• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Democrats Unveil Carbon Cap Plan.

S

Scarecrow Akhbar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 22, 2005
Messages
11,430
Reaction score
2,282
Location
Los Angeles
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
House Democrats release climate planHouse leaders released Tuesday a broad plan to reduce carbon emissions and set renewable energy production mandates, the first detailed proposal in what is expected to be one of Democrats' toughest battles in the coming years.

Speaker Nancy Pelosi's point men on climate change House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman and Energy and Rep Edward Markey, chair of the panel's energy subcommittee detailed the plan to reducing carbon emissions through a trading scheme, a measure President Barack Obama has made a cornerstone of his domestic agenda but which has been loosely defined throughout the year.

The plan calls for a reduction of carbon emissions of 20 percent by 2020 using carbon trading system and requires utilities to purchase 25 percent of their energy from renewable fuel sources by 2025. By 2050, the lawmakers want to reduce U.S. carbon emissions by 83 percent.
Click to expand...

The question is: Why?

1) No one ever demonstrated a warmer climate is disadvantageous to the United States. That's all that matters. Then again, they never showed it was disadvantageous to the rest of the world.

2) The earth has entered a cooling trend. Ergo, global warming, the concern allegedly prompting all this interest in controlling people....er I mean reducing carbon emissions, isn't an issue.

So, why are the Democrats rushing to do as much damage to the American economy as they can as fast as they can?
 
Even if I was for this kind of thing, which I'm not, this is a horrendous time to be talking about this. The economy, especially in the manufacturing sector, is tanking so in the process of that you're going to institute massive government guidelines forcing them to potentially significantly change their structure in a potentially costly way? Regardless of whether you agree with this kind of thing or not, now is not the time to be pushing it.
 
Well, you see, the Democrats are seriously pushed for time. They have to appease all the stupid people that were dumb enough to vote for Obama and the Democrats before the fit hits the shan, which will be long long before November, 2010.

Just remember, George Bush is going to be a major candidate in all the 2010 Congressional races. The Democrats will be running against him and doing their best to hide from Obama, too.
 
Zyphlin said:
Even if I was for this kind of thing, which I'm not, this is a horrendous time to be talking about this...
Click to expand...

It's the perfect time if your part of the far left green movement, which would like nothing more than to gain control of 'collapsing' manufacturing and distribution systems so that in the future, environmental committees will have the power to decide how much is produced... or rather, how little is produced.

Their intent, of course, is to reduce production, reduce growth, and return the planet to mother nature. I'm talking of the far left environuts, of course. But at times it's hard to distinguish between a far left environut and a moderate one. There are plenty of folks in this world who'd like to see us all living in sod huts, riding bicycles, and growing our own 'chem-free' food in the back yard. Plenty of them.

:shock:
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
So, why are the Democrats rushing to do as much damage to the American economy as they can as fast as they can?
Click to expand...

Simple.
Enviroloons are like watermellons:
Green on the outside, red on the inside.
 
Zyphlin said:
Even if I was for this kind of thing, which I'm not, this is a horrendous time to be talking about this. The economy, especially in the manufacturing sector, is tanking so in the process of that you're going to institute massive government guidelines forcing them to potentially significantly change their structure in a potentially costly way? Regardless of whether you agree with this kind of thing or not, now is not the time to be pushing it.
Click to expand...

While I agree with your assessment I think in certain situations this could prove useful. In some instances, if manufacturing processes are being completely redesigned from the ground up to be more economically efficient then adding environmentally friendly processes during the redesign is really the best time to implement such changes. Though I could also see such guideline requirements during the redesign process being a deterrent to the manufacturer to avoid redesign.
 
Gibberish said:
While I agree with your assessment I think in certain situations this could prove useful. In some instances, if manufacturing processes are being completely redesigned from the ground up to be more economically efficient then adding environmentally friendly processes during the redesign is really the best time to implement such changes. Though I could also see such guideline requirements during the redesign process being a deterrent to the manufacturer to avoid redesign.
Click to expand...

hehe.

You think this about Green anything?

