We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Re that thing about California changing its lightbulbs, Althouse has a better idea: ban air conditioning. Naw, they'd never do that. Tokenism is the thing. Plus a/c cools things off, right?
Meanwhile, SDA notes that no-one in Canada really believes in the man-made global cooling warming hypothesis. Goldstein explains, in the Toronto Sun, while noting that any warming would be much to the advantage of Russia and Canada.
In other weather-related news, Joe Malchow illustrates the high intellectual and factual level on which global climate debates occur. (h/t, Viking). Blue Crab unveils the newest weather and climate predicting supercomputer. And those nice folks at the UN have decided that, if they can't scare the adults, maybe they can give the kiddy-poos nightmares. Since the UN totally sucks at preventing war and creating peace, maybe they are switching their marketing plan for world governance to the climate angle.
Image: Scientists' consensus of the appearance of a Nome, Alaska, beachside resort in 2010. Make your reservations now, and save!
Wot a set-up. Borders are the one-wprlder's bete noir, and what else but climate is borderless?
If it wasn't 'warming', it'd be
'cooling'(the difference between measuring midnight-to-noon, vs noon-to-midnight), and that too would be a problem only the Stateless State could solve. Solve, er, 'address'. Er, send money, and sovereignty.
Well, it's now or never for these birds--they've been caught ruining the schools, now have to strike before the population gets un-dumbed again.
Its the carbon credits. Pres. Bush had his foot on the necks of the Kyoto crowd in Dec. 2005 in Montreal. The US had the opportunity to end this debate then and there but we did not. I think the CER market must be why. But global warming/Kyoto has always been a UN/socialist idea to 'open' an all new market with CERs. Google Maurice Strong. I do not really understand CERs but I think we all risk having our pockets picked, regardless of which political party is in power. I also understand there may already be big problems with the CER markets in the EU. But I do not know enough about it and I wager neither do most people, even the ones who invented this whole plan.
Here is a link with older info on the market and a snip from a more recent FOX article.
Hot air is often associated with politicians, but the new 110th Congress will try elevating that unflattering characterization to the status of a tradable commodity in hopes of stemming the perceived problem of man-made global warming.
New Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and Senate Environment and Public Works Committee chairman Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., support Kyoto Protocol-like plans to limit greenhouse gas emissions and to trade permits to emit greenhouse gases – a.k.a “cap-and-trade.”
Speaker Pelosi’s and Sen. Boxer’s plans are supported by investment banking firms, such as Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, that plan on profiting from trading so-called “carbon credits.”
Toward that end, Morgan Stanley vice chairman Jon Anda argued for cap-and-trade this week in a commentary in the Jan. 3 Financial Times. It’s a useful place for starting the debate over what will likely be a major political issue during 2007.
Also search "papal dispensations" as a model for the proposed tradeable good.
The intrinsic value is relief, but not, as per the propaganda, from harmful climate change, from rather, from punishment by the authorities.
(see "administrative law", and how it is different from civil or criminal, in that is controlled by agencies of the executive branch)
The extra cost of doing business will be paid--as always--by the end-users of the products created by industry, and this cash transfer will accrue to Uncle Sam and the market makers.
Morgan & Goldman are both Big Dem organizations. Very good, very corporate-capitalist, very Democratic party.
The system will drag the economy about as much as the Iraq War drags the economy--a point made more and more often by the idea's salesmen.
Basically, the line is "If USA can afford to fight terrorism, it can afford to fight the climate. If defense industries can profit off terror, then government and big finance should profit off climate."
There is a certain symmetry, except for the fact that since terrorism is real, and man-controllable climate change ain't, the whole analogy is as bogus as Al Gore's sincerity.
Thanks buddy. You have helped 'clear the air'. I am still having a hard time trying to follow the money. I think the monies will be collected when we buy the energy we require at a higher cost and those extra monies will then buy credits to be traded or sold to coal fired plants in China and India, with the brokerages getting a percentage on the trades. Whether I like it or not this is one beautiful scam.