I probably should not even comment but I cannot ever shut up. I totally agree with what you said. I am very sorry if your thread gets deleted. For some reason they are being deleted more and more these days. I just hope this does not happen to this one since this is a really good debate subject.
I think the best way to have control over any form of pollution is to provide financial incentives to companies that do that such as companies that can produce affordable hybrid cars or "green" energy sources. Once it involves more regulations it generally makes companies feel uneasy and of course financially unsafe and relocate to countries where there aren't any rational forms of control of pollution and the people there have to live with it (and of course the loss of American jobs). I'd prefer a reasonable solution than more complex regulations but that is not the way things are usually done unfortunately.
You are a very good voice of reason. This is how people with differing political views can normally have a healthy debate and also connect on the issues we can agree on - thanks!
I absolutly disagree and hope it doesnt get passed by the Senate ..our energy bills will double .I also saw that OBama had made it clear that HE wanted it passed......
Here's another reason I vehemently don't want this legislation to be passed. Cap and Trade legislation is based on the notion that climate change (notice I did NOT say global warming) is man-made.
For one this is a HUGE hoax that is making BIG BUCKS, but it is the epitome of fear-mongering. If Big Brother can get we the little people scared, he (BB) can tax us and we'll gladly pay so he (BB) can "protect" us from this [false] threat.
There is evidence that temperatures have DROPPED. But, scientists who try to report THAT end up disappearing from their jobs - ESPECIALLY if they are government jobs.
Well there does seem to be a global climatic disruption and it is often provable linked to the rise in carbon emmissions from fossil fuels. However, I do note that some studies have found otherwise and if you have a link to one I'd be glad to read it. The climatic disruption will create cooler temperatures in some regions as the ocean currents are disrupted. I can see some form of climatic disruption in my own neighborhood such as tornadoes two summers in a row in N.Y.C. (never happens here in general), thunderstorms in wintertime and the robins instead of migrating south for the winter, remaining in place year round, the emergence of West Nile Virus due to the extreme variations in rainfall from drought like conditions to floods, etc.
I would think your question more is should people be forced to have to pay for any changes and I would think that the government should work with the companies especially since regardless of any changes that create global warming known pollutants that create acid rain and the like can be lowered. Some renewable energy sources such as wind power and the sensible use of nuclear power can actually create more jobs for the industries who produce them so it depends.
This is an interesting article:
For those of you that love to watch ABC since they are a very liberal based station here is what they have to say about Global Warming according to an article which HelpinUtah just posted for all to go check out:
Scientists tell reporters that computer models should "be viewed with great skepticism." Well, why aren't they?
The fundamentalist doom mongers also ignore scientists who say the effects of global warming may be benign. Harvard astrophysicist Sallie Baliunas said added CO2 in the atmosphere may actually benefit the world because more CO2 helps plants grow. Warmer winters would give farmers a longer harvest season, and might end the droughts in the Sahara Desert.
Why don't we hear about this part of the global warming argument? "It's the money!" said Dr. Baliunas. "Twenty-five billion dollars in government funding has been spent since 1990 to research global warming. If scientists and researchers were coming out releasing reports that global warming has little to do with man, and most to do with just how the planet works, there wouldn't be as much money to study it."
I can agree that computer models are inaccurate but what is that scientist's explanation for the melting of the polar ice caps? Regardless of cause I have seen many harmful climatic changes including where I live. I think that spending government money to research global warming is a waste of taxpayer's dollars to begin with. It could be used to prevent provable sources of pollution. The borough of N.Y.C. that I live has one of the highest rates of known pollutants (this is excluding anything that contribute to global warming such as CO2) statistically and the air quality is quite terrible (this leads to a high rate of asthma and other proven negative health results of pollution) and this is because of the large number of power plants. Obviously power has to come from somewhere but I'd be for people willingly investing in renewable energy sources and an affordable hybrid car. Let's all remember that if our dependence on foreign sources of oil were ended (and its not contested that our supply of oil is not renewable even if we tap more sources, within our lifetimes it will run out) then our economic dependence on some countries in the middle east we should not have to deal with in any manner would come to a halt and so would OPEC as well as their power and ability to manipulate us.
I totally understand what you are saying but people are not the only reason that this planet is going through these changes. We have always gone throught climate change and we actually have more people that die from a cold climate than a warm one. I would love to see alternative resources used to help this earth that God created. But, unfortunately, our Government feels that raising rates on our electric is going to make people change. We'll no it will not it will just cause people to go into more debt and try to find other means on their own and then our Government will complain since they are not making money from GE and their lobbyists. The other thing is that the car companies tend to raise prices on these hybrid cars when actually they are extremely cheap to make. If the car companies and our government would make them more affordable and safer then we would want to invest in these types of vehicles more. Have you ever seen some of these hybrid vehicles and how tiny they are. A family of four would never be able to fit into it and as far as safety is concerned; they are too small to even be safe. Their are so many larger vehicles on the road that this type of car would be demolished in a crash.
