How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Employment Application   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Employment Application

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


0 posted 06-30-2009 10:30 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Name: Alan Carlin   Education:Ph.D., Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, B.S., Physics, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA Occupation: EPA -  38 years as senior operations research analyst. Reason for leaving:  Still employed, but under tense situation, with dismissal possible in near future. See below for reasons...

.

After reviewing the scientific literature that the EPA is relying on, Carlin said, he concluded that it was at least three years out of date and did not reflect the latest research. "My personal view is that there is not currently any reason to regulate (carbon dioxide)," he said. "There may be in the future. But global temperatures are roughly where they were in the mid-20th century. They're not going up, and if anything they're going down."

Carlin's report listed a number of recent developments he said the EPA did not consider, including that global temperatures have declined for 11 years; that new research predicts Atlantic hurricanes will be unaffected; that there's "little evidence" that Greenland is shedding ice at expected levels; and that solar radiation has the largest single effect on the earth's temperature.

If there is a need for the government to lower planetary temperatures, Carlin believes, other mechanisms would be cheaper and more effective than regulation of carbon dioxide. One paper he wrote says managing sea level rise or reducing solar radiation reaching the earth would be more cost-effective alternatives.

The EPA's possible suppression of Carlin's report, which lists the EPA's John Davidson as a co-author, could endanger any carbon dioxide regulations if they are eventually challenged in court.

Carlin's report was rejected and he recieved an e-mail from his boss, McGartland which read "I decided not to forward your comments... I can see only one impact of your comments given where we are in the process, and that would be a very negative impact on our office." He also wrote to Carlin: "Please do not have any direct communication with anyone outside of (our group) on endangerment. There should be no meetings, e-mails, written statements, phone calls, etc."

One reason why the process might have been highly charged politically is the unusual speed of the regulatory process. Lisa Jackson, the new EPA administrator, had said that she wanted her agency to reach a decision about regulating carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act by April 2 -- the second anniversary of a related U.S. Supreme Court decision.
"All this goes back to a decision at a higher level that this was very urgent to get out, if possible yesterday," Carlin said. "In the case of an ordinary regulation, these things normally take a year or two. In this case, it was a few weeks to get it out for public comment." (Carlin said that he and other EPA staff members asked to respond to a draft only had four and a half days to do so.)
[URL=http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/26/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5117890.shtml]http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/06/26/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5117890.shtml[/UR L]


Wake up, people. There are two important things to consider here. First, the global warming hysteria that has netted Al Gore tens of millions of dollars, may actually not be as hot of an issue that the administration claims. Carbon dioxide, that stuff that we breathe out and plants breathe in, may not be the culprit this administration claims. Could there actually be a reason Gore has always refused to debate his findings with a number of scientists around the world who have asked for that opportunity?

Second, and very  important, is...can't you people see the recurring theme happening here with this administration? We are being force-fed garbage at such a quick rate we can't even gag until it is already down our throats. This is just another case.....

How many things has Obama tried to push through at a rate of speed that would make an olympic sprinter wince with envy?  There was the TARP, which had to be passed immediately to save the country from collapse. There was the stimulus package, which had to be passed immediately (by a congress of which many acknowledged they didn't even read) or the United States would be irrevocably destroyed. There is the health package, which Obama claims must be passed immediately, (with no specifics of how much it would actually cost or where the money would come from) or the country would be damaged beyond control. Now we have the cap-and-trade, which Obama claims must be passed immediately or carbon dioxide will ruin the earth. I repeat, ""All this goes back to a decision at a higher level that this was very urgent to get out, if possible yesterday," Carlin said. "In the case of an ordinary regulation, these things normally take a year or two. In this case, it was a few weeks to get it out for public comment." (Carlin said that he and other EPA staff members asked to respond to a draft only had four and a half days to do so.) In a test conducted by Fox News (who else would have the gonads to do it?) listeners were asked to call their congressmen and asked their intentions on voting for or against the cap and trade bill and whether or not they had read the 1200 page bill. The majority replied that they were voting for it and, no, they hadn't read the entire bill.

We have a president throwing bills like shotputs to a congress willing to pass them without even reading them, while he has quadrupled the deficit, raised unemployment, and wants to destroy our health system, all in the name of "redistribution of wealth", which is his major goal.

I don't care what your party affiliations are. You are Americans, or at least foreign members who are experts of America and our politics. Wake up and see what damage this man, and his congressional majority, is causing. Wake up and see that our future generations are being saddled with bills they have no chance of paying. Wake up and see how these tax increases will cause more unemployment, a lower standard of living,  an inferior health care system (which people from all over the world come to use), and a stifling of an economy based on innovation, entrepreneurialship and the belief that opportunities are endless in this country for those willing to apply themselves, the same opportunities that allowed Obama to sit in the Oval office. Don't let this man destroy what so many have worked for so many years amd decades to build and what has made the United States the most powerful country in the world.


*For the record, Carlin is still at the EPA although he calls the atmosphere "tense". If you watch a video on the man's interview, you will see a decent man, not a rabble-rouser, not a political activist, and not someone with an axe to grind...just a man with the interests of the country at heart.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


1 posted 06-30-2009 01:39 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

It's too bad the politicians aren't more like him.
Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


2 posted 06-30-2009 03:28 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch



97% of climate experts believe global average temperatures have increased during the past century.

84% of climate experts believe humans have had a hand in those increases.

If the global average temperature rises by more than 2% Celsius climate experts say it will result in major environmental disruptions.

They may be wrong of course. Carlin may actually be right.

I’m not convinced either way. I don’t think we know enough about the global climate to be sure one way or the other but if I were forced to bet my life on which was more likely I’d go with the percentages. It’s no surprise that the politicians are doing the same; it’s the logical choice.

.
Klassy Lassy
Member Elite
since 06-28-2005
Posts 2181
Oregon


3 posted 06-30-2009 06:54 PM       View Profile for Klassy Lassy   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Klassy Lassy

I have noticed that special leglislation is often passed within the format of more visible bills, some of which are hundreds of pages long,and there isn't enough time for the representatives to read everything they contain in all that is before them before they must vote. It's manipulative deceit and the interested parties have become very adept at the wording and concealment of special interests.  It is noteworthy, too, that only a small number of people may derive benefit, and sometimes a large number of people are deprived of their rights.

I can't cite examples the way you do, but I, never-the-less, feel that greed or personal interest is all too often the motivation for what goes on behind the scenes when public figures are reluctant to talk and do not want the public to know the innate workings of a bill before congress to be passed.

Why, indeed, should Al Gore not wish to talk about that which concerns a pet project that made him even more wealthy?  And he is just one.  I have trouble these days seeing politicians as public servants.
Huan Yi
Member Ascendant
since 10-12-2004
Posts 6334
Waukegan


4 posted 06-30-2009 07:13 PM       View Profile for Huan Yi   Email Huan Yi   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Huan Yi

.


“The cap-and-trade bill passed the House of Representatives shrouded in a fog of willful ignorance and calculated irrationality.

No one could be sure what he was voting for — not after the 1,200-page bill had a 300-page amendment added at 3:09 a.m. the day of its passage.   The bill is so complex and jerry-built that even its supporters can’t know how, or if, it will work. And it’s metaphysically impossible for someone to know whether the motivating crisis, impending planetary doom, will ever materialize. . . .

Even if Waxman-Markey were perfectly formulated, it would reduce global surface temperatures by only one-tenth of 1 degree Celsius in 100 years. That’s a negligible difference, purchased at a great price."

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDc3OWI1NjJjYWZmNmE4NjQ4Y2ZlNDMxNzgyYmI5ZDI=
.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


5 posted 06-30-2009 07:35 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Ok, grinch, let's talk logic then. Has humanity raised the global warming up to dangerous points? I'll let the experts fight over that for the moment.

The United States is not going through a very smooth period of time right now. Unemployment is at a 25 year high and millions of Americans are stretching budgets tighter than Joan River's face to make ends meet. Obama predicts unemployment will get worse by the end of the summer. In the midst of all of this, Obama demands that congress initiates a cap and trade bill RIGHT NOW which will help lower carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere over the next 40 years. He further acknowledges that this bill will raise taxes on every energy-related product for everyone.

Now, as the logical person I believe you to be, does the timing of this seem reasonable to you? Is it reasonable to raise more and more taxes on people who are such economic straits RIGHT NOW for the sake of global warming, which is at the same level it was years ago? At the very least couldn't we wait for, let's say, a year or so for Obama's economic stimulus plans to start working and begin easing the unemployment and economic difficulties we now face? Is the global infrastructure in such dire straits that if we don;t act RIGHT NOW, the planet is doomed? Do these actions and this insistence on immediate action, along with the hardships it will cause, seem logical to you, Mr. Grinch? I find it hard to believe it would.

As I said earlier, this is just another "ram it down your throat" plan that Obama has instituted since taking over, citing immediate action or doom and destruction. It's easy enough for a non-biased person to follow, from tarp to stimulus, to health care to cap and trade. The tactics have all been the same. So do you agree with the immediacy of this bill, Grinch? Please don't say it for the children and future generations because Obama has already placed them in a position of debt that will be almost impossible to overcome. Are his actions logical to you or are they more of a power play on his, and the democratic congress's, part?

Getting back to the main topic of this thread, does it seem reasonable that they would tell a senior official who had worked there for almost four decades to shut his mouth and have no contact with any "outsiders" because his findings would put the EPA in a bad light and hurt the chances of the passage of Obama's bill? Does that sound like something logical to do or does it sound like a strong-arm tactic to keep a voice with dissenting reports quiet?

use your logic, Mr. grinch, and see what is there, please.

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


6 posted 06-30-2009 08:46 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Um, ok, logically -- did you hire your accountant to do your surgery Mike?  No?  Why?  Isn't he or she a smart person?

I'm just going to head off to talk to some of my friends with PhD's about my cholesterol;

My friend with the PhD in music
The one in electric motor physics
English
Special Education
Linguistics

And I'm going to talk to an Economist about Global Climate Change.

Forget about the Climatologists.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


7 posted 06-30-2009 09:05 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Perhaps you would like to take a shot at what I asked grinch above, reb....or not. I don't really expect it.

Your reply is not even a good attempt....
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


8 posted 06-30-2009 09:10 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

No.  I wouldn't.

It's another red-herring conversation started by a non-scientist about a scientific subject.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/06/bubkes/
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


9 posted 06-30-2009 09:17 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

E-mail: davidson.john@epa.gov
Job Title: Environmental Scientist
Division/Office: Innovation and Emerging Challenges Division
Joined Program: 1983
Education: Ph.D., Physics, 1972, University of Michigan
Previous Experience: Staff Member for Energy Programs, Council on Environmental Quality, Executive Office of the President, Washington, D.C.
Staff Member, Energy Policy Project, Ford Foundation, Washington, D.C.
Postdoctoral Scholar, Department of Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Selected Publications: Global Energy Futures and the Carbon Dioxide Problem, Council on Environmental Quality, 1981, staff coauthor.
Energy chapters of Environmental Quality, Council on Environmental Quality, 1976-1980, staff coauthor.
A Time to Choose: America's Energy Future, Report of the Energy Policy Project of the Ford Foundation, Ballinger Publishing Co., 1974, staff coauthor.

See anything about an economist there in his co-author?

No, of course you would not like to take on the logic of Obama's immediacy of this attempt at passage. I don't blame your non-attempt. it's logical
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


10 posted 06-30-2009 09:24 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

Education: Ph.D., Physics, 1972, University of Michigan



Call the plumber honey -- we need to get the computer fixed again!

The logical fallacy the right keeps falling for is the appeal to false authority.  
http://scentofpine.wordpress.com/2009/06/29/epa-non-coverup/
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


11 posted 06-30-2009 09:29 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

It's also interesting that they did not tell them their report would not be submitted because it was wrong - rather that it would shed a bad light on the department. ..and why was carlin one of the staffers asked to respond to the fraft od the Clean Air act and only given four days to do it, if he were so unqualified?


The Competitive Enterprise Institute has obtained an EPA study of the "endangerment" to human well-being ostensibly caused by carbon dioxide emissions, together with a set of EPA emails indicating that the study, which concludes that carbon dioxide is not a significant cause of climate change, was suppressed by the EPA for political reasons.

In their report, Carlin and Davidson point out that the EPA has not done its own evaluation of the global warming theory. Rather, it has relied on analyses by others, mostly the U.N.'s IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) report. That report, however, was a political document, not a scientific one. Knowing that current scientific research disproves the anthropogenic global warming theory, the U.N. ordered that no recent research be considered in the IPCC report. This is a scandal of which too few people are aware. As science, the U.N. report is a bad joke.

Carlin and Davidson go on to recite the scientific work that shows rather clearly that human activity is a minor factor, at most, in climate change--which has, of course, been occurring from the beginning of Earth's history to the present. Their report is a useful summary of the evidence for those who are not familiar with it.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/06/023915.php


At any rate, the question still remains that, regardless of the causes of global warming, is it right for Obama to be pushing his cap and trade aka energy tax hikes for all, NOW and with such urgency? If you are not willing to address that, then the rest is so much swiss cheese.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


12 posted 06-30-2009 09:41 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

I'm not going to play the 'butwhatabout' game Mike.

quote:

As it turns out, the suppressed “study” was not actually a study at all but rather a report and series of comments compiled primarily by Alan Carlin, an economist within the agency’s National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE). Carlin, who holds a B.S. in Physics from CalTech and a PhD in Economics from M.I.T. both from the late fifties and early sixties, has professed he is not a climate scientist but has been “working on climate change” for six years. He compiled the report as a response to the EPA’s endangerment draft which would open up regulation of CO2 as part of the Clean Air Act, concerned that the EPA’s reliance on the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ignored more recent research that undermined the accuracy of the IPCC’s conclusions.

Reviewing solely the accusations of suppression from both the CEI and the supporting bloggers, you are given the impression of a rushed deadline and an intrepid lone voice of reason and knowledge amongst the cacophony within the politically driven bureaucracy of the EPA. In this scenario, Carlin deftly crafts an almost 100 page evisceration of the IPCC’s and thus the EPA’s findings in a mere 4 days, bringing to light an avalanche of new and unconsidered scientific knowledge, only to be rebuffed by his politically motivated superiors.

Reviewing the EPA’s response, the emails themselves, and the draft report in context, you are left with an impression of distinctly the opposite.

First there is the proposition that the version of Carlin’s report available from CEI was an “early draft”. Yet, the “March 16″ date on the footer of many of its pages is the same day as “the COB [close-of-business] deadline” Carlin references himself in his email on March 16 at 3:55 PM. The available report may be a draft, but it’s definitely not an early version of it.

As a late draft it stands to reason that Carlin was merely rushing to meet the EPA’s hastily determined deadline, a viable justification for it being a bit rough around the edges. Compiling nearly 100 pages in less than four days is no small task. Yet, the report itself states that it “in part builds on three previous reports (Carlin, 2007), Carlin (2007a), and Carlin (2008)”, a comment removed from a version of the report posted on the author’s own web site and replaced with a disclaimer to the reader that the comments “were prepared under severe time constraints”. So, rather than being written in four days, it appears the report was actually an ongoing work-in-progress for better than two years.

The EPA, in its response to the non-controversy, stated that Carlin had been granted numerous opportunities to have his views presented and heard by individuals both inside and outside of the agency, and Carlin readily acknowledges he hosted several seminars presenting opinions running counter to the findings of the IPCC, though he states these were not attended by members of the group generating the endangerment finding.

    “Additionally, his manager allowed his general views on the subject of climate change to be heard and considered inside and outside the EPA and presented at conferences and at an agency seminar. The individual was also granted a request to join a committee that organizes an ongoing climate seminar series, open to both agency and outside experts, where he has been able to invite speakers with a full range of views on climate science. The claims that his opinions were not considered or studied are entirely false.”
    - Adora Andy, EPA spokesperson

Considering the numerous previous report iterations and hosted seminars, it is reasonable to conclude those within the agency were already readily familiar with Carlin’s overall thoughts on the subject at hand and that much of the related material had been previously presented and considered. Carlin’s voice was being anything but quashed inside and outside of the agency.

As for the hasty deadline, the EPA finding had been in the works for over a year, having been started under the previous Bush administration, providing more than enough time to make any concerns known, even if the content of the finding had not been finalized.
http://scentofpine.wordpress.com/2009/06/29/epa-non-coverup/


http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/jun/25/edward-markey/claims-cbo-predicts-cap-and-trade-will-cost-about-/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/apr/01/cato-institute/cato-institutes-claim-global-warming-disputed-most/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/feb/18/al-gore/al-gore-optimistic-about-solar-energy-and-pretty-a/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2007/jun/12/tom-tancredo/most-scientists-say-humans-cause-warming/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/mar/30/house-republicans/GOP-full-of-hot-air-about-Obamas-light-switch-tax/
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


13 posted 06-30-2009 09:59 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

There is no butwhatabout game here, reb...just a simple question you refuse to answer, preferring your own games instead. No problem...

for those of you willing to take this seriously, please answer this simple question..

In a time of the economic uncertainty we are living in, why is the urgency of the cap and trade bill passage, which will raise taxes, so important to the country that it be passed NOW? Why is it so important that Obama insists it be passed immediately,even though congressmen have not even had the opportunity to read it through? Why is it so important that we are asked to endure the future hardships it will create as a trade-off for it's possible benefits over the next 40 years, hardships in a time of record unemployment, projected to get worse? This is no "whatif". This is exactly what is happening. For those of you willing to be honest enough to address this question, I would like to hear your views.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


14 posted 06-30-2009 10:19 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

For those of you willing to be honest enough to address this question, I would like to hear your views.



Your question sir, is -- honestly, loaded.  

The links, and answers, are there.  Honestly
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


15 posted 06-30-2009 10:50 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Your evasions have been duly  noted, LR. Perhaps others may care to offer their thoughts.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


16 posted 06-30-2009 10:56 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

I've evaded nothing Mike.  I've avoided a lot of unnecessary typing, or cutting and pasting, and just showed you the information.

If you don't read it -- you don't really want to know.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


17 posted 06-30-2009 11:33 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

LR, you have shown nothing which indicates why the bill, designed to help the environment over 4 decades, needs to be passed immediately, along with it's tax increases, at a time of economic duress and your talking around it serves no purpose. I've no desire to continue the go-around with you and will wait to hear from others. Have a nice evening...
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


18 posted 07-01-2009 12:03 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

What I haven't done, Mike, is accept your assumptions that you use to load the questions.  I have, although, given plenty of information, to debunk Carlin (your main thesis) and even to answer your butwhatabout question.

Now -- if you'd like to be more specific with your question -- starting with this one -- the magnitude of the 'tax increase' and what your study shows it's effects will be on the economy -- that's fine.

You're 'why do we have to do it now?' question is going to be the same for every initiative (which you've accordingly laid out within the scope of this thread -- way to keep it narrow Mike)-- and there's a simple response -- because the American people voted for it.

Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


19 posted 07-01-2009 12:44 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

The American people voted for it?  Why? Because the American people voted for the people pushing it? Forget it. The American people may hold the ultimate responsibility for it by having voted in the people responsible but they had no vote in the bills they pass.

Another outrageous embarrassment was the fact that there was only one copy of the 1,201-page bill that all 435 members of Congress had to share. http://www.standard.net/live/news/177239

THAT is how the democratic senators voted for it....in the same way they voted for the stimulus bill they didn't read. Is THAT why the American people put them in office? Is that what they expected? I'd like to see a national vote on the cap and trade bill. I have doubts the American people would pass it at this time.

Several moderate and conservative Democrats indicated that they received heavy constituent pressure in the final hours to buck their party leadership and vote against the bill.

"I can't begin to tell you how many calls we've received," said Rep. Charles Gonzalez, D-Texas. "And it's disproportionately vote 'no.'"
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/26/house.energy/index.html

How much will it cost the taxpayer? The range goes from the high 3,100 from the republicans to the $98.00 from the EPA, the average hovering around 1500. There are also other points to consider...

[b]Cap-and-trade bill as written will rewrite the American dream – home ownership and provide heavy tax burdens for generations. Provisions within the largest tax increase in the country’s history will change the way you buy and sell a home, use energy and shop for goods and services.
A new government bureaucracy created within the bill will force homeowners who wish to sell their homes to retrofit their houses to be “environmentally-friendly.” The costs would fall to the homeowners possibly injuring an already fragile real estate marketplace.
Potential replacement items required would range from eco-friendly hot-water heaters to windows. The homes in California have already seen values fall through the floor and homeowners see no way to recoup the expensive upgrades the state and federal government would require.
Also included in the massive 1,500-page bill is water rationing. The federal government has set up a shower manager. One website selling a shower manager calls the gadget the “Shower Nazi.” Located in section 217 of the bill and the Shower Nazi units puts a three-to five-minute limit on showers.
Controlling other aspects of your life will be seen in the mandatory 20 percent wind/solar consumption to start; this would definitely lead to energy rationing if there was not enough wind turbines and solar panels in place.
http://www.examiner.com/x-10317-San-Di   ego-County-Political-Buzz-Examiner~y2009m6d30-Cap-and-trade-completely-rewrites-the-American-dream

So, you are right. The American people, the either ill-advised or misguided people who voted for Obama and the Democratic congressmen, believing that they were something they are not and not having to common sense to realize it was a lie, hold the utimate blame. hopefully they will have a chance to rectify that error in the next round of elections.

Why does it need to be done NOW? With all of the urgency Obama has attached to it? With all of the hoops Pelosi jumped through to get it done? With unemployment through the roof? With the housing market still in dire straits? Neither you or your links have answered that question, which I expected.

Personally I would think that anyone with half a brain would look at how the stimulus package was forced through the congress, how the cap and trade ws forced through the House, how the health reform is being forced by Obama onto congress, and see the pattern between all of them. Those who don't are deluding themselves or wishing on rainbows.

Whatever side you are on, you had better pray that the Senate is smart enough to throw it out.
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


20 posted 07-01-2009 08:46 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

Neither you or your links have answered that question, which I expected.



First -- you're conflating and asking two separate things...

a)the EPA finding that was submitted to the White House March 24th -- in the works for a year with ample time for Carlin to add comments (not a report -- at taxpayer expense even though he wasn't qualified for nor assigned to the project, but his boss indulged him his opportunity)

b)the cap and trade bill that has passed the floor of the Congress

Now, if the Republicans are the slowskies and want to replace the elephant with a turtle -- then I can understand why they think this may be moving too fast.  But this is a subject that the legislature, the EPA, the previous Bush administration, and the American people have been talking about and working on for a very long time.

quote:

International responsibility also means preserving our common home. The risks of global warming have no borders. Americans and Europeans need to get serious about substantially reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the coming years or we will hand over a much-diminished world to our grandchildren. We need to reinvigorate the US-European partnership on climate change where we have so many common interests at stake. The US and Europe must lead together to encourage the participation of the rest of the world, including most importantly, the developing economic powerhouses of China and India.

I have introduced legislation that would require a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, but that is just a start. We need a successor to Kyoto, a cap-and-trade system that delivers the necessary environmental impact in an economically responsible manner. New technologies hold great promise. We need to unleash the power and innovation of the marketplace in order to meet our environmental challenges. Right now safe, climate-friendly nuclear energy is a critical way both to improve the quality of our air and to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources.

That dependence, I am afraid, has become a vulnerability for both the US and Europe and a source of leverage for the oil and gas exporting autocracies. The US needs to wean itself off oil faster. Europe needs a comprehensive energy policy so that Russia's oil and gas monopolies cannot behave as agents of political influence.

The bottom line is that none of us can act as if our only concerns are within our own borders. We cannot define our national interests so narrowly that we fail to see how intimately our fate is bound up with that of the rest of humanity. There is such a thing as good international citizenship. If we wish to be models for others, we must be model citizens ourselves.

John McCain
March 18, 2008 http://www.cagop.org/index.cfm/in-case-you-missed-it_400.htm



Now, issue 'a' is clearly the topic of this thread -- which I've addressed with information ad nauseum.

On issue 'b' if you want to say that we don't know how it's going to work then you have no basis to say that it's going to wreck the economy for generations to come -- because -- you don't know how it's going to work.

But we do know how it's going to work because we have the model for it and we've been doing it with other pollutants since 1990: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/01/capandtrade101.html  http://www.epa.gov/captrade/

Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


21 posted 07-01-2009 09:51 AM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
Is it reasonable to raise more and more taxes on people who are such economic straits RIGHT NOW for the sake of global warming, which is at the same level it was years ago?


If that was the case then no, it’s not reasonable, but that isn’t the case we’re being presented with.

97% of climate experts believe global average temperatures have increased during the past century.

84% of climate experts believe humans have had a hand in those increases.

If the global average temperature rises by more than 2% Celsius climate experts say it will result in major environmental disruptions.


If the majority of experts are right then average global temperatures have risen and human activity is at least partly responsible. If they’re right, and they are the experts, then it would be a good idea to do something about it before it’s too late.

Why RIGHT NOW?

From the information I’ve looked at global temperature changes once they hit a tipping point can become uncontrollable, each negative effect sets off a chain reaction that promotes an exponential rise, or reduction, in the average global temperature. Studies of previous global climate changes have proved that hypothesis.

The experts are divided on when we’ll reach that tipping point, the closest I could find to an average consensus seems to be that it will occur within the next 50 years.

If that figure is correct and the proposed changes reverse the increase in average global temperature in 40 years we’ll have avoided a catastrophe by 10 years. If the estimate of the tipping point figure is 10 years too optimistic we can just about make it if we act RIGHT NOW. If the tipping point comes in thirty years instead of fifty we’re already too late. If 97% of the climate experts are wrong and Carlin is right we’ll have spent a whole lot of money just to reduce energy consumption and promote cleaner air – which isn’t that bad of a consolation prize.

An analogy simplifies the logic:

Nine Doctors tell you that, in their opinion, you need to have an operation to remove an inflamed appendix, they tell you it needs to be done RIGHT NOW before it becomes inoperable or it will burst within a week and kill you.

One doctor disagrees and says that you have wind.

You can have the operation RIGHT NOW Mike, you can put it off until next Monday if you like or you can believe it’s only wind and hope that the majority of experts are wrong and you and the tenth doctor are right.

Which is the logical course of action Mike?

As I said earlier I’m not convinced about global warming one way or the other, but given the opinion of the experts I think doing something RIGHT NOW is a logical decision.

