Proposition 23

[sd_matt]

[quote=pri_dk]You have to indicate what measure you are using before you can name the “largest.” Depending on the measure, revenue, market cap, number of employees, etc., you will get different answers for largest.

However big oil will be at, or near the top, of any list of the largest.

[quote]AB32 penalizes everything else so Green can compete[/quote]

Use of the word “penalizes” is debatable – in fact, it is the debate.

The argument in favor of AB32 is that it imposes the full (and correct) cost on producers, instead of allowing them to pass on costs to public (in the form of pollution.)

The question:

Is it a”penalty,” or is it the elimination of an “unfair advantage.”[/quote]
If AB 32 played “Uncle Sugar” to anyone that made green energy cheaper than fossil fuels (more specifically able to compete without gov’t subsidies) I would be all for it.

As it stands I’ve asked BGIG the question at least two times. I’ll ask it again Mr Troll..ahem…BGIG…What does AB 32 do that rewards the person/entity that makes the cheap green thneed?

[no_such_reality]

Hmm, still no answer.

Maybe they can tell us what measure they used on biggest most successful company…

[no_such_reality]

Hmm, still no answer.

Maybe they can tell us what measure they used on biggest most successful company…

[no_such_reality]

Hmm, still no answer.

Maybe they can tell us what measure they used on biggest most successful company…

[no_such_reality]

Hmm, still no answer.

Maybe they can tell us what measure they used on biggest most successful company…

[no_such_reality]

Hmm, still no answer.

Maybe they can tell us what measure they used on biggest most successful company…

[BigGovernmentIsGood]

[quote=sd_matt]
As it stands I’ve asked BGIG the question at least two times. I’ll ask it again Mr Troll..ahem…BGIG…What does AB 32 do that rewards the person/entity that makes the cheap green thneed?[/quote]

What are you asking?

[BigGovernmentIsGood]

[quote=sd_matt]
As it stands I’ve asked BGIG the question at least two times. I’ll ask it again Mr Troll..ahem…BGIG…What does AB 32 do that rewards the person/entity that makes the cheap green thneed?[/quote]

What are you asking?

[BigGovernmentIsGood]

[quote=sd_matt]
As it stands I’ve asked BGIG the question at least two times. I’ll ask it again Mr Troll..ahem…BGIG…What does AB 32 do that rewards the person/entity that makes the cheap green thneed?[/quote]

What are you asking?

[BigGovernmentIsGood]

[quote=sd_matt]
As it stands I’ve asked BGIG the question at least two times. I’ll ask it again Mr Troll..ahem…BGIG…What does AB 32 do that rewards the person/entity that makes the cheap green thneed?[/quote]

What are you asking?

[BigGovernmentIsGood]

[quote=sd_matt]
As it stands I’ve asked BGIG the question at least two times. I’ll ask it again Mr Troll..ahem…BGIG…What does AB 32 do that rewards the person/entity that makes the cheap green thneed?[/quote]

What are you asking?

[BigGovernmentIsGood]

Valero and Tesoro (dirty oil energy companies), the two biggest backers of proposition 23, only have 4,000 employees in California.

Compare that paltry number of dinosaur jobs to the clean-energy industry in California:

The number of clean energy businesses and clean energy jobs has increased in California 45% and 36%, respectively, in the period between 1995-2008. [17] This rate of growth is 10 times more than the state’s average job growth rate.[18]

California has over 12,000 clean energy businesses [19] and 500,000 people are employed in clean energy occupations.[20] With over $9 billion in venture capital funds, California’s clean energy firms have received 60% of venture capital funds in North America [21].

The independent Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has stated that suspending AB 32 would “dampen additional investments in clean energy technologies or so-called ‘green jobs’ by private firms, thereby resulting in less economic activity than would otherwise be the case.” [22]

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_23_%282010%29#About_AB_32

Why would anyone want to risk 500,000 jobs in order to try and protect 4,000? Vote no on Prop. 23 to protect California’s 500,000 clean-energy jobs.

[BigGovernmentIsGood]

Valero and Tesoro (dirty oil energy companies), the two biggest backers of proposition 23, only have 4,000 employees in California.

Compare that paltry number of dinosaur jobs to the clean-energy industry in California:

The number of clean energy businesses and clean energy jobs has increased in California 45% and 36%, respectively, in the period between 1995-2008. [17] This rate of growth is 10 times more than the state’s average job growth rate.[18]

California has over 12,000 clean energy businesses [19] and 500,000 people are employed in clean energy occupations.[20] With over $9 billion in venture capital funds, California’s clean energy firms have received 60% of venture capital funds in North America [21].

The independent Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has stated that suspending AB 32 would “dampen additional investments in clean energy technologies or so-called ‘green jobs’ by private firms, thereby resulting in less economic activity than would otherwise be the case.” [22]

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_23_%282010%29#About_AB_32

Why would anyone want to risk 500,000 jobs in order to try and protect 4,000? Vote no on Prop. 23 to protect California’s 500,000 clean-energy jobs.

[BigGovernmentIsGood]

Valero and Tesoro (dirty oil energy companies), the two biggest backers of proposition 23, only have 4,000 employees in California.

Compare that paltry number of dinosaur jobs to the clean-energy industry in California:

The number of clean energy businesses and clean energy jobs has increased in California 45% and 36%, respectively, in the period between 1995-2008. [17] This rate of growth is 10 times more than the state’s average job growth rate.[18]

California has over 12,000 clean energy businesses [19] and 500,000 people are employed in clean energy occupations.[20] With over $9 billion in venture capital funds, California’s clean energy firms have received 60% of venture capital funds in North America [21].

The independent Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has stated that suspending AB 32 would “dampen additional investments in clean energy technologies or so-called ‘green jobs’ by private firms, thereby resulting in less economic activity than would otherwise be the case.” [22]

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_23_%282010%29#About_AB_32

Why would anyone want to risk 500,000 jobs in order to try and protect 4,000? Vote no on Prop. 23 to protect California’s 500,000 clean-energy jobs.

[BigGovernmentIsGood]

Valero and Tesoro (dirty oil energy companies), the two biggest backers of proposition 23, only have 4,000 employees in California.

Compare that paltry number of dinosaur jobs to the clean-energy industry in California:

The number of clean energy businesses and clean energy jobs has increased in California 45% and 36%, respectively, in the period between 1995-2008. [17] This rate of growth is 10 times more than the state’s average job growth rate.[18]

California has over 12,000 clean energy businesses [19] and 500,000 people are employed in clean energy occupations.[20] With over $9 billion in venture capital funds, California’s clean energy firms have received 60% of venture capital funds in North America [21].

The independent Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has stated that suspending AB 32 would “dampen additional investments in clean energy technologies or so-called ‘green jobs’ by private firms, thereby resulting in less economic activity than would otherwise be the case.” [22]

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_23_%282010%29#About_AB_32

Why would anyone want to risk 500,000 jobs in order to try and protect 4,000? Vote no on Prop. 23 to protect California’s 500,000 clean-energy jobs.

[Author]

Posts