Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
luchabee
ParticipantTo the pro-prop 23 crowd: Please cite a single environmental regulation that, after going into effect, caused widespread economic damage. BigOil/BigPollution always whines about the sky falling any time a new environmental regulation is proposed, but has there ever been an environmental reg that caused serious damage to the economy?
In response to your question above, your question is either carefully crafted to be intentionally misleading (e.g., single environmental regulation), and a likely a fallacy of composition, or perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
Seriously, we probably have a 20% real unemployment rate in California and this is economic suicide.
Besides, as mentioned by other posters, global warming, in my opinion an adult fantasy for the left, is not present and if present this regulation would do nothing to stop it.
In conclusion, it this type of pie-in-the-sky and adolescent thinking advocated by the left that will hopefully lead to their mass removal from office in November.
ParticipantTo the pro-prop 23 crowd: Please cite a single environmental regulation that, after going into effect, caused widespread economic damage. BigOil/BigPollution always whines about the sky falling any time a new environmental regulation is proposed, but has there ever been an environmental reg that caused serious damage to the economy?
In response to your question above, your question is either carefully crafted to be intentionally misleading (e.g., single environmental regulation), and a likely a fallacy of composition, or perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
Seriously, we probably have a 20% real unemployment rate in California and this is economic suicide.
Besides, as mentioned by other posters, global warming, in my opinion an adult fantasy for the left, is not present and if present this regulation would do nothing to stop it.
In conclusion, it this type of pie-in-the-sky and adolescent thinking advocated by the left that will hopefully lead to their mass removal from office in November.
ParticipantTo the pro-prop 23 crowd: Please cite a single environmental regulation that, after going into effect, caused widespread economic damage. BigOil/BigPollution always whines about the sky falling any time a new environmental regulation is proposed, but has there ever been an environmental reg that caused serious damage to the economy?
In response to your question above, your question is either carefully crafted to be intentionally misleading (e.g., single environmental regulation), and a likely a fallacy of composition, or perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
Seriously, we probably have a 20% real unemployment rate in California and this is economic suicide.
Besides, as mentioned by other posters, global warming, in my opinion an adult fantasy for the left, is not present and if present this regulation would do nothing to stop it.
In conclusion, it this type of pie-in-the-sky and adolescent thinking advocated by the left that will hopefully lead to their mass removal from office in November.
ParticipantTo the pro-prop 23 crowd: Please cite a single environmental regulation that, after going into effect, caused widespread economic damage. BigOil/BigPollution always whines about the sky falling any time a new environmental regulation is proposed, but has there ever been an environmental reg that caused serious damage to the economy?
In response to your question above, your question is either carefully crafted to be intentionally misleading (e.g., single environmental regulation), and a likely a fallacy of composition, or perhaps you have never run a private business and dealt with the layers of layers of regulation needed to operate a business in California. It is the stacks of regulations and taxes that keep businesses from hiring more poor and working class folks and this is a significant reason why California and American businesses are failing or moving overseas.
Seriously, we probably have a 20% real unemployment rate in California and this is economic suicide.
Besides, as mentioned by other posters, global warming, in my opinion an adult fantasy for the left, is not present and if present this regulation would do nothing to stop it.
In conclusion, it this type of pie-in-the-sky and adolescent thinking advocated by the left that will hopefully lead to their mass removal from office in November.
ParticipantI am always entertained when liberals attempt to predict the future on anything. In this case, it was global warming, then aggregate temperatures declined and their models were exposed as complete fraud and fantasy.
Now, it is “global climate change” . . . whatever nebulous standards this is based on–probably what ever happens that year with the weather.
Reminds me of the Obama’s prediction that unemployment would be a 7.5 percent with the stimulus and would be 9.5 without it, with the opposite happening.
No doubt, the same type of wishful-thinking-never plan-on-unintended-consequences-event would occur here with this law. Isn’t that a great definition for the left? While I won’t get into the inane discussion about how many jobs will be lost because of this law, it is just an additional layer of feel-good emotional regulation that we don’t need in California for something that will have no effect on aggregate “global warming,” which doesn’t even exist.
Also, while I am at it, I bet 99% of the windmill and solar panel lovers advocating for this global warming law and “green jobs” likely will never employ a real person . . . ever.
Liberalism’s incessant drive to create inefficient regulations and tax small business actually creates what liberals say they don’t like, a wider distinction between rich and poor. With these regulations, most of those running businesses either fail (and become poor) or leave the state. So, we are only left with the poor, government workers as the new middle class, and then a few rich. Pretty much California, in a nutshell.
If this law stands, along with the 1099-misc regulation for Obamacare, we might as well close down California for business right now.
ParticipantI am always entertained when liberals attempt to predict the future on anything. In this case, it was global warming, then aggregate temperatures declined and their models were exposed as complete fraud and fantasy.
Now, it is “global climate change” . . . whatever nebulous standards this is based on–probably what ever happens that year with the weather.
Reminds me of the Obama’s prediction that unemployment would be a 7.5 percent with the stimulus and would be 9.5 without it, with the opposite happening.
No doubt, the same type of wishful-thinking-never plan-on-unintended-consequences-event would occur here with this law. Isn’t that a great definition for the left? While I won’t get into the inane discussion about how many jobs will be lost because of this law, it is just an additional layer of feel-good emotional regulation that we don’t need in California for something that will have no effect on aggregate “global warming,” which doesn’t even exist.
