Republicans for Environmental Protection calls GOP’s cap-and-trade myth ‘a disservice’ to Americans.
Republicans for Environmental Protection calls GOP’s cap-and-trade myth ‘a disservice’ to Americans.
This week, the Wonk Room and ThinkProgress have noted that many congressional Republicans (at least 19) have been repeating a false claim that a cap-and-trade proposal currently before Congress is a “light switch tax” which would cost American families over $3,000 extra per year. They base their claim on a 2007 MIT study that actually says any tax burden would be about one-fortieth of what the Republicans claim. Yesterday, Republicans for Environmental Protection disparaged their colleagues, saying that “conservatives, of all people, should not ignore basic principles of economics”:
Such tactics, which are designed to score political points and gain headlines, are a disservice to American citizens, who urgently need Congress to debate the climate issue constructively. Voters are counting on their elected representatives to work together across party lines to develop balanced legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, lower Americas dangerous dependence on oil, and help us move more quickly to a more diversified, robust energy economy. [...]
Few except special interests and politicians who do their bidding would argue that limiting emissions that put human health and the environment at risk puts a burdensome “tax” on American families and businesses.
Yet congressional Republicans don’t seem to care. Today, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) issued a “Leader Alert” saying they won’t be backing down from their false claim.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
But lying and distorting is the primary method of action for Rushpublicans
Without lies, they would have no words to say
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:35 pmOh crap, could Republicans really be capable of learning? That would take all the fun out of things if they start acting responsibly.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:36 pmAnother rift emerges.
Has me wondering whether the emergence of a real 3rd Party won’t result from the fragmentation of the Republican base.
I always thought it would be the other way around.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:38 pmInstead of the Bull Moose Party, we’ll have the Bull S**t Party…
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:40 pmWhoohoo! A climate change thread!
It’s been a long and crappy week and I am so in the mood to kick some science-denier ass.
BRING IT!
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:40 pmRepublicans for Environmental Protection –
it must be a really small organization.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:43 pmKeep it up, Boner.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:44 pmHow does this group even exist? Almost as odd as Log Cabin Republicans.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:44 pmTo all of you above,
Your extreme partisanship is going to be the ruin of us all.
Cap and trade will cause the consumer to pay twice – higher energy bills now and tax dollars to fund the research and development that those oh so trustworthy folks in Congress decide will work.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:52 pmNo, its not a partisan issue. So why all the partisan rant?
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:54 pmThis is not a partisan issue.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:54 pmSince when do repugs give a rat’s a$$ about anything that does a disservice to American’s – they could care less.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:54 pmRight again RO –
We should appoint T. Boone Pickens to a non-elected “Energy Potentate” position, and do whatever he says instead.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:54 pmtombaker Says:
Another rift emerges.
Has me wondering whether the emergence of a real 3rd Party won’t result from the fragmentation of the Republican base.
I always thought it would be the other way around.
Does it really matter where it comes from? The idea that all Republicans are sucking the Limbaugh teat is no more true than the one that all Democrats are liberals and are concerned for the people.
I’ve always felt the Progressive idea was about progress for America. By Americans.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:56 pmYour extreme partisanship is going to be the ruin of us all.
Your concerns would be better placed with the hyper-partisan republicans.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:57 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Cap and trade will cause the consumer to pay twice – higher energy bills now and tax dollars to fund the research and development that those oh so trustworthy folks in Congress decide will work.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:52 pm
___________
Whoohoo! First customer of the day!
Energy bills may indeed be a bit higher if we continue to use electricity at the same rate, which should provide an incentive for individuals and businesses to REDUCE their energy consumption. That’s the entire point!
And seriously – “to fund the research and development that those oh so trustworthy folks in Congress decide will work.” What do you have against research and development? Every technological advance in human history since the inclined plane has been a product of research and development. It WILL work.
Or do you prefer the “blissful ignorance” approach to climate change?
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:57 pmDo they allow concern trolls on wingnut sites?
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:58 pm“Republicans for Environmental Protection” — I think a better name for this oxymoronic group might be “Republicans Against Protecting the Environment”; the acronym more accurately reflects what Republicans are actually doing to the environment…
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:59 pmtom,
Again, the extreme partisan rant does nothing to help any of us.
Any comments to my actual argument? It’d be great if you could omit any personal insults, GOP generalities, etc.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:59 pmThere’s actually such a thing as the Republicans for Environmental Protection?
