America's First Carbon Tax

We used to joke about the government taxing us for breathing. It seems that most Americans do not remember that liberty and freedom, not taxation were the cornerstones of this country.

Another dangerous precedent set by this (assuming we drink the pitcher of global warming kool-aid set before us) is that we can buy ourselves out of doing something wrong. I make CO2, no worries, because I can pay for it. If I cannot, I go out of business. That is better for the CA economy, right? Nope. And by extension, how long until we can buy ourselves out of a murder charge? (I know, OJ already did it). If it is wrong, it should be illegal. If it is not, then it should be free. And just what magical wand is this money going to buy that lowers the CO2 level to 0.00322 (thanks for the stat MTM)? There is not one. So this tax is going to get poured right back into supporting the hysteria so rightly cited as a haven for the misled. I often wonder why any company would squander their revenues by being located in CA at all. That is why I left and choose to provide my tax money (at less than half the rate of CA) to a state that spends it on more appropriate things. Like schools. Or roads. Or parks. Or emergency services. Or any of the other hundreds of things that should be supported over this tripe.

Ahh, the horrible stink of Marxism. 31,000 scientists sign a petition doubting global warming and nobody pays attention. One ex VP makes a movie and everybody considers it gospel and panics. What just happened with this tax is the tip of the iceberg and you can now put a time limit on free market innovation and development. Say goodbye to the remaining companies that haven't moved overseas yet, because, with taxes like this, they will be gone. The left and their policies such as this, are destroying our country and nobody seems to understand and, more importantly, care.

Taxafornia - that's a better name. Always a gimick to collect more tax dollars on the backs of citizens.

I always thought liberal meant freedom--but I guess I'm wrong about that. Why is it the left wing calls themselves the protectors of the people and the less fortunate, yet, it's the left wing that are slowly eroding away everyone's rights by imposing stupid nanny laws in the first place?

There are two issues being thrown about here: 1. Whether or not global warming is a threat 2. Whether or not a carbon tax is an appropriate and fair countermeasure. As for the former, looking at CO2 concentrations only makes sense in light of historic values. As such the "0.00323" estimate, although a very nice wikipedia tidbit, is without merit. I'll assume, jfm125, that you are not an atmospheric or climatic scientist, and therefore are really not qualified to comment on the climactic significance of fluctuations in CO2. You either believe in science (and consequent innovation), and trust the scientific community, or you don't. If you don't, you really have no right to be clicking away on that personal computer, using a cell phone, etc. , nor do you have a right (next time you fall ill), to utilize modern medicine, receive vaccinations, etc. ad naseum. If a worldview rooted in logic empiricism is "scary", then there, regrettably, is no hope for you.

Blog,
Just because other countries aren't doing the right thing means that we shouldn't either? Why shouldn't we set an example for the global community? aaah yes, the economy! American greed rears it's ugly head once again..

Well put Royce.

The IPCC (International panel on climate change) is not scientific at all. They put hundreds of scientist names on their report, come up with the conclusions of their report, then work backwards trying to make the computer models (not satelite evidence) fit their preordained conclusion. Without removing the names of the scientist who openly and aggressivley disagree with it's (flawed) findings. Don't you know about the flawed hypothesis that lead to the "hockey stick" curve in the IPCC report? It has been proven going back through the ice core data at the poles that CO2 comes AFTER a warming trend, NOT before! You can't have it both ways. When the Vikings went to Greenland they were able to farm and live off the land for hundreds of years, then they went into a cooling period and everything iced over. Can you tell me what the hell caused all of that warming before the Vikings came to town? There's no way it was humans or cow #####. And that sure aint what's causing the temperature to go up on Mars and all of the other planets today either. Sunspot activity has been proven to predict the onset of solar wind, and this plays a vital role in the warming and cooling of our planet. It's just that you can't enforce draconian laws and regulations down the American people's throat if they think that there isn't a threat to the earth every five seconds, can you? In the 60's it was global cooling, now it's global warming, global dimming, and the only way it can be stopped is global government... Uh come on! Give us a little credit, will you? Show some respect for the intelliecgence of humanity. You can fool alot of people, but you can't fool everyone.

