PDA

View Full Version : Obama climate plan could cost $2 trillion


hindes204
03-24-2009, 12:05 PM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/18/obama-climate-plan-could-cost-2-trillion/


Obama climate plan could cost $2 trillion
Tom LoBianco (Contact)
Wednesday, March 18, 2009



President Obama's climate plan could cost industry close to $2 trillion, nearly three times the White House's initial estimate of the so-called "cap-and-trade" legislation, according to Senate staffers who were briefed by the White House.

A top economic aide to Mr. Obama told a group of Senate staffers last month that the president's climate-change plan would surely raise more than the $646 billion over eight years the White House had estimated publicly, according to multiple a number of staffers who attended the briefing Feb. 26.

"We all looked at each other like, 'Wow, that's a big number,'" said a top Republican staffer who attended the meeting along with between 50 and 60 other Democratic and Republican congressional aides.

The plan seeks to reduce pollution by setting a limit on carbon emissions and allowing businesses and groups to buy allowances, although exact details have not been released.

At the meeting, Jason Furman, a top Obama staffer, estimated that the president's cap-and-trade program could cost up to three times as much as the administration's early estimate of $646 billion over eight years. A study of an earlier cap-and-trade bill co-sponsored by Mr. Obama when he was a senator estimated the cost could top $366 billion a year by 2015.

A White House official did not confirm the large estimate, saying only that Obama aides previously had noted that the $646 billion estimate was "conservative."

"Any revenues in excess of the estimate would be rebated to vulnerable consumers, communities and businesses," the official said.

The Obama administration has proposed using the majority of the money generated from a cap-and-trade plan to pay for its middle-class tax cuts, while using about $120 billion to invest in renewable-energy projects.

Mr. Obama and congressional Democratic leaders have made passing a climate-change bill a top priority. But Republican leaders and moderate to conservative Democrats have cautioned against levying increased fees on businesses while the economy is still faltering.

House Republican leaders blasted the costs in the new estimate.

"The last thing we need is a massive tax increase in a recession, but reportedly that's what the White House is offering: up to $1.9 trillion in tax hikes on every single American who drives a car, turns on a light switch or buys a product made in the United States," said Michael Steel, a spokesman for House Minority Leader John A. Boehner. "And since this energy tax won't affect manufacturers in Mexico, India and China, it will do nothing but drive American jobs overseas."






Everything that i have read on this says that the average utility bill will go up about $1800 a year......just what the country needs, an extra $150 in bills every month. With my wife out of work right now, i am barely surviving paycheck to paycheck

revefsreleets
03-24-2009, 12:18 PM
At least this is one of his own ideas and not a re-hash of Bush's. That's a change.

Obama needs to stick to the economy. Period. We can worry about dealing with garbage legislation like this after we save the country from going bankrupt.

fansince'76
03-24-2009, 12:19 PM
Raise my utility bills to pay for my "tax cut," all the while giving domestic businesses with the wherewithal to do so even more incentive to move lock, stock and barrel overseas and take jobs that actually pay a living wage with them! Brilliant! Hope! Change!

revefsreleets
03-24-2009, 12:24 PM
Raise my utility bills to pay for my "tax cut," all the while giving domestic businesses with the wherewithal to do so even more incentive to move lock, stock and barrel overseas and take jobs that actually pay a living wage with them! Brilliant! Hope! Change!

Hmmm..wait a second now.

We got a $13 a week break. That's $672 a year. We'll say, for arguments sake, that the majority of households have two breadwinners. So that's $1344 a year in a middle class tax break. BUT the average utility bill will go UP $1800 a year.

So, in other words, with Obama's "Middle class tax cut", the average family actually LOSES $456 a year.

That's definitely change all right! But not the kind I can believe in.

:doh:We are SOOOO screwed:banging:

Dino 6 Rings
03-24-2009, 01:10 PM
Ok folks, just an FYI

Allow a company to "purchase" Carbon Credits in case they go over their allowed emissions does NOTHING to help the Environment. All that does is basically allow companies to Pay to pollute instead of installing and upgrading to the new hardware that would be required to meet the new emission standards.

So basically, it'll be Cheaper for these companies to buy Carbon Credits and continue their pollution instead of fixing the problem.

Biggest Scam Ever.

steelreserve
03-24-2009, 01:37 PM
Yeah, since it's the worst economic situation in about 50 years, this does not really strike me as the best time to be spending extra money on "going green."

Although in all fairness, this just sounds like rules of the Kyoto Protocol, and McCain said he was in favor of joining that too.

HometownGal
03-24-2009, 02:34 PM
Obama needs to stick to the economy. Period. We can worry about dealing with garbage legislation like this after we save the country from going bankrupt.

BINGO. The country is going to hell in a handbasket under his watch and The Savior is worrying about the freakin' climate? :banging:

Like you, revs, I can proudly say that I didn't vote for this weenie.

