This is what some experts are saying will happen with Obama's cap and trade joke of a bill. It has also been shown that it will cost our economy trillions and Amercans millions of jobs. Yet, he wants to use this oil spill crisis as a reason to push it through.
President Obama has a solution to the Gulf oil spill: $7-a-gallon gas.
That's a Harvard University study's estimate of the per-gallon price of the president's global-warming agenda. And Obama made clear this week that this agenda is a part of his plan for addressing the Gulf mess.
So what does global-warming legislation have to do with the oil spill?
Good question, because such measures wouldn't do a thing to clean up the oil or fix the problems that led to the leak.
The answer can be found in Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's now-famous words, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste -- and what I mean by that is it's an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before."
Oil-spill risks should be addressed directly -- such as finding out why the leak occurred and requiring new preventive measures or preparing an improved cleanup plan for the next incident. Cap-and-trade is no fix and would cause trillions of dollars in collateral economic damage along the way.
Emanuel was wrong. The administration shouldn't view each crisis -- including the oil spill -- as an opportunity to be exploited, but as a problem to be addressed. And America can't afford $7-a-gallon gas.
I just came across this link this morning and have only scanned it very superficially (working on researching info to address Rockdoc and PrintSmith's points in the global warming thread at the moment). It's the EPA's economic analysis of the American Power Act. Would love to discuss it in more detail with everyone (I really suck at economics, to be honest).
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/econom ... -14-10.pdf
from this website with other economic analyses:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/econom ... ml#apa2010
There are other economic analyses of addressing global warming out there, but I have to run. Will try to find them in my mass of bookmarked pages so I can post them too...Where's mtspike when you need him?!
"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther
The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill
Science Chic wrote: I just came across this link this morning and have only scanned it very superficially (working on researching info to address Rockdoc and PrintSmith's points in the global warming thread at the moment). It's the EPA's economic analysis of the American Power Act. Would love to discuss it in more detail with everyone (I really suck at economics, to be honest).
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/econom ... -14-10.pdf
from this website with other economic analyses:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/econom ... ml#apa2010
There are other economic analyses of addressing global warming out there, but I have to run. Will try to find them in my mass of bookmarked pages so I can post them too...Where's mtspike when you need him?!
I know I probably shouldn't say this but I don't think they have figured out how to surgically remove his lips from certain Mods arses on Pinecam.
Even though I almost always disagree with him, I enjoy a good debate with him once in a while.
The Viking wrote: This is what some experts are saying will happen with Obama's cap and trade joke of a bill. It has also been shown that it will cost our economy trillions and Amercans millions of jobs. Yet, he wants to use this oil spill crisis as a reason to push it through.
President Obama has a solution to the Gulf oil spill: $7-a-gallon gas.
I love how conservatives rail about the left-wing media and education establishment and say you can trust anything they report then don't mind quoting them when it suits their purpose.
I just recieved a reaming from a MOD from another unmentiond site in a PM over here, so I am just making sure people know that we can joke over here and still get along with everyone. Over here we let you know that you are allowed to remove the sticks from your arses before entering.
The Viking wrote: This is what some experts are saying will happen with Obama's cap and trade joke of a bill. It has also been shown that it will cost our economy trillions and Amercans millions of jobs. Yet, he wants to use this oil spill crisis as a reason to push it through.
President Obama has a solution to the Gulf oil spill: $7-a-gallon gas.
I love how conservatives rail about the left-wing media and education establishment and say you can trust anything they report then don't bother quoting them when it suits their purpose.
This was a Harvard study (very left wing) and I quoted them.
Sorry, I meant to say "don't MIND quoting them" rather than "don't BOTHER quoting them."
And I think 'can' should be 'can't'
Don't worry - we'll revise it 'till it's right... wait... "correct', not right, cuz that'd imply conservative which it ain't so it'd be left but we want the language to be right.... errr... correct..
"Whatever you are, be a good one." ~ Abraham Lincoln
Sorry, I meant to say "don't MIND quoting them" rather than "don't BOTHER quoting them."
And I think 'can' should be 'can't'
Don't worry - we'll revise it 'till it's right... wait... "correct', not right, cuz that'd imply conservative which it ain't so it'd be left but we want the language to be right.... errr... correct..