I’m sure both members have to clear their calendars for their annual meeting.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:59 pmOr do you prefer the “blissful ignorance” approach to climate change?
The human sacrifice approach is more what they understand.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:59 pmJohn Boehner’s an effing drunken idiot.
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:59 pmRomartin16985 Says:
No, its not a partisan issue. So why all the partisan rant?
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:54 pm
_____________
Good question. Why don’t you ask John Boehner and get back to us on that one…
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:00 pmGo, toasterhead, go!!!
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:00 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Cap and trade will cause the consumer to pay twice – higher energy bills now and tax dollars to fund the research and development that those oh so trustworthy folks in Congress decide will work.
Your rant would be much more effective if it wasn’t straight from the Republican Book of Fear.
And since the free market piracy of the past 8 years has shown it is inept and incapable, I’ll vote for giving the government a shot at it. I’d rather deal with bureaucracy than greed any day.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:02 pmI see we have a “blissfully ignorant troll” on the thread.
Do these Republican shills actually believe their own $hit?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:02 pmGOP: Party of No Sense Whatsoever
Party of Fear ‘n Smear. They need to realize that they’re nothing but a pathetic of losers.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:03 pmRo – I’ve got waaaayyy more of my guys voting with your guys than you have voting with mine, so, again, WHO is hyper-partisan???
This dog that you have, it is not hunting.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:05 pm#25 Free market piracy is about the size of it. That along with capitalism run amok and the damn near destruction of the world economy.
Where where these fear mongers then? Where were they when Bush hid the cost of the Iraq War from the budget? Where were they when Bush and their party of ignorance (POI?)ran up an unprecedented national debt?
Their collective heads were lodged solidly in their anal orifices – that’s precisely where these thugs were. Now they pretend to actually “care”.
First time/shame on you! Second time/shame on me! Americans (73%) KNOW BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT what the Republican party has become and whose side they’re on.
The Republicans have (by choice) become the #1 enemy of the people.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:05 pmThe Ctenocephalides Dogfather Says:
“Republicans for Environmental Protection” — I think a better name for this oxymoronic group might be “Republicans Against Protecting the Environment”;
April 3rd, 2009 at 2:59 pm
___________
We should give credit where it’s due – at least there are some Republicans who do get it and are standing up to their science-denier colleagues. The RAPE folks are Boehner and his lying cronies.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:05 pmAny comments to my actual argument?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:06 pm—
Sure. So what is energy costs rise? Perhaps that needs to happen to get an energy wasteful and spoiled population under some control and cause people to make intelligent energy decisions
The only reason our government is on the verge of bankruptcy is because it has been forced to bail out all the ‘capitalists’ who have run their companies into the ground.
They got their chance to show the world how perfect the whole free market thing is, no regulation, trickle down economics, the rich get richer.
Guess what? It tanked so badly. Greed is no way to run anything.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:08 pma soul that is not that advanced will have no problem sticking to its lies.
look close the repubs are like on a different planet adn the demos dont have a clue, in fact the demos are afraid of the repubs.
the repubs dont control the house the senate or the white house but they control congress.
folks the two party system has failed us and its needs to be changed. the consitution is over 200 years old and it needs to be updated to represent the 21st century reality.
how much of the middle class will disappear before americans wake up to the reality that wash no longer represents the people.
without a huge middle class there is no more republic and a slow decline to third world status.
americans wake up this is not a recession this is a decline of wealth due to something called uncontrolled capitalism which is about profits not people.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:10 pmToasterhead,
You’ve missed my point. I don’t believe in climate change, but I do believe in clean energy and conservation.
So here’s what I prefer to do, point by point -
Understand that businesses are in business for one reason only – to make a profit. Judge this if you will, but its a fact.
Make it more profitable for corporations to produce clean energy than to produce dirty energy.
This means tax incentives (yes I know, evil profits, but I refer you back to my first point).
Recognize that taxing behavior that you don’t want (producing dirty energy) won’t make them do what you do want (produce clean energy). They will pass that on to the consumer, thereby reenforcing my first point yet again.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:10 pmTo all of you above,
Your extreme partisanship is going to be the ruin of us all.
Cap and trade will cause the consumer to pay twice – higher energy bills now and tax dollars to fund the research and development that those oh so trustworthy folks in Congress decide will work.
