on sugar based ethanol doyathink????