.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


22 posted 07-01-2009 12:43 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Nine Doctors tell you that, in their opinion, you need to have an operation to remove an inflamed appendix, they tell you it needs to be done RIGHT NOW before it becomes inoperable or it will burst within a week and kill you. If it would burst within a week, i would have it done now. If it would burst within the next 40 years with no chance it would burst in any near-immediate future, I would put it off until it was more financially doable.
I'll provide my own analogy, grinch. The doctor tells you that you have a disease that could possibly kill you in 40 years or so. It is not going to kill you now but, over the years, it may get to the point where it could be lethal. He wants you to have the operation NOW. You have lost your job, are living on savings and have 3 kids and a wife to support and your budget is stretched to it's limits. You know that, if you put the operation off for a year or so, you will not be in any danger. There are even other doctors who claim that the disease is harmless. Do you take your savings and spend it on the operation or do you wait until you get work or your finances improve enough to be able to do it without bankrupting your family? And what do you think about the doctor who insists you have the operation NOW while knowing you are not in any immediate danger?

I don't know what you would choose but i'm pretty comfortable in assuming what the wife and kids would have to say about it.

Or...

"Hey, honey, look! I bought this ozone-blocker device that we can put on the roof! As the ozone layer deteriorates, it will offset the ultra-violet rays coming through the holes and protect us. Scientists, and the salesman, told me it will add an average of 2.4 years to a user's life!"

"That's fine, sweetheart. Now, where are the groceries?"

"Groceries? I had to spend all we had on this device...but we will live longer!"

If you would like to see the rest of this episode, tune into Divorce Court on ABC at noon.  
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


23 posted 07-01-2009 01:26 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Now, issue 'a' is clearly the topic of this thread -- which I've addressed with information ad nauseum.

No, LR. You really haven't addressed anything. You just throw out links that other people say, while making sure you don't commit yourself to anything.  I think one of the reasons for having the Alley is for people to voice their opinions. I certainly voice mine and will use links when necessary to bolster them. You simply use links and yours opinions are MIA.

"What do you think about this, LR?" You respond with links.
"Do you think it's a good idea...?"  More links.
"But what is your feeling...?"  Your response is "It's all in the links".
"But what do YOU think....?"  Your response? "I'm not going to engage in unnecessary typing.  Read the links."

Man, we can all come up with links. We can match each other link for link  until the cows come home. So what? Where is the sharing of opinions? What are YOUR thoughts, not some impersonal thoughts from links written by someone else?

Do you favor the cap-and trade bill?
Do you believe in it's immediate need of passage?
Do you believe that the House's action of passing it without reading it is beneficial to the country?
How do you feel about the checks and balances our government was founded on which has now deteriorated,  with congress rubber-stamping whatever Obama claims he wants  done NOW and not even bothering to read the bills, even though they quadruple the national debt?
Do you think it will raise taxes for the average family?

I can understand that not committing oneself to a personal opinion can have it's benefits. For example, if the people revolt about how much the cap and trade bill is costing them and someone says, "LR, what do you think about the bill NOW?" you can simply respond that you never actually said you were for it...and you would be right. It's a good, safe way to go.

Grinch gave his opinions and, whether I agree with them or not, I respect that he gave them. It would be interesting to get your personal views,  just out of curiosity....minus links.

Grinch
Member Elite
since 12-31-2005
Posts 2710
Whoville


24 posted 07-01-2009 01:57 PM       View Profile for Grinch   Email Grinch   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Grinch


quote:
If it would burst within a week, i would have it done now.


Thank you

Given your analogy Mike I’d put off the operation, but then again your analogy is flawed.

quote:
You know that, if you put the operation off for a year or so, you will not be in any danger.


We don’t know everything is going to be ok Mike, the politicians don’t know either, all we and they can do is listen to what the experts are predicting will happen and then act accordingly. You proved that with your answer to my analogous scenario

The majority of climate experts are telling us that if we don’t do something RIGHT NOW we may be too late. The logical thing to do is to listen to them and act accordingly, which is exactly what the politicians are doing.

 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Employment Application   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  5  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors