President Obama travels to Ohio to promote the $862 billion failure otherwise known as the stimulus's 10,000th project, causing hundreds to lose a days pay. Way to go Mr. President.
Maybe these guys can receive their lost wages from the $100 million fund that BP set up to help out of work oil-rig workers. After all, the president's six month ban on drilling caused the need for the fund in the first place, just as his need for a photo op caused the construction workers to hit the bricks. When all else fails blame BP, but don't return their campaign donations. Sure they're evil incarnate, but there are elections to win and a country to re-make. Besides, BP supports cap and trade.
Showing posts with label cap and trade. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cap and trade. Show all posts
Saturday, June 19, 2010
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Coakley's Soft Spot: Cap and Trade
We've all seen Rasmussen's numbers, Brown's winning independents 65-21 and still down to Coakley by 9. Which means that Rasmussen doesn't see many independents turning out to vote on the 19th. If you've made calls for Scott, I can guarantee you the folks who've responded " I haven't thought about it" when asked if they'll be supporting Scott are independents. So how do we energize(no pun intended)independents to get out and vote in numbers big enough to carry Scott to victory? My suggestion, Martha Coakley's support of cap and trade legislation.
We need the voters' of MA to know that Martha Coakley wants them to pay more to heat and light their homes, watch the Pats,C's,B's and Sox on the big screen and fill their gas tanks.
A sample ad: I'm sure the folks who get paid to do this kind of thing can come up with something much better.
A shot of a furnace as it comes rumbling to life. A sound all too familiar to Baystaters' this winter. Announcer, "Martha Coakley wants you to pay more to heat your home".
A shot of a lightbulb going on. Announcer, "Martha Coakley wants you to pay more for electricity".
A shot of someone pumping gas(it could even be Scott filling up his truck). Announcer, "Martha Coakley wants you to pay more for gas". Remember, then candidate Obama claimed to be fine with $4 gas. His only complaint is that it happened too quickly.
Then some quick numbers on the screen of the economic impacts of cap and trade(I recommend using those from Heritage).
End with Scott saying something along the lines of " Until the scientists' are 100% positive that it will do any good, I don't think Baystaters' should pay one penny more than they have too to keep warm this winter".
I believe that if we get independents' thinking voting for Coakley is going to cost them money every time the furnace kicks on, they'll show up at the polls and vote for Scott. Call it a benefit of having the election in the middle of winter.
We need the voters' of MA to know that Martha Coakley wants them to pay more to heat and light their homes, watch the Pats,C's,B's and Sox on the big screen and fill their gas tanks.
A sample ad: I'm sure the folks who get paid to do this kind of thing can come up with something much better.
A shot of a furnace as it comes rumbling to life. A sound all too familiar to Baystaters' this winter. Announcer, "Martha Coakley wants you to pay more to heat your home".
A shot of a lightbulb going on. Announcer, "Martha Coakley wants you to pay more for electricity".
A shot of someone pumping gas(it could even be Scott filling up his truck). Announcer, "Martha Coakley wants you to pay more for gas". Remember, then candidate Obama claimed to be fine with $4 gas. His only complaint is that it happened too quickly.
Then some quick numbers on the screen of the economic impacts of cap and trade(I recommend using those from Heritage).
End with Scott saying something along the lines of " Until the scientists' are 100% positive that it will do any good, I don't think Baystaters' should pay one penny more than they have too to keep warm this winter".
I believe that if we get independents' thinking voting for Coakley is going to cost them money every time the furnace kicks on, they'll show up at the polls and vote for Scott. Call it a benefit of having the election in the middle of winter.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Obama Declares Ostrich To Be New National Symbol
President Obama, uncomfortable with the martial image portrayed by the bald eagle has found a new bird to embody the new, improved America, the ostrich. Following her leader, Lisa Jackson of the EPA has embraced the new symbol with gusto. The ostrich's claim to fame is that it chooses to bury its head in the sand rather than face the ugly truth. That's exactly what the EPA has done with Climategate.
From the Wall Street Journal:
By IAN TALLEY
WASHINGTON--"The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will early next week, possibly as soon as Monday, officially declare carbon dioxide a public danger, a trigger that could mean regulation for emitters across the economy, according to several people close to the matter.
