Can Democrats Retake Cap And Trade Debate?

Reader Comments
Back to blog

There is no Global Warming, there has been no Global Warming for over 10 years. Tempratures peaked in 1998 and has been heading straight down since at least 2005. Computer programs can't be taken as seriously as hard data and that data is against any Global Warming scenario.

John of WV 9:49AM September 14, 2009

bottom line: you need to look at it from a different economic angle because of the nature of the unpredictability of climate change.
A couple good resources:
http://www.globalproblems-globalsolutions-files.org/unf_website/PDF/articles/UNF_EC_TaleFatTail_KimbleTawney_0907.pdf
http://www.wri.org/stories/2009/08/climate-change-legislation-myths-and-reality

Michael of OH 3:09PM September 12, 2009

But perhaps we ought to have a LOT of debate on the advantages (if any) of "cap and trade". The cap part is fine. The "trade" part may be another colossal opportunity for a few in the financial world to "tax" individuals in an incredible scam if not regulated to the moon.
Think about $4.00 gas when oil was "traded" to $145 a barrel by "traders" who were neither producers nor users of oil. Why did that happen? How much do you want to pay in the price of everything for traders' activities in carbon credits?
Note, I'm not in line with garden-variety conservatives who distrust climate science and the government in general. I'm saying, DON'T LET FREE ENTERPRISE WHOLLY CAPTURE THE CONCEPT OF "CAP AND TRADE".
The likes of Goldman Sachs could very well eat your lunch (again) if you do. It's said that some there are salivating about this cap and trade thing even moreso than they were about the IPO craze of the late 1990s---when you were sold stocks of companies in a FRENZY that did not even have sales, let alone earnings.

Muser of NM 12:46PM September 11, 2009