What's in store for Cap and Trade "Yes" voters?

~

What's wrong with Cap and Trade?
On June 29th, 2009 tamckissick says:

People who are against cap-n-trade don't know the whole story. They're starting to sip the cool-aid that the energy companies are pushing. I'm not saying that pushing through a bill that hasn't been read is good, but aside from that, I'm tired of this BS from the right and even the RP people that cap and trade will kill jobs. That's a complete crock. I'm 100% for RP and have been for nearly 2 years now (when I first heard of him and got interested in politics). I've been active in supporting everything he stands for. I'm strongly for the free market and that's why I'm actually strongly for this bill. Follow along for the "why".

The utility companies have a lock on their regulators and they're pushing for different regulation that will enforce their monopoly in the US. They're swaying votes toward things like the smart grid. The problem is that they hijacked the name and put it to their version which is vastly different from the real 'free market' smart grid. There are so many other examples I could give but the main one is investment.

If investors don't have a solid projection of income from their investment, they're not going to invest. Period. That means no new technical development in renewables. That means the new companies with the R&D behind them now, will die on the vine. No solar, wind, geothermal, ocean or any other new competition for the status quo. Is this what you want? That's insanity.

The fact is that cap and trade will allow our new energy companies to compete more in the international free market and fund new tech. This will put millions to work, not out of work.

And don't give me that crap about global warming not being real. Even if it wasn't, there's too many other reasons to get off the monopolistic fossil fuel teet.

End the FED and allow open competition to end all the other monopolies we have!

*

What about the fact that it
On June 29th, 2009 bmcgrew says:

What about the fact that it is unconstitutional?

*

I'm not saying it's perfect...
On June 29th, 2009 tamckissick says:

but just look at the world. There are energy companies and oil, coal, NG, etc. companies everywhere. Why? Because they've already got the monopoly in place. They control all the news on the subject as well as the votes for their regulation. (I'm talking about the regulators, not politicians) They want that status quo to stay in place and to kill any competition. This is the regulation we currently have. Cap & Trade will simply force trading on the international market, allowing renewables to play on a more level playing field.

If you generate your own power, you cannot sell your excess to your neighbor because of this regulation. You cannot sell to the power company and then to your neighbor because of the prices they have in place. It just doesn't work. The only solution is to string a line across the road and hook him up. OOP! Nope. They made that illegal. They even partnered with the rail companies and got the term "rail" legally mandated to mean steel wheels on steel rails. This is how they're locking maglev from many areas of our country. I could go on all day, but the fact is that they need less regulation, not more, so fair competition can come to the table. By implementing cap & trade, many of their monopolistic regs become moot.

So, until we can completely open that industry to the free market, we can only mandate that they trade their product that way. What's unconstitutional about that? What's even unconstitutional about limiting their emissions into my air? Nothing. The problem people have is the way they're doing it.

*

What?!
On June 29th, 2009 bmcgrew says:

"So, until we can completely open that industry to the free market, we can only mandate that they trade their product that way"

So instead of legalizing competition, you want to tax monopolies which will then pass this tax onto the consumer?

The burden of proof is on you about the constitutional authority of the government to interfere with emissions. I can't prove a negative except to say that it is the evidence or proof is not there.
--------------------------------------------------------------

"If the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them."
Candidus, in the Boston Gazette, January 20, 1772

*

Cap and trade is legalizing competition
On June 29th, 2009 tamckissick says:

This is not taxing the monopolies, it's across the board, making dirty industries pay cleaner ones for the right to pollute. In other words, it's mandating the only form of free market we have any hope of getting passed. There are an estimated 20,000 deaths in the US alone each year related to the various pollutions we live in because of just coal. The regulations and limits on that were set by lobbying from a monopoly. Wanna take a guess at what lobby?

Forget 'passing that tax on to the consumer'. That's a crock. The consumer is only going to be stuck paying if they choose the old dirty energy suppliers. It finally evens up the playing field between our choices to make our own decisions. Until now, we've been stuck paying for dirty coal because any competing energy source was mandated to be priced out of the mix. If I want to make power from wind or solar, why do I have to pay so much more to sell through a coal powered utility company? If you put the country to work with any new industry (think industrial revolution, housing, electronics, infomation, etc.), we'll all benefit much more. We need a producing industry to remain strong and self reliant. The alternative is more centralized power and profits.

People that are scared of paying more are simply selfish in not wanting to pay their fair share of cleaning up after their energy needs. You should try buying energy in a few other countries. Electricity costs 4-10 times as much in many countries that are doing more to go renewable.

What about stopping all the money our country sends overseas for the energy we import? How is that right? If we stopped sending $700B / year out for just the oil we buy, we could pay for the whole revolution in 2-5 years. What about the lives lost because Bush went into Iraq for oil?

You wanna rail about the FED or big Pharma or Monsanto or any other monopolistic industry, but the energy companies only have our best interests at heart?????

What's unpublished mean and how is something on a forum unpublished when comments show up immediately?

What is meant by 'we can still give your comments to you'?

Who's writing a new thread? Where's the old one? Is this person going to accurately recreate the intent of my original post?

Sunny called Ron's office? Ron Paul? What's he got to do with THIS THREAD of debate? Is he or someone else deciding what topics we can discuss here?

Who's only allowed to focus on the senate? I'd actually like to discuss the focus on the senate right now... Like a phone bomb to get them to vote for C&T and get it passed.

Of course I'll be stopped from passing along any of my decade's worth of education in researching the problem and solutions.

I'll admit that I've been much less frequent on this site in the last 6 months, but what the heck have I missed?

Access denied ????