Fine, let’s debate those issues. But we shouldn’t willfully lie and distort the truth to avoid having to defend our real positions. If you disagree with cap-and-trade, fine. Good. Now debate on the issues.
Do you understand how cap-and-trade works? Environmentally conscious companies and polluters alike get an allotted amount of “carbon credits.” Companies that don’t use all their credits can trade them on the open market to companies that use up all of theirs. This creates a new market which will add income to environmentally conscious companies. This will either convince high-polluters to change their practices or force them to pay a “tax” on their pollution. The cost that could be passed on to the end user would be roughly $70/person/year. This cost could easily be negated with a small tax refund, thus not impacting the end user whatsoever.
Debate these facts with truth and logic please, not ad-hominem arguments and straw men. I presented the facts, I didn’t distort numbers or try to paint with a broad brush. I suggest you and the rest of the Republicans do the same.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:11 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Your STUPIDITY will be the ruin of us all. You want to talk about OUR partisanship on a thread where Boehner ADMITS they will continue lying. You keep SAYING it will cause us higher energy rates without considering that a push is NEEDED to get these companies to invest in greener energy. The business of business is to increase profits and NOTHING is more profitable than owning a larger share of a shrinking resource even if that means wars and hardship. It STILL means higher profits.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:12 pmI not for cap and trade because who it enriches, mainly wall street.
They dont own carbon, but want to make a commodity of it, and speculate on that, do some synthetic derivatives on it, trade it like oil.
The tax is one thing, the real rip off will be the speculation of it, like oil was.
Too much carbon, like too much water, is surely not a good thing, and we need to limit it, but to give it to wall street, the people who brought us weapons of mass financial destruction to create another bubble that will, as all bubbles, implode?
No more wealth stealing, generational theft bubbles. Which reminds me, did the S&L [Thrifts] bailout,under Bush the first, get repaid?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:12 pmUh-OH! A Leader Alert has been issued!!!
Cue the trolls!
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:15 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Again, the extreme partisan rant does nothing to help any of us.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
It is a partisan rant to point out that Boehner basically ADMITTETD he was going to continue lying for partisan advantage?
Any comments to my actual argument? It’d be great if you could omit any personal insults, GOP generalities, etc.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
WE should omit personal insults to someone that BEGAN HIS FIRST POST telling us that OUR extreme partisanship was going to ruin us all? Why would that be? Did you think God gave you conservatives the exclusive FRANCHISE on insults and that ONLY you should be allowed them?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:15 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Recognize that taxing behavior that you don’t want (producing dirty energy) won’t make them do what you do want (produce clean energy). They will pass that on to the consumer, thereby reenforcing my first point yet again.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
When they DO that, pass on that cost it will make clean energy more affordable and attractive thereby NEGATING your entire argument
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:18 pm(it’s joe scarborough, sockpuppeting)
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:19 pmRomartin16985 Says: You’ve missed my point. I don’t believe in climate change,
You could shut up right there. Or remember to pay your dues to the Flat Earth Society.
Either way, your credibility is shot.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:20 pmLOL, thank you for your concern about our ‘partisanship’.
Let me concern troll you for a moment. Cap and trade places market pressure on ‘dirty energy’ and creates an incentive for the market to develop alternative sources of ‘renewable energy’. If we do not take the lead in this industry, it will likely be the end of american relevance in the world.
America was made strong by the middle class manufacturing base which we’ve outsourced to China and the third world.
We subsisted for decades on a ’service economy’ most of which has either been outsourced to India or diminished in the financial services sector.
We need a massive economic paradigm shift in our country to make up for the fact that the market has rejected having a ‘buying and selling houses to each other’ based economy.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:21 pmRomartin16985 Says:
You’ve missed my point. I don’t believe in climate change, but I do believe in clean energy and conservation.
Ok, so you’re only a science denier when it suits you. Fair enough…
Understand that businesses are in business for one reason only – to make a profit. Judge this if you will, but its a fact.
This is a major problem with our conception of capitalism, and I don’t believe it’s entirely true. There are many businesses – particularly in the green product industries, whose sole focus is not the bottom line, otherwise they’d be cutting the same corners and causing the same pollution as everyone else.
Make it more profitable for corporations to produce clean energy than to produce dirty energy.
This means tax incentives (yes I know, evil profits, but I refer you back to my first point).
Which would be nice if multinational companies paid taxes, but between loopholes and offshore tax shelters and subsidies, most of the big polluters don’t.
