Proposition 23

[briansd1]

No on 23.

This is an interesting piece on why we should vote no on 23.

The Terminator vs. Big Oil
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Published: October 5, 2010

The Terminator, a k a the Governator, is not happy. And you shouldn’t be either.

What has Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California incensed is the fact that two Texas oil companies with two refineries each in California are financing a campaign to roll back California’s landmark laws to slow global warming and promote clean energy innovation, because it would require the refiners to install new emission-control tools. At a time when President Obama and Congress have failed to pass a clean energy bill, California’s laws are the best thing we have going to stimulate clean-tech in America. We don’t want them gutted. C’mon in. This is a fight worth having.

[air_ogi]

EconProf, how come Germany has far stricter carbon regulation than AB32, and yet significantly lower unemployment rate (7.2%) than California?

[air_ogi]

EconProf, how come Germany has far stricter carbon regulation than AB32, and yet significantly lower unemployment rate (7.2%) than California?

[air_ogi]

EconProf, how come Germany has far stricter carbon regulation than AB32, and yet significantly lower unemployment rate (7.2%) than California?

[air_ogi]

EconProf, how come Germany has far stricter carbon regulation than AB32, and yet significantly lower unemployment rate (7.2%) than California?

[air_ogi]

EconProf, how come Germany has far stricter carbon regulation than AB32, and yet significantly lower unemployment rate (7.2%) than California?

[jstoesz]

Are these Texas oil companies going to operate in the red? Why would the refiners continue refining at the same cost? If they do not pack up and leave, they will pass that cost on to us. And with the highest cost of gas already in the country, what does that do for everyone? Not just commuters, but businesses alike. If we allocate resources away from profitable ventures to unprofitable ones, everyone is poorer.

California has the cleanest air in 40 years with way more people living here. The affect this bill has on GHG’s is less than negligible.

This green industry is a fantasy (see ethanol). Every time we take money from the profitable and give it to the unprofitable, we are all worse off. I am all for green energy, but it can not come at the expense of jobs. I am all for clean air and water, but CO2 is no pollutant…

[jstoesz]

Are these Texas oil companies going to operate in the red? Why would the refiners continue refining at the same cost? If they do not pack up and leave, they will pass that cost on to us. And with the highest cost of gas already in the country, what does that do for everyone? Not just commuters, but businesses alike. If we allocate resources away from profitable ventures to unprofitable ones, everyone is poorer.

California has the cleanest air in 40 years with way more people living here. The affect this bill has on GHG’s is less than negligible.

This green industry is a fantasy (see ethanol). Every time we take money from the profitable and give it to the unprofitable, we are all worse off. I am all for green energy, but it can not come at the expense of jobs. I am all for clean air and water, but CO2 is no pollutant…

[jstoesz]

Are these Texas oil companies going to operate in the red? Why would the refiners continue refining at the same cost? If they do not pack up and leave, they will pass that cost on to us. And with the highest cost of gas already in the country, what does that do for everyone? Not just commuters, but businesses alike. If we allocate resources away from profitable ventures to unprofitable ones, everyone is poorer.

California has the cleanest air in 40 years with way more people living here. The affect this bill has on GHG’s is less than negligible.

This green industry is a fantasy (see ethanol). Every time we take money from the profitable and give it to the unprofitable, we are all worse off. I am all for green energy, but it can not come at the expense of jobs. I am all for clean air and water, but CO2 is no pollutant…

[jstoesz]

Are these Texas oil companies going to operate in the red? Why would the refiners continue refining at the same cost? If they do not pack up and leave, they will pass that cost on to us. And with the highest cost of gas already in the country, what does that do for everyone? Not just commuters, but businesses alike. If we allocate resources away from profitable ventures to unprofitable ones, everyone is poorer.

California has the cleanest air in 40 years with way more people living here. The affect this bill has on GHG’s is less than negligible.

This green industry is a fantasy (see ethanol). Every time we take money from the profitable and give it to the unprofitable, we are all worse off. I am all for green energy, but it can not come at the expense of jobs. I am all for clean air and water, but CO2 is no pollutant…

[jstoesz]

Are these Texas oil companies going to operate in the red? Why would the refiners continue refining at the same cost? If they do not pack up and leave, they will pass that cost on to us. And with the highest cost of gas already in the country, what does that do for everyone? Not just commuters, but businesses alike. If we allocate resources away from profitable ventures to unprofitable ones, everyone is poorer.

California has the cleanest air in 40 years with way more people living here. The affect this bill has on GHG’s is less than negligible.

This green industry is a fantasy (see ethanol). Every time we take money from the profitable and give it to the unprofitable, we are all worse off. I am all for green energy, but it can not come at the expense of jobs. I am all for clean air and water, but CO2 is no pollutant…

[jstoesz]

air_ogi,

Your rhetorical argument is a complete fallacy. I could just as easily point to china and show what their complete lack of pollution control as done for their GDP growth.

There is no way that regulating ghg’s can have anything but a depressive effect on the economy as a whole (subsidies and regulations for GHG’s take from producers and give to non producers). Other aspects of the economy can be sufficiently strong to overcome this depressive effect (probably the case for germany). There is no 1-1 correlation…only influence.

[jstoesz]

air_ogi,

Your rhetorical argument is a complete fallacy. I could just as easily point to china and show what their complete lack of pollution control as done for their GDP growth.

There is no way that regulating ghg’s can have anything but a depressive effect on the economy as a whole (subsidies and regulations for GHG’s take from producers and give to non producers). Other aspects of the economy can be sufficiently strong to overcome this depressive effect (probably the case for germany). There is no 1-1 correlation…only influence.

[jstoesz]

air_ogi,

Your rhetorical argument is a complete fallacy. I could just as easily point to china and show what their complete lack of pollution control as done for their GDP growth.

There is no way that regulating ghg’s can have anything but a depressive effect on the economy as a whole (subsidies and regulations for GHG’s take from producers and give to non producers). Other aspects of the economy can be sufficiently strong to overcome this depressive effect (probably the case for germany). There is no 1-1 correlation…only influence.

[jstoesz]

air_ogi,

Your rhetorical argument is a complete fallacy. I could just as easily point to china and show what their complete lack of pollution control as done for their GDP growth.

There is no way that regulating ghg’s can have anything but a depressive effect on the economy as a whole (subsidies and regulations for GHG’s take from producers and give to non producers). Other aspects of the economy can be sufficiently strong to overcome this depressive effect (probably the case for germany). There is no 1-1 correlation…only influence.

[Author]

Posts