I'm sure there's a Rasmussen poll showing it to be unpopular and the death of the Dems.

Ok, so I read an article the other day on Cap and Trade which said that credits would be traded on the exchanges. IF this is true, count me as someone who is against this, unless it is HEAVILY regulated. If we allow the bozos on Wall Street to create derivatives out of this, we will wind up with all energy going sky high, just as we saw with oil and gas prices when we were paying $5.00 a gallon. Then the GOP will be able to say SEE, TOLD YA but for all the wrong reasons.

Polls showing support for the public option accomplished what, exactly?

And the Republicans run around screaming that polls show people don't want this, and it will cost every American $5k. And the media dutifully repeats their claims.

If we only had a majority in the legislative branch...

A "market-based approach" to climate change will require child sacrifices and human cannibalism?!?!

Well I for one am agin' that sort of thing.

Whoa, hold up a sec, pardner! We still haven't settled the Global Warming hoax, er controversy. Just ask Pat Buchanan.

I don't trust scientists with agendas, either way, so I did some sampling and some computationing of my own. This AM it was 19F, and barely six months ago it was 79F. That's a fifty degree drop; 100 degrees per year. If we don't act quick, we'll all freeze by next summer.

Time to drill, baby drill! Either that, or start lighting those cow farts. . .

Steve has missed a lot of what has been going on for the last 6+ months. At least in Indiana, the oil, gas, and coal industries have been advertising heavily to defeat ANY legislation.

As we, in Indiana, have never been at the forefront of any advertising campaign. I find it hard to believe that they are not spending as heavily elsewhere.

The serious work of lying to, confusing, and misleading the amerikan publik is yet to come, but it has very much been started.

For an excellent article about 'The Manufactured Doubt Machine' and its role in fighting any limitations that might impact the profitability of the oil and coal lobbies: http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/12/07-1

To paraphrase from John Paul Jones who said, after months of battles: "We have not yet begun to seriously lie!"

The saddest thing about all the lies is that I am finding people I think are pretty darned smart, buying in to this whole denial thing. Science be damned. They say Gore said this but it's been proven otherwise - even if it hasn't been proven otherwise.

It's depressing.

It makes me really happy I don't have children. This won't affect me as much as it would them.

"the public's understanding of the issue is limited"

The "experts" understanding of Cap and Trade is also limited -or at least varied. Ill bet if you randomly selected 5 democratic senators and asked for a brief summary of Cap and Trade and its benefits you would get 5 completely different responses. This is not necessarily a reflection on the senate, but rather the complexity of the legislation. The opposition has a much easier task-the fox news zombies will keep repeating the slogan "Cap and Tax ".

"What happens when the coal industry, Fox News, and the Republican National Committee start telling Americans that a "market-based approach" to climate change will require child sacrifices and human cannibalism?" I'd say that is something of an oversimplification of the problem. Coal is mined is about twenty-five states. In some it is the major industry. If you think opposition is just going to come from the corporate interests you are very wrong. Aside from the miners themselves there are the workers at coal fired generating plants, all the innumerable suppliers of machinery and supplies to these industries and all of their families. We're talking about millions of jobs and people. Then, of course, we have the oil and gas industries and their millions of dependents. Let's face it, some people will be called upon to make much larger sacrifices than others to get this done and minimizing or ignoring that fact may result in failure to get anything done.

What happens when the coal industry, Fox News, and the Republican National Committee start telling Americans that a "market-based approach" to climate change will require child sacrifices and human cannibalism?

Since signing the Kyoto Accord, the EU nations have bought carbon credits from China and India (from others as well). China and India have used the money to build up the industries that compete with the EU. Instead of reducing their "carbon footprint", the Europeans have relocated it to China and India. So it is merely a metaphorical "industrial cannibalism", not literal.

India and China have pledged to reduce the "carbon intensity" of their economies: that is, to continue increasing their consumption of fossil fuels but to increase energy production from green sources at a higher rate. They have announced (that is, Indian and Chinese authorities have announced) that they expect their CO2 emissions to start to decline in absolute terms in 3 - 5 decades.

Cap and trade will cost the US a lot of money, productive capacity, or both. It just is not clear who will pay, what the total cost will be, or how much productive capacity will be lost. And it isn't clear who will profit, except carbon credit traders.

Well that won't last long. The Rs will see the poll and start a campaign to convince Americans that capping emissions is a socialist plot and must be stopped. That should turn Americans against such 'extremist' behavior.

MatthewRMarler wrote: "Cap and trade will cost the US a lot of money, productive capacity, or both."

That's a lie, and you know it.
Same old, same old.

That's a lie, and you know it.

And your point is?

I'm having difficulty seeing the advantage of cap and trade over a carbon tax which pushes the price up for exactly what we are trying to reduce and allows capital to flow where it needs to go. Cap and trade inherently has some frictions and, like any commodity market, can be manipulated and distorted at least in the short term.

The tax could be net zero by reducing other taxes. Of course it would need a market free of all the usual pork, preferences, subsidies and pay-offs.

Fat chance.

SecularAnimist on December 11, 2009 at 2:03 PM

You mean to say that you are actually denying that cap and trade will cost the US a lot of money? The CBO only went to far as to claim that most of the cost of Waxman-Markey would not occur in the early years.

I agree with MsJoanne, that there are reasons for centrists and progressives to oppose Cap and Trade. The big problem is that Cap and Trade will very likely end up being a money grab by which Wall Street reaches into your pocket and extracts money.

There are alternatives. A direct carbon tax with rebates paid back directly to households on a per capita basis would be one option that would be better from a progressive standpoint. This would increase the cost of carbon-based energy. Non-carbon-based energy would have a competitive advantage. From an economists standpoint this would help account for the externalities of carbon fuels.

On a related note, I think we are all too quick to forget that there are many other major reasons why we should be moving away from carbon-based fuels other than climate change. How about the fact that we are on the downward slope of worldwide oil production and the costs for oil are only going to go up (better adapt now). Or how about the fact that countries that have most of the world's oil reserves aren't exactly the kinds of regimes we should be propping up with American dollars.

I say junk Cap and Trade and tax carbon.

But Steve, a cap-and-trade plan will pay for abortions and create government "death panels" to kill the elderly.

while 41 percent are opposed

Of course, these American want the pollution to continue .... don't give a fuck about it. Only in America .......

The Rise of American Unexceptionalism

nothere: I'm having difficulty seeing the advantage of cap and trade over a carbon tax...

Sorry old boy to cut you off in mid-sentence...
But think back to the Democratic primaries. Remember all the hot flame over Barack's and Hillary's health care plans and which was better? Now flash forward to today. Did any of that ever matter? I argued back then that the difference in the plans was a silly way to choose one candidate over the other. Argued that the Senate would butcher the brains out of any plan, while the House squabbled over the color of crayon to use for subclause 20098-4bc...

And here we are.
And here I go with another damning observation of the same ilk:

Does anybody have any reason to believe that this country will craft a worthy piece of carbon emissions legislation? Does anybody have any faith in the legislative branch of this country at all? It is broken. Horribly and completely broken. Which emissions plan is better doesn't matter. We are a recalcitrant nation and our legislature reflects our recalcitrance. As a people, we are as sclerotic and neurotic as our legislative branch. It really is a perfect reflective fit...

That's the bad news.

The good news is that the rest of the world won't suffer American Idiocy on global warming matters much longer. Few of us Americans realize just how fragile our empire has become. If we don't do something meaningful about global warming soon, I can see the rest of the world boycotting the goods produced by our Dicks and our Sarahs.

I mean really...
Would you want to trade with global warming denying savages if there was an option to buy somewhere else? Even if it cost a bit more? The rest of the world accepts the fact that the icecaps are melting, and prayer won't change that fact. The rest of the world realizing the enormity of the disaster bearing down on us. And so I argue: American Exceptionalism is in dangerous denial territory right now.

Which is all to say: Watch out! If the rest of the world decides tomorrow to start treating us like an offensive dumb third world nation to be boycotted, their scorn will make us even more so. And all Dick's and Sarah's foot-stomping, and lip-curling anger won't put Humpty-Dumbty Sam back together again. Which is all to say: America can't afford to not play global warming ball with the rest of the world. American Exceptionalism hangs in the balance. Go tell that to your sclerotic monkeys on Capitol Hill...

The problem with Cap and Trade and with the Public Option is exactly the same. While both might be good short hand descriptions for wonks, the average non-wonk doesn't understand either. We need to do what we have failed to do with health care, explain exactly what we are talking about in simple declarative sentences.

The reason medicare for people 55 years and older is gaining traction is because folks can understand exactly what is being said. They will feel cheated with they are finally told that the new program really doesn't mean medicare will be available for everybody over 55 but that is another problem. Right now people understand what is meant by extending medicare to folks 55 and older.

It has gotten to the point that I feel about as depressed and hopeless on the subject as Steve does. There is no way that the average American is going to give up a thing now for future gain. Even if it is shown to them that they aren't going to have to give up anything, they still are afraid. Psychologically it has been shown that people are less willing to risk what they have even if the rewards are greater.

I would say since only the people that took it upon themselves to understand what the Cap and Trade Bill is really about, it is no wonder that the slanted poll question got the desired results.
Question should have been..What if a cap and trade program significantly lowered greenhouse gases but raised the price of everything you buy by 10 dollars.? In that case would you support or oppose it?"Corporations won't be paying these taxes. Corporations collect taxes for the Government. When these taxes take effect they will simply be added into the cost of what ever product is being manufactured, shipped, or sold.
Are Americans really this stupid or are they being manipulated for a massive distribution of wealth....

valentines day gift ideas

The problem with cap and trade is that Duke Energy and Shell Oil were heavily involved in its drafting, and turned it into a coal/nuclear bailout.

I'm an environmentalist, and I want to switch over to renewables ASAP. Problem is, by including huge buckets of money for so-called "clean coal" research and creating a huge carbon market, cap and trade does more to sustain the coal industry than phase it out. That... I can't support.

My problem with cap and trade isn't the spending, or the global warming denialism or anything like that. My problem is that it's a political game to divert attention away from plans that will actually push us toward cleaner energy, and that's just how coal companies want it.