So WE in America have to subsidze China, India and the rest of the unregulated, polluting world with OUR capital, so they can continue to pollute without repercussion, and make things worse... I see. You don't care about the enviroment, your just using it as an excuse to make the US a third world country and prop up Communist China, Russia, North Korea and the rest of the corrupt regimes around the world. Enviromentialism is a tool to win the gains that Communism couldn't win on the battlefield. Ah, I see... That's certainly worth all of this trouble. I can see how having us pay these countries to pollute while forcing us to de-industrialze is for the good of the nation and for the enviroment... uhh NOT!

MTM -

Nobody in the global community cares what we do. All they want from the USA is money, money and more money. They also want to weaken us and our economy in any way possible and this global warming crap, is just another way. China, India, etc, don't care if we are doing the right thing or not. They are going to do what they view is in the best interests of their country. It appears that left and their leaders and some on the right as well, do not care about what's best for our country and doing things that makes us stronger instead of weaker, which is what is happening now. If we worry and conduct our business with the thought of making the "global community" happy, we will wake up one day and realize that the USA no longer exists. We have to look out for number one, us, first, everybody else second. The same way everybody does with their own families. They take care of their family first, then, if they are able to, then they help their neighbor. It's call survival of the fittest and I want our country to be the most fit country around. I never thought I would see some many people willing to give up their freedoms, be so willing to be taxed to death, and not wanting to care for themselves and their families but to demand a government provide everything for them from cradle to grave. It's sickening.

You call it American greed, I call it American innovation and success. There is nothing wrong with making as much money as you possible can. As has always been the case, not everybody will nor should they, make the same amount of money. We all make money to provide for our families and people like you want to take that money out of my pocket to provide for some other family, and/or country, instead of my own. Sorry, I don't call that freedom, I call that communism. Individual success and freedoms are disappearing at faster rate than the polar bears ever will.

Once again, the left coast leads the way in stupidity. Follow Algore down the road to ruin. Libs, gotta wonder how they tie their shoes.

The global community absolutely does care what we do - look at the repercussions worldwide when we pulled out of Kyoto. And as for China and India, THEY RATIFIED IT! China and India are (on paper) willing to do more than us! That's an embarrassment to the world community, and to me personally, as an American. I'm sick of people making excuses, pointing fingers, etc. This is about building a worldwide coalition to combat something that will worsen and ultimately destroy us.. Sounds like your personal freedoms, greed, etc. are more important than joining together with the EU and 148 other nations to try to solve this problem. And this is precisely why the US is so despised by the rest of the world - we are simply not willing to do our part.

>>>There is nothing wrong with making as much money as you possible can>>>

Yes, there is something wrong with that and those principles are enshrined under US law. To further your own profit margin you can't exploit child labor, provide unsafe working conditions, fail to reward your workers or abuse them, etc. There are also caps on the amount and type of pollutants you can release while pursuing your profits. There is nothing new here. It's hardly the new world order.

Let's set aside the elementary school rhetoric and look at capitalism as adults. It of course needs to be regulated to some degree. That line will always be changing depending on the whims of government (local, state or federal).

Now, according to the comments above this decision has lumped the american left in with "OJ", "Marxism", and one poster believes the left should be executed by firing squad. Wonderful sentiments, surely derived from talk radio. This local San Fransisco decision should be good news if you believe scientists dont' believe AGW, theyll have plenty of opportunities to debate it nationally as a result.

I also find the escalating claims of there being armies of scientists opposed to the idea of AGW a bit odd. On the previous thread they promoted a list of 400 skeptics. It was filled with non-specialists and organized by a young earth creationist. A similar list of 500 released by the "Heartland Foundation" has no actual signatures, iirc, and just placed the names of scientists they believed to have made remarks critical of AGW. The bar lowers. Some have even asked that their names be removed to no avail.

Now, we have a new list. 31,000 "scientists" who signed an online petition over 10 years. The rhetoric escalates. A quick search on the list finds that it's a pretty screwy affair that doesnt event reveal its "verification" procedures. You just have to trust them. What kind of methodology is that? Why the secrecy? That's just bizaree. Scientific american did a random sampling of the Phd climate scientists and found many who didnt support the petition. When they confirm, are they just confirming the existence of such people and not confirming the opinion? Anyone can get a list of scientists and spam a list.

