Cap and Fade

There aren’t too many conclusions that can be drawn from the Democrats’ insisting on passing legislation that the CBO is certain will doom our economy for decades to come.

Reasonable people, when viewing the evidence, can really only arrive at one of either two positions:

First—The Democrats believe that the opinions of experts don’t apply to them and that they are somehow different than the Democrats which came before. Past failures of similar policies don’t necessarily mean that today’s policies are equally doomed. I call this the “Dumb Democrat” camp.

Second—The Democrats are well aware of the certain ‘failure’ of their plans to ‘fix’ our capitalist system because in their opinion, our system is the underlying problem and must be eliminated. Until we’ve eviscerated our capitalist foundations, we won’t ‘succeed’ in making America what it ‘should be’. In other words, all ‘fixes’ should be aimed at ‘destroying’ us so that we can be ‘rebuilt’ as an anti-capitalist welfare state. I call this the “Evil Democrat” camp.

Here’s the Washington Post reporting on the CBO’s opinion of proposed Cap-and-Trade legislation (emphasis mine):

A House-passed bill that targets climate change through a cap-and-trade system of pollution credits would slow the nation’s economic growth slightly over the next few decades and would create “significant” job losses from fossil fuel industries as the country shifts to renewable energy, the head of the Congressional Budget Office told a Senate energy panel Wednesday.

CBO Director Douglas W. Elmendorf emphasized that his estimates contained significant uncertainties and “do not include any benefits from averting climate change,” but his message nevertheless contrasted sharply with those of President Obama and congressional Democratic leaders, who have suggested that a cap on carbon emissions would help revive the U.S. economy.

In which camp do you come down? Have the Democrats just not read their history? Do they not understand economics? Or is it something different? Do they purposefully want to torpedo the capitalist foundation on which this country was built and has prospered for 200 years in order to install a system where we all become uniform…but uniformly bad?

These are educated men and women we’ve elected to represent us in Washington. Lawyers. Doctors. It’s not likely that any of them are dumb enough to advocate policy that’s so demonstrably flawed.

Is it?

Perhaps it’s more likely that there’s something else going on. To many, and we’ve seen this from the Left pretty consistently since 9/11, America has been “cruising for a bruising” for quite some time now. Is it time to finally consider whether this incomprehensibly awful legislation is not simply the product of uneducated rubes with too much power…but something more insidious?

Are we instead witnessing the intentional erosion of America’s capitalist foundation? If so, is it too late to prevent?

Because She Says So
Ginsburg Hospitalized, Released
  • GarandFan

    “These are educated men and women we’ve elected to represent us in Washington.”

    Some of the dumbest people I’ve ever met were supposedly “educated”. Or as Ron White has observed, “You can’t fix stupid”.

  • davidt

    The most important factor is that politicians believe themselves personally financially secure in the face of economic downturn.

  • http://albanymediabias.blogspot.com Falze

    who have suggested that a cap on carbon emissions would help revive the U.S. economy

    I’m so confused about what they’re even peddling now. How does this even make sense? The only argument they can make is the “broken window” argument of damaging the economy and putting people to work in still-unproven and still-unworkable “renewables” instead, as if that is growth.

    And can you believe they’re still repeating the ridiculous “postage stamp cost” argument? It’s already been obliterated by the documents that CEI was able to force the government to release, plus the fact that the “postage stamp” costs arrived at by the CBO report are only AFTER years of required expenditures by businesses that, you know, just might get passed along to consumers:

    Waxman-Markey would begin raising energy costs in 2012. The CBO study, however, begins as if 2012 would already be 2020 when “the cap would have been in effect for eight years” and it can “measure the costs that would occur once the economy had adjusted to the change in the relative prices of goods and services.” (Investor’s Business Daily)

    The CBO does a fine job with analyses – but you always have to look at WHAT they’re analyzing. If you ask them how much revenue the government can get from raising income taxes to 100%, they will give you an answer. If you ask them what the costs down the road will be for cap’n’tax, they’ll tell you. If you ask them what the real, immediate costs of taking over the health care industry will be, they’ll tell you. This is not a bash on the CBO, but they are very much a garbage in, garbage out unit, you have to look at what they’re analyzing, not just what the result is, and whether you’re getting the whole story. The guy running the show there now is a breath of fresh air, in that he has been peppering their releases and his hearing appearances with the little details that Congress usually “leaves out” when they discuss CBO findings – like the whole “this analysis assumes the legislation will never change for decades and that never happens” thing with the health care takeover.

  • dsc

    Imagine it rewritten this way:

    A House-passed bill that targets how communications are transmitted would slow the nation’s economic growth slightly over the next few decades and would create “significant” job losses from the pony express industry as the country shifts to telegraphs.

  • mag

    Lets give rid of the lawyers and put in some good honest men who have business and making money talents or a good military backround. Lawyers are too full of themselves. A country should be run as a business to stay in business, protecting itself where every one wins and not as a chariable organziation that is running out of money, making excuses to everyone and calling people names who don’t agree with them..

