Posted
by rycK on Saturday, March
15, 2008 11:57:57 AM
The
New York Times, always associated with Walter Duranty [1]and
Marxism
and any notions that might promote indecency, sloth, drug addiction, child
molestation, terrorism or other authentic left-wing programs has offered its
op-ed page, for a price [2],
to scam artists who will bleed the ignoratti on the Global Warming Farce.[3]
In
an insane article entitled Want to Buy Some Pollution?[4]
The NYT Ragzine offers propaganda like this:
“LATER this year, Massachusetts
Ponzi[5]
missed his chance to herd the suckers into a common sheep dip ditch by
neglecting this stunning opportunity and stroke the mentally unwashed with the
old Robbing Peter to pay Paul. grift.
More of the pitch:
“Auctions make sense. When Europe
first tried regulating greenhouse gases under a cap-and-trade program, in 2005,
it gave away, or “grandfathered,” emissions permits to its power generators,
which made modest changes in their operations and then sold the permits to
others at a premium. The result: windfall profits for the power companies.
Europe is now switching to emissions auctions and plans to finance programs
promoting climate protection, economic growth and energy security with the
proceeds.”
Now,
let us analyze this. Say there are 100 units of emission units in a given
country. Let us say that the object is to reduce the number of units to 90 for
the sake of the EcoNazis
[6]who
tell us that the CO2 emissions are causing global warming even
thought the increase from 1900 to 1996 was canceled out by a sudden drop in
1997. So, the whole global warming/cooling circus is a joke, but now there is
money on the drum. How could this ‘trading process’ affect, to be blunt, the
levels? [7]
There has to be some enforcement of the levels, which will increase with
growth, and that means the levels will rise to say 110 units in some time
period.
The scheme unfolds:
“By
setting a national
cap on greenhouse gas emissions and running a national auction for
emissions permits under the cap, the federal government could accrue tens of
billions annually. With that money, Washington
The
fruit analogy is very appropriate here. Here, we have the following fruit salad
scenario that brings laughter to all who want to watch the monkey dance the
Dunciad:
Some
company has outputs of say 5 emission units and will increase the output to 6
in some expansion plan because of growing demand by customers and ‘buys’
permits at auction from some person or company who holds allowances. This
transaction, strangely, just adds to the cost of producing the 5 emission
units. Now, suppose some other company decides to cut production from 4 down to
3 and could ‘sell’ the extra allowances to the first company. This is an
increase in cost with no reduction in
emissions!!
This is a shell game
where the peanut is always concealed by the grifters.
This
is the kind of lunacy that elevates drug-crazed lefties into their carnival
deportment. They can now but credits and allowances at market, demand that caps
be lowered and then sell their little papers to one of the companies for a fat
profit. Two things happen here: [1] the cost of doing business increases and
[2] some leftist parasite make a bundle of money off the deal.
We
know that wind power is much more expensive than nuke or coal, but with a
little bribing of elected officials, the ‘credits’ for wind power might be sold
to coal burners for fat profits. This would result in some lowering of
emissions, but a huge hike in the price of energy. The phony Bluewater Wind
bozos have a plan to build off shore wind mills and their electricity costs
would be 600% higher than current costs.[8]
So,
we leave off this with a question: If I had a car that was driven say only one
half of the national average, can I sell my unused ‘carbon footprint’ allowance
for cash??
I
have two cars that fit that description.
Somebody
make me an offer or perhaps the State of Massachusetts
Taking
bids at ryckki@gmail.com
Be
generous with your offers as the planet is in jeopardy.
[1] Walter Duranty. “ He said that
these people had to be "liquidated or melted in the hot fire of exile and
labor into the proletarian mass". Duranty claimed that the Siberian labor
camps were a means of giving individuals a chance
to rejoin Soviet society but also said that for those who could not
accept the system, "the final fate of such
enemies is death.". Duranty, though describing the system as cruel,
says he has "no brief for or against it, nor any purpose save to try to
tell the truth". He ends the article with the claim that the brutal collectivization campaign which led to the famine
was motivated by the "hope or promise of a subsequent raising up" of
Asian-minded masses in the Soviet Union which
only history could judge.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Duranty
[2] Whores work like this.
[3] 21,000
Scientists Refute the Phony Global Warming Follies as The Biggest Attempt to
Tax The World Has Even Seen.
[4] Want to Buy Some
Pollution? By IAN BOWLES Op-Ed Contributor
Published: March
15, 2008 . http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/15/opinion/15bowles.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Critics argue that emissions trading does little to solve
pollution problems overall, as groups that do not pollute sell their
conservation to the highest bidder. Overall reductions would need to come from
a sufficient and challenging reduction of allowances
available in the system. It is possible that this would occur over time
through central regulation, though some environmental
groups acted more immediately by buying credits and refusing to use or sell
them
No comments:
Post a Comment