Why is no one discussing this?
Does the prospect of being required to have a federal climate agent approve your house for sale not bother anyone?
How is this going to increase jobs and bolster the economy?
Where can regular citizens go to view this bill?
Have your senators read this bill?
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Cap and Trade
Cap and TradeFollow
Quote:
Why is no one discussing this?
Can you just cut right to whatever Pubbie talking point you heard this morning & spare us the mock outrage?
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
publiusvarus wrote:
Why is no one discussing this?
Quote:
Does the prospect of being required to have a federal climate agent approve your house for sale not bother anyone?
Quote:
How is this going to increase jobs and bolster the economy?
I don't believe that's its intent. And I'm fine with that.
Quote:
Where can regular citizens go to view this bill?
thomas.loc.gov
opencongress.org
Quote:
Have your senators read this bill?
Durbin? Almost certainly. Burris? Who knows? If it makes you happier, I won't vote for Burris in 2010. That'll learn him.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
publiusvarus wrote:
Not yet.
Is this anything like my slaying of two million dinosaur-ninjas?
Edited, Jul 7th 2009 9:22am by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
www.nytimes.com/2008/01/11/us/11control.html
Another tidbit for ya.....
Be interesting to see how this all plays out, especially in areas that are
"Sanctuary" cities.
In our County,we have several cities that have Tracts that exceed designed occupancy by 400-700% (1100 sq. ft 2 BDRM homes with 15 people in 'em)
Curious how "Grandfather status" would be impacted bt this, would you be required to upgrade home to make it marketable ? (even if not by law)
And would they lower assessed value, thus lowering tax revenue ? doubtful.
and yes if its a federal law ANY agent who enforces/inspects would be a "Federal Agent"
Another tidbit for ya.....
Be interesting to see how this all plays out, especially in areas that are
"Sanctuary" cities.
In our County,we have several cities that have Tracts that exceed designed occupancy by 400-700% (1100 sq. ft 2 BDRM homes with 15 people in 'em)
Curious how "Grandfather status" would be impacted bt this, would you be required to upgrade home to make it marketable ? (even if not by law)
And would they lower assessed value, thus lowering tax revenue ? doubtful.
and yes if its a federal law ANY agent who enforces/inspects would be a "Federal Agent"
Terrifyingspeed wrote:
and yes if its a federal law ANY agent who enforces/inspects would be a "Federal Agent"
Quote:
(3) MEANS OF IMPLEMENTATION- In adopting the model labeling program established under this section, a State shall seek to ensure that labeled information be made accessible to the public in a manner so that owners, lenders, tenants, occupants, or other relevant parties can utilize it. Such accessibility may be accomplished through--
(A) preparation, and public disclosure of the label through filing with tax and title records at the time of--
-(i) a building audit conducted with support from Federal or State funds; or
-(ii) a building energy-efficiency retrofit conducted in response to such an audit; or
-(iii) a final inspection of major renovations or additions made to a building in accordance with a building permit issued by a local government entity; or
-(iv) a sale that is recorded for title and tax purposes consistent with paragraph (8); or
-(v) a new lien recorded on the property for more than a set percentage of the assessed value of the property, if that lien reflects public financial assistance for energy-related improvements to that building;
-(vi) a change in ownership or operation of the building for purposes of utility billing; or
(B) other appropriate means.
(A) preparation, and public disclosure of the label through filing with tax and title records at the time of--
-(i) a building audit conducted with support from Federal or State funds; or
-(ii) a building energy-efficiency retrofit conducted in response to such an audit; or
-(iii) a final inspection of major renovations or additions made to a building in accordance with a building permit issued by a local government entity; or
-(iv) a sale that is recorded for title and tax purposes consistent with paragraph (8); or
-(v) a new lien recorded on the property for more than a set percentage of the assessed value of the property, if that lien reflects public financial assistance for energy-related improvements to that building;
-(vi) a change in ownership or operation of the building for purposes of utility billing; or
(B) other appropriate means.
It seems pretty clear that the labeling would happen as a natural part of having the home inspected for sale and following a major remodeling project -- both times when your home is getting inspected anyway, assuming that you're following the law. Parts (i) and (ii) seem like they have more to do with LEED certification for commerical/government properties.
Whether or not this makes the guy doing the paperwork a "federal agent" seems inconsequential. When I bought my house, I had an EPA report filled out regarding the septic tank. Did that make the guy from the septic company a "federal agent"? I don't think so but I don't particularly care either.
Edited, Jul 7th 2009 9:58am by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
TerrifyingSpeed wrote:
www.nytimes.com/2008/01/11/us/11control.html
Another tidbit for ya.....
Be interesting to see how this all plays out, especially in areas that are
"Sanctuary" cities.
Another tidbit for ya.....
Be interesting to see how this all plays out, especially in areas that are
"Sanctuary" cities.
Yeah, having lived with rolling blackouts I think I prefer the proposed changes. I'm betting dollars to donuts very few people would even notice it, to be honest.
You sure as **** notice when your computer reboots due to a rolling blackout.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
You keep saying that without backing it up.
My utility bills are low enough that I probably wouldn't care, anyway. Bait someone else.
My utility bills are low enough that I probably wouldn't care, anyway. Bait someone else.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Because ACC aside, I think we should be more energy efficient.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
Samira wrote:
You keep saying that without backing it up.
Amusingly, when the CBO gave higher than expected prices for one of the health care bills, the GOP was all over it crowing about how important it was that these numbers came from the nonpartisan CBO.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
World warming or cooling, we're slowly coating the surface of the planet with plastic, and anything that stops that is fine by me.
publiusvarus wrote:
Quote:
It's from some "independent study" the Heritage Foundation came up with when they didn't like the CBO's rather benign numbers.