Such an "endangerment" decision is necessary for the EPA to move ahead early next year with new emission standards for cars. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has said it could also mean large emitters such as power stations, cement kilns, crude-oil refineries and chemical plants would have to curb their greenhouse gas output.
The announcement would also give President Barack Obama and his climate envoy negotiating leverage at a global climate summit starting next week in Copenhagen, Denmark and increase pressure on Congress to pass a climate bill that would modify the price of polluting.
While environmentalists celebrate EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gases, it has caused many large emitters to cringe at the potential costs of compliance.
According to a preliminary endangerment finding published in April, EPA scientists fear that man-made carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are contributing to a warming of the global climate. Senior EPA officials said in November the agency would likely make a final decision in December around the time of the summit."
The Obama administration won't let a little data fudging at CRU stop its drive to regulate the American economy into submission. Much of the world, heck even the UN understands that the leaked e-mails undercut the case for making drastic, painful reductions in emissions of carbon dioxide. Instead of abandoning this policy, or at the very least questioning whether increasing the costs of energy production and consumption will provide any benefit at all, the Obama administration is going full steam ahead. In fact, President Obama is still planning to go to Copenhagen to negotiate higher taxes for Americans when we are still in recession, paying winter heating bills and shopping for Christmas gifts. Ignoring the leaked e-mails, with phrases like "hide the decline" and "it's a tragedy we can't explain the cooling" is borderline criminal.
The refusal of the president and his administration to see that these documents have changed the game provides republicans with a wonderful opportunity. The American public gives democrats credit for their supposed dedication to science. By ignoring the fact that the global warming alarmists were cooking the books, democrats and the president are destroying that image. Ask the average American how long they would keep a financial advisor who told them to invest everything they have with Bernie Madoff after his ponzi scheme had been revealed. They would fire that person in a heartbeat. What the president is doing by ignoring the cooked warming data is no different than looking at Madoff's cooked returns and saying "it's easy money, only a fool wouldn't invest". Well, as the saying goes a fool and his money are soon parted. If democrats keep insisting that the American people be saddled with massive taxes to "save the planet" they'll soon be parted from their majorities in Congress.
From the Wall Street Journal:
By IAN TALLEY
WASHINGTON--"The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will early next week, possibly as soon as Monday, officially declare carbon dioxide a public danger, a trigger that could mean regulation for emitters across the economy, according to several people close to the matter.
Such an "endangerment" decision is necessary for the EPA to move ahead early next year with new emission standards for cars. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has said it could also mean large emitters such as power stations, cement kilns, crude-oil refineries and chemical plants would have to curb their greenhouse gas output.
The announcement would also give President Barack Obama and his climate envoy negotiating leverage at a global climate summit starting next week in Copenhagen, Denmark and increase pressure on Congress to pass a climate bill that would modify the price of polluting.
While environmentalists celebrate EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gases, it has caused many large emitters to cringe at the potential costs of compliance.
According to a preliminary endangerment finding published in April, EPA scientists fear that man-made carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are contributing to a warming of the global climate. Senior EPA officials said in November the agency would likely make a final decision in December around the time of the summit."
The Obama administration won't let a little data fudging at CRU stop its drive to regulate the American economy into submission. Much of the world, heck even the UN understands that the leaked e-mails undercut the case for making drastic, painful reductions in emissions of carbon dioxide. Instead of abandoning this policy, or at the very least questioning whether increasing the costs of energy production and consumption will provide any benefit at all, the Obama administration is going full steam ahead. In fact, President Obama is still planning to go to Copenhagen to negotiate higher taxes for Americans when we are still in recession, paying winter heating bills and shopping for Christmas gifts. Ignoring the leaked e-mails, with phrases like "hide the decline" and "it's a tragedy we can't explain the cooling" is borderline criminal.
The refusal of the president and his administration to see that these documents have changed the game provides republicans with a wonderful opportunity. The American public gives democrats credit for their supposed dedication to science. By ignoring the fact that the global warming alarmists were cooking the books, democrats and the president are destroying that image. Ask the average American how long they would keep a financial advisor who told them to invest everything they have with Bernie Madoff after his ponzi scheme had been revealed. They would fire that person in a heartbeat. What the president is doing by ignoring the cooked warming data is no different than looking at Madoff's cooked returns and saying "it's easy money, only a fool wouldn't invest". Well, as the saying goes a fool and his money are soon parted. If democrats keep insisting that the American people be saddled with massive taxes to "save the planet" they'll soon be parted from their majorities in Congress.
Friday, December 4, 2009
To Create Jobs, First Do No Harm
The unemployment numbers for November were just released and Wall Street is chearing that only 11,000 Americans lost their jobs. The news media will no doubt be trumpeting the success of President Obama's job summit. I can just see a gleeful Brian Williams informing America that "only one day after his job summit President Obama has turned the economy around". The sad truth is that 10% unemployment is nothing to crow about. Even more troubling, is that the president doesn't understand that his policies are to blame. In the snippet of the summit aired on the Nightly News an unidentified businessman told the president that companies weren't hiring because of the pending cap and trade and health care legislation. The president nodded and then told this gentleman, who presumably knows a thing or two about creating jobs, that when passed, the legislation will help, not hurt the economy.
For a cool aid free assesment, here's the Heritage Foundation's take:
"Executives like Dan DiMicco, CEO of steelmaker Nucor Corp, who told the Wall Street Journal: “Companies large and small are saying, ‘I am not going to do anything until these things — health care, climate legislation — go away or are resolved.’” Or Porta-King CEO Steve Schulte who tells USA Today his company is not investing because “proposals in Congress to tackle climate change and overhaul health care would raise costs.” These businessmen have every right to be worried. As we’ve detailed before, the Senate Health Bill currently being debated in the Senate would be a disaster for the U.S. economy."
Kills Jobs: All told, the Reid Bill raises taxes by $370.2 billion over the next ten years with many of those taxes starting to be collected this year with unemployment at 10.2% and rising. Worse, the bill includes a job killing employer mandate which taxes companies for hiring people. Specifically, companies with more than 50 employees that do not offer a health plan approved by federal bureaucrats will be forced to pay a $750 per employee job tax.
Hurts Small Businesses: The Reid Bill acknowledges it is terrible public policy for small businesses and tries to address this problem by including a “small business tax credit” to minimize the impact of the job killing employer mandates and regulation-caused increases in private health insurance premiums. But the tax credit only lasts two years and largely excludes small business owners, small businesses with high-average payrolls, and firms with 25 or more workers. Essentially, after all exclusions, the only eligible firms are those firms with 10 or fewer workers as well as those with low-income workers—the least likely to offer coverage even with a significant price reduction.
Hurts Poor: The Reid Bill’s employer mandate is especially punitive on poor families. Firms that hire an employee from a low-income family who qualify for an insurance subsidy are charged a tax penalty of $3,000. So a company could save $3,000 by hiring, say, someone with a working spouse or a teenager with working parents, rather than a single mother with three children. Worse, companies only have to pay $750 an employee instead of $3,000 if one quarter of employees are low-income. This creates a situation where, if a company has a lot of low-income workers, they can actually save money by dropping their health plan and just dumping all their employees into the federal exchange at their own expense."
President Obama refuses to see that his plans for ever bigger government are not good for the American economy. Even the revelations of Climategate haven't changed his mind on the need to reduce carbon emissions via painful tax increases. He only sees the green jobs potentially created covering the states of Arizona with solar panels and West Virginia with windmills.
The American economy will eventually recover and begin to actually add jobs instead of just losing them at a slower pace. The fewer shackles the government places on businesses and consumers, the faster the economy will recover and more jobs will be created.
For a cool aid free assesment, here's the Heritage Foundation's take:
"Executives like Dan DiMicco, CEO of steelmaker Nucor Corp, who told the Wall Street Journal: “Companies large and small are saying, ‘I am not going to do anything until these things — health care, climate legislation — go away or are resolved.’” Or Porta-King CEO Steve Schulte who tells USA Today his company is not investing because “proposals in Congress to tackle climate change and overhaul health care would raise costs.” These businessmen have every right to be worried. As we’ve detailed before, the Senate Health Bill currently being debated in the Senate would be a disaster for the U.S. economy."
Kills Jobs: All told, the Reid Bill raises taxes by $370.2 billion over the next ten years with many of those taxes starting to be collected this year with unemployment at 10.2% and rising. Worse, the bill includes a job killing employer mandate which taxes companies for hiring people. Specifically, companies with more than 50 employees that do not offer a health plan approved by federal bureaucrats will be forced to pay a $750 per employee job tax.
Hurts Small Businesses: The Reid Bill acknowledges it is terrible public policy for small businesses and tries to address this problem by including a “small business tax credit” to minimize the impact of the job killing employer mandates and regulation-caused increases in private health insurance premiums. But the tax credit only lasts two years and largely excludes small business owners, small businesses with high-average payrolls, and firms with 25 or more workers. Essentially, after all exclusions, the only eligible firms are those firms with 10 or fewer workers as well as those with low-income workers—the least likely to offer coverage even with a significant price reduction.
Hurts Poor: The Reid Bill’s employer mandate is especially punitive on poor families. Firms that hire an employee from a low-income family who qualify for an insurance subsidy are charged a tax penalty of $3,000. So a company could save $3,000 by hiring, say, someone with a working spouse or a teenager with working parents, rather than a single mother with three children. Worse, companies only have to pay $750 an employee instead of $3,000 if one quarter of employees are low-income. This creates a situation where, if a company has a lot of low-income workers, they can actually save money by dropping their health plan and just dumping all their employees into the federal exchange at their own expense."
President Obama refuses to see that his plans for ever bigger government are not good for the American economy. Even the revelations of Climategate haven't changed his mind on the need to reduce carbon emissions via painful tax increases. He only sees the green jobs potentially created covering the states of Arizona with solar panels and West Virginia with windmills.
The American economy will eventually recover and begin to actually add jobs instead of just losing them at a slower pace. The fewer shackles the government places on businesses and consumers, the faster the economy will recover and more jobs will be created.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
House vote
Well enough arms have been twisted and midnight deals struck that the 1,200+ page behemoth cap and trade bill will be voted on by the House. This map is of projected budget deficits that will result from this bill for 2012. Remember, the whole idea of this bill is to make energy so expensive that we use less of it. In the real world, that means slower economic growth, fewer jobs created and everything you buy is going to cost you much more.
Just click on map to see budget numbers.
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Cap and trade
The President and his willing accomplices in Congress claim they are going to save the planet. Remember that line from his Berlin speech when then candidate Obama claimed that when he was elected the oceans would recede? While Moses required the assistance of God to move waters, President Obama will have Waxman-Markey by his side. For you see, the planet is warming and the only way to prevent castastrophe is to regulate the American economy. The Heritage Foundation has done a study of this bill and the numbers are grim:
By 2035 electricity rates will increase by 90%, gross domestic product (GDP) will be reduced by $7.4 trillion and 1,900,000 American jobs will be lost.
The benefits: A decrease in global temperature of less than 1 degree Fahrenheit.
What these numbers don't tell you is that while the U.S. is destroying its economy to save the planet the Chinese who are already the biggest polluters are going to continue manufacturing and hence polluting full steam ahead. Why should America sacrifice when others do not?
The President points to Spain as model for us to follow. Again, the facts are grim. Unemployment in Spain is 17.5% and they expect it to reach 20.5% by year end. As for Spain's vaunted "Green Jobs program" a study by Dr. Gabriel Cardoza has found that for every green job created 2.2 jobs have been lost. Of those green jobs 2/3 were only temporary, mainly in installation and construction.
America can't afford this much change.
By 2035 electricity rates will increase by 90%, gross domestic product (GDP) will be reduced by $7.4 trillion and 1,900,000 American jobs will be lost.
The benefits: A decrease in global temperature of less than 1 degree Fahrenheit.
What these numbers don't tell you is that while the U.S. is destroying its economy to save the planet the Chinese who are already the biggest polluters are going to continue manufacturing and hence polluting full steam ahead. Why should America sacrifice when others do not?
The President points to Spain as model for us to follow. Again, the facts are grim. Unemployment in Spain is 17.5% and they expect it to reach 20.5% by year end. As for Spain's vaunted "Green Jobs program" a study by Dr. Gabriel Cardoza has found that for every green job created 2.2 jobs have been lost. Of those green jobs 2/3 were only temporary, mainly in installation and construction.
America can't afford this much change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