Recognize that taxing behavior that you don’t want (producing dirty energy) won’t make them do what you do want (produce clean energy). They will pass that on to the consumer, thereby reenforcing my first point yet again.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:10 pm
__________
Perhaps. That is, until some companies start producing clean energy, reduce their tax burden, and pass that savings on to the consumer, thereby pulling customers away from the dinosaur companies who refuse to adapt.
It swings both ways.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:23 pmBrian,
I do understand the cap and trade plan.
A cap and trade tax will of course get passed on to the end user, the consumer.
So any given corporation may or may not be compelled to change their ways. I don’t know about you, but I don’t have a choice of where to buy my electricity.
And I don’t know definitively what the cost per person per year will be, but even if it is a small number, have you ever known a tax to not go up?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:23 pmSelling carbon emission credits is like selling your sister to the whorehouse so your momma don’t have to work there.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:25 pmdeebaser, did you really use the word paradigm?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:26 pmRomartin16985 Says:
So any given corporation may or may not be compelled to change their ways. I don’t know about you, but I don’t have a choice of where to buy my electricity.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:23 pm
___________
But you do have a choice to use less. Get some LED bulbs and turn the thermostat down in the winter – problem solved.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:26 pmGlad to see there are some people within the Republican party who haven’t lost all sense of sanity. We need to start dealing with all of these pressing issues like the economy and the environment in a bipartisan manner, and also begin to remember old promises we made long ago. For example, global poverty, which we pledged in 2000 to help eradicate by supporting the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. The Borgen Project (www.borgenproject.org) has some interesting insight into addressing the issues of global poverty, something we can remedy easily and sustainably.
Some interesting figures to ponder:
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:28 pm$30 billion USD: The annual shortfall to end global poverty.
$550 billion USD: The annual US defense budget.
“A cap and trade tax will of course get passed on to the end user, the consumer.”
–
See #31
“but I don’t have a choice of where to buy my electricity.”
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:28 pm—
Have you considered living off the grid?
Romartin16985 Says:
Toasterhead,
You’ve missed my point. I don’t believe in climate change, but I do believe in clean energy and conservation.
Hmmmmm…dinosaurs and wooly mammoths probably disagree with you on the “climate change” part.
So here’s what I prefer to do, point by point -
This oughta be GOOD!
Understand that businesses are in business for one reason only – to make a profit. Judge this if you will, but its a fact.
OK!!! Profound! Often there is a service or product that is made that in turn makes the profit, but you’re simple. I like that!
Make it more profitable for corporations to produce clean energy than to produce dirty energy.
Hmmmm…like cap and trade?
This means tax incentives (yes I know, evil profits, but I refer you back to my first point).
Evil profits? Tax incentives? Your first point? Where is it?!?!
Recognize that taxing behavior that you don’t want (producing dirty energy) won’t make them do what you do want (produce clean energy). They will pass that on to the consumer, thereby reenforcing my first point yet again.
Really? Cigarette tax lights up quit-smoking hotlines
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:28 pmRomartin16985 Says:
And I don’t know definitively what the cost per person per year will be, but even if it is a small number, have you ever known a tax to not go up?
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Ah, YES, income tax on the top earners has gone DOWN the last Thirty years. I guess you havent been keeping up with current events.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:30 pmThe Republican business credo: Profits. Screw responsibility.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:31 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Brian,
I do understand the cap and trade plan.
A cap and trade tax will of course get passed on to the end user, the consumer.
And smart consumers will in turn buy from environmentally conscious businesses! A win-win!!
So any given corporation may or may not be compelled to change their ways. I don’t know about you, but I don’t have a choice of where to buy my electricity.
I may or may not understand what you are trying to say here. Do you know you can construct a battery out of a potato?
And I don’t know definitively what the cost per person per year will be, but even if it is a small number, have you ever known a tax to not go up?
Bush tax cuts made it cheaper to stay rich!
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:33 pmToasterhead,
I’m afraid its wishful thinking to automatically believe that corporations will make so much more money by producing clean energy and selling their credits that they’ll have to unload some on the consumers. Again, I don’t have a choice as to where to buy my electricity or gas.
And until all these corporations figure out how to turn that tax into a credit, guess who pays for it.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:33 pmSorry, Im corporate. Sometimes stupid buzzwords just feel natural. Well hooda, this has been a productive exhange. My take away is that in the future I should reduce my negative output and be more of a value add to the thread… JESUS SOMEBODY STOP ME….
…lulz
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:33 pmYour extreme partisanship is going to be the ruin of us all.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:35 pm—
Let’s revisit this bizarre intro shall we?
Whoot! Maximizing your input should always be in direct relation to the minimized response of market gains as expressed by subcretaceous responders who like Cheetos.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:38 pmTweedster,
I guess it was too much to assume that we could all agree businesses yes produce a product or a service. I won’t make that mistake again.
Anyway, the point that I’m trying to make is that cap and trade does NOT make it more profitable for businesses to produce clean energy. It makes it LESS profitable for them to continue producing dirty energy, UNLESS they charge US more. Thats their out. A smoker doesn’t have that same out I’m afraid.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:41 pmRomartin16985 Says:
I’m afraid its wishful thinking to automatically believe that corporations will make so much more money by producing clean energy and selling their credits that they’ll have to unload some on the consumers. Again, I don’t have a choice as to where to buy my electricity or gas.
And until all these corporations figure out how to turn that tax into a credit, guess who pays for it.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:33 pm
____________
You do.
So I thank you in advance for the financial contributions you will inevitably be making to save my planet.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:46 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Tweedster,
I guess it was too much to assume that we could all agree businesses yes produce a product or a service. I won’t make that mistake again.
What mistake? Why are you so uptight? It’s freakin’ Friday!!!
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:47 pmToasterhead,
There’s no incentive to corporations to change their ways if they don’t feel the pain.
My feeling the pain won’t change anything.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:48 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Anyway, the point that I’m trying to make is that cap and trade does NOT make it more profitable for businesses to produce clean energy. It makes it LESS profitable for them to continue producing dirty energy, UNLESS they charge US more. Thats their out. A smoker doesn’t have that same out I’m afraid.
So, you believe that cap and trade will be the ONLY policy to address weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels? That’s a pretty odd notion…
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:49 pmRomartin16985 Says:
My feeling the pain won’t change anything.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:48 pm
___________
No, but it’ll make me smile, and that’s all that matters. :)
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:52 pm@58… Wow, you’re like Senior Management material.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:53 pmMy feeling the pain won’t change anything.
—
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:54 pmWhat is so painful about putting on a freakin’ sweater and properly inflating your tires?
This is the policy we’re discussing at the moment. And its a bad one, won’t have the effect we want.
You’ve got to give businesses a reason to go out and explore alternative energies.
And the reason that motives business is the possibility of increasing profits. Thats it.
A tax incentive to do this WILL work. A tax dis-incentive will just be passed on.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:57 pmToasterhead,
I forgot to say that of course you will be paying the cap and trade tax, and when your children/grandchildren are paying it I can only assume it’ll be higher……
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pmRomartin16985 Says:
A tax incentive to do this WILL work. A tax dis-incentive will just be passed on.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:57 pm
___________
And the research you’re basing this opinion on is?
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Toasterhead,
I forgot to say that of course you will be paying the cap and trade tax, and when your children/grandchildren are paying it I can only assume it’ll be higher……
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:58 pm
__________
Fine. I view it as an investment in the planet I’ll be passing on to my children and grandchildren.
If the energy companies have not significantly reduced their emissions by the time they’re paying taxes and power bills, a few extra bucks a month will be the least of their worries given what will be happening to the climate.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:03 pmI was with Republicans for Environmental Protection for a few years back in the 1990s. Bob Dole utterly ignored us when he ran for President, John McCain and some other well-known Republicans liked us. I’m surprised they’re still around after the Bush administration.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:04 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Your post makes no sense. It DOES make it more profitable to make green energy if it makes it LESS profitable to produce dirty energy. It is a choice they make. The same energy companies produce both types. Edison in California has had a solar generating plant in Dagget since the 70’s. I know people who work there and it has worked great for decades. If they pay MORE in taxes for their other plants and LESS for that plant it makes it MORE profitable for them to make more solar plants.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:05 pmumm… How do you figure? If a business has to ‘pass it on’, they are at a competitive disadvantage whereas a business that has more credits than they need can sell the credits and pass on the savings. This is basic economics. You’re only cherry picking the half of the equation that makes your argument work.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:05 pmchiroptera toasterhead Says:
Romartin16985 Says:
A tax incentive to do this WILL work. A tax dis-incentive will just be passed on.
April 3rd, 2009 at 3:57 pm
___________
And the research you’re basing this opinion on is?
Psssst…he doesn’t realize the tax incentive inherent in NOT paying a tax by NOT polluting…
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:06 pmToasterhead,
This is how the world works. Some taxes are put in place to discourage behaviors (smoking, drinking, etc.) Some tax breaks are meant to encourage behaviors (buying a home, whatever).
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 pmdeebaser:
You’re only cherry picking the half of the equation that makes your argument work.
Ding! Ding! DING!!
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 pmThe Republican lying points memo is now out in the open. Boner commands – “You must keep lying to the people or it’s game over. You have your orders.”
Behold the corrupt dictators! We get to see it all unfold in real time. Do they know that we know that the republican party is now held together by a fabric of lies? Maybe they know but they can’t help themselves. Maybe they think the people will remain gullable.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 pmRomartin16985 Says:
This is how the world works. Some taxes are put in place to discourage behaviors (smoking, drinking, etc.)
And the people sufficiently discouraged don’t pay those taxes.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 pmWrong Tweedster,
Do you really believe that tax won’t be passed on?
Poof, tax incentive in not paying a tax gone!
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:08 pmRomartin16985 Says:
A tax incentive to do this WILL work. A tax dis-incentive will just be passed on.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Your evidence this is true is WHAT? What would stop them from making their future energy generation decisions based on what the tax is? What makes you think that just passing on the cost wont have a deliterious effect on their business? You do NOT know the tax disencentive wont work that is a baseless assertion you make because of your prejudicial assumptions, nothing more
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:08 pmrmwarnick Says:
I was with Republicans for Environmental Protection for a few years back in the 1990s.
My condolences…
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:08 pmRomartin16985 Says:
I forgot to say that of course you will be paying the cap and trade tax, and when your children/grandchildren are paying it I can only assume it’ll be higher……
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
And your evidence that his children and grandchildren will be paying it instead of buying greener energy is WHAT again? Oh you dont HAVE any. Imagine my suprise
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:09 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Wrong Tweedster,
Do you really believe that tax won’t be passed on?
Poof, tax incentive in not paying a tax gone!
Why would companies not paying the tax, pass the tax they aren’t paying on?
Huh?
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:10 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Do you really believe that tax won’t be passed on?
Poof, tax incentive in not paying a tax gone!
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
And your evidence that there is NO consequences for raising their prices is WHAT again? Oh you dont have any? Imagine my surprise
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:11 pmI don’t know how else to say this, but I’ll try again -
They don’t not pay the tax until they pass it on!
Think about it…..
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:11 pmRomartin16985 Says: Let’s just keep playing the game we have been playing because it worked so gooder.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:13 pmRomartin16985 Says:
I don’t know how else to say this, but I’ll try again -
They don’t not pay the tax until they pass it on!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I dont know how much simpler I can make this. There are consequences for raising prices. It DOES make it attractive for them to make DIFFERENT choices on generation in the future.
THINK ABOUT IT
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:15 pmBy your standards, romartin, energy companies will pass on all expenses to the consumer so they can protect their profits. Since this is an area that definitely falls into the ‘promote the general welfare” then the government should just nationalize the industry and remove the whole profit motive.
Master Po says: Be careful of how stupid you sound.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:17 pmIf you take Ro’s argument to its logical conclusion we would NEVER tax ANY business EVER because they would just pass it on to consumers. Leaving out the part that there ARE actions consumers can take OTHER than just saying thank you sir can I have another increase.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:18 pmAnd the ‘tax incentives’ from the companies that pollute less will also be passed on as well. Think about it.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:19 pmdon’t know how else to say this, but I’ll try again -
They don’t not pay the tax until they pass it on!
Think about it…..
—
What part of so what if the end result is the reduction of wasteful enrgy use by a nation of ecessive spoiled energy brats…
Think about it…
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:32 pmRomartin16985 Says:
This is how the world works. Some taxes are put in place to discourage behaviors (smoking, drinking, etc.) Some tax breaks are meant to encourage behaviors (buying a home, whatever).
Like the cap on Social Security, which was originally meant to spur economic investment and job creation, by allowing the wealthy to only pay an infinitesmal portion of their incomes, to the retirement fund?
That has failed horribly, as the recent staggering job losses show.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:36 pmThe fact is that businesses treat taxes as a cost, remember from high school econ Total profit =Total revenue-total cost?