  • http://geoffreybritain.wordpress.com/ Geoffrey Britain

    I’m completely against cap & trade.

    That said, the post above is fallacious.
    It states:
    There aren’t too many conclusions that can be drawn from the Democrats’ insisting on passing legislation that the CBO is certain will doom our economy for decades to come.

    That’s NOT what the CBO said at all. They said it would slow (national) economic growth SLIGHTLY…

    “a cap-and-trade system of pollution credits would slow the nation’s economic growth slightly over the next few decades and would create “significant” job losses from fossil fuel industries as the country shifts to renewable energy, the head of the Congressional Budget Office told a Senate energy panel Wednesday.”

    Then the CBO acknowledged that before implementation
    of a cap-and-trade system of pollution credits ‘significant uncertainties’ existed in his estimates of likely economic impact. Those ‘uncertainties’ could be negative but he never said nor implied that “the CBO is certain (a cap & trade system) will doom our economy for decades to come.”

    I believe the CBO’s projections are erroneous and, that cap and trade would severely hurt our economy but that is NOT what the CBO said.

    This is just a sloppy at best and purposely disingenuous at worst ‘reasoning’.

  • Zelsdorf Ragshaft III

    They must destroy our system to install a new one. After all Obama is the one they have been waiting for. I see a civil war looming.

  • Hank

    Cap and Trade.
    A solution to a problem that does not exist.

    as mentioned in another thread, Waxman hasn’t actually read the damn bill. Even if he did, he wouldn’t understand it.

    I recall reading about Waxman chairing the committee investigating the use of illegal substances in major league baseball. After the hearings, Waxman had lunch with his old friend, Burt Prelutsky. Prelutsky, after talking with him a while concluded:

    “So here was a congressman investigating baseball who not only had no idea who its most famous players were, but no pertinent information about the substances they were being condemned for using.”

    Nothing like governing without a clue.
    Hell, that should be the democrat motto.

  • http://albanymediabias.blogspot.com Falze

    to be fair, it’s rather appropriate for the republicans in Congress, too

  • jim m

    Not to worry he economy is booming!!!

    But take a look at his analysis and you can see that it is just an artifact of Obama printing money like a jackass.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/dow-10000-oh-wait-make-7537

    We’re at a 12 year low when you hold things constant for either money supply or inflation.

  • Bob

    Cap and Trade, like pretty much everything else in the BHO/Democrat agenda, is aimed at one thing: more government control. To them, whether it hurt the economy or will really result in lots of “green jobs,” the main purpose of the act is to expand federal control over more aspects of business and citizens generally. Unfortunately, too many Republicans (read: John McCain, Lindsey Graham, et al.) have signed on to the global warming – climate change hoax, and will probably support this crappy (Crap and Trade?) bill. So don’t just blame the Dems.

  • bobdog

    There are several little problems with this legislation:

    1. Despite the belligerent puffery of our politicians and “environmental experts”, no clear proof exists to support the underlying problem. I don’t mean “studies” carefully sculpted to produce a preordained “scientific” conclusion. That is not science; it’s political science. Environmental groups have proven themselves to be untrustworthy, if not downright dishonest in their incessant whining about global warming. The “hockey stick” charts everybody waves around have been proven to be based on lies of omission, as are many of the other populist arguments in support of this legislation.

    2. There is no clear proof that even a full blown implementation of Cap and Trade would have any significant effect on global temperatures. Claims that we can unilaterally reduce global temperatures by several degrees are specious. No clear science exists to support these claims. In the meantime, our economy is ruined.

    3. The Kyoto treaties specifically exclude China, North Korea and India, three of the world’s worst polluters. I’m not clear on whether Russia is exempted, but expecting them to make any major contribution to the “problem” is a pipedream.

    So we’re expected to ruin our economy to solve an unproven problem, with highly dubious benefits, all by ourselves.

    It buggers the imagination.

  • mag

    #7
    A lot of people are saying the same thing. A civil war between far out leftist and Americans (liberals or conservatives) who do care for their country. We have a evil force here who is trying to tear down this country. I fear too something nasty is in the wind.
    I always felt the “1960′s” protest was communism-based and inspired…and now lots of these people are in positions of power.
    Communist are/were the sneakiest bastards around.

  • Flu-Bird

    Global warming is a big fat lie becuase ANTARCTICA the ice is getting thicker their sending through another fruadulent bill to increes taxes on us all all for the satisfaction of atax and spend green freak like AL GORE

  • http://triessentialism.blogspot.com/ BlueNight

    Intentional erosion? From a man whose political career started at an Alinsky party? From the senator with the most liberal voting record? Couldn’t be.

    The reason he hit the ground running with his agenda was precisely that he knew he had exactly four years to do as much damage as humanly possible.

    I TOLD you to vote Huckabee!

Optimization WordPress Plugins & Solutions by W3 EDGE