It's not. They believe they know what's best, and they are going to destroy anything that stands in their way. EVERY PRODUCT IN AMERICA is going to be effected by this crap. And when the EPA unveils it's CO2 control and regulation, a loaf of bread is gonna hit $5.00, and that's before the hyperinflation by these asinine monetary moves hits us.
 
MrVicchio said:
You think this about Green anything?
It's not. They believe they know what's best, and they are going to destroy anything that stands in their way.
Click to expand...
They want to destory the freedom to spend your money on whatever you want.
 
MrVicchio said:
hehe.

You think this about Green anything?

It's not. They believe they know what's best, and they are going to destroy anything that stands in their way. EVERY PRODUCT IN AMERICA is going to be effected by this crap. And when the EPA unveils it's CO2 control and regulation, a loaf of bread is gonna hit $5.00, and that's before the hyperinflation by these asinine monetary moves hits us.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with your apocalyptic outlook of implementing environmental friendly quality control on product production.

We can easily do many of the same process in a a eco-friendly/organic manner and there are manufacturer's that already do this and bread doesn't cost $5.00 a loaf in their market. Check out the Trader Joe's grocer sometime. Plus supply/demand will also control inflation of grocery products.
 
MrVicchio said:
hehe.

You think this about Green anything?

It's not. They believe they know what's best, and they are going to destroy anything that stands in their way. EVERY PRODUCT IN AMERICA is going to be effected by this crap. And when the EPA unveils it's CO2 control and regulation, a loaf of bread is gonna hit $5.00, and that's before the hyperinflation by these asinine monetary moves hits us.
Click to expand...

Don't worry. The Greens are opposed to bread, tofu is much better for you.
 
Gibberish said:
Where is the government denying you the ability to purchase products?
Click to expand...

Well....

...government is raising taxes to spend on their favorite programs. Tax dollars not in my pocket are dollars I can't use to buy the things I want.

...government has created so much new imaginary money that the value of the money I have now in savings is going to be reduced 30, 40, 50%, probably even more....so that's money I won't have any more to buy the things I want.

That's just two real examples of what's happening right now.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Well....

...government is raising taxes to spend on their favorite programs. Tax dollars not in my pocket are dollars I can't use to buy the things I want.

...government has created so much new imaginary money that the value of the money I have now in savings is going to be reduced 30, 40, 50%, probably even more....so that's money I won't have any more to buy the things I want.

That's just two real examples of what's happening right now.
Click to expand...

Ignoring the fact that none of the above has anything to do with the topic, None of the above is the government denying you the ability to purchase a specific product.
 
Last edited:
Gibberish said:
While I agree with your assessment I think in certain situations this could prove useful. In some instances, if manufacturing processes are being completely redesigned from the ground up to be more economically efficient then adding environmentally friendly processes during the redesign is really the best time to implement such changes. Though I could also see such guideline requirements during the redesign process being a deterrent to the manufacturer to avoid redesign.
Click to expand...

The bold part doesn't happen by government fiat.

It takes money to completely redesign a manufacturing process and during this time especially, companies are trying to hold on to cash and not redesigning with all the extra problems that involves.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
The bold part doesn't happen by government fiat.

It takes money to completely redesign a manufacturing process and during this time especially, companies are trying to hold on to cash and not redesigning with all the extra problems that involves.
Click to expand...

There are more redesigns of SOPs going on now then I have ever seen before. Previously it was expansion of positions and/or outreach. During these times many companies are re-looking out their manufacturing SOPs to see if they are working in the most efficient manner.

Like I said though, re-designs are more involved and costly if you have to meet higher requirement standards. Which is a reason implementing such standards now may not be a good idea.
 
Gibberish said:
There are more redesigns of SOPs going on now then I have ever seen before. Previously it was expansion of positions and/or outreach. During these times many companies are re-looking out their manufacturing SOPs to see if they are working in the most efficient manner.

Like I said though, re-designs are more involved and costly if you have to meet higher requirement standards. Which is a reason implementing such standards now may not be a good idea.
Click to expand...

I don't like forcing companies to change based on popular opinion.

