- This topic has 4 voices and 4 replies.
-
Posts
-
Because politics is such a big issue and the current debates in Congress will undoubtedly impact America in ways well beyond the economy I decided to run this poll.I personally think Health-Care and Cap & Trade will be a disaster. I think Cap & Trade will stifle business growth in both existing companies and in start-ups. It is in actuality a hidden tax and I just think that the science on GW is not as compelling as some think. I just do not see how 100 or so years of generally unreliable data can be as convincing as the GW crowd would have us believe. This is especially so given that we are talking about s0omething that has experienced wide swings of variation over geologic time scales. GW simply does not convince me.I think that while universal Health-Care is a noble goal, it should not be achieved at the cost of bankrupting the country. I am appalled at the way the politicians in Wash. are casually talking about another $1,000,000,000,000 of deficit spending over ten years and that number is certain to be too low given the governments history of spending and projections. I would sooner trust a four year-old with my money than the federal government. I would be more than happy to support Health-Care reform if it were to be paid for by offsets elsewhere in the federal budget. They could start by cutting education spending and giving control back to local school boards where it belongs. I am certain that if I were king for a day, I could balance the budget and lower taxes while paying off the debt. People would not like me but our country would be on sound financial feet again.
I agree that Cap & Trade would have a more disastrous impact than universal health care. As Scout said, it's a noble goal to have every person provided with free health care, even though we conservatives think that the way the government would do it is the wrong way of getting it done. At least with health care, there would be some distinct tangible benefit that the public would receive. Cap and Trade would lead to NO tangible benefit, assuming that global warming theory is not true. Correction - there may be a very mild benefit through cleaner environment in terms of having generally cleaner air and water, but relative to the amount of money and lost productivity this would involve, it would be like putting a golden air filter for $1000 in your home when a cheap $2 filter would do. If GWT is true, then I'm still not certain that our efforts as a nation would have that great of an effect.For me, the problem is that I'm not anywhere near certain that GWT is true and the way the debate has been framed makes it seem like it's being rammed through for political purposes. I recall when the issue really gained steam around 2005 that the IPCC issued a report and one foreign scientist was quoted as saying that the issue of global warming was now no longer a matter of dispute. That struck me as odd because, really - how often is the science of complex systems "beyond dispute"? Sounded like a way to censor one's critics to me....and I think they're still trying to do that.
Joe Bastardi, a meteorologist and long time opponent to Gore & GW, holds the position that GW is caused by sun spots and the trend is actually moving toward a drop in global temps.http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/09/10/accuweathers-joe-bastardi-makes-mincemeat-of-greenpeace-claim-that-california-wildfires-are-caused-by-global-warming/Carbon Credit, on its face is bogus logic. Isn't the whole concern over polluting that we irreversably damage the earth? How you can you throw money at a whole in the ozone? Do you think hollywood weirdos are going to give up their mansions and private planes? No. They will presume to tell lesser beings, like my grandparents, how much they can spend on health care.
The thing about Cap & Trade that really gets me going and scares the hell out of me is also the dirty little secret that no one really talks about. Supposedly every business will get a Carbon allowance and will have to buy credits if they emit too much or they can sell credits if they emit less than their allowance. The whole process of establishing allowances is so open to fraud it is unbelievable. The mechanism whereby allowances will be established has never been enumerated to my knowledge. Who gets to decide how much carbon a business can emit? It sounds like a perfect invitation for corruption and influence peddling if you ask me. We think gerrymandering congressional districts is bad, wait until they start deciding how much carbon your bakery/grocery store/ trucking company/ you name it can emit. Government control of health care is nothing when you consider carbon regulation; they could literally regulate every aspect of your life on the basis of carbon emissions. How long until they go from regulating businesses to individual homes? Do you want to be the guy who gets his heat turned in the middle of winter because you have exceeded your carbon allowance and there are no more heating credits available? Big Brother is nothing compared to this. Yes, I think cap & trade is the real disaster here. It will also pass under the radar because everyone is talking about health care.