Of course. That's why the CBO gave the Democrats exactly the answer they wanted to hear about their health care reform bill
Oh, wait! You realize that conservative policy think-tanks give the conservatives exactly the answer they wanted to hear, right?
Quote:
This Cap and Trade bill will also put coal companies out of business and force domestic oil companies to buy more oil from foreign sources.
Mark Kirk noted that, when he talked to local coal industries in Illinois, they supported the legislation as it would make things easier for them.
Quote:
I can't believe anyone here actually thinks this bill is going to do anything but raise the overall cost of energy in this country.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Quote:
Do you like the prospect of your utilties bill increasing 50% once this is passed?
Didn't someone mention "energy efficiency" somewhere? Wouldn't that mean lower utility bills?
Also, where did you get the idea that the bills would get higher?
Quote:
You realize of course govn funded studies had better show what the govn wants it to or the people conducting the study will be looking for a new job right?
That's...um....that's actually a really terrible way to run anything. Only an idiot would fire the people doing a study because they didn't get the results they hoped for.
10k before the site's inevitable death or bust
The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
The World Is Not A Cold Dead Place.
Alan Watts wrote:
I am omnipotent insofar as I am the Universe, but I am not an omnipotent in the role of Alan Watts, only cunning
Eske wrote:
I've always read Driftwood as the straight man in varus' double act. It helps if you read all of his posts in the voice of Droopy Dog.
publiusvarus wrote:
You're right we shouldn't trust either.
Quote:
Quote:
Mark Kirk noted that, when he talked to local coal industries in Illinois, they supported the legislation as it would make things easier for them.
That's lovely. It also fails to address the point I made. Are you saying that Kirk is lying? Or that the people he spoke to didn't know what they were talking about? Should I go a-huntin' for some pro-bill blogs and we can have a blog-off?
Edited, Jul 7th 2009 3:33pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Bickering over which think tank says what and why aside, the proposed Cap and Trade bill is a disaster waiting to happen. Fortunately, given the incredibly narrow passage in the House, it's unlikely to pass the Senate. We can hope anyway...
It's the wrong bill, for the wrong reasons, and at probably the most wrong time possible. Yes. Let's capitalize on a shaky economy by putting more weight on it. No amount of smugness about how we're helping clean the environment helps the people who are losing jobs today and will find it harder to get new ones tomorrow if this bill passes. It's a straight up tax on industry cloaked in an environmental bill. The greatest actual impact on the environment it's likely to actually have is to cause industry to offshore where there are lower standards than the ones this bill replaces, ultimately making the global impact of said industry worse, not better.
All while hurting the US economy at a time when we really can't afford to. It's a dumb idea even when we're not struggling. It's moronic right now and even the most avidly liberal democrats appear to know this given the timid support for it so far.
It's the wrong bill, for the wrong reasons, and at probably the most wrong time possible. Yes. Let's capitalize on a shaky economy by putting more weight on it. No amount of smugness about how we're helping clean the environment helps the people who are losing jobs today and will find it harder to get new ones tomorrow if this bill passes. It's a straight up tax on industry cloaked in an environmental bill. The greatest actual impact on the environment it's likely to actually have is to cause industry to offshore where there are lower standards than the ones this bill replaces, ultimately making the global impact of said industry worse, not better.
All while hurting the US economy at a time when we really can't afford to. It's a dumb idea even when we're not struggling. It's moronic right now and even the most avidly liberal democrats appear to know this given the timid support for it so far.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
Bickering over which think tank says what and why aside
The CBO isn't a "think tank". Comparing the two is silly.
Quote:
the proposed Cap and Trade bill is a disaster waiting to happen. Fortunately, given the incredibly narrow passage in the House, it's unlikely to pass the Senate.
Could be. But I think the House vote was artifically narrow. The House leadership has a pretty good idea of the counts and lets folks off the hook by letting them vote "no" so long as the bill will pass. If the bill had another 30 Democratic "yes" votes, it wouldn't have changed the discourse any.
However, I assume the bill will languish in the Senate for a while. I get the impression that the Democrats will spend their capital on health care before attempting the climate bill.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
Could be. But I think the House vote was artifically narrow. The House leadership has a pretty good idea of the counts and lets folks off the hook by letting them vote "no" so long as the bill will pass. If the bill had another 30 Democratic "yes" votes, it wouldn't have changed the discourse any.
I suspect you are correct. However, that's a great indicator of just how unpopular they know that this is. The Dems know that this bill will hurt them next year in a number of key races.
The assumption that they have to "let them off the hook" should be the first clue as to just how bad an idea this is. If it was truly a good bill they'd be able to stand behind it proudly. Clearly, it isn't...
Quote:
However, I assume the bill will languish in the Senate for a while. I get the impression that the Democrats will spend their capital on health care before attempting the climate bill.
Hah. That's another disaster waiting to happen IMO. I don't think that the House as a whole really wants to touch this with a 10 foot pole. But if Obama can't push it through during this session, it's not going to have a chance and he's going to have serious problems in 2012. It's going to be another one of those "push this through while trying to minimize the damage it does to us in the process".
I just don't think the Dems can thread that needle. My fear is that they'll try anyway, figuring that even if it costs them control of Congress the damage will have been done and in another 10 years or so they can play on the problems of the day, knowing that the people will have forgotten this, regain power and continue to the next step.
We'll be the ones who lose though...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Quote:
You realize of course govn funded studies had better show what the govn wants it to or the people conducting the study will be looking for a new job right?
Yes, If we learned nothing else from Dubya, we learned that them thar eggheads better return the results we want.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.
gbaji wrote:
I suspect you are correct. However, that's a great indicator of just how unpopular they know that this is.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Recent Visitors: 258
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (258)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Cap and Trade
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC