| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17751
Location: Berkeley, California
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 1:48 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
NW--not one to read carefully. Oil prices have gone up dramatically over the past three decades--due to the higher cost of extraction, supply demand relationships, and profits. That has reduced demand dramatically--as has the California regulatory program. The cost of a carbon tax, in relation to that, is minor. Some advocate rebating the higher cost to those under a given income level. That would still use market forces to reduce demand and encourage alternatives. Asked and answered, if you were paying attention.
The most affected areas from higher temperatures and sea level rise are often poorer areas. And of course, those who maximize their carbon footprint, whether left or right, windsurfer or abstemious soul, pay nothing for their impacts.
Tell me why the right wing is so afraid of the market? Seems to me that more fuel efficient cars work out pretty well for those with limited incomes.
I already know where you get your talking points. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 8:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mac wrote: | NW--not one to read carefully. Oil prices have gone up dramatically over the past three decades--due to the higher cost of extraction, supply demand relationships, and profits. That has reduced demand dramatically--as has the California regulatory program. The cost of a carbon tax, in relation to that, is minor. Some advocate rebating the higher cost to those under a given income level. That would still use market forces to reduce demand and encourage alternatives. Asked and answered, if you were paying attention.
The most affected areas from higher temperatures and sea level rise are often poorer areas. And of course, those who maximize their carbon footprint, whether left or right, windsurfer or abstemious soul, pay nothing for their impacts.
Tell me why the right wing is so afraid of the market? Seems to me that more fuel efficient cars work out pretty well for those with limited incomes.
I already know where you get your talking points. |
A) I read everything that you post, just because I don't accept most of it doesn't mean that I don't read it. Some things that you post I have no words for, not wanting to get sucked into a mac vortex that is very similar the to the Baja *ahem* human vortex that I like to avoid because there is no bottom to it, the two of you have a lot in common.
B) The right wing is afraid of the market? Since when, they thrive on the market, but a free open market that has little federal forces on it to try to drive it in a direction that is not healthy for the market overall.
C) The poor have a very hard time affording a new car that has better mileage, let alone the money to install alternative energy sources to their homes, who are you try to kid?
D) I know where you get your talking points also, you are not that special.
I've been windsurfing all afternoon today (try it sometime), I need a shower, so for now I'm done, out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17751
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 10:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
20 plus in Berkeley. On the odd chance that you might be interested in learning something, here is an accessible version of the Tragedy of the Commons, from a professor in your neck of the woods: http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/TragedyoftheCommons.html
The idea is, that if someone can use a commonly owned resource--the pastures in England held in common, the air in a region, or the climate, without paying for the consequences of their activity they will maximize their economic benefit and ignore the costs to others. It is the underlying economic theory for regulation.
In the case of air pollution--which includes CO2-- those who benefit from cheap fuel that doesn't reflect the public health cost, and climate cost, are cheating the system. They are not paying a fair price for the goods they consume, but transfering costs to others. That is not a market economy, that is subsidy. I know, went right by you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14892
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nw30 wrote: | | mac wrote: | NW's comments about Republican support for environmental programs is laughable. Republicans such as William Ruckleshaus were pioneers in environmental protection, and I can name at least a dozen from California who were committed to protecting the environment and minimizing the impacts on business. This valuable perspective has been lost as the party moved to the far right, pandering to the oil companies, the Koch's, and anti-regulation ideology. But then NW is not know for his grasp of facts or deep thinking.
|
Thank you, it sounds like you're trying to make me famous, I know you are famous, so coming from you is great.
The first part of this paragraph of yours is accurate, and I doubt if swc even knew that, but then you went astray, no surprise.
When talking about big oil, you always confuse pandering with defending. The candid defense of the oil companies started at the same time as the liberal attack on the oil companies. There is a reason for everything, and pandering ain't it.
You do realize that fossil fuel is still by far the cheapest fuel available, so when anyone does anything to force the price to go up, keeping in mind that it is a global market, then it's the poor all around the world, that get hit the hardest. And I can't imagine why a good liberal like yourself would be in favor of anything that would do something like that.
Is it the perceived bigger picture that's more important, so that some collateral damage is okay? |
Did you factor in the first gulf war, the support of the shaw of Iran the invasion of Iraq, the cost of defending against new waves of terrorism all over the world into that price? Or did you conviently leave that out?
Well I know you did not include it... again I did a cost analysis of the solar reflecting farm in Boulder City NV, nothing technologically advanced there that could not have been done 40 years ago. mirrors on pipes with a steam generator is it. well if we spent just 1 trillion for the war in Iraq which is to be double to triple and now higher estimates. Well at 1 trillion at the cost to install and make the first ones we would have free electricity for every household in the USA for the next 30 could be as high as to 50 year to 100 years. now add in mass production that would mean our companies would have free energy to make products with, you realize what that would do for us economically?
So did you forget the costs to us for protecting and wars? gee why?
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 11:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mac and Baja, a tag team, OMG!!!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14892
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2016 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nw30 wrote: | | mac and Baja, a tag team, OMG!!!!! |
troll post....
please cut and run because as you noted you can not debate my fine tuned points... Note no right winger ever has been, well actually right wingers are has-beens.
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14892
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
low level thinker says a degreed engineer is not a scientist... from the brain of the republican party.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sarah-palin-bill-nye_us_57101cefe4b0018f9cb993a1
Sarah Palin Doesn’t Think Bill Nye Is A Real Scientist
“Bill Nye is as much as scientist as I am.”
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 20935
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The mac/Dean Tag Team philosophy is making national headway and headlines. The Intolerance Brigade, formerly known as the American Left Wing, is demonstrating and filing suits across the nation in an attempt to silence all conservative speech. Writing "Trump" in chalk on a sidewalk is now "hate speech" -- unless, of course, it's preceded by "Fuck" -- and some universities are providing psychological counseling for PTSD-ridden liberal students who cannot study or take tests because they saw "Trump" chalked on a wall.
Um ... that's not a joke. It's the result of their being given all A's in high school, being given "participation trophies" in every sport they ever tried, being raised in a PC world by liberal parents, and being allowed to deck teachers they don't like, and in general just being allowed to act like the the spoiled little shits and fatherless gang bangers they were brought up to be, all with no consequences to any actions or non-actions.
Wait 'til these clueless little shits -- esecially the idiots who actually believe
Uncle Benie -- go off their parental or public dole, get jobs, and have to make it in the real world
Last edited by isobars on Sat Apr 16, 2016 12:31 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17751
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 15, 2016 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Isobars would rather make it up than understand it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 17751
Location: Berkeley, California
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 17, 2016 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Are you shocked?
| Quote: | Peabody Energy, the nation’s largest investor-owned coal company, declared bankruptcy Wednesday. Among the many consequences, the company’s court-ordered disclosures are likely to yield hard evidence of Peabody’s direct links to climate science denial.
After all, that’s what we learned from the bankruptcy filings of two other major U.S. coal companies, Arch Coal and Alpha Natural Resources. The companies’ lists of creditors accompanying their Chapter 11 bankruptcy filings both cited known climate science deniers. So far, the bankruptcy cases have not revealed the details of these financial relationships. But there is no doubt the coal companies contracted with these groups and individuals to either make a donation or pay for services.
This new evidence is important at a time when coal and oil and gas companies are under increased scrutiny about their ongoing climate science disinformation campaigns. ExxonMobil currently faces state and possibly federal investigations into whether the discrepancies between what the company knew about climate science and what it told its shareholders and the public amounted to fraud. |
Author is Eliot Negin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
