PDA

View Full Version : Cap & Trade Green Jobs or Job Killer?



Gayle in MD
11-18-2009, 11:51 AM
http://factcheck.org/2009/10/cap-and-trade-green-jobs-or-job-killer/

Gayle in Md.

No one is better at creating outrage over imaginary injustices or threats than the modern-day right-wing.

pooltchr
11-18-2009, 02:58 PM
So basically, the article says there will be a long term shift in jobs from one area to another. Not really any gain or loss either way.
So jobs being the same either way, what about the impact of the higher energy prices the tax will create? What about the cost of any consumer goods that require transportation from producer to consumer? How about the increase in the cost of traveling because of higher fuel taxes?
Please don't try to tell us you believe crap and trade is a good thing!

Steve

Deeman3
11-18-2009, 03:22 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">http://factcheck.org/2009/10/cap-and-trade-green-jobs-or-job-killer/

Gayle in Md.

No one is better at creating outrage over imaginary injustices or threats than the modern-day right-wing.
</div></div>


<span style="color: #FF0000"> You had to love the one in Arkansas where the $1,000 expendature saved 50 jobs! With that type of efficiency, it is no wonder we are out of the recession and things are booming! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Listen, I know the economy needed a bump like practically everyone did. We did not expect such a pork filled mess but, what the heck, you can't expect more from Washington, from either party. Let's just hope they don't use this lame excuse for spending more money to "save" or create jobs at over a million a pop.

In fact, a lot of the money has created a few jobs overseas and maybe that will make them like us better. I just hope they can learn to do it more in line with sane costs to make jobs in the future. </span>

Gayle in MD
11-18-2009, 03:52 PM
And I just hope we can change our tax structure, get a handle on health, insurance, and energy costs, and clean up our environment....and address climate change, at the same time.

Most of all, I hope we can figure out a way to get out of the MESS Bush left in the Middle East!

G.

No one is better at creating outrage over imaginary injustices or threats than the modern-day right-wing.

cushioncrawler
11-18-2009, 04:19 PM
Gayle -- The popular notion of creating jobs and killing jobs iznt logical. Obviously when things change jobs and industrys will change -- jobs will moov etc -- in the short term.

But short term and long term jobs and unemployment iz mostly independant of any changes.
Unemployment iz determined by things having nothing to do with strategys etc re clean this or renewable that etc.

The size of the (short'term) cake will be (can be) drastically affekted by clean this or renewable that etc.
But the long'term cake must allways be paramount -- totally ignored by the GOP and other pigs.
madMac.

Deeman3
11-18-2009, 04:22 PM
I have to agree that we must figure a way out of the Middle East as well as fix our economy. I see great signs as there are all sorts of jobs available under the Obama Administration. I just saw an ad for $79 an hour working from home and as for Afghanistan, I hear Obama is considering writing a stern letter to the Middle East leaders.

Just a few more months and we will be fine. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

wolfdancer
11-18-2009, 06:59 PM
Is this a Union job? I don't work no non-union jobs
I'll also have to check out the fringe bennie's

Gayle in MD
11-19-2009, 03:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have to agree that we must figure a way out of the Middle East as well as fix our economy. I see great signs as there are all sorts of jobs available under the Obama Administration. I just saw an ad for $79 an hour working from home and as for Afghanistan, I hear Obama is considering writing a stern letter to the Middle East leaders.

Just a few more months and we will be fine. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Paul Krugman: On China and Climate Change Transcript
November 16, 2009


By Alison van Diggelen, host of Fresh Dialogues

This exclusive interview with Nobel Prize winner, Paul Krugman was recorded on November 12, 2009 in Silicon Valley. Dr. Krugman was in town to deliver a lecture as part of the Foothill College Celebrity Forum Series. Here is the transcript of Part Two: On China and Climate Change. To listen to this interview click here and or watch video (coming soon)

Alison van Diggelen: Paul thank you very much for joining me today on Fresh Dialogues.

Paul Krugman: OK. Good to be doing this.

Alison: Talking about other countries, Spain took the lead… Denmark is taking the lead… China is now way ahead of us in certain clean energy technologies. Do you feel that we’ve lost eight years and we have at least eight years to catch up? Is it feasible we can catch up?

Paul: It’s always feasible. You don’t want to get too hung up on the specific sexy technologies. I guess the Danes are ahead of us in building wind turbines. But a lot of what we’re going to be doing on the environment is going to be… insulation, clever urban design to minimize energy loss. That’s all stuff that’s coming along and look – the history of information technology has said very clearly that nobody gets a monopoly for very long… I don’t get anxiety about it. I’m just more concerned that we won’t do what we need to do to protect the environment.

Alison: How big is the role of government? Ultimately it’s the private sector investment that’s going to make the substantial investment…

Paul: But the government has to provide the incentives…what we have now is the economic concept of an externality…if you have something where you impose costs on other people but you don’t have any incentive to reduce those costs, bad stuff happens. And climate change is the mother of all externalities. It’s a gigantic thing and the private sector by itself is not going to deal with it. Left without any government intervention, we’re just going to basically par-boil the planet, right?

So what you have to do is have a set of rules in place. Now the idea is for it to be market oriented. Yes, there can be some public research, some public investment, some things will have to be done directly by government… but mainly put in a cap and trade system – put a price on greenhouse gas emissions and then let the private sector do its stuff.

Alison: Right. Why is it you favor a cap and trade system over a straight carbon tax?

Paul: Oh, there are a couple of reasons. One is, right now, cap and trade looks like it might pass Congress and a direct tax will not. Partly that’s because cap and trade is relatively well suited to paying off the industry groups, right? We live in the real world. By handing out some of the licenses, at least in the first decade or so, you make it easier to swallow.

International coordination is easier with cap and trade. If we say to the Chinese – well we want you to have a carbon tax – how can we really tell it’s enforced? But if we negotiate with the Chinese that they will have total CO2 emissions of so much, we can monitor pretty well whether that’s actually happening. So that’s a lot easier to envision an international agreement with cap and trade.

So, I would take a carbon tax if…

Alison: If it were politically feasible?

Paul: It’s not clear to me that it’s even superior. But it would be OK, certainly. The fact is, cap and trade could be a bill by this time next year. A carbon tax is like single payer health care. It’s not going to happen this decade and I want something to actually happen now.

Alison: Paul Krugman, thank you very much I really appreciate your taking the time.

Paul: Thank you so much.

Check back soon for more interview segments on the stimulus package, what gave him that “missionary zeal” to write such fervent columns in the New York Times, and whether the green economy can be our salvation.

To check out more exclusive Fresh Dialogues interviews, click here

Listen to Part One: Paul Krugman’s advice on Obama’s Job Summit

Part Two when Paul Krugman discusses China, Climate Change and clean technology

</div></div>

http://www.freshdialogues.com/2009/11/16/paul-krugman-advice-on-china-and-climate-change-transcript/

Gayle in MD
11-19-2009, 03:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Tom Friedman: China Envy Explained
September 16, 2009


By Alison van Diggelen, host of Fresh Dialogues

Download or listen to this lively Fresh Dialogues interview


We welcome feedback at FreshDialogues.com, click on the Contact Tab

Last week, I sat down with Pulitzer Prize winner, Tom Friedman, just before he delivered a lecture to an expectant Foothill College Celebrity Forum audience at the Flint Center in Silicon Valley. We discussed his bestselling book, Hot, Flat, and Crowded and why he thinks it’s imperative that the U.S. government jump-start the green economy. According to Tom, creating the right ecosystem is key: funding research, setting price signals and creating incentives to encourage green innovation. Tom admitted to some China envy in that regard. (see below or check out the transcript)

On his motivations for writing “Hot, Flat, and Crowded”

“My concern is about America…imagine if Microsoft were a French company; Google were a Chinese company…What would our standard of living be like? If Energy Technology (ET) is the next big thing, we need to be at the head of the line…By being big in the next big thing, we’ll be seen by the rest of the world as working on the most important problem in the world.”

On the need for Energy Technology

“Demand for clean energy, clean fuel and energy efficiency is clearly going to explode; it’s going to be the next great global industry. I know that as sure as I know that I’m sitting here at De Anza College talking to you.”

Why do we need government action?

“Research needs to be funded, and that’s government’s role…(we need) really scale answers to clean energy and climate change.”

Why Tom says: ‘Change your leaders not your light bulbs’

“(We need) people who can write the rules, set the taxes, incentives…people who are really committed to launching the ecosystem of green innovation.”

Can the US government get its act together on climate change?

“Government has a huge role…if the government is divided against itself – red states, blue states – we’re not going to get where we need to be.”

Does he have China envy?

“You detect the envy of someone who wants his own government to act democratically with the same effectiveness that China can do autocratically.”

If President Obama asked him to be his Green Czar, what would he say?

“I’d say: I get my aggravation playing golf.”

The interview was recorded in Silicon Valley on September 10, 2009. Click here for transcript, and check back soon for video and more interview highlights. Check out Part Two of our interview when Friedman discusses the Van Jones resignation, how he deals with critics; the future of journalism and daiquiris with Maureen Dowd.

Here’s a transcript extract from Part Two on Dealing with Critics

Alison van Diggelen: “In that environment of criticism (that Van Jones bowed to), do you feel you are a ‘bad guy’?”

Tom Friedman: “I don’t really care. I say what I say. I think there’s a big audience for what I say and I don’t really pay attention to the critics.”

Alison: “Right. So you just turn a deaf ear?”

Tom: “I keep on marching on. I hear it and it’s fine. And it’s a free country. You can say whatever you want. But I’ve got my own bully pulpit and I use it. I don’t use it to shout back at critics; I use it to get my message out. I’m looking forward. You know, the dogs bark and the caravan moves on. I’m in the caravan.”

Alison: “But you don’t feel that distraction…that Glenn Beck and his ilk… are getting stronger and are going to be energized by the Van Jones resignation?”

Tom: “The Glenn Becks and the other opponents of these ideas will have their audience and I have mine…and let the best man win. I don’t spend my time dealing with my critics. I’ve got a great podium and if you’re criticizing me, God bless you. I’m not above criticism. My focus is on my ideas with my audience. ”

Alison: “I’m not intending to criticize you. But I’m just curious…”

Tom: “I’m telling you this is just my philosophy…My feeling is, I’m out there. And therefore, if you can’t take the heat, don’t be out there… Why would I waste a column writing about one of my critics? So what I always say to the critics is, ‘you may be writing about me, I really appreciate that, but don’t think for a second that I’d waste a column writing about you.’ ”

Alison: “Good for you.”

Tom: “By the way, they’re entitled to their criticism. I’m out there. Sometimes you even learn from critics, but you move on.”

</div></div>

Deeman3
11-19-2009, 08:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: wolfdancer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Is this a Union job? I don't work no non-union jobs
I'll also have to check out the fringe bennie's </div></div>


<span style="color: #FF0000">I don't think there are too many union jobs left are there? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif I must admit that when I look at the GM benefits packages from a distance, now that I have been gone from there for over 12 years, I do have fond memories of them. Your very first reaction when you sign on with them is, "Are they serious?" can you really afford to pay these wages and benefits and compete in the market. Of course, at that time it was mostly internal competition, not world competition.

Am honest question? Do I want us to have to compete with third world economies? No, but the reality is that we are. How do we pay a decent living wage in this country and not have to have half our people on the dole, via welfare or government jobs? If I knew that I's be running in 2012! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

At least we will pick up the NYC economy with the show trials for the "used-to-be" terrorists. Why should the Gitmo economy get the benefits of this?

Listen, I am hoping as much as anyone that Obama finds a way to create jobs but the stimulous, so far, is not it. Most of us, with jobs at least, are still patient with his efforts. I was patient with Bush and will be the same with Obama. </span>

llotter
11-19-2009, 10:03 AM
The freer the marketplace, the better and cheaper are the solutions. This is not a statement of faith but of fact. The marketplace is the result of satisfying the wants and needs of our individual citizens and the rewards go to those who can provide the best products at the best price. The function of government in this process should be limited to codifying the 'rules of the road', not manipulating supply and demand to achieve some egalitarian ends.

It verges on insanity to think that the politician can direct the economy in the right direction though those in power seem inevitably inclined to do. Already, through the legal and regulatory process, we have made energy more expensive and increased our dependence on foreign oil. Let freedom ring and let the politicians take a very long vacation.

cushioncrawler
11-19-2009, 03:11 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Paul Krugman: On China and Climate Change Transcript November 16, 2009 By Alison van Diggelen, host of Fresh Dialogues This exclusive interview with Nobel Prize winner, Paul Krugman was recorded on November 12, 2009 in Silicon Valley. Dr. Krugman was in town to deliver a lecture as part of the Foothill College Celebrity Forum Series. Here is the transcript of Part Two: On China and Climate Change. To listen to this interview click here and or watch video (coming soon).........</div></div>Gayle -- There aint no Nobel Prize for Economix -- Krugman, besides being a krappynomicyst and a fool, iz it appears a liar.
There iz in existance an award called The Nobel Memorial Prize for Economix -- granted by a stupid committee of krappynomicysts, and payd for by the bank of sweden.
This iz a fraud -- by krappynomicysts, for krappynomicysts, to make krappynomix look scientifik and legitimate.
Nobel would be sickened by this, if he were alive today.
madMac.

wolfdancer
11-19-2009, 03:28 PM
My uneducated version of that was that GM's contracts worked, like every other company's labor union contract worked, with the increased costs passed on to the consumer. And then in the middle of the "Catch up" game, they changed the rules.
Other countries decided to switch from rice farming to manufacturing automobiles (not that big a switch, really) and didn't stop there. Now our once proud "Made in the U.S.A." label, draws snickers.
You can see the short version of that effect here,as WalMart with it's third world wages, and 19th century working conditions, is the
500 lb Gorilla.

cushioncrawler
11-19-2009, 03:48 PM
The freer the congress, the better and cheaper are the solutions. This is not a statement of faith but of fact. The congress is the result of satisfying the wants and needs of our CEO's and the rewards go to those who can provide the best products at the best price. The function of the CEO's in this process should be limited to codifying the 'rules of the road', not manipulating supply and demand to achieve some egalitarian ends.

It verges on insanity to think that the CEO's can direct the economy in the right direction though those in power seem inevitably inclined to do. Already, through the legal and regulatory process, we have made energy more expensive and increased our dependence on foreign oil. Let freedom ring and let the marketplace take a very long vacation.

llotter
11-19-2009, 08:19 PM
You have twisted my words and meaning and got it all wrong. You can't let freedom ring without the marketplace because that is the essence of freedom and congress represents the state which is the only enemy of freedom. You'll have to go back to the drawing board

Sev
11-19-2009, 08:22 PM
A report came out that estimates Cap and trade will double the unemployment in America.

Cant wait to see 22% unemployment in the USA.