hmmm. I wonder which one willl report the other first.
I got .3 less on my yearly raise.
That’s absolutely a problem. Soil and water are finite resources, and their pollution will end our species well before we even see drastic effects from climate change. Under the Obama administration, we saw the largest oil boom of our generation, as well as the BP Gulf Spill crisis. Meanwhile, limousine liberals were private jetting around the world, lecturing on the dangers of carbon emissions.
Now if you would kindly wean your people off the gospel of the carbon credit and back to actual conservationism, maybe something would get done about that polluted water. It would be nice if at least one party gave a shit. Absent that, and given my choice of one group of incompetents or another, I’ll take the one that lets me keep more of my money.
Originally Posted by C.S. Lewis
AL gore wasted jet fuel, better do nothing.
Not what I said. It’s about misplaced priorities. ARBM is right that soil and water are a priority. But taxing carbon has so much more revenue-generating potential for government, with the added bonus of establishing another avenue by which to exert control going forward. From the statist point of view, what’s not to love?
Originally Posted by C.S. Lewis
I’ve actually come around to carbon credits a bit more. They have problems (reallt poorly managed imo) but similar programs like fishery shares in the US have really helped the curb declining fish populations (if only Japan would take a clue).
I don't know, you felt the need to mention it. Maybe your points would be clearer if you didn't have to add unrelated snark digs.
Bookmarks