Muppet13
03-24-2009, 04:19 PM
:mad::banging::mad::banging::mad::banging::mad::ba nging::mad::banging::mad::banging::mad::banging:

MACH1
03-24-2009, 05:24 PM
Stupid is as stupid does.:banging:

Dino 6 Rings
03-24-2009, 05:29 PM
What's hilarious, and I mean this is really funny...is that the US is basically one of only 3 or 4 big nations that cares about the environment to begin with. Seriously, we have such high standards already, have so many organizations and groups dedicated to stopping pollution already, that its a JOKE to think we need to do more by basically Taxing companies for their pollution.

China, Mexico, India, Indonesia, all of Africa, Russia, Eastern Europe and a few nations in Western Europe, basically,don't meet 1/10th of the regulations we already impose on ourselves.

Fcking Laugh Fest.

MACH1
03-24-2009, 05:58 PM
Fcking Laugh Fest.


Company's laughing all the way over sea's. I guess obaaama didn't say he was going to save or create four million american jobs, did he? :rolleyes:

tony hipchest
03-24-2009, 07:29 PM
...or it could not.

i love all these "could" and "maybe" panic articles.

:coffee:

hindes204
03-24-2009, 09:34 PM
...or it could not.

i love all these "could" and "maybe" panic articles.

:coffee:

panic article......this "could" is coming from White House aide Jason Furman...he told a group of Congressional staffers that the plan could wind up costing as much as $2 trillion http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2009/03/24/white-house-ups-estimate-of-climate-plan-costs/


so this is no "right wing" panic estimate...this is coming straight from the white house

tony hipchest
03-24-2009, 09:43 PM
panic article......this "could" is coming from White House aide Jason Furman...he told a group of Congressional staffers that the plan could wind up costing as much as $2 trillion http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2009/03/24/white-house-ups-estimate-of-climate-plan-costs/


so this is no "right wing" panic estimate...this is coming straight from the white house
SO?

i never said it WAS a "right wing" panic estimate.... :moon: so bite it.

i still call it a panic article, only this one "could" be designed to soften the blow when the actual numbers come out as opposed to trying to get obama assassinated, or what ever it is sour grape right wingers hope to do or see get done. :smile:

HometownGal
03-24-2009, 09:53 PM
i still call it a panic article, only this one "could" be designed to soften the blow when the actual numbers come out as opposed to trying to get obama assassinated, or what ever it is sour grape right wingers hope to do or see get done. :smile:

WOW. :jawdrop: Even if you said that in jest - that's a far stretch and just plain disgusting.

I can't speak for others, but my attitude on Obama has nothing to do with "sour grapes". I was willing to give the man a fair shot to prove me wrong in my original opinion of him, but in the past 64 days, he's shown not only his total ineptitude and lack of real governmental experience - he's made Bush look like a Mensa scholar. Did you watch his live press conference tonight? If he wasn't reading off of a teleprompter, he stumbled all over himself trying to get a real command of the English language. I've never heard any President say "uhhhhh" or draw a blank that many times in 60 minutes. :shake01:

tony hipchest
03-24-2009, 10:10 PM
he's made Bush look like a Mensa scholar.

Even if you said that in jest - that's a far stretch and just plain disgusting.

a "fair" shot, huh?

after 64 days?

:rofl:

were you expecting the "silver bullet" obama spoke of?

im pretty sure its a pretty safe bet that millions of sour grapers who honestly believe we are doomed to obama induced socialism would gladly trade his life and presidency to be led by mccain/palin.

HometownGal
03-24-2009, 10:46 PM
Even if you said that in jest - that's a far stretch and just plain disgusting.

a "fair" shot, huh?

after 64 days?

:rofl:

were you expecting the "silver bullet" obama spoke of?

im pretty sure its a pretty safe bet that millions of sour grapers who honestly believe we are doomed to obama induced socialism would gladly trade his life and presidency to be led by mccain/palin.

Obama didn't even need 64 days to prove himself to be a farce. Pretty obvious when his own party started to turn on him in the infancy of his Presidency. :rofl: :rofl:

Though admittedly I would prefer McCain/Palin, Laurel & Hardy or even 2 of the 3 Stooges over this duo, I would never - ever - wish anything bad on Obama and/or Biden or anyone else for that matter.

Whether we are "doomed to Obama induced socialism" or not - Obama is sure off to the races in proving the points of those who do believe we are indeed "doomed" to this country adopting socialism, as I am beginning to believe.

tony hipchest
03-24-2009, 11:07 PM
Obama didn't even need 64 days to prove himself to be a farce. Pretty obvious when his own party started to turn on him in the infancy of his Presidency. :rofl: :rofl:


of course not. many had him pegged as a farce before he was even elected. the whole "give him a chance" schtick was just lip service.

Though admittedly I would prefer McCain/Palin, Laurel & Hardy or even 2 of the 3 Stooges over this duo, I would never - ever - wish anything bad on Obama and/or Biden or anyone else for that matter. so you are hoping to see obama succeed, get elected again, and see his plan through just like i voted for bush the 2nd go around so he could see his war through?

:coffee: i highly doubt that.


Whether we are "doomed to Obama induced socialism" or not - Obama is sure off to the races in proving the points of those who do believe we are indeed "doomed" to this country adopting socialism, as I am beginning to believe.

*BAAAAAAAAA* http://www.rr-bb.com/images/smilies/sheepaid.gif

say what?

:chuckle:

X-Terminator
03-24-2009, 11:37 PM
Even if you said that in jest - that's a far stretch and just plain disgusting.

a "fair" shot, huh?

after 64 days?

:rofl:

were you expecting the "silver bullet" obama spoke of?

im pretty sure its a pretty safe bet that millions of sour grapers who honestly believe we are doomed to obama induced socialism would gladly trade his life and presidency to be led by mccain/palin.

So you're saying that anyone who disagrees with Obama's stances on...well, damn near everything...is nothing more than "sour grapes" from the right wing? Really? Well then I guess I'm a "sour graper," because there hasn't been much Obama has done that I support.

Let me ask you this, then - do you believe that spending billions or trillions of dollars on "green projects," in this period of economic strife, is the right thing to do? With all of the spending that Obama is promising/promoting/signing into law, he likely is going to have a significant budget deficit, at least double what it is right now from what I've been reading. Do you not see that as a problem? And where is he going to get the money from? Fairy World? We've seen time and time again over the years the government dipping its finger into damn near everything, throwing trillions of dollars at perceived "problems," and ended up turning it into an even bigger mess than before. All you need to do is look at the bailouts to see a prime example of that. And yet, here's Obama endorsing more government spending and more government control, things that I and the other people you refer to as "right-wing sour grapers" do not want. More government control = socialism, and since Obama supports more government control, that means he supports socialism. Knowing what you know about government, do you REALLY want more power in their hands, spending our tax dollars on insignificant pork projects? At what point do you stand up and say "enough already?" It's time for the government to show some fiscal restraint. I mean, if the rest of America has to make do with less and live within a reasonable budget, why can't the government? I don't believe it's wrong to have that view.

cubanstogie
03-25-2009, 12:10 AM
WOW. :jawdrop: Even if you said that in jest - that's a far stretch and just plain disgusting.

I can't speak for others, but my attitude on Obama has nothing to do with "sour grapes". I was willing to give the man a fair shot to prove me wrong in my original opinion of him, but in the past 64 days, he's shown not only his total ineptitude and lack of real governmental experience - he's made Bush look like a Mensa scholar. Did you watch his live press conference tonight? If he wasn't reading off of a teleprompter, he stumbled all over himself trying to get a real command of the English language. I've never heard any President say "uhhhhh" or draw a blank that many times in 60 minutes. :shake01:

I was thinking the same things. When the teleprompter was turned off he sounded like a babbling idiot. He was indignant to every reporter who didn't serve him a question on a platter. Obama gave long winded answers and evaded all questions. I never saw Bush look even close to that bad. It just proved to me how strong that Kool Aid he dished out was. What a joke that press conference was. Libs are frigging idiots, that was proved tonight. What a joke this President is.

tony hipchest
03-25-2009, 12:10 AM
sorry X-T.

i didnt read beyond trillions of dollars on "green projects ". :hunch:

i'll believe THAT when i see it.

steelwall
03-25-2009, 12:11 AM
So you're saying that anyone who disagrees with Obama's stances on...well, damn near everything...is nothing more than "sour grapes" from the right wing? Really? Well then I guess I'm a "sour graper," because there hasn't been much Obama has done that I support.

.


Pretty much thats all I see from any of his posts. Like Marriane I wished Obama the best. I'm an American, I served this country and the last thing I want to see happen is it go down the tubes, by spending, spending, and spending...while we are allready in an economic crisis. I would love for Obama to "change" things around, bring our country out of recession, get the stock market back over 10,000. It would tickle me pink.

But there is alot of things happening, alot of spending happening that has me scratching my head. I only want the best for this country not whats best for Obama's approval rating.

The rock star concert is over...people want results, as was promised....or at very least the sight of something good thats going to happen. I'm just not seeing it. Right wing, left wing, whatever, I love this country and do not want to see it and it's people suffer from poorly thought out government spending, and a larger government.

Toney I will truley pray for Obama, and pray for this country believe it or not. I don't have to agree with him, I don't even have to like him, I do respect the office of the presidency, thats why you didnt see me posting crazy photos of him looking stupid (even though some were pretty darn funny) heck I would get a good laugh when Bush would say the wrong words or get flustered in a speech.

Didnt mean I was a lefty it meant I have a sense of humor. I'm not trying to bait you or force you to pull out that "mooning" smiley, or the old koolaid sipping remarks, I'm serious.

I know I've kinda skipped around a bit here, but in short...... just because someone disagrees with Obama certainly doesnt mean they are involved in a right wing conspiracy, or even a right winger. Also the assasination comment was totally uncalled for.... anyone that would like to see that happen is sick, some remarks are best kept to ones self.

tony hipchest
03-25-2009, 12:13 AM
I was thinking the same things. When the teleprompter was turned off he sounded like a babbling idiot. He was indignant to every reporter who didn't serve him a question on a platter. Obama gave long winded answers and evaded all questions. I never saw Bush look even close to that bad. It just proved to me how strong that Kool Aid he dished out was. What a joke that press conference was. Libs are frigging idiots, that was proved tonight. What a joke this President is.lemme guess...

anytime you saw bush throw a presser you saw the parting of clouds and a heavenly blast of golden trumpets?

cubanstogie
03-25-2009, 12:15 AM
lemme guess...

anytime you saw bush throw a presser you saw the parting of clouds and a heavenly blast of golden trumpets?

typical lib response, divert criticism towards someone else. Hipcheese is the epitome of lib. Proof is in the pudding.

tony hipchest
03-25-2009, 12:33 AM
typical lib response, divert criticism towards someone else. Hipcheese is the epitome of lib. Proof is in the pudding.typical rib response, divert criticisn towards someone else. cubanstooge is the epitome of rib. Proof is in the pudding.

:chuckle: this is fun.

steelwall
03-25-2009, 12:35 AM
This thread is going no place fast....

hindes204
03-25-2009, 12:59 AM
This thread is going no place fast....

isnt that tonys whole plan...divert attention

tony hipchest
03-25-2009, 01:22 AM
as opposed to fixating on "coulda, woulda, shouldas"?

maybe so.

but you credit me WAY too much by suggesting i have a "whole plan". :toofunny: (:hatsoff:....thanks, i appreciate it)

:fishing:

steelwall
03-25-2009, 01:29 AM
as opposed to fixating on "coulda, woulda, shouldas"?

maybe so.

but you credit me WAY too much by suggesting i have a "whole plan". :toofunny: (:hatsoff:....thanks, i appreciate it)

:fishing:

As opposed to focusing on your "shoulda, coulda, woulda," in you last Palin post.


You're right this is fun:chuckle:

tony hipchest
03-25-2009, 01:48 AM
people want results, as was promised.....

youre looking for that silver bullet, huh? in the real world there are no vampires. :noidea:

steelwall
03-25-2009, 04:30 AM
youre looking for that silver bullet, huh? in the real world there are no vampires. :noidea:


Silver bullets kill werewolves:noidea: what the hell are you smokin/talking about, I want some of that smoke.... Maybe I'll be blinded to whats happening around us...

stlrtruck
03-25-2009, 07:40 AM
lemme guess...

anytime you saw bush throw a presser you saw the parting of clouds and a heavenly blast of golden trumpets?

No, I thought Bush with or without the teleprompter was not a good orator. Hearing some of his speeches made me laugh just the way he stumbled through it. However, with Obama it seems different - maybe it's the presentation he gives when he's using the teleprompter.

Everyone knew that Bush wasn't good at speeches, even ones that were prepared. But Obama has the perception (which becomes reality) that he's this great communicator and the more he goes off script, he's proving he can't handle some of the pressure that comes with it. Last night was proof of that, there were some questions that he simply had no answer for and a few of the peopled showed that when he couldn't answer their questions.

X-Terminator
03-25-2009, 08:43 AM
sorry X-T.

i didnt read beyond trillions of dollars on "green projects ". :hunch:

i'll believe THAT when i see it.

So in other words, just because you don't believe that, the rest of my points don't matter, even though there is a correlation. Got it.

HometownGal
03-25-2009, 09:44 AM
of course not. many had him pegged as a farce before he was even elected. the whole "give him a chance" schtick was just lip service.



I believe many people could see right through him and his own "lip service" while he was on the campaign trail and others (many of who put him into office - not mentioning any names here :wink02::flap:) bought lock, stock and barrel into his "Change We Can Believe In" pie in the sky schtick, while others pulled the "Anyone But A Republican" lever.

so you are hoping to see obama succeed, get elected again, and see his plan through just like i voted for bush the 2nd go around so he could see his war through?

:coffee: i highly doubt that.


