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 : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (19947)	7/19/2012 8:29:19 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 85487

oops Back in May 2009, Climate Progress predicted that U.S. CO2 emissions had peaked (see “ I predict U.S. carbon dioxide emissions peaked in 2007!“). Of course, I had been thinking the U.S. would pass the Waxman-Markey climate and clean energy bill putting a price on carbon, “which will lead to steadily declining coal emissions.” Ironically, one of the reasons I thought the U.S. would pass a climate bill is that, as I wrote the following month, “ unconventional natural gas makes the 2020 Waxman-Markey target so damn easy and cheap to meet.” I didn’t imagine natural gas would become so darn cheap it would get us so far to the 2020 target without a carbon price. I stand by my original prediction, “that U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions will never exceed 2007 levels.” I believe this country will have a carbon price within a decade, and maybe considerable sooner if we are homo “sapiens” rather than, say, brainless frogs. Uber-blogger David Roberts has a chart-filled discussion of some key trends underlying the drop in CO2 levels over the past 5 years — and why few folks outside of the blogosphere are talking about it. It is reprinted in full below with permission. U.S. leads the world in cutting CO2 emissions — so why aren’t we talking about it? By David Roberts, via Grist... thinkprogress.org

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (19947)	7/19/2012 9:29:38 PM
From: mistermj	5 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 85487

LOL...it's not an attack ad when Obama said it! More on the Biggest Mistake of Campaign 2012 The damage Barack Obama did to himself in Roanoke, Va. when he said ”If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that, somebody else made that happen” has become the occasion for his defenders and apologists to say he didn’t say it, or he didn’t really say it, or he’s being taken out of context, or he didn’t mean it, or something. Fine. Here’s the whole thing: Look, if you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something — there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen. I would argue the context makes the quote worse, not better. Obama’s utter contempt for the idea that people deserve to prosper due to the fruits of their own labors and their own skills is made even deeper and more apparent from the entire quote. The president is saying that people who are successful in business do not deserve credit for being successful in business. He scorns those who say “it must be because I was so smart” by citing the fact that there are a lot of smart people out there. So what sets the smart people who do well apart from the smart people who don’t? Is it that they are hard-working? No, of course not, because “there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.” So if you do well, and it’s not because you’re smart or because you’re hardworking, what do you owe your success to? Answer: “Somebody else.” As in “somebody else made that happen.” Somebody gave you some help. You had a great teacher. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. Not you. Oh, yes, you. The whole idea of being a productive citizen who pays his taxes in a progressive system is that you are paying your own way—and even more than your own way to help others less fortunate. In other words, you are the one building the roads and bridges, or at least paying more than your share for your own use of them and their maintenance and their upkeep. The government gathers the money from every other user (and everyone else who pays for more than his use to help carry the burden of others who can’t) and pools it. That money is collected and pooled through the actions of a democratically elected legislature and signed into law by a democratically elected president, who are fulfilling the mandate assigned them by you. Government doesn’t build it. Government doesn’t make it possible. You do. For the president to say a taxpaying citizen didn’t build the infrastructure he uses is a fundamental denial of the entire concept of a self-governing citizenry. So Obama defenders really ought to think long and hard about whether they want to continue advancing this meme. The longer it goes on, the worse he will look. commentarymagazine.com

To: Wharf Rat who wrote (19947)	7/19/2012 10:01:17 PM
From: LLCF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 85487

Too funny.... that whole thing is a non-issue. Out here in RedStateLand (AZ) local papers are chronicling how no one would even BE here without the massive canal project that was essentially a massive giveaway by the federal government to land holders and developers. People aren't stupid... they know what he meant, and he'll EASILY be able to defend and enunciate what he means in a debate. Romney will be standing there with the shit eating grin on his face: dailyagenda.org DAK