Comments on: For Those Unemployed from Cap and Trade, Help is on the Way…For 1.5 % of You http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/16/for-those-unemployed-from-cap-and-trade-help-is-on-the-way%e2%80%a6for-15-of-you/ Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:27:43 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Liberally Conservative » Blog Archive » Moonbat(s) of the Week http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/16/for-those-unemployed-from-cap-and-trade-help-is-on-the-way%e2%80%a6for-15-of-you/#comment-39176 Liberally Conservative » Blog Archive » Moonbat(s) of the Week Sat, 27 Jun 2009 10:01:01 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=8687#comment-39176 [...] don’t worry because the architects of the bill built in unemployment insurance; too bad it will only help 1.5% of those losing their jobs from the [...] [...] don’t worry because the architects of the bill built in unemployment insurance; too bad it will only help 1.5% of those losing their jobs from the [...]

]]> By: Dan Holler http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/16/for-those-unemployed-from-cap-and-trade-help-is-on-the-way%e2%80%a6for-15-of-you/#comment-37498 Dan Holler Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:46:43 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=8687#comment-37498 Aaron – you are correct that energy prices will increase occur even if we do not pass Waxman-Markey or some other variation of an energy tax. The Heritage analysis measures the cost increase above and beyond that baseline. Interestingly, many on the left believe health care is a fundamental right that should be cheap (or free). All too often, they view cheap energy, which stimulates our economy and produces high standards of living, as an evil that must be rationed or made prohibitively expensive. A serious and genuine conversation begins with an honest cost-benefit analysis. To date, not even the proponents of Waxman-Markey have produced an analysis that suggests it will have a measurable impact on our changing climate. Aaron – you are correct that energy prices will increase occur even if we do not pass Waxman-Markey or some other variation of an energy tax. The Heritage analysis measures the cost increase above and beyond that baseline. Interestingly, many on the left believe health care is a fundamental right that should be cheap (or free). All too often, they view cheap energy, which stimulates our economy and produces high standards of living, as an evil that must be rationed or made prohibitively expensive. A serious and genuine conversation begins with an honest cost-benefit analysis. To date, not even the proponents of Waxman-Markey have produced an analysis that suggests it will have a measurable impact on our changing climate.

]]> By: Lynn B. DeSpain http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/16/for-those-unemployed-from-cap-and-trade-help-is-on-the-way%e2%80%a6for-15-of-you/#comment-37397 Lynn B. DeSpain Thu, 18 Jun 2009 02:19:46 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=8687#comment-37397 More blatant lies brought toyou by the same blatant liars who have been blaming all our ills on everyone but themselves! Hozro More blatant lies brought toyou by the same blatant liars who have been blaming all our ills on everyone but themselves!

Hozro

]]> By: Ken, Sandy, UT http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/16/for-those-unemployed-from-cap-and-trade-help-is-on-the-way%e2%80%a6for-15-of-you/#comment-37362 Ken, Sandy, UT Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:05:36 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=8687#comment-37362 The cap and trade bill taxes consumers twice: once for the allowances that are required, and once more to actually install technology to address greenhouse gas emissions. Further, the allowances are not allocated in the same way acid rain (SO2) allowances were allocated. With the Waxman bill, allowances can be traded by financial instutions (you know, the same folks that brough us derivatives and the current financial mess). If we want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, then a cap is sufficient and can be used within the exisiting regulatory framework. However, for some, this has a 'fatal flaw' in that the states retain regulatory power...! Oh, one other thing: With the SO2 allowances, commercial technology existed to reduce SO2 emissions. We do not currently have such technology available, so expect the cost of allowances to increase dramatically until such a time as the technology is available. In the meantime, natural gas-fired powerplants will be called on to fill the void (good luck getting new hydro or nuclear approved). This will increase the natural gas demand, so those of us who use gas for home heating can expect our gas bill to rise as well. Renewable power has a very important role to play, and is welcomed, but it is still only a fraction of the total power supply. Note also that gas-fired generation is required to support some renewable generation (when the wind doesn't blow or at night). Currently, coal accounts for about half of the power generation in the US, and we have hundreds of years of proven reserves. In terms of national security, it makes sense to utilize the resources we have, and not be held hostage to the whims of foreign powers. If we as a nation do decide to migrate from a carbon-based economy, we should be quite clear about what the costs and what the benefits will be. One guess as who will ultimatly pay for cap & trade (hint: look in the mirror). Will power cost us four times current rates? eight? More? And what will this shock do to an already weak economy? This appears to be a solution in search of a problem. The cap and trade bill taxes consumers twice: once for the allowances that are required, and once more to actually install technology to address greenhouse gas emissions. Further, the allowances are not allocated in the same way acid rain (SO2) allowances were allocated. With the Waxman bill, allowances can be traded by financial instutions (you know, the same folks that brough us derivatives and the current financial mess). If we want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, then a cap is sufficient and can be used within the exisiting regulatory framework. However, for some, this has a 'fatal flaw' in that the states retain regulatory power…!

Oh, one other thing: With the SO2 allowances, commercial technology existed to reduce SO2 emissions. We do not currently have such technology available, so expect the cost of allowances to increase dramatically until such a time as the technology is available. In the meantime, natural gas-fired powerplants will be called on to fill the void (good luck getting new hydro or nuclear approved). This will increase the natural gas demand, so those of us who use gas for home heating can expect our gas bill to rise as well. Renewable power has a very important role to play, and is welcomed, but it is still only a fraction of the total power supply. Note also that gas-fired generation is required to support some renewable generation (when the wind doesn't blow or at night).

Currently, coal accounts for about half of the power generation in the US, and we have hundreds of years of proven reserves. In terms of national security, it makes sense to utilize the resources we have, and not be held hostage to the whims of foreign powers. If we as a nation do decide to migrate from a carbon-based economy, we should be quite clear about what the costs and what the benefits will be.

One guess as who will ultimatly pay for cap & trade (hint: look in the mirror). Will power cost us four times current rates? eight? More? And what will this shock do to an already weak economy?

This appears to be a solution in search of a problem.

]]> By: Ron. San Diego, Ca http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/16/for-those-unemployed-from-cap-and-trade-help-is-on-the-way%e2%80%a6for-15-of-you/#comment-37311 Ron. San Diego, Ca Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:58:07 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=8687#comment-37311 Surely there must be away to create a means to aleave us of the cost of oil and supply another sorse of energy. I fear the cost accounding to the cap and trade as it stands will be to costly and no time to recover in the short years. Let use the resourses we have using both. And what I have been reading about globle warming tells me that there is not enough facts to prove it, and actually the co2 level is steady and mostly level thoughout the years. And many scientist strongly disagree. It is a shame that there is not a debate concerning greenhouse, open to the public. And see what actually is right. Leaving politics out of it. Surely there must be away to create a means to aleave us of the cost of oil and supply another sorse of energy. I fear the cost accounding to the cap and trade as it stands will be to costly and no time to recover in the short years. Let use the resourses we have using both. And what I have been reading about globle warming tells me that there is not enough facts to prove it, and actually the co2 level is steady and mostly level thoughout the years. And many scientist strongly disagree. It is a shame that there is not a debate concerning greenhouse, open to the public. And see what actually is right. Leaving politics out of it.

]]> By: Aaron, Albany http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/16/for-those-unemployed-from-cap-and-trade-help-is-on-the-way%e2%80%a6for-15-of-you/#comment-37299 Aaron, Albany Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:38:45 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=8687#comment-37299 You overlook something very important: energy prices are going up with or without Cap and Trade. It takes water -- billions of gallons -- to produce gas, coal, and nuclear energy (although not solar). Water is going to be the next great scarcity we face. Also, BP just announced we have four decades -- not centuries mind you -- of oil reserves (see Economist.com). Thus, energy prices WILL go up as the scarcity and limits of our economy and environment come more into view. Given that's the reality, it is better to start NOW the transition to an economy where energy costs are higher. The Cap and Trade is a model to do that, while what you speak of, namely neoclassical economics of the market solving everything, well, is simply discredited given the market didn't account for the current financial crises, the spiraling costs of healthcare, Global Warming, to name just a few. Let's have a serious and genuine debate about what we HAVE to do to make the transition to a new economy, instead of quibble with details as you do in this article. You overlook something very important: energy prices are going up with or without Cap and Trade. It takes water — billions of gallons — to produce gas, coal, and nuclear energy (although not solar). Water is going to be the next great scarcity we face. Also, BP just announced we have four decades — not centuries mind you — of oil reserves (see Economist.com). Thus, energy prices WILL go up as the scarcity and limits of our economy and environment come more into view.

Given that's the reality, it is better to start NOW the transition to an economy where energy costs are higher. The Cap and Trade is a model to do that, while what you speak of, namely neoclassical economics of the market solving everything, well, is simply discredited given the market didn't account for the current financial crises, the spiraling costs of healthcare, Global Warming, to name just a few.

Let's have a serious and genuine debate about what we HAVE to do to make the transition to a new economy, instead of quibble with details as you do in this article.

]]> By: Dennis Idaho http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/16/for-those-unemployed-from-cap-and-trade-help-is-on-the-way%e2%80%a6for-15-of-you/#comment-37288 Dennis Idaho Wed, 17 Jun 2009 12:54:13 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=8687#comment-37288 the "TAXMAN/MALARKEY" plan is just a ruse to steal from the people to support Big Government control of every area of our lives. Slavery in disguise. Let us throw out the whole bunch and start over with real conservatives that will honor our constitution. the "TAXMAN/MALARKEY" plan is just a ruse to steal from the people to support Big Government control of every area of our lives. Slavery in disguise.

Let us throw out the whole bunch and start over with real conservatives that will honor our constitution.

]]> By: AntonioSosa http://blog.heritage.org/2009/06/16/for-those-unemployed-from-cap-and-trade-help-is-on-the-way%e2%80%a6for-15-of-you/#comment-37196 AntonioSosa Tue, 16 Jun 2009 22:25:18 +0000 http://www.foundry.org/?p=8687#comment-37196 Thank you for explaining how Cap and Trade will destroy jobs. Cap and Trade “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification,” says famed climatologist Dr. S. Fred Singer. It would significantly increase taxes and the cost of energy, forcing many companies to close, thus increasing unemployment, poverty and dependence. We pray that honest leaders – both Democrat and Republican - are able to save us from Obama's criminal ACES Act (cap-and-trade) scam. Thank you for explaining how Cap and Trade will destroy jobs. Cap and Trade “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification,” says famed climatologist Dr. S. Fred Singer. It would significantly increase taxes and the cost of energy, forcing many companies to close, thus increasing unemployment, poverty and dependence.

We pray that honest leaders – both Democrat and Republican – are able to save us from Obama's criminal ACES Act (cap-and-trade) scam.

]]>