You are putting words in my mouth, Tony. You know damned well when I stated that I don't want to see anything "bad" happen to Obama and/or Biden that I was responding to your off the wall "assassination" remark. :buttkick:

Of course I want to see the President of the country I love so much succeed (whether I voted for him or not), but as I said - he's off to a very bad start in doing so and is only exacerbating the problems that have been festering going all the way back to the Carter administration. Of course I'm not naive enough to expect things are going to turn around overnight - that is impossible, but do you honestly believe that robbing Peter to pay Paul and putting our children, grandchildren and their children into trillions upon trillions of dollars of debt is going to right the sinking ship? Only an imbecile with a straw brain would buy into that (and before you think it, I'm not referring to YOU :wink02:).

:coffee: I highly doubt that.




*BAAAAAAAAA* http://www.rr-bb.com/images/smilies/sheepaid.gif

say what?

:chuckle:

But, But, But, But Bush . . . . . .


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_o5swS_a08j4/SXcWzXwWs-I/AAAAAAAADKc/jEnrFdcHzVY/s320/obama+sheep.JPG

:chuckle:

fansince'76
03-25-2009, 09:52 AM
So in other words, just because you don't believe that, the rest of my points don't matter, even though there is a correlation. Got it.

Yep, never mind that one of his own staffers said that an estimate of $646 BILLION over eight years was a CONSERVATIVE estimate....

President Obama's climate plan could cost industry close to $2 trillion, nearly three times the White House's initial estimate of the so-called "cap-and-trade" legislation, according to Senate staffers who were briefed by the White House.

At the meeting, Jason Furman, a top Obama staffer, estimated that the president's cap-and-trade program could cost up to three times as much as the administration's early estimate of $646 billion over eight years. A study of an earlier cap-and-trade bill co-sponsored by Mr. Obama when he was a senator estimated the cost could top $366 billion a year by 2015.

A top economic aide to Mr. Obama told a group of Senate staffers last month that the president's climate-change plan would surely raise more than the $646 billion over eight years the White House had estimated publicly, according to multiple a number of staffers who attended the briefing Feb. 26.

A White House official did not confirm the large estimate, saying only that Obama aides previously had noted that the $646 billion estimate was "conservative."

But hey, it'll be nice to breathe cleaner air while standing on the bread-and-soup line.

tony hipchest
03-25-2009, 10:33 AM
Yep, never mind that one of his own staffers said that an estimate of $646 BILLION over eight years was a CONSERVATIVE estimate....

President Obama's climate plan could cost industry close to $2 trillion, nearly three times the White House's initial estimate of the so-called "cap-and-trade" legislation, according to Senate staffers who were briefed by the White House.

At the meeting, Jason Furman, a top Obama staffer, estimated that the president's cap-and-trade program could cost up to three times as much as the administration's early estimate of $646 billion over eight years. A study of an earlier cap-and-trade bill co-sponsored by Mr. Obama when he was a senator estimated the cost could top $366 billion a year by 2015.




But hey, it'll be nice to breathe cleaner air while standing on the bread-and-soup line.and weve come full circle with a "could happen" article.

in other news- the evil empire patriots could win the superbowl next year. :noidea:

fansince'76
03-25-2009, 10:35 AM
and weve come full circle with a "could happen" article.

in other news- the evil empire patriots could win the superbowl next year. :noidea:

When have you ever known the federal government to actually stick to the low side of a cost projection - for anything? I never have. :noidea:

tony hipchest
03-25-2009, 10:55 AM
When have you ever known the federal government to actually stick to the low side of a cost projection - for anything? I never have. :noidea:thats kinda my point. it could cost 640 billion :noidea: it could cost 2 trillion :noidea: if it comes in at 1.2 trillion i guess the blow is softened by the 2 trillion estimate. its kinda like when the price of gasoline was artificially inflated to 5 bucks a gallon. that way when the price finally settles at the still inflated price of $2.50/gal it doesnt seem quite as bad.

but its comments like these i cant get beyond-


Let me ask you this, then - do you believe that spending billions or trillions of dollars on "green projects," in this period of economic strife, is the right thing to do?

were talking about a speculative projection of 10 years into the future and people are twisting the facts like obama is running out tomorrow to write multiple checks for trillions of dollars.

but while were at it, we might as well speculate/debate/get livid/or panic over how many trillions of dollars we could spend on foreign aid in the next 10 years. or policing the world. or eradicating diseases such as AIDS....

the list goes on.

revefsreleets
03-25-2009, 11:19 AM
The bottom line? SOMEONE is going to have to pay a BOATLOAD of money, money no one really has to begin with, to implement a bunch of environmental initiatives that probably won't have any real impact on Climate Change to begin with.

Everyday there is increasing evidence that the chief cause of Global Warming is due to Nature doing what it does.

I have no problem being green. It certainly can't hurt to be responsible concerning the Earth we live on. But why spend trillions on something that probably won't make a bit of difference, and, more importantly, why spend that money NOW? When no one has any money to spend?

Fix.
The.
Economy.

That's all. Let the generals handle the war. Let Hillary handle foreign policy. Maintain status quo on domestic policy. And fix the Goddamned economy already! Stop worrying about 500 other less important things!

fansince'76
03-25-2009, 11:32 AM
The bottom line? SOMEONE is going to have to pay a BOATLOAD of money, money no one really has to begin with, to implement a bunch of environmental initiatives that probably won't have any real impact on Climate Change to begin with.

Everyday there is increasing evidence that the chief cause of Global Warming is due to Nature doing what it does.

I have no problem being green. It certainly can't hurt to be responsible concerning the Earth we live on. But why spend trillions on something that probably won't make a bit of difference, and, more importantly, why spend that money NOW? When no one has any money to spend?

Fix.
The.
Economy.

That's all. Let the generals handle the war. Let Hillary handle foreign policy. Maintain status quo on domestic policy. And fix the Goddamned economy already! Stop worrying about 500 other less important things!

But the habitat of the endangered lily-livered, yellow-bellied, polka-dotted, purple-and-blue Peckerwood must be preserved at any cost! Al Gore said so!

revefsreleets
03-25-2009, 11:37 AM
http://media.southparkstudios.com/media/images/1111/1111_manbearpig_and_kyle_no_red.jpg

X-Terminator
03-25-2009, 11:39 AM
thats kinda my point. it could cost 640 billion :noidea: it could cost 2 trillion :noidea: if it comes in at 1.2 trillion i guess the blow is softened by the 2 trillion estimate. its kinda like when the price of gasoline was artificially inflated to 5 bucks a gallon. that way when the price finally settles at the still inflated price of $2.50/gal it doesnt seem quite as bad.

but its comments like these i cant get beyond-




were talking about a speculative projection of 10 years into the future and people are twisting the facts like obama is running out tomorrow to write multiple checks for trillions of dollars.

but while were at it, we might as well speculate/debate/get livid/or panic over how many trillions of dollars we could spend on foreign aid in the next 10 years. or policing the world. or eradicating diseases such as AIDS....

the list goes on.

The least you can do is mention my name since you're calling me out, Tony.

The point I was making, that you obviously did not take the time to read, is whether it's tomorrow or 10 years from now, we're still talking about billions of dollars. Where is it going to come from? You know that eventually, taxes are going to have to be raised to pay for this and all of his other pet projects, and given how times are right now and how most people think, that's going to go over about as well as a toothache. And why does it have to cost so much? That's where the fiscal responsibility angle comes in. Again, we the people have to live within a reasonable budget every day. Why is the government seemingly exempt from doing the same?

atlsteelers
03-25-2009, 11:45 AM
It might cost the coal bussinese some cash but I help create mitigation banks. so come on with the carbon credits already - we have some more trees to plant

tony hipchest
03-25-2009, 11:46 AM
The least you can do is mention my name since you're calling me out, Tony.
im NOT calling you out. im critiquing the post NOT the poster i.e. not making it personal (something so many around here have a problem doing).

Again, we the people have to live within a reasonable budget every day. Why is the government seemingly exempt from doing the same?i would say that as the richest government in the world, ALL americans have become accustomed to a sense of entitlement.

the fact is as americans we DONT have to live within a reasonable budget. that is what got us into this economic problem in the first place. our leadership has taught us that its ok to live on credit.

fansince'76
03-25-2009, 11:56 AM
i would say that as the richest government in the world, ALL americans have become accustomed to a sense of entitlement.

the fact is as americans we DONT have to live within a reasonable budget. that is what got us into this economic problem in the first place. our leadership has taught us that its ok to live on credit.

I have one credit card with a $500 limit and a zero balance. I own my car free and clear. I currently rent (but am looking to buy a house soon). I don't owe anybody anything. I'm putting money away every month. If I can't afford something, I simply don't buy it. How am I "living on credit?" Please don't say "ALL" Americans are as fiscally irresponsible as our government is.

tony hipchest
03-25-2009, 12:13 PM
I have one credit card with a $500 limit and a zero balance. I own my car free and clear. I currently rent (but am looking to buy a house soon). I don't owe anybody anything. I'm putting money away every month. If I can't afford something, I simply don't buy it. How am I "living on credit?" Please don't say "ALL" Americans are as fiscally irresponsible as our government is.my credit card limit is $2500. i use it for general purchases and internet shopping so i usually pay a montly bill of $800-900 to maintain zero balance.

with a trade in and half down i had $160/ month payments on my car on a 5 year loan (which i paid off the final $1000 bucks 2 years ago cause i had the cash and was tired of mailing in a monthly bill. we lease our house with an extra 50 buck per month going towards principal.

while i own a few stocks, my IRA is my savings account. :noidea:

it takes 2 to tango and the proof is in the pudding... as a whole, americans are just as irresponsible as our government. they are one in the same. you cant seperate americans from government or governmet from americans. its the culture we live in.

again, I am NOT making this personal, therfore I am NOT saying YOU are "living on credit".

sheesh :headshake:

Dino 6 Rings
03-25-2009, 12:44 PM
I'll be burning tires in my back yard tonight in honor of this new spending proposal.

maybe if I'm lucky, I have some styrafoam laying around I can toss on for some really pretty colors.

xfl2001fan
03-25-2009, 12:48 PM
I'll be burning tires in my back yard tonight in honor of this new spending proposal.

maybe if I'm lucky, I have some styrafoam laying around I can toss on for some really pretty colors.

Mix the styrafoam in with gasoline to make a home-made version of napalm...then it will burn longer for ya! I've got some bald-eagle eggs we can cook over your fire if you'd like!

Dino 6 Rings
03-25-2009, 12:50 PM
Maybe later, I'll go set an auto dealership on fire, including the cars, to show my support for the environment. Or maybe I'll burn down a ski lodge. That'll show how much I love Mother Earth.

revefsreleets
03-25-2009, 01:09 PM
Maybe later, I'll go set an auto dealership on fire, including the cars, to show my support for the environment. Or maybe I'll burn down a ski lodge. That'll show how much I love Mother Earth.

I believe you qualify for both stimulus bill AND spending bill bail out cash for all of these wonderful initiatives.

However, all the responsible people here who don't have debt to their eyeballs, unfortunately you for you, we have to raise your taxes.

xfl2001fan
03-25-2009, 01:17 PM
I believe you qualify for both stimulus bill AND spending bill bail out cash for all of these wonderful initiatives.

However, all the responsible people here who don't have debt to their eyeballs, unfortunately you for you, we have to raise your taxes.

What's sad about that statements...is that if I told you to not be so pessimistic...you could easily (and correctly) state that you're "positive" that it will happen that way.

X-Terminator
03-25-2009, 01:53 PM
im NOT calling you out. im critiquing the post NOT the poster i.e. not making it personal (something so many around here have a problem doing).

You quoted me, so I took it as you calling me out.

i would say that as the richest government in the world, ALL americans have become accustomed to a sense of entitlement.

the fact is as americans we DONT have to live within a reasonable budget. that is what got us into this economic problem in the first place. our leadership has taught us that its ok to live on credit.

And that sense of entitlement came straight from our leadership over the years by promising everyone the Sun, Moon and stars, knowing full well that fulfilling those promises is next to impossible.

I agree that we're in this financial mess because of people living beyond their means, so wouldn't you think now would be a good time for leadership to actually "lead" and practice fiscal responsibility, showing Americans the value of doing the same? Instead, we're getting $800+ billion "stimulus packages" that is nothing more than a glorified spending bill, multi-billion dollar bailouts of shady companies and, now, the possibility of $2 trillion being spent in the name of climate change. Let's fix the economy FIRST, then worry about funding for climate change and Obama's other pet projects, because there won't be any money for them if the economy still sucks. After all, you can't squeeze juice out of a dry lemon.

Dino 6 Rings
03-26-2009, 10:21 AM
Hey, lets go green!

How efficient are the solar panels that were inspected by President Obama? The Denver Museum of Science isn't telling. But you are helping to foot the bill for the solar array that won't pay for itself until the year 2118.
by Todd Shepherd


Before signing the $787 billion stimulus package into law on Feburary 17, 2009, President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden toured an array of solar panels on top of the Denver Museum of Nature and Science. The photo-op allowed the President to once again extol the virtues of the coming “green” economy.

According to the Denver Post's article on the event, “The sun generates enough energy on the museum rooftop to power about 30 homes.” However, that claim cannot be verified at this time, and in fact, seems to be belied by the scant information provided by the museum and other sources.[1] Laura Holtman, Public Relations Manager for the Museum said in an email, “Because the array generates less than 5 percent of the Museum's power, [the purchased energy] is not a particularly large bill.”

The Independence Institute asked the Denver Museum of Science and Nature to provide certain statistical information regarding the now-famous solar array. Specifically, the Institute asked for:

1 ) Two years worth of electric bills prior to the installation of the solar array,
2 ) All electric bills following the completion of the installation.

The Museum denied those requests.

The solar array is not owned by the Museum, however. It is owned by Hybrid Energy Group, LLC. HEG owns the solar array, sells the electricity to the Museum, and receives tax incentives from the state and federal governments, while also receiving “rebates” from Xcel Energy. The rebates are funded by a surcharge collected on the monthly bill of every Colorado Xcel customer.

A 2008 article in the Denver Business Journal sheds further light on the subject. The article notes the total price of the solar array was $720,000. And Dave Noel, VP of operations and chief technology officer for the Museum, was quoted as saying, “We looked at first installing [the solar array] ourselves, and without any of the incentive programs, it was a 110-year payout.” Noel went on to say that the Museum did not purchase the solar array because it did not “make sense financially.”

Additionally, most solar panels have an expected life-span of 20 to 25 years.

So how can Hybrid Energy Group afford to own a solar array that not even the museum would buy? In part, HEG gets “rebates” from Xcel's “Solar Rewards” program. The Solar Rewards program is a response to Colorado voters passing Amendment 37 in 2004. The Amendment mandated that Colorado utilities procure a certain percentage of their power generation from renewable resources like wind and solar.

“Amendment 37 really should have been called a tax,” said Independence Institute President Jon Caldara. “And it would have been interesting to see whether it would have passed if the ballot language had started off with the phrase, 'shall there be an increase in energy taxes?' For those of you who are Xcel customers, look at your bill and find the line that says 'Renew. Energy Std. Adj.' Then realize that you are paying this “adjustment” to buy solar panels which the museum has admitted that without any government subsidization wouldn't pay for themselves until the year 2118.”

http://www.i2i.org/main/page.php?page_id=248

revefsreleets
03-26-2009, 01:11 PM
"Look, there's Sarah Palin!"

"George Bush did this and that!"

MACH1
03-26-2009, 01:44 PM
but, but, but I inherited the problem. Its not my fault.

GBMelBlount
03-26-2009, 01:47 PM
This is complete insanity.

fansince'76
03-26-2009, 01:50 PM
The solar array is not owned by the Museum, however. It is owned by Hybrid Energy Group, LLC. HEG owns the solar array, sells the electricity to the Museum, and receives tax incentives from the state and federal governments, while also receiving “rebates” from Xcel Energy. The rebates are funded by a surcharge collected on the monthly bill of every Colorado Xcel customer.

Exactly - the bastards jack mine and others' electric bills up to cover these "rebates." Xcel Energy is as crooked as they come. :mad:

tony hipchest
03-27-2009, 12:52 AM
Exactly - the bastards jack mine and others' electric bills up to cover these "rebates." Xcel Energy is as crooked as they come. :mad:

question?

how much did your gas and electic bills go up last year vs. the price of gasoline?

i know down here in new mexico it used to cost about the same for us to provide heat/cooling and electricity for a month as it did to keep fuel in 2 cars. then all of a sudden the price to fuel the vehicles increased 100%.

i know for sure the price of gas and electricity hasnt gone up 100%.

now our democratic governor is big on alternative (and yes... even green) sources of fuel such as solar, wind, hydrothermal, and he's also big on drilling for oil in the rocky mountain states (which includes colorado).

he also povided an energy rebate 2-3 years ago to ALL new mexico tax payers because energy prices were shooting through the roof and new mexico was raking in profits from the over inflated price of the natural gas it was producing.

some would call it a "tax break".

but this kinda sounds like a threat to our dependence on foreign oil and the profiteers of "big oil". i know! :idea:

lets come up with a bogus "investigation" that will prevent him from taking a bigger position in obamas cabinet! :thumbsup:

what a joke.


... and it is US who will ultimately suffer.

revefsreleets
03-27-2009, 09:52 AM
Update: The Congressional Democrats axed the cap and trade parts of the budget. They also scrapped the carbon tax. The long and short of this is that they finally got their head out of their asses and realized that THIS is NOT the time to spend cash on this stuff.

Fix the economy, get re-elected and try this stuff in the second term (that's generic advice, by the way, just smart politics)

fansince'76
03-27-2009, 10:28 AM
question?

how much did your gas and electic bills go up last year vs. the price of gasoline?

i know down here in new mexico it used to cost about the same for us to provide heat/cooling and electricity for a month as it did to keep fuel in 2 cars. then all of a sudden the price to fuel the vehicles increased 100%.

i know for sure the price of gas and electricity hasnt gone up 100%.

now our democratic governor is big on alternative (and yes... even green) sources of fuel such as solar, wind, hydrothermal, and he's also big on drilling for oil in the rocky mountain states (which includes colorado).

he also povided an energy rebate 2-3 years ago to ALL new mexico tax payers because energy prices were shooting through the roof and new mexico was raking in profits from the over inflated price of the natural gas it was producing.

some would call it a "tax break".

but this kinda sounds like a threat to our dependence on foreign oil and the profiteers of "big oil". i know! :idea:

lets come up with a bogus "investigation" that will prevent him from taking a bigger position in obamas cabinet! :thumbsup:

what a joke.


... and it is US who will ultimately suffer.

My electric bill went up approximately 25% last year at some point - don't remember which month exactly, for approximately the same amount of electricity usage. My natural gas bill stayed about the same after making about a 70% jump during the previous winter. That was the one that kind of hurt and actually forced a lot of families to request public assistance to pay their utility bills.

revefsreleets
03-27-2009, 11:32 AM
Interesting aside.

Why is it that when gas went up, everyone had to pay the gas surcharge directly or indirectly, but now that gas is back down to $2, we STILL have to pay the gas surcharge?