Also, the language is classic creationist obfuscation. It basically asks the signers to deny evidence that warming will "in the forseeable future, cause catastrophic heating", not dismiss global warming or even AGW. Creationists circulate simliar lists to "darwinists", with very careful language, trying to trick people into signing. Its a public relations effort, not reality.

And the "review" they posted and sent out doesnt even claim the earth is warming, they say its cooling. They also tried to pass it off with NAS font and formating, which even the head of the organization said in retrospect was stupid. When does the honesty begin?

Just a common sense check: And how could it be that almost every climate scientist in the world opposes AGW when dozens of major scientific orgs support the the AGW claims as reasonable while none oppose it. Do these skeptics not have employment with scientific organizations? What do they do?

I personally couldnt say whether AGW is a fact or not but why the need to resort to these silly and bizarre lists? When attached to inflamatory political rhetoric it doesnt leave the impression of reasoned opposition.

This is just another revenue generating scheme. The atmosphere does not hang in one place. The air that is over your head today in somewhere in europe in a couple of weeks. You exhale co2 when you breath. They are taxing life itself. There will soon be a revolt against this type of out of control government.

The fact that emitted pollutants circulate to other parts of the world makes it ok? Well, then lets dump all of our nuclear waste across the border onto Canadian soil. They won't mind and then it won't be our problem. In fact, lets repeal all of the clean air legislation of the 60s and 70s and return to using leaded fuel. It'll bow away eventually and become someone else's problem. Please try hard to understand this - the CO2 we've put into the atmosphere is not innocuous (even though we happen to exhale it and plants use it to create chemical energy).

MTM, look this up for christsake CO2 carbon dioxide is NOT carbon monoxide CO. I know you weren't allowed to learn this in school but Jesus Christ it's a basic, fundamental... FACT! They are NOT the same thing. One is pollution, and the other is a life giving gas that promotes plant growth and vegetation. Punch it in Wikipedia or a dictionary if you have to. But that is the truth. Reguating/taxing and punishing those who have levels of the good gas, while dropping windfalls of cash to those who aren't regulated to prevent or even monitor the levels of the gas pollutant carbon monoxide or CO... defeats the ENTIRE purpose of the tax in the first place. This is just simple logic at it's most basic level. What does not compute? How can one be so threatened or confused by facts instead of mere assertions? I don't understand. You can look this up for yourself... try it. And you will see the truth. It's right there for all to see, nobody is trying to hide it in plain sight. You just have to look for yourself. What's so difficult?

Is there something in the water in that state?

Blog,
Thanks for the ochem lesson. Nobody here is debating that they aren't different - reread my posts - no mention of CO. And while CO is quite toxic to humans, so is H2O in sufficient quantities. In this context, is H2O still a "good" liquid? My point is, anything in excess can have deleterious effects on life. CO2 is no exception. Referring to it as a "life-giving gas" and "good gas" is just asinine in the context of an increasingly industrialized world. 150 years ago, perhaps a fair characterization.

I see you were polluted by the vast emptiness of modern liberal college professors who were busy telling you that America is BAD, Communist are good and that everything in the world is ideally 50-50. (Must be a liberal arts major, right, or worse the dreaded "sociology" degree for you, eh?) Scientist are wrong, doctors are wrong, and you are legend in your own insular mind. Be careful the last person who had those views was President for eight years... But don't think that (horrific) example makes you qualified for the highest office in the land. Hell you still think that the world functions so rigidly that if human beings burp the whole world will explode. The Earth has survived earthquakes, volcanoes, tornadoes, flooding, mudslides, nuclear explosions, solar wind, solar radiation, "global cooling", the ice age, the "little ice age" and variations in the output of the sun... And yet you want us to believe that human beings and animals breathing as well as cow farts are destroying the planet... I think the Department of Homeland Security was made to track people like yourself. Do the country a great service and don't replicate. You may even want to go ahead and end your life as well; After all, look on the bright side, you will be doing your share to control that evil pollutant gas you emit, every time you take a breath. And you will play a valuable role in "saving" the planet, naturally at the expense of yourself. Although if your survive this attempt... you may need a shrink to justify your existence and your failure at this most simple basic step. God bless... (Ew, sorry, I mean "Earth bless")