Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Joe NYC who wrote (537946)	12/21/2009 9:42:03 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575761

"On wealth transfer, just because Copenhagen failed, it does not mean it was not the intend." And you know this because you have seen the secret documents by the Illuminati detailing their plans... Like Ted said. Paranoia.

To: Joe NYC who wrote (537946)	12/22/2009 12:43:29 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575761

Without regulation, how do you see getting pollution reduced? Without reasonable taxation, how do you see new technology getting developed? As for the transfer of wealth, that's just conservative paranoia. On wealth transfer, just because Copenhagen failed, it does not mean it was not the intend. Explain to me what you mean by wealth transfer. On taxation, especially "reasonable taxation", on one hand, I would like the government to be neutral (not being able to favor one activity and punish another on), on the other hand I could see that a predictable, increasing tax on burning of fossil fuels would reduce their use of fossil fuels - so I am conflicted... That's all I want......people who can afford gas guzzling SUVs can afford to pay more taxes. Use those taxes to develop rail and encourage the development of eco friendly industries. On taxation being a pre-requisite for new technology development, I obviously disagree. Why? Under Bush, tech. development has been spotty and sporatic. Now that cafe standards are going up and the threat of higher taxes exist, suddenly companies are working over time to produce products that reduce pollution and carbon consumption. On regulation of pollution, I am for it, given honest people work at EPA. But with the dishonest party hacks Obama put in place (who declared CO2 a pollutant), the natural reaction is to oppose their regulations.... Uh.....what are you talking about Joe? Are you getting Obama confused with Bush? Scientists cheer latest Obama picks As a Nobel laureate is named to Energy post, some expect an end to what they see as policy driven by ideology. December 16, 2008\| Jim Tankersley and Tom Hamburger, Tankersley and Hamburger are writers in our Washington bureau. WASHINGTON — With the nomination of Nobel Prize-winning physicist Steven Chu for Energy secretary, President-elect Barack Obama made sure no one missed the message in the resume. "His appointment should send a signal to all that my administration will value science," Obama said during a Chicago news conference Monday. "We will make decisions based on facts, and we understand that the facts demand bold action." Chu, director of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, headlines a quartet of appointments that includes former Environmental Protection Agency chief Carol Browner as a coordinator of energy and climate policy, former New Jersey environmental protection commissioner Lisa Jackson as EPA director, and Los Angeles Deputy Mayor Nancy Sutley to run the White House Council on Environmental Quality. With this team, some environmentalists and former federal research scientists expect Obama's White House to break from what they view as the Bush administration's record of overlooking science in favor of politics. "It's such an incredible contrast, compared to the years of darkness under the current administration, to see a scientist in such a position of authority and influence in the Cabinet," said Alan Nogee, who directs the Clean Energy Program for the Union of Concerned Scientists, which has accused the administration of silencing and overruling scientists in policy-making. "It's night and day." Critics -- including Nogee's organization and former EPA Administrator Christie Todd Whitman -- have complained about the influence of industry lobbyists and ideologues on Bush administration decision-making. Rep. Henry A. Waxman of Beverly Hills is among the Democrats who repeatedly have accused top Bush officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney and political advisor Karl Rove, with pressing federal agencies to take positions that put them at odds with their own scientists on energy, global warming and stem cell research. The critics say many high-ranking scientists have fled federal jobs or have been forced from advisory panels in an effort to tilt agency decision-making to be more favorable to corporate interests or, in at least one case, to help secure reelection of Republicans. In 2001, Waxman issued a 40-page report accusing the administration of having "manipulated the scientific process and distorted or suppressed scientific findings." In 2004, 60 prominent scientists accused the administration of "misrepresenting and suppressing scientific knowledge for political purposes." articles.latimes.com