1 edit
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/01/michael-bloomberg-obama_n_2059212.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg endorsed President Barack Obama for reelection on Thursday, Bloomberg TV reported and The Huffington Post confirmed.
The mayor, an Independent, did not endorse a candidate in the 2008 election and hadn't seem poised to do so this time around either. But he said in an op ed published on his website that his eagerness to see action on climate change legislation persuaded him to back a second term for the president.
Originally posted by SoothfastThis is presumably because neither candidate is likely to do anything positive (because big business is against it) and neither would like to highlight this.
Climate change issues have been neglected throughout much of the campaign season.
In general the US is against doing anything about climate change and is embarrassed about their very selfish stance.
Originally posted by twhiteheadWhat do you suggest the U.S. do about climate change ?
This is presumably because neither candidate is likely to do anything positive (because big business is against it) and neither would like to highlight this.
In general the US is against doing anything about climate change and is embarrassed about their very selfish stance.
Originally posted by utherpendragonCut energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions?
I'm serious. Twhitehead says that the U.S. is "embarrassed about their very selfish stance."
What does he and likeminded individuals think the U.S. should do that would be less selfish considering climate change ?
Originally posted by SoothfastSo then it would be on the honor system then ?
How about common sense and good old-fashioned self-interest?
We should drive less, turn off the lights when we leave the room, put air in our tires,etc.
Corporations who produce green house gasses should take it upon themselves to do it less. I guess this is what you are saying.
What of the individuals who do not adhere to these principals of "common sense" ?
Originally posted by utherpendragonFines, obviously.
What of the individuals who do not adhere to these principals of "common sense" ?
What I'm trying to say, though, is that the things that society has to do to counteract climate change are also just good things to do from an economic standpoint: using energy more efficiently, reducing industrial pollutants deleterious to human health, making the environment cleaner. Even if you don't believe in anthropogenic climate change (though you should), that doesn't negate the advantages of instituting common-sense reforms for a more prosperous and sustainable future.
Originally posted by KazetNagorraBehavorial change through taxation.
In general the most efficient way is to tax energy consumption and let the market figure out the optimal way to reduce it.
The state of NY is doing that w/tobacco products.
Following that logic the government could/should heap large taxes on peoples electric,natural gas,coal and oil usage.
Large taxes on gasoline,cars over a certain size and wieght, more toll roads and bridges,etc,etc. Just tax them to the point where they think twice about using any of these products.
Is that the the common sense reform we are getting at here ?
Where do you see these new tax dollars going ?
I've heard talk on off over the years coming from the left that American tax dollars should go to 3rd world countries for a kind of pennance,if you will, over our irresponsible over consuption of energy.
Are you on board with that ?
- Joined
- 06 Aug 07
- Moves
- 8299
"I've heard talk on off over the years coming from the left that American tax dollars should go to 3rd world countries for a kind of pennance,if you will, over our irresponsible over consuption of energy. "
That must have come from the loony left. They are just as ridiculous as the loony right. The obvious answer is that we keep the money in our own nation - for our own purposes.