The government receives the money, but we the consumer effectively pay it, it doesn’t somehow magically reduce a company’s profits.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:37 pmBarfly,
You continue to want to treat the social security tax the same as income tax.
It wasn’t meant to be an income tax, it was meant to be money set aside for an individuals retirement. But please lets not go there.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:39 pmPrice controls are what is indicated.
If it’s OK to have a “minimum wage”, then it should also be OK to have a “maximum profit margin”, and that’s how a tax can be passed that is not simply shuffled downhill until it hits someone who can’t afford to dodge it.
Deeply cynical and pessimistic worldview, Romartin.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:41 pmThat’s even worse than “hyper-partisanship” imho.
dbadass,
We won’t have clean energy to buy until our energy companies start producing clean energy.
A business needs a financial reason (ie the possibility of higher profits, and a tax incentive to encourage the risk-taking to boot) to do this.
A tax disincentive won’t work IF the company can just turn around and raise their rates to cover the tax.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:43 pmYour extreme tax whining is going to be the ruin of us all.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:44 pmRomartin16985 Says:
The government receives the money, but we the consumer effectively pay it, it doesn’t somehow magically reduce a company’s profits.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
You again pretend that there couldnt POSSIBLY be any negative consequences for them raising their prices. There is a lot I COULD do if I think the energy companies are charging me too much. I make a very good living. I could buy a windgenerater some photovoltaic cells and cut my usage down to very little. I could buy a wood burning stove in fact LOTS of people could do that. So keep pretending that if we EVER tax businesses it doesnt do anything because they just pass that cost on. I know it is the rightwing talking point that is ALWAYS bandied about but you have to ignore logical consequences to keep making that argument over and over.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:45 pmhostage takers always want more ransom.
when is it ok to stop negotiating with them?
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:45 pmwhen a company like exxon is ONLY making WORLD RECORD profits,
you have to give them MORE MONEY
so they will do the RIGHT THING???
if that’s the case, we’re toast.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:46 pmRomartin16985 Says:
Barfly,
You continue to want to treat the social security tax the same as income tax.
It wasn’t meant to be an income tax, it was meant to be money set aside for an individuals retirement. But please lets not go there.
No, let’s go there. Social Security. Security for society. Contributions should be made based on an individual ability. The cap was put in place because rich people saw no reason to participate in society on an equal basis. They were special.
Is there another word in Social Security we have missed? Did it include except for the special and rich?
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:47 pmRomartin16985 Says:
A tax disincentive won’t work IF the company can just turn around and raise their rates to cover the tax.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You keep repeating this over and over as if by force of will and repitition alone you will make it magically be true. You have NOT given any evidence this is so. You have NOT shown that energy corporations will NOT take this into consideration when making future energy generation decisions you have NOT shown that raising their prices would NOT have any negative consequences you just keep saying it over and over and over and…have you been hypnotized lately by some shiny object?
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:48 pmtombaker Says:
hostage takers always want more ransom.
when is it ok to stop negotiating with them?
When we nationalize their sorry butts because they choose to believe they are better than the system?
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:50 pmtombaker,
Maximum profit margins is where we’re heading. Good-bye clean energy then, as well as advances in medicine.
I’m just being realistic, not pessimistic. I do believe many businesses take pride in how they do business, not only making a profit. But if we want energy companies to change the way they create energy, they won’t do it without the possibility of increasing their profits.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:50 pmRomartin16985 Says: I’m just being realistic
The mantra of the Republicans as they try to feed on the carcass of their kill.
Remember the buffalo.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:52 pmtombaker Says:
I dont know about that but I WOULD support is that if a corporation pays any of their top executives, including all compensation, more than one million dollars per year it CANNOT be taken off of their tax bill as a business expense.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:54 pmIn the late 1800’s there were millions of buffalo, vast herds on the prairie. In a few short decades they were down to pitifully small herds. The government stepped in and slowly they recovered but never to their previous levels.
It was the government who saved the buffalo from the extreme capitalistic predation because the hunters had no clue, all they wanted was profits.
We are the buffalo today.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:57 pmFrom where I sit, it’s the only place we’ve ever even tried to go, and that is the problem.
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:59 pmThat sums it up quite nicely. Im done with this troll.
Roman: BUT X WILL CAUSE Y!!!!!
