John Stossel is ABC News' Co-Anchor of "20/20" and New York Times best-selling author of Give Me A Break & Myths, Lies and Downright Stupidity. His "Give Me a Break" commentaries take a skeptical look at a wide array of issues, such as education, the economy, parenting, and more.
RECENT POSTS
JOHN STOSSEL'S CATEGORIES
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
The Cost of “Doing Something” II
07/01/2009 5:24 PM
“We're in the middle of pretending to save the planet, baby. If it's about helping ‘the environment,’ suspend reason and salvation is yours.”
David Harsanyi’s Denver Post column today on the House’s recent climate bill makes good points about cap-and-trade’s destructive power, i.e.:
“Having to pay for expensive carbon credits will be an incentive for many American companies to close their carbon-emitting businesses and move abroad to places less devoted to destroying themselves.”
Trade is good. And voluntary. Let’s trade more. “Cap” is the problem. Better get your home ready for visits from the Chimney Police.
If carbon someday does prove to be a real threat (it is possible), then isn’t a carbon tax a simpler and better disincentive?
Of course, cap-and-trade gives the political class more opportunity to do favors for their contributors.
July 1, 2009 in Global Warming | Permalink | Share | User Comments (8)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
ON the other hand we can continue with the rise in use of health care and it's costs, as a resultf lung diseases such as asthma, then you can continue to rile against the cost of health care like you have been.
Then ABCan continue to pay you and provide your health care.
Posted by: Thinking | Jul 1, 2009 6:57:36 PM
The dreaded asthma pandemic!
Let's disregard the issue!
Posted by: Stinking | Jul 1, 2009 7:49:02 PM
This post is about cap-and-trade, not health care, "Thinking."
Do you really think cap-and-trade is the best solution for reducing the pollution you would say is causing that rise in asthma costs? Can you really say that? It's hard not to read through the bill and see how much of a special-interests-driven scam the whole thing is.
John even suggests alternative ideas like a carbon tax. There are certainly ways to help reduce pollution, but cap-and-trade does not look to be one of them. Try "thinking" things through next time before having a knee-jerk reaction that results in an ad hominem tirade against Mr. Stossel.
Posted by: DJ | Jul 1, 2009 8:17:31 PM
@Thinking:
I, for one, am going to take you seriously.
I would honestly like to know what connection or correlation you see between "carbon dioxide emissions created exclusively for electrical and/or power generation" and asthma.
The cap-and-trade bill only affects carbon counting, and not mercury or sulfates. If there is indeed a correlation in a higher incidence of asthma in a population near a source emitting carbon dioxide, please share it. (and then prove it's inhaled CO2 that is the culprit, and not the POLLEN FROM THE ADDITIONAL PLANT LIFE that grows in a richer CO2 environment.)
Posted by: Ike | Jul 1, 2009 9:09:56 PM
There is no reason to pass any sort of Cap and Trade legislation. There is no reaqson to attempt to lower our emmissions of CO2. CO2 DOES NOT drive climate change. The cyclical variations of the suns intensity is what drives climate change.
And right now, the sun isn't looking so hot.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2009/01apr_deepsolarminimum.htm?list53494
NASA tries to spin their report, stating that this delay in the next solar cycle (24) cranking up will not reverse "Global Warming", but the fact that they are reporting a significant delay coincides with a paper presented in 2007 by Dr David Archibald, in which he predicted a coming "Maunder" that could lower average temps on earth a 2 degrees C by 2035. Dr Archibald had studied the records of sun spot activity going back to 1700. He found that Maunders (they seemed to ahve come along at the turn of each century since 1400 AD) were preceded by a delay between cycles. This resulted in the following cycle or 2 to be longer and less intense, causing a cooling of the earth. Well, We're past due for a Maunder and there has been a significant delay inn the start of Cycle 24.
Read Dr Archibalds paper here in PDF format
http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=74&Itemid=1
Better be stocking up on long johns.
Posted by: Task Force 16 | Jul 1, 2009 10:59:31 PM
I am not certain that CO2 is or will cause global warming, but I think I have read enough articles and seen enough evidence to believe it is altering our environment. I have no issue with providing an incentive for businesses to lower their CO2 output, but I hate the idea of cap and trade for several reasons: 1. It will lead to a new bureaucracy to regulate the market for buying and selling permits. 2. It gives huge breaks to some of the worst polluters, because they have managed to get permits on the cheap due to cozy relations with legislators. and 3. Applying property rights to CO2 and forcing polluters to pay a tax is the easiest way to regulate pollution and reward the most efficient companies.
Posted by: H. Green | Jul 1, 2009 11:52:29 PM
Doing something for the sake of doing something, or worse, for the sake of political expediency is problematic.
To wit: why won't Reid and Pelosi allow a full discussion, reading and debate on these bills they are ramrodding through the Congress? If the politicians voting on it don't understand the bill, and they have admitted as much, then how can they make an informed vote?
Dump the Micheal Jackson stories and get back to what is important (or get to it in the first place!).
Posted by: Dimsdale | Jul 5, 2009 7:25:32 PM
I really tink it's time to re-air your global warming report. IN PRIMETIME and hope that it helps people to come to their senses
Posted by: Carol | Jul 10, 2009 10:25:13 AM
Post a comment
