my point is, dont come into an area where coal mining is life and say you back coal, when you clearly dont.
This region never backed him, I don' recall really any SWVA counties being blue - maybe a few- but I really don't remember any. And if this is the same quote you're talkng about, he never said that, I think you just misread it if these is what you were talking about...Originally Posted by Rocky
What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as an ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.
That's saying we should not keep talkng about doing something about coal or just throw around ideas, but actually pursue and compliment it.
I think the best way to explain the cap-and-trade idea is from 2008, while Senator/POTUS hopeful said this in on of his speeches..
Enormous good came from... industrial growth, and we are all the beneficiaries of the national prosperity it built. But there were costs we weren't counting, and these have added up now, in the atmosphere, in the oceans, and all across the natural world. And what better way to correct past errors than to turn the creative energies of the free market in the other direction? Under the cap-and-trade system, this can happen. In all its power, the profit motive will suddenly begin to shift and point the other way toward cleaner fuels, wiser ways, and a healthier planet. As never before, the market would reward any person or company that seeks to invent, improve, or acquire alternatives to carbon-based energy. It is very hard to picture venture capitalists, corporate planners, small businesses and environmentalists all working to the same good purpose. But such cooperation is actually possible, and this reform will set it in motion.
And from his campaign site...
..proposes a cap-and-trade system that would set limits on greenhouse gas emissions while encouraging the development of low-cost compliance options. A climate cap-and-trade mechanism would set a limit on greenhouse gas emissions and allow entities to buy and sell rights to emit, similar to the successful acid rain trading program of the early 1990s. The key feature of this mechanism is that it allows the market to decide and encourage the lowest-cost compliance options... A cap-and-trade system harnesses human ingenuity in the pursuit of alternatives to carbon-based fuels. Market participants are allotted total permits equal to the cap on greenhouse gas emissions. If they can invent, improve, or acquire a way to reduce their emissions, they can sell their extra permits for cash. The profit motive will coordinate the efforts of venture capitalists, corporate planners, entrepreneurs, and environmentalists on the common motive of reducing emissions... The cap-and-trade system would encompass electric power, transportation fuels, commercial business, and industrial business - sectors responsible for just under 90 percent of all emissions. Small businesses would be exempt. Initially, participants would be allowed to either make their own GHG reductions or purchase 'offsets' - financial instruments representing a reduction, avoidance, or sequestration of greenhouse gas emissions practiced by other activities, such as agriculture - to cover 100 percent of their required reductions. Offsets would only be available through a program dedicated to ensure that all offset GHG emission reductions are real, measured and verifiable. The fraction of GHG emission reductions permitted via offsets would decline over time.
Does that make sense? I like it.
my point is, dont come into an area where coal mining is life and say you back coal, when you clearly dont.
Cant we all just get along?
All the cap and trade part of that bill did was require them to buy permits for their emissions, then that money used for clean-coal technology - if they didn't buy the permits, they would pay hefty fines/taxes, but the permits really would not be that high at all. This was the whole part of Bouchers Amendment to the bill, since cap and trade was such a tiny part of the much larger bill, he made it to where most of those permits would be free/very low cost...but Griffith ran away with that and said he "co-wrote the bill", but that was his amendment to it and by house rules if you add an amendment like that and it get approved..you have to vote "yes" on the entire bill. Which is why he voted "yes", but again, Griffith took that and ran...and unfortunately the public was not interested in those real facts, just those catchy 30 sec ads and the "Boucher Betrayed Coal" yardsigns did all the swaying they needed. Yeah, us young people are so gullible huh?
But I ask, do you agree or disagree with those quotes I posted last night?
like i said, WHEN we have the clean coal burning technology then yes, tax the absolute and utter dog fuck out of anyone that doesnt conform to those standards, but taxing people because they cant afford a new technology or a technology hasnt been developed yet is a bad idea and would absolutely have killed coal mining. Beyond that, I agree with all of it.
this is all the past so it doesnt matter anyhow, but Biden did tell an eco freak that there would be NO new coal plants built in america while they were well would potentially be in office. he said to ship it overseas. this all has nothing to do with the point i was making though, which was......... do not come into an area where you know the backbone of the economy (sadly) is coal mining and tell the people that you are all about coal mining, when in reality you do not support it at all.
Cant we all just get along?
[img]http://www.lutte-wrestling.com/old-train2.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.lutte-wrestling.com/old-train2.jpg[/img]
So I just can't keep it in anymore, those quotes I posted earlier were not from Senator/Presidential hopeful Barack Obama...they were from Senator/Presidential hopeful John McCain, from a stump speech in Nevada and his campaign website in 2008. What most people around here don't know is that McCain has been a big proponent of cap and trade legislation for years, before Obama was even in the Senate he was pushing for it. But people don't care enough to check the facts, they just assumed McCain was against it, when really he's a bigger supporter of it then Obama.
Are you sure you can say he is a bigger supporter? Seems like both are pretty much for it the same amount, and the ideas sure didn't benefit McCain any, but he didn't put his feet down in the area and proclaim to be for the coal producers, yet support legislation that can hinder our area.
"Call me crazy, but I want to buy the Dallas Cowboys end zone and have the star right at the foot of my bed. That way when I score, I can spike the ball right on the star!" -Woody Paige, Around the Horn 10.9.08
A very good example of how voters were trapped with a damned if you do, damned if you don't vote last year. I was glad Obama won. I still don't see what other alternative we were given. I am also very, very, very disappointed in his performance as president, and I'm certainly not alone in that view.
[img]http://www.lutte-wrestling.com/old-train2.jpg[/img]
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks