Taxpayers Trillions - How Obama Cap & Trade Will Dig Deep in YOUR Pocket!

[WhiskeyGirl]

Obama Years Ago Helped Fund Carbon Scheme He Is Now Pushing Through Congress

While on the board of a Chicago-based charity, Barack Obama helped fund a carbon trading exchange that will likely play a critical role in the cap-and-trade carbon reduction scheme he is now trying to push through Congress as president.

Obama's espousal of cap-and-trade, a system that is intended, among other things, to increase the price of fossil fuels and force their replacement by energy sources that produce less greenhouse gases, has drawn fire from many economists as a huge energy tax that will weigh heavily on an economy that is already in steep recession. The price tag has been put high as $2 trillion dollars over eight years. That figure, nearly three times higher than originally projected, was given in a White House briefing to Senate staffers last week and reported by US News and World Report and the Washington Times.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/03/25/obama-helped-fund-carbon-scheme/

Money gone forever.  The new Energy "Wall Street" Bankers.

Americans need to be more energy efficient.  Americans need cheap energy to run their personal vehicles, mass transportation, heat and cool their homes, factories, and places of business.

I don't see how spending TRILLIONS more on for traders is going to accomplish anything.

We need TVs, computers, monitors, refrigerators, stoves, that use less and do MORE.

Why not invest in energy efficient products?  Build products Americans can buy with their wages?

What are the chances that someone making $5 a day can afford the $30,000 cars, $1000 washers they make every day?   

How much does 'free trade' cost Americans?   

'Henry Ford' - generations ago made a market for his product  by raising the wages in his factories so that his workers could reasonably afford the products they made.  IIRC, something like a $500 car.  He introduced the "Ford Principle" to the world.   

IIRC from my reading, the Chinese save for future healthcare costs - they have no universal health care.   

Cap & Trade is just another rip off.  Change the expectations - reduce consumption and spur on innovation.

TVs and monitors that use 1/2 of what they use this year in energy, in two years.

Today, I think Obama is pushing the "Detroit" model of making things efficient.  The Detroit model is one of those things that never really worked. 

jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

Obama seems to be promoting his own special interests - lobbyists NOT needed in Washington for 'Cap & Trade' carpetbaggers.

Obama served as one of 12 directors on the Joyce Foundation board from July 1994 until December 2002...

...In 2001, it gave Sandor a second grant of $760,100 to "launch" the trading system with only a few founding partners, including the City of Chicago, Ford Motor Company, DuPont, and a handful of other firms.

...Since then, the exchange has expanded around the world, and itself become the subsidiary of a London-based firm, Climate Exchange PLC, which is also headed by Sandor.

Sold?  Traded?

...The value of Sandor's 8 million shares in the exchange has grown to more than $260 million, even before a national cap-and-trade system has been imposed. The share value could climb even more when and if the government makes the market mandatory.

Wow.  How much of the $2 trillion will go to Sandor?

Why shouldn't all Americans have inexpensive energy they can afford?  Why keep digging deeper in the pockets of millions?

Many economists and environmentalists have argued that a straightforward carbon tax on polluters would be more efficient, less prone to manipulation and more transparent.

Another idea and more transparent!!!   Tax on polluters, no tax on those that are doing a GOOD job, and doing the RIGHT things. 

I think the last thing the globe needs is another shell game.  Liar loans ran their course, now we have 'Cap & Trade' from the same folks.  Cheap responsible engergy is what the globe needs.

jmho

[WhiskeyGirl]

How will this 'transparent' shell game work?

The theory behind a carbon trading system involves the government setting a cap on the total carbon emissions for the country and distributing a finite number of emissions credits to polluters, University of Minnesota applied economics professor Jay Coggins said.

Polluters include everyone, from the average citizen to small businesses, but the majority of trading will likely occur between major corporations.

I wonder how much I can sell my excess carbon credit for?

“So, somebody who decides they can cut carbon emissions cheaply will reduce more than is necessary,” Coggins said. “That frees up some of these allowances, which they can then sell to someone else who decides cutting back is really expensive and they’d rather just keep doing what they’re doing and buy the allowance.”

Why not offer loans and other incentives to clean up the dirty people?  Why give them a pass? 

I still have to breath the air and drink the water fouled by these dirty 'somebody''s that want to keep polluting.

“It’s a hidden tax,” Burnett said. “It’s a tax that doesn’t put pressure on the government; it blames industries for imposing higher costs on consumers.”

The Obama administration seems fond of these 'hidden tax' schemes.  What happened to transparency?

“Let’s say the economy has started to turn around … that means energy prices are already rising because demand has increased … so now you’re going to pile on taxes on top of already higher costs, tell me how the consumers are going to like that,” he said. “It might slow the recovery or reverse it.”

http://www.mndaily.com/2009/03/10/carbon-cap-trades-could-become-reality-us

Everything that comes out of the Obama administration seems to further strangle our economy and condem our children to a bleak future.  Has anyone ever been able to spend their way out of a depression?  Create prosperity by deficit spending?   What happens to nations that can't pay their bills? 

Who loses in the end? 

jmho

[nonesuche]

WG I listened to his speech last night, TiVO'd it and listened to it again. I am 'thirsty' to understand how his proposals will work, particularly balancing the budget in a few years?????

Several things are appearing to be consistent that trouble me, one being his propensity to speak in a very condescending manner whenever he receives true grit questions from the press. The numbers just do not add up here and if he's pressed he obviously doesn't feel he has to provide details or greater transparency. I can't trust that.

This commentary appeared today on CNN.com and although I don't agree with everything within it, I do think it speaks to the heart of this dilemma. Obama's experience is largely theoretical and not experiential and all the 'academic' posturing on the planet isn't going to qualify plans with merit.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/25/castellanos.obama/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

(CNN) -- Things I learned Tuesday night from President Obama's press conference:

Obama and congressional Democrats are angry that greedy Wall Street executives took $165 million in bonuses that the president and congressional Democrats gave them.

We have made them give it back, but they have to keep the trillion-dollar bailout.

Apparently, our education system is worse than we thought. Neither the president nor Democrats in Congress actually read the bailout-bonus bill.

Per-family household debt more than doubled from 1989 to 2007, going from $42,000 per family to $97,000 per family, in inflation-adjusted dollars. Most of it, 85 cents of every dollar, is home equity or mortgage debt. This is not the consumer's fault for borrowing it, nor Congress' fault for legislating it, nor the Fed's fault for enabling it, nor Fannie Mae's or Freddie Mac's fault for packaging it. This is all Wall Street's fault.

It is also all George W. Bush's fault.

If there were an inheritance tax on problems, Obama could pay off any deficit.

Taxpayers living next to a toxic waste dump is a bad idea. Taxpayers buying a trillion dollars worth of toxic assets is good idea.

Taxpayers borrowing a trillion dollars to buy those toxic assets is an even better idea. Though it is still Bush's fault.

Obama isn't on the ballot next year, but Democrats in Congress are. You can make money betting they will lose more than 25 seats, but not as much money as by purchasing toxic assets with taxpayer dollars.

The problem with America's economy is that the last bubble, the "home-mortgage, derivative, credit default swap bubble" popped, as all economic bubbles eventually do. We must never let that happen again.

It is imperative that we re-inflate this bubble immediately.

If we all loan a lot of money we don't have to each other, we will all be more prosperous.

An Obama press conference offers hope to everyone. Both those who want to drive the deficit up and drive it down receive encouragement.

A dollar when given to failed auto companies or hollow banks has great stimulative value for the economy, but there's almost no dampening cost to the economy when the dollar is taken from taxpayers, who will have to pay our debt back.

If he does not drive the deficit down, within this decade, interest on the Obama debt will total more than a trillion dollars a year.

Bush was laughed at for saying, "Yes, we are getting the job done. It's hard work," though it's OK for Obama to say only hard decisions reach his desk.

Enhanced border security was a bad idea when Sen. John McCain and Republicans proposed it but a good idea now that Obama is for it.

Trickle-down economics from Republicans got us into this mess. Trickle-down government from Democrats will get us out of it.

Washington was doing such a great job making things work before the meltdown that we should give it more to do, like running health care, the energy industry, banks, Wall Street and the car business.

Our economy is so complex that millions of Americans can't plan for it, but Timothy Geithner and a couple of other smart guys in Washington can.

Political greed is more noble than corporate greed.

We have to short-change charities that help people, so government can help people.

Wall Street and the U.S. government are too big to fail though the American taxpayer isn't.

The Barack Obama experiment, conducted by this 47-year old man, is the riskiest economic wager the world has ever seen.

Next year, when this experiment in European-style socialism isn't working, the Democrats up for re-election will panic and make the spending this year look like an appetizer. To appear responsible, they then will raise taxes on "upper-income taxpayers" to the stratosphere, paralyzing investment and the economy.

Obama's communications gifts are powerful and poetic -- but round-the-clock campaigning on "The Tonight Show With Jay Leno," "60 Minutes" and this press conference won't save bad policy. Nothing kills a bad product quicker than good advertising. iReport.com: What did you think of Obama's press conference?

Obama has never built a business, created real wealth or produced tangible prosperity. His understanding of our economy is theoretical and academic.

Obama is a privileged young man who has not yet made many mistakes in his life. Having a president who belongs to the Harvard elite and the community-organizer streets is not the same as having a president who has lived a long life among middle-class Americans and understands them.

Impatience lies not deep beneath the surface of Obama. There is no shortage of self-confidence in this young man. It is a short step from such confidence to arrogance.

Arrogance in a politician is not healthy. Hubris, combined with inexperience, can be fatal. Obama could be a one-term president.

Obama is looking a little older. There would be nothing wrong with acting like it.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Alex Castellanos.

[WhiskeyGirl]

If Obama and the Democrats aren't reading the things they vote for and sign, who's running the government?

Who's writing all these mystery bills?

I say, just stop voting and signing until the mystery is resolved.

Isn't this some kind of political malpractice to vote and sign things you didn't read?