I'll give you that this time in an economy is good for becoming more efficient some just can't afford it.
The government stepping in and making mandates across the board when not all industries or companies are the same helps no one.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I don't like forcing companies to change based on popular opinion.

I'll give you that this time in an economy is good for becoming more efficient some just can't afford it.
The government stepping in and making mandates across the board when not all industries or companies are the same helps no one.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to imply these redesigns should be forced. I am very much against the government forcing companies to redesign their processes in anyway. My point is that if the company chooses a process redesign is in the best interest of the company then they should add the new quality standards as part of their redesign.
 
Gibberish said:
I didn't mean to imply these redesigns should be forced. I am very much against the government forcing companies to redesign their processes in anyway. My point is that if the company chooses a process redesign is in the best interest of the company then they should add the new quality standards as part of their redesign.
Click to expand...

That sounds fair.

I'm pretty annoyed with any cap and trade plan since "Climate Change" is less science and more politics.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
That sounds fair.

I'm pretty annoyed with any cap and trade plan since "Climate Change" is less science and more politics.
Click to expand...

If climate change is true or not, we have the ability to lower emissions so why not? Less toxins in the air is healthier for all.

I would much rather we lower emissions now and find out that climate is not really affected by emissions and is just naturally changing then to not lower emissions and find out not doing so has put our climate into irreversible destruction.
 
Last edited:
Gibberish said:
If climate change is true or not, we have the ability to lower emissions so why not? Less toxins in the air is healthier for all.

I would much rather we lower emissions now and find out that climate is not really affected by emissions and is just naturally changing then to not lower emissions and find out not doing so has put our climate into irreversible destruction.
Click to expand...

Are emissions really that toxic to individuals, considering that most of us never really get exposed to enough concentrated amounts to hurt us. I think it is mostly bunk. Now you do have your extreme cases like Beijing for example.

I seriously doubt there is anything we can do that will put us on any irreversible path.

Its akin to people saying that a boogy man and space aliens exist and have visited them.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
Are emissions really that toxic to individuals, considering that most of us never really get exposed to enough concentrated amounts to hurt us. I think it is mostly bunk. Now you do have your extreme cases like Beijing for example.
Click to expand...
With population expansion more cities have the potential of being Beijing like. This should be prevented if possible.

Harry Guerrilla said:
I seriously doubt there is anything we can do that will put us on any irreversible path.

Its akin to people saying that a boogy man and space aliens exist and have visited them.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it's boogeyman/aliens related. THer eis no evidence that these things exists. Omissions exist and commissions effect on the environment can be tested. The extent of the effect, specifically the level of negative impact, is what can't be determined.

I think it can be assumed with relative confidence that Earth's climate is not indestructible. What is yet to be proven is that our omission levels are anywhere near or ever will be near the ability to destroy it or even significantly change it. But, though they may not be at climate distortion levels, they can get to uninhabitable levels for living beings. Beijing is getting there.
 
Gibberish said:
With population expansion more cities have the potential of being Beijing like. This should be prevented if possible.
Click to expand...

I think as more and more countries modernize their economies that their may be an increase in air pollution but at the same time as they do expand, they also start the population contraction soon afterward.

Gibberish said:
I wouldn't say it's boogeyman/aliens related. THer eis no evidence that these things exists. Omissions exist and commissions effect on the environment can be tested. The extent of the effect, specifically the level of negative impact, is what can't be determined.

I think it can be assumed with relative confidence that Earth's climate is not indestructible. What is yet to be proven is that our omission levels are anywhere near or ever will be near the ability to destroy it or even significantly change it. But, though they may not be at climate distortion levels, they can get to uninhabitable levels for living beings. Beijing is getting there.
Click to expand...

I don't think its not indestructible but that its not likely that we are facing a cataclysmic crisis, the most pressing issue in my mind is land and water pollution.

That you can definitely see everyday and if nothing else its ugly.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
I don't think its not indestructible but that its not likely that we are facing a cataclysmic crisis, the most pressing issue in my mind is land and water pollution.

That you can definitely see everyday and if nothing else its ugly.
Click to expand...

I definitely agree water and land pollution are more troubling than air pollution. Water being the most urgent one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom