• 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!

Mitsubishi Cement Corp. expanding Long Beach operations

ocean515

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 26, 2013
Messages
36,760
Reaction score
15,468
Location
Southern California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Mitsubishi Cement Corp. expanding Long Beach operations

With the economy improving, demand for cement is on the rise.

In order to meet new demand for the construction material, companies are increasingly turning to imports in the wake of environmental regulations that make it expensive to produce in Southern California.

Biggs said California cement producers’ abilities to meet expected increases in demand for raw materials are constrained by a state law that created a cap-and-trade program designed to limit greenhouse gas emissions resulting from industrial processes that include cement production or refining. Essentially, the law imposes an emissions “cap” on firms that can “trade” for credits that must be paid for in order to produce emissions that exceed the state’s allowances.

The California Air Resources Board has said the law is intended to create a financial incentive for firms to seek cleaner technologies.

Biggs, however, said it has effectively made it too expensive for cement companies to build new production facilities.​


As usual, "good" intensions give way to economic reality, and more good paying jobs are lost.

Should Progressives be forced to explain, or is job loss and government dependence a worthwhile objective to be applauded?
 
Do you remember what Southern California's air looked like in the 1970's and 80's? Were you around then? Thanks to "Liberals" our air quality has improved substantially. Imagine what our air would be like if Liberals hadn't passed strong environmental laws in California. Industry is good but not at the expense of the environment.
 
Do you remember what Southern California's air looked like in the 1970's and 80's? Were you around then? Thanks to "Liberals" our air quality has improved substantially. Imagine what our air would be like if Liberals hadn't passed strong environmental laws in California. Industry is good but not at the expense of the environment.

LOL

Was I around? I've been breathing SoCal air since the mid-50's, so yes, I was around. And it wasn't just liberals who passed air quality legislation. So let's not attempt to re-write history.

AB32 has little to do with this strawman you've thrown out. But thanks for the comment.
 
Do you remember what Southern California's air looked like in the 1970's and 80's? Were you around then? Thanks to "Liberals" our air quality has improved substantially. Imagine what our air would be like if Liberals hadn't passed strong environmental laws in California. Industry is good but not at the expense of the environment.

Using California as a example of the successes of Liberal policies pegs the irony meter.

It leads the Nation in debt and unfunded liabilities, has the Highest poverty rates in the Nation, is home to 1/3 of the Nation's Welfare recipients even though it only has 1/8 of the Nation's citizen's and is driving out Millions of its tax paying citizens and hundreds of its Businesses to Red States like Texas.

Energy prices are higher and so is the cost of living.

In " Progressive " cities like San Francisco and Berkeley only the rich can afford to own property and businesses and crime rates are disproportionately divided between white and minorities.

In San Francisco blacks are charged for 40 percent of the Cities murders.
 
The right wing thinks "freedom" includes the freedom of multi-national corporations to poison others.
 
Using California as a example of the successes of Liberal policies pegs the irony meter.

It leads the Nation in debt and unfunded liabilities, has the Highest poverty rates in the Nation, is home to 1/3 of the Nation's Welfare recipients even though it only has 1/8 of the Nation's citizen's and is driving out Millions of its tax paying citizens and hundreds of its Businesses to Red States like Texas.

Energy prices are higher and so is the cost of living.

In " Progressive " cities like San Francisco and Berkeley only the rich can afford to own property and businesses and crime rates are disproportionately divided between white and minorities.

In San Francisco blacks are charged for 40 percent of the Cities murders.

Let's not forget how Progressives in California have also rewarded the invasion of millions of illegal aliens, who are encouraged to steal jobs from minority US citizens desperate for jobs. Having been sufficiently enslaved by their liberal/progressive masters, they are now being sent to the back of the bus where Progressives want them, so new targets can be captured for political gain.
 
The right wing thinks "freedom" includes the freedom of multi-national corporations to poison others.

LOL

As pointless and fact free as ever.

Actually the right wing thinks "freedom" includes having a well paying job, as opposed to waiting for the next government handout.
 
Do you remember what Southern California's air looked like in the 1970's and 80's? Were you around then? Thanks to "Liberals" our air quality has improved substantially. Imagine what our air would be like if Liberals hadn't passed strong environmental laws in California. Industry is good but not at the expense of the environment.

I do, I grew up there in the 60's-70's, the brown smog that hung over LA was ever present.
 
I do, I grew up there in the 60's-70's, the brown smog that hung over LA was ever present.

If only the automobile pollution controls were in place before the '60's and '70's:

Why Did a 1542 Spanish Voyage Refer to San Pedro Bay as the 'Bay of the Smoke'? | LA as Subject | SoCal Focus | KCET

A blanket of haze hung over the land that would become Los Angeles on October 8, 1542, when Spanish sailors entered San Pedro (or perhaps Santa Monica) Bay and made the first written observations of the Southland. This early air pollution so impressed the sailors and their captain, Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo, that they named the area "Baya de los Fumos, or "Bay of the Smokes."​
 
Do you remember what Southern California's air looked like in the 1970's and 80's? Were you around then? Thanks to "Liberals" our air quality has improved substantially. Imagine what our air would be like if Liberals hadn't passed strong environmental laws in California. Industry is good but not at the expense of the environment.

That is mostly because of a reduction in emissions from vehicles due in large part to advances in technology. Nice try though.
 
LOL

Was I around? I've been breathing SoCal air since the mid-50's, so yes, I was around. And it wasn't just liberals who passed air quality legislation. So let's not attempt to re-write history.

AB32 has little to do with this strawman you've thrown out. But thanks for the comment.

It has EVERYTHING to do with this topic....and if you studied your California history you would know that it was "liberals" who have been responsible for California having the toughest environmental laws in the country...and the improvement in our air quality from decades ago is a direct result whether you want to accept it or not. Sorry Charlie.
 
LOL

As pointless and fact free as ever.

Actually the right wing thinks "freedom" includes having a well paying job, as opposed to waiting for the next government handout.

Not to mention, hypocritical as all get out. How many democrat pols and their spouses have their arms elbow deep in "multinational corporations"? :roll: Gimme a freakin' break already. How many democrat pols get exempted from the very onerous laws they craft for "the little people", to say nothing of industry. I cannot believe these libs can actually point their crooked little fingers at others with a straight face. Wow.....:shock:
 
It has EVERYTHING to do with this topic....and if you studied your California history you would know that it was "liberals" who have been responsible for California having the toughest environmental laws in the country...and the improvement in our air quality from decades ago is a direct result whether you want to accept it or not. Sorry Charlie.

Evidence? No? Didn't think so.

10544269_718794404871333_863353224_a.jpg
 
Not to mention, hypocritical as all get out. How many democrat pols and their spouses have their arms elbow deep in "multinational corporations"? :roll: Gimme a freakin' break already. How many democrat pols get exempted from the very onerous laws they craft for "the little people", to say nothing of industry. I cannot believe these libs can actually point their crooked little fingers at others with a straight face. Wow.....:shock:

When one researches the history of the current draconian environmental laws crushing California, it can be seen that Progressives didn't follow the will of the people, but the will of the special interests who own them.

When Progressives became the first government in the world to label CO2 a GHG, they did so in the dead of night, on a Saturday, against the public will. This opened to door to AB32, which had California among the first Governments in the world to lay out an anti-business, anti-job plan they enthusiastically called the Global Warming Solutions Act.

As the article in the OP illustrates, it appears the solution is to lose enough jobs that it because impossible to use much energy in the state.
 
When one researches the history of the current draconian environmental laws crushing California, it can be seen that Progressives didn't follow the will of the people, but the will of the special interests who own them.

When Progressives became the first government in the world to label CO2 a GHG, they did so in the dead of night, on a Saturday, against the public will. This opened to door to AB32, which had California among the first Governments in the world to lay out an anti-business, anti-job plan they enthusiastically called the Global Warming Solutions Act.

As the article in the OP illustrates, it appears the solution is to lose enough jobs that it because impossible to use much energy in the state.

"Progressives" didn't "label" CO2 a GHG. Physics did that.
 
"Progressives" didn't "label" CO2 a GHG. Physics did that.

No, in the state of California, it was Progressives. And they did it my lying to the voters, and using gut and paste to create a new bill in the dead of night on a Saturday night during extraordinary session.

That's how progressives do things. When they raise their hand to pass laws and regulations nobody wants, they make sure to raise the middle finger to voters while doing so.
 
No, in the state of California, it was Progressives. And they did it my lying to the voters, and using gut and paste to create a new bill in the dead of night on a Saturday night during extraordinary session.

That's how progressives do things. When they raise their hand to pass laws and regulations nobody wants, they make sure to raise the middle finger to voters while doing so.

Carbon dioxide does not change its behavior due to legislation.
 
Carbon dioxide does not change its behavior due to legislation.

Co2 is incorrigible. I would note that climate doesn't change it's behavior due to legislation either.
 
As the article in the OP illustrates, it appears the solution is to lose enough jobs that it because impossible to use much energy in the state.

Umm, the article in the OP provides an example of industry expanding its' operations, and not one example of a job loss.
 
That is mostly because of a reduction in emissions from vehicles due in large part to advances in technology. Nice try though.

Those advances happened because of the emissions laws, not due to the civic mindedness of auto makers.
 
California simply has too much government thanks to the worst state legislature in the nation.
 
Carbon dioxide does not change its behavior due to legislation.

Of course it does.

When Progressives buckled under pressure from voters, CO2 caused a change in behavior to force voters to submit to it's will.


http://ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/7190/2/wp071040.pdf

This changed significantly with the enactment of AB 1493, requiring CARB to adopt regulations to reduce GHG emissions by new motor vehicles sold in California. The bill was introduced originally as AB 1058 at the beginning of the legislative session in February 2001 by a freshman legislator, Fran Pavley, from Southern California.

The bill was revived through a parliamentary maneuver on Saturday June 29, when the Senate was meeting in a special session on the state budget. An existing, unrelated bill, AB 1493, was gutted by the Democratic leadership and amended to bear the content of AB 1058. This was passed by the Assembly with a bare majority on a mostly party-line vote. It was passed by the Senate that same day, and Governor Davis signed it into law a few weeks later.​


So, once again, Progressives tell voters to sit down, shut up, and submit to our will. And the Nation is forced to accept it, right, or wrong.

That what it means to be Progressive.
 
If only the automobile pollution controls were in place before the '60's and '70's:

Why Did a 1542 Spanish Voyage Refer to San Pedro Bay as the 'Bay of the Smoke'? | LA as Subject | SoCal Focus | KCET

A blanket of haze hung over the land that would become Los Angeles on October 8, 1542, when Spanish sailors entered San Pedro (or perhaps Santa Monica) Bay and made the first written observations of the Southland. This early air pollution so impressed the sailors and their captain, Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo, that they named the area "Baya de los Fumos, or "Bay of the Smokes."​

So the natives had been burning off the land as they were want to do, and the smoke settled there. What's that got to do with the fact that the LA area was under smog perennially when I grew up there and is absent now.
 
Umm, the article in the OP provides an example of industry expanding its' operations, and not one example of a job loss.

I'm sorry you can't read. Not sure you want to be so forthcoming with that admission.

The OP points out that local industry can't supply demand because of Progressive forced regulations, so those jobs are being sent overseas, rather than benefitting US citizens. So goes the Progressive meme about offshoring by evil corporations.

Do try to keep up Sangha.
 
So the natives had been burning off the land as they were want to do, and the smoke settled there. What's that got to do with the fact that the LA area was under smog perennially when I grew up there and is absent now.

Just pointing out the geography of this area plays a big role in what people see. And while vastly improved, California is still susceptible to pollution from outside it's borders, although Progressives don't like to think about that as they pass more and more job killing regulations ignoring this fact.
 
Back
Top Bottom