Do you know that cows produce more gas in the atmosphere than vehicles? Then maybe we should just get rid of all the cows on this planet. We'll that would just not be reasonable since we get alot of great foods from these animals. I do not think that our Government money should be spent on Global warming either. Did you know that they are spending millions and millions of dollars on finding out how much gas that cows actually produce in the atmosphere? I am sorry but isn't it just common sense to know that cows produce a lot of gas in the atmosphere. I mean when you go by a field full of cows doesn't it just stink something awful. Spending more money to research these silly things is just ridiculous.
Anyway, we actually do agree on some of the issues and this was a really great topic to discuss. I thought that you would find this interesting but my parents home has always used solar panels for energy and to this day are still being used. As well as, they use coal to heat their home. These are great resources but unfortunately when they bought these items they were very inexpensive since it was back in the 70's. Nowadays, it is just so unreasonably priced to put some of these alternative energies in that people just stick to what they have. To switch from electric to another source costs so much more money that just paying extra on electric every month. It is the upfront cost that most families and people cannot handle.
this has the LARGEST TAX INCREASE ever in this bill, plus like someone wrote earlier our electric bills will double
Hey Brian, WElcome Back, we missed you very much.
I heard today that our electric bills will go up to about $3000 more a year.
thank you hon..and i heard that report too!!!!!! but I guess us conservative repbilicans are just causing trouble again?????
Yup been on this morning,maybe it wont go through but I hear the President is' urging" the Senate to pass it.
President Obama is in a hurry to ramrod this legislation through because there is a desperate attempt to make sure the American people stay in the dark about climate change. We are NOT told the whole inconvenient truth.
In March, Alan Carlin, a senior research analyst at the EPA, asked that his research results on greenhouse gases be distributed. Because HIS didn't fit the "blame human activity" angle the EPA was going for, Carlin's study was shelved.
Not only that, on March 12 he was basically slapped with a gag order. He was told by his director, AL McGartland, that he could speak to NO ONE, by any means (voice, paper, electronic, PERIOD).
On March 16, Carlin asked that his work be shown to the department in the EPA that deals with climate change. THE NEXT DAY, McGartland fired Carlin! Politically motivated? Sure appears that way!
See, Carlin's findings go against what the EPA has *already determined to do*, so they HAD to get Carlin out of the way. The EPA is going to railroad their endangerment findings through. What research do you think is behind Cap and Trade?
YOU ARE ONLY BEING TOLD WHAT THE GOVERNMENT WANTS YOU TO BE TOLD. Temperatures HAVE been dropping, but THAT doesn't make the news.
Comparitively there has been a global climate disruption. That much I can see for myself from the disruption of weather patterns where I live as well as across the country. Research does seem to bear it out. I think the concern is over government regulations that will raise taxes and studies have been conducted to either support this finding or prove it wrong. I don't find the issue of climate change itself that contestuous. Just the requirements that the American public will have to fund the requisite changes to help stop it. I would agree that's a genuine concern. And I would emphasize that just because someone is a middle of the road democrat such as myself or even a complete liberal does not mean they want their taxes increased as the recession does not discriminate as regards political background. Surely there has to be a more cost effective way of preserving the environment with any form of pollution, including clearly known ones. I really can't find anyone who if asked as regards themselves would want their taxes to increase or for these taxes to bankrupt the company they are working for.
Well said as usual iladvocate. I have misgivings about this bill as well. But I come from not so much a political stance on this but from a faith based standpoint. I think a lot of what we see is just another sign of what the Bible says it is going to be as time goes on. I am not sure that this bill is going to do anything to change anything except raise our rates. Granted I have not done major research on why it is they think this is necessary, but it is something that will take the whole world working together as one to even make a dent, and we all know that is not going to happen. IMO
I agree with your thoughts about global warming. I come from a different stance as well - but do believe that it will increase our rates. They are already saying it will. I think i that weather changes are definitely signs spoke of in the Bible and I also believe the Earth goes through cycles naturally. I remember in the 70s how we were told the opposite that the Earth was cooling and we'd be in an ice age within a few decads and I think they mentioned the year 2000. I honestly do not believe the Scientists can know for sure what's happening. The planet is very complex and there's no way to predict this stuff unless you follow the Bible. IMO as well.
Very well said. The whole bill really only comes down to one thing, more money in politicians pockets. See they all, whether Dems or Repubs, all have some stake in the welfare of GE. They get money from lobbyists and from GE directly so raising rates benefits them all very directly. They will definitely not tell you that. But just remember the head of GE is now part of the administration. Both sides did not fight that appointment.
One thing I think we can ALL agree on: The world DOES need to look into renewable energy(ies), but NOT because of the scare tactics and lies about global warming.
Temperatures have NOT risen since 1998.
Yeah we certainly do need to looke into renewable energy.
I agree with you on this issue - aren't there certain cycles of weather and each "phase" only happens once every so many hundred years or so?
I'm not saying that we humans don't do ANY damage, but how do we know this isn't a normal part of the whole cycle?
It scares me, I hope the senate vetoes it. My dad and I are on a very fixed income, and our electrical bill is already close to 200.00 a month and we hardly use any electricity, it is scary. This will affect everything down the line, our food, gas prices, general shopping purchases, you name it. I am genuinely scared now. it all amounst to two words: Money and Greed.
Bible scholars will tell this is biblical and I agree, I just don't know my bible that well, but, I do see the signs.