Sane TPer: But then wont ~X result in ~Y?
Roman:…
Roman: Let me put it another way that you partisan liberals can understand “X WILL CAUSE Y!!!!!”
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:59 pmForget about why – HOW could we do that for a company like Exxon, that makes more PROFIT than any other corporation on Earth ever has?? IF the Stim is too expensive, then what would a bribe big enough to turn Exxon’s head be???
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:07 pmRomartin16985 Says: 104
You are NOT being realistic you are being dogmatic. They are NOT the same thing. You cannot show your assertions based only on your assumptions and prejudices are true. They wont BECOME true because you keep repeating them. For instance it is plain idiotic to say there goes advances in medicine when MANY advances in medicine are made by TAX DOLLARS through the NIH. Check out the story of Taxol
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:08 pmRepubs for Environmental Protection:
Where have they been for the last 8 years ?
Or is this just putting lipstick on an elephant ?
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:25 pmRoman’s piteous cry: but if we can’t make money why should we do it?
I’d go out on a limb and reply: Because it would be a decent thing to do?
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:32 pmThe point is that the Republicans are lying about the cost, and the author of the study that is being misquoted has set it straight.
link that is in this story
This is chickenfeed compared to the costs of global warming. When you lose 20,000 customers in a heat wave, it’s bad for business.
April 3rd, 2009 at 5:58 pmMaybe there’s no agreement about the cost, but there will be a cost to consumers.
Obama himself said in a 2008 campaign speech “Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.” Have you forgotten?
Do some research if you doubt my quote.
Yes, he will give tax rebates to families, but has admitted that families will still pay at least $500 per year. These rebates don’t apply to retirees or college students, so this effective tax to consumers is very regressive.
And the worst effect of all – the admitted cost of $646 billion out of the private sector.
I’m sure our elected officials will do a great job of spending that.
April 3rd, 2009 at 6:26 pmguess we’ll just have to wait and see what happens, ro.
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:29 pmtom, Sure will.
And before you all start telling me I don’t care about our environment, guess what I – care just as much as you do.
This drive towards energy independence/clean energy is good, but it should not be done on the backs of the taxpayers, the poor, etc. and in the midst of a recession.
Any plan needs to be thought through on its own merits by our leaders, and then let us see the proposal online, remember that too? NOT shoved through in a budget bill.
April 3rd, 2009 at 7:36 pmAnd Eugene,
In case you missed my response to you on the other discussion, here it is again:
there’s nothing DEMOCRATIC about you.
Go soak your head.
April 3rd, 2009 at 10:26 pmRomartin16985 Says:
I am not nor have I ever said I was a Democrat. There CERTAINLY is something IGNORANT about you. Your stupidity however is NOT my problem. Keep whining that I am blowing your mindless talking points out of the water however. I just love laughing at people as stupid as you. I am more democratic, and care more about people than a moron like you EVER WILL.
April 5th, 2009 at 6:07 amOh also Ro BLOW ME.
April 5th, 2009 at 6:07 amHey Eugene,
Before you accuse me of it, I know I’m repeating myself.
Go peddle stupid somewhere else. Those of us living in the real world aren’t buying it.
April 5th, 2009 at 2:13 pmRomartin16985 Says:
You dont know anything about the real world. You are far too stupid and brainwashed. THAT wasnt really repitition so much as it was pure projection. STUPID is the ONLY thing you have to hawk. Big stupid. Vast stupid. Stupid so pure it must be left over from the first primordial ooze of stupid. While I think it is a pure and impressive strain of stupid it really doesnt have anything to do with the real world and you have only deluded yourself that you are aquainted with THAT at all. You are a moron Ro. You are always going to BE a moron. Time to come to grips with THAT simple reality
April 5th, 2009 at 7:08 pmI can almost feel the spittle. Ugh.
April 5th, 2009 at 7:51 pmRomartin16985 Says:
I can almost feel the spittle. Ugh.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
I am sure you can. I am sure you can SEE the drool pooling on your keyboard. I am sure you can imagine all kinds of things that have NOTHING to do with me OR reality. That really doesnt mean anything except that you are very stupid and think WE are like YOU. We arent. Get over it
April 5th, 2009 at 9:53 pmOK Pat obviously senile dementia has set in. Time to see the nice young men that will need to take care of you soon.burun estetigi rent a car arac kiralama
April 18th, 2009 at 6:00 amsac ekimi