Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Global Warming’ Category

Expect Food Prices to Keep Rising, Industry Says

From Reuters:

By Rene Pastor, Reuters

WASHINGTON — Americans who dug deeper into their pockets for groceries last year will face sticker shock again this year when shopping for food, experts said Thursday.

Consumer food prices are expected to rise 3.0% to 4.0% this year after a 4.0% gain in 2007, said USDA Chief Economist Joseph Glauber at the U.S. Agriculture Department’s annual outlook conference.

He added that “overall retail food prices for 2008 to 2010 are expected to rise faster than the general inflation rate.”

“There’s going to be real food inflation in this country,” said C. Larry Pope, president and chief executive of U.S. beef processor Smithfield Foods (SFD).

Read the rest of the article here.

So my big question is with all the Obama – and even John McCain fans – this is all about, among other things, attempting to use up grains to create ineffective bio-fuels. The other part is that our farm industries are so subsidized that I heard somewhere that this is the first year we are actually going to have to import wheat for consumption. So add to this the massive tax increases that an Obama presidency would cause and you will see something that will make the Carter years look like paradise.

Technorati Tags: ,,,

Read Full Post »

Sen. McCain Is Pushing An Energy Tax Hike That Would Harm Michigan

McCain For Energy Tax Hike“What do John McCain, Environmental Defense, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Pew Center on Climate Change have in common? They have united to support a massive new tax increase on energy – which will raise costs throughout the economy and threaten the vitality of, among others, the oil and automobile industries I suspect that many who would be significantly harmed by McCain’s wrongheaded tax plan –  say, blue-collar workers in Michigan – have never heard of it.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)


Sen. McCain Is Pushing For A Massive New Energy Tax Which Would Especially Harm Michigan:

Sen. McCain’s Legislation Would Dramatically Raise Taxes On All Carbon-Based Fuels. “What is not widely understood is that he is currently sponsoring legislation that, in the name of fighting global warming, would dramatically raise the tax on all carbon-based fuels, including gasoline, home heating oil, coal, and to a lesser extent, natural gas.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain’s Energy Policy Could Devastate The Auto Industry. “Higher energy costs will, among other things, raise the cost of manufacturing big-ticket items in American factories. And higher gas prices will likely raise demand for those classes of automobiles that tend to be manufactured overseas. Somehow, I think Michigan voters will be less than thrilled about this, should anyone bother to inform them.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Send Gas Taxes Sky High And Would Harm The National Economy:

The EPA Estimates Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Hike Gas Taxes By 68 Cents Per Gallon. “The EPA has estimated what the McCain energy tax would mean to consumers. Since the bill’s provisions are phased in, the full cost of the tax would not be felt for a number of years. But in a letter to Senator McCain dated July 2007, the EPA estimated that the tax will be about $.26 cents in current dollars per gallon of gasoline by 2030 and $.68 cents per gallon by 2050.” (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

The EPA Estimates Sen. McCain’s Plan Would Reduce United States GDP By As Much As $5.2 Trillion. “The effect on the economy of the McCain tax would be similar to any other broad-based tax. In the EPA’s own words: ‘The present value of the cumulative reduction in real GDP for the 2012-2030 period ranges from $660 billion to $2.1 trillion…the cumulative reduction in the present value of real GDP for the 2012-2050 period ranges from about $1.6 trillion to $5.2 trillion.'”  (Roy Cordato, “McCain’s Costly Tax On Energy,” National Review, www.nationalreview.com, Posted 1/10/08)

Sen. McCain Has Repeatedly Teamed Up With Sen. Joe Lieberman To Push Radical Climate Change Legislation:

McCain-Lieberman Would Have Capped Carbon Dioxide Emissions. “The latest bill rejected by the Senate, sponsored by Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz, and Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., would have mandated caps on carbon dioxide and a market-oriented system for trading them. Those who needed more energy could theoretically buy credits from those who could make do with less. But government would still have to establish the overall cap on energy use.” (Thomas Bray, Op-Ed, “Public Rejects Giving Control Of Energy Use To Government,” The Detroit News, 6/26/05)

  • McCain-Lieberman Would Have Hiked Gas Prices. “The increases in gasoline prices projected to occur (is) 9 percent in 2010 and 19 percent in 2025.” (“Analysis Of Senate Amendment 2028, The Climate Stewardship Act Of 2003,” Energy Information Administration, 1/6/07)

The American Council For Capital Formation’s Margo Thorning Said That McCain-Lieberman Would “Significantly Hurt Michigan’s Economy.” “Imposing the McCain/Lieberman bill… would also significantly hurt Michigan’s economy. Residential electricity prices are projected to rise by 12 to 30 percent, household income falls by up to $791 and there would be up to 33,000 fewer jobs in by 2010 compared with the baseline forecast, according to an analysis by CRA International.” (Margo Thorning, Op-Ed, “Opinion: Capping Global Warming Gases Will Cost Michigan Jobs With Little Cooling,” The Detroit News, 3/22/07)

  • Thorning Said McCain-Lieberman “Would Seriously Harm Detroit’s Auto Industry.” “Proposals like McCain/Lieberman would seriously harm Detroit’s auto industry, as both union and management leaders noted earlier this month in a joint appearance before Congress. So profits would sink and jobs would vanish. That’s a high price to pay for a negligible benefit to the environment.” (Margo Thorning, Op-Ed, “Opinion: Capping Global Warming Gases Will Cost Michigan Jobs With Little Cooling,” The Detroit News, 3/22/07)

Detroit News Columnist Thomas Bray Said That The McCain-Lieberman Plan Would Ultimately Result In A Huge Indirect Tax On The American People.  “Aside from the crucial question of whether a government bureaucracy is smart enough to do so, even environmentalists confess that Kyoto or McLieberman measures would have been a small first step in clamping a huge indirect tax on the American and world economy.” (Thomas Bray, Op-Ed, “Public Rejects Giving Control Of Energy Use To Government,” The Detroit News, 6/26/05)

The U.S. Energy Information Administration Estimated That McCain’s Global Warming Legislation Would Have Decreased U.S. GDP By $776 Billion. “The cumulative losses in actual GDP are about $776 billion (1996 dollars) in the SA.2028 (McCain-Lieberman)…. The peak, single-year impact on actual GDP under SA.2028 occurs in 2025, with a loss of $76 billion (1996 dollars), or about 0.4 percent of GDP. The largest percentage change in actual GDP, 0.5 percent, occurs in 2011, where the estimated loss in actual GDP that year is $57 billion…” (“Analysis Of Senate Amendment 2028, The Climate Stewardship Act Of 2003,” Energy Information Administration, 1/6/07)

“Impact Of McCain-Lieberman * If The Climate Stewardship Act Passes, It Would Increase:

  • Energy Costs By 30 To 50 Percent.
  • Unemployment By Nine Percent.
  • Electricity Costs By 46 Percent.
  • Fuel Oil Prices By 33 Percent.
  • Inflation By 27 Percent.” (Editorial, “Climate Stewardship Bill Would Starve U.S. Economy,” The Detroit News, 10/30/03)

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) Said McCain-Lieberman Was “The Right Thing To Do.” “Continuing his fight for environmental protection and energy security, Senator John Kerry (D-Mass.) today joined a bipartisan group of Senators in offering an amendment to the Energy Bill that would ensure that America takes a leadership role in addressing the effects of global climate change. … Kerry said. ‘It is not just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do.'” (Sen. John Kerry, “Kerry Joins Bipartisan Group In Offering Climate Change Amendment To Energy Bill,” Press Release, 6/22/05)

Sens. McCain, Kerry And Lieberman Voted For Global Warming Legislation That Was Soundly Rejected By Senate Republicans And Democrats. 49 Republicans and 11 Democrats voted against McCain’s “greenhouse gas” amendment to the energy bill. (H.R. 6, CQ Vote #148: Rejected 38-60: R 6-49; D 31-11; I 1-0, 6/22/05, McCain, Kerry and Lieberman Voted Yea)

Read Full Post »

Next year in California, state regulators are likely to have the emergency power to control individual thermostats, sending temperatures up or down through a radio-controlled device that will be required in new or substantially modified houses and buildings to manage electricity shortages.

Read Full Post »

22 WAYS TO BE A GOOD DEMOCRAT
IT’S NOT SO HARD, EVEN A CAVE MAN CAN DO IT….


1. You have to be against capital punishment, but support abortion on demand.

2. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity.

3. You have to believe that guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens are more of a threat than nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese and North Korean communists.

4. You have to believe that there was no art before federal funding.

5. You have to believe that global temperatures are more affected by soccer moms driving SUVs than by scientifically documented cyclical changes in the earth’s climate.

6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial, but being homosexual is natural.

7. You have to believe that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding.

8. You have to believe that the same teacher who can’t teach fourth graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

9. You have to believe that hunters don’t care about nature, but loony activists who have never been outside of San Francisco do.

10. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.

11. You have to believe that Mel Gibson spent $25 million of his own money to make The Passion of the Christ for financial gain only.

12. You have to believe that the NRA is bad because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good because it supports certain parts of the Constitution.

13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high.

14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Edison, and Alexander Graham Bell.

15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides are not.

16. You have to believe that Hillary Clinton is normal and is a very nice person.

17. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been tried is because the right people haven’t been in charge.

18. You have to believe that conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and a sex offender belonged in the White House.

19. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites, and bestiality should be constitutionally protected, and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal.

20. You have to believe that illegal Democratic Party funding by the Chinese Government is somehow in the best interest to the United States .

21. You have to believe that it’s okay to give federal workers the day off on Christmas Day, but it’s not okay to say “Merry Christmas.”
 
22. You have to believe that this message is part of a vast right wing conspiracy.
 
Ready to vote?

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

An article in an Adelaide newspaper by an obstetrician is rather
worrying. He has proposed a tax on children and large families to
offset carbon emissions.

A WEST Australian medical expert wants families to pay a $5000-plus “baby levy” at birth and an annual carbon tax of up to $800 a child.

Writing in today’s Medical Journal of Australia, Associate Professor Barry Walters said every couple with more than two children should be taxed to pay for enough trees to offset the carbon emissions generated over each child’s lifetime.

Professor Walters, clinical associate professor of obstetric medicine at the University of Western Australia and the King Edward Memorial Hospital in Perth, called for condoms and “greenhouse-friendly” services such as sterilisation procedures to earn carbon credits.

Read more…


Read Full Post »