Also, while I am at it, I bet 99% of the windmill and solar panel lovers advocating for this global warming law and “green jobs” likely will never employ a real person . . . ever.
Liberalism’s incessant drive to create inefficient regulations and tax small business actually creates what liberals say they don’t like, a wider distinction between rich and poor. With these regulations, most of those running businesses either fail (and become poor) or leave the state. So, we are only left with the poor, government workers as the new middle class, and then a few rich. Pretty much California, in a nutshell.
If this law stands, along with the 1099-misc regulation for Obamacare, we might as well close down California for business right now.
ParticipantI am always entertained when liberals attempt to predict the future on anything. In this case, it was global warming, then aggregate temperatures declined and their models were exposed as complete fraud and fantasy.
Now, it is “global climate change” . . . whatever nebulous standards this is based on–probably what ever happens that year with the weather.
Reminds me of the Obama’s prediction that unemployment would be a 7.5 percent with the stimulus and would be 9.5 without it, with the opposite happening.
No doubt, the same type of wishful-thinking-never plan-on-unintended-consequences-event would occur here with this law. Isn’t that a great definition for the left? While I won’t get into the inane discussion about how many jobs will be lost because of this law, it is just an additional layer of feel-good emotional regulation that we don’t need in California for something that will have no effect on aggregate “global warming,” which doesn’t even exist.
Also, while I am at it, I bet 99% of the windmill and solar panel lovers advocating for this global warming law and “green jobs” likely will never employ a real person . . . ever.
Liberalism’s incessant drive to create inefficient regulations and tax small business actually creates what liberals say they don’t like, a wider distinction between rich and poor. With these regulations, most of those running businesses either fail (and become poor) or leave the state. So, we are only left with the poor, government workers as the new middle class, and then a few rich. Pretty much California, in a nutshell.
If this law stands, along with the 1099-misc regulation for Obamacare, we might as well close down California for business right now.
ParticipantI am always entertained when liberals attempt to predict the future on anything. In this case, it was global warming, then aggregate temperatures declined and their models were exposed as complete fraud and fantasy.
Now, it is “global climate change” . . . whatever nebulous standards this is based on–probably what ever happens that year with the weather.
Reminds me of the Obama’s prediction that unemployment would be a 7.5 percent with the stimulus and would be 9.5 without it, with the opposite happening.
No doubt, the same type of wishful-thinking-never plan-on-unintended-consequences-event would occur here with this law. Isn’t that a great definition for the left? While I won’t get into the inane discussion about how many jobs will be lost because of this law, it is just an additional layer of feel-good emotional regulation that we don’t need in California for something that will have no effect on aggregate “global warming,” which doesn’t even exist.
Also, while I am at it, I bet 99% of the windmill and solar panel lovers advocating for this global warming law and “green jobs” likely will never employ a real person . . . ever.
Liberalism’s incessant drive to create inefficient regulations and tax small business actually creates what liberals say they don’t like, a wider distinction between rich and poor. With these regulations, most of those running businesses either fail (and become poor) or leave the state. So, we are only left with the poor, government workers as the new middle class, and then a few rich. Pretty much California, in a nutshell.
If this law stands, along with the 1099-misc regulation for Obamacare, we might as well close down California for business right now.
ParticipantI am always entertained when liberals attempt to predict the future on anything. In this case, it was global warming, then aggregate temperatures declined and their models were exposed as complete fraud and fantasy.
Now, it is “global climate change” . . . whatever nebulous standards this is based on–probably what ever happens that year with the weather.
Reminds me of the Obama’s prediction that unemployment would be a 7.5 percent with the stimulus and would be 9.5 without it, with the opposite happening.
No doubt, the same type of wishful-thinking-never plan-on-unintended-consequences-event would occur here with this law. Isn’t that a great definition for the left? While I won’t get into the inane discussion about how many jobs will be lost because of this law, it is just an additional layer of feel-good emotional regulation that we don’t need in California for something that will have no effect on aggregate “global warming,” which doesn’t even exist.
Also, while I am at it, I bet 99% of the windmill and solar panel lovers advocating for this global warming law and “green jobs” likely will never employ a real person . . . ever.
Liberalism’s incessant drive to create inefficient regulations and tax small business actually creates what liberals say they don’t like, a wider distinction between rich and poor. With these regulations, most of those running businesses either fail (and become poor) or leave the state. So, we are only left with the poor, government workers as the new middle class, and then a few rich. Pretty much California, in a nutshell.
If this law stands, along with the 1099-misc regulation for Obamacare, we might as well close down California for business right now.
ParticipantPosters have mentioned that big oil is behind this proposition. The same thing can be said for the global warming hysterics as well, who receive billions in funding:
University of California physics professor, resigning from American Physical Society:
‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’
ParticipantPosters have mentioned that big oil is behind this proposition. The same thing can be said for the global warming hysterics as well, who receive billions in funding:
University of California physics professor, resigning from American Physical Society:
‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’
ParticipantPosters have mentioned that big oil is behind this proposition. The same thing can be said for the global warming hysterics as well, who receive billions in funding:
University of California physics professor, resigning from American Physical Society:
‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’
ParticipantPosters have mentioned that big oil is behind this proposition. The same thing can be said for the global warming hysterics as well, who receive billions in funding:
University of California physics professor, resigning from American Physical Society:
‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’
ParticipantPosters have mentioned that big oil is behind this proposition. The same thing can be said for the global warming hysterics as well, who receive billions in funding:
University of California physics professor, resigning from American Physical Society:
‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’
-
AuthorPosts