Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Global Warming
Topic Started: Jan 3 2014, 02:00 AM (901 Views)
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Berton
Jan 4 2014, 05:33 AM
colo_crawdad
Jan 4 2014, 05:26 AM
Berton
Jan 4 2014, 05:22 AM
tomdrobin
Jan 4 2014, 05:20 AM
Neutral
Jan 4 2014, 04:53 AM
Tobacco didn't stop for 17 years. Wouldn't the fact that the alarmist movement has lots to gain make you stop and take note?
Who gains in your so called "alarmist movement"? Carbon tax just taxes those who emit more.

The government is who.

What does "the government" gain?

Money to waste on more social spending programs.

Making Tulsa, OK a seaport wasn't a waste of taxpayer MONEY? Money wasted is subjective, in this case OK was the king of the porkers.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
campingken
No Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
The sad thing is that the big companies who are fighting this wouldn't lose any money. They would only have to change some of their business practices.

It wasn't all that long ago that the Big 3 auto industries testified to congress that mandating seat belts would mean the death of the US auto industry....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thumper
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
yep. and if the belts didn't do it, the cat converters most certainly would. lol
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
I don't remember anyone testifying to that. More BS?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
Thumper
Jan 4 2014, 05:54 AM
Berton
Jan 4 2014, 05:33 AM
colo_crawdad
Jan 4 2014, 05:26 AM
Berton
Jan 4 2014, 05:22 AM
tomdrobin
Jan 4 2014, 05:20 AM
Neutral
Jan 4 2014, 04:53 AM
Tobacco didn't stop for 17 years. Wouldn't the fact that the alarmist movement has lots to gain make you stop and take note?
Who gains in your so called "alarmist movement"? Carbon tax just taxes those who emit more.

The government is who.

What does "the government" gain?

Money to waste on more social spending programs.

Making Tulsa, OK a seaport wasn't a waste of taxpayer MONEY? Money wasted is subjective, in this case OK was the king of the porkers.

Why do you think attacking the state I live in makes your argument? I agree that it was not a good investment. I have never said it was. We did get some nice lakes out of it though.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Berton, Do you agree with massive subsiides at taxpayers expense for the oil indiustry. If so, why.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Brewster
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
Good question, Telco.

How can anyone who claims to be concerned about government spending and deficits possibly support those subsidies and tax breaks?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Neutral
Member Avatar
Fire & Ice Senior Diplomat
[ * ]
At least we use what the oil companies produce.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Berton
Member Avatar
Thunder Fan
[ * ]
telcoman
Jan 4 2014, 09:21 AM
Berton, Do you agree with massive subsiides at taxpayers expense for the oil indiustry. If so, why.
I don't know of any "subsidies" oil companies get. I do know of tax breaks oil companies get which are the same as all industries get. I also know of tax breaks oil companies get which all "mineral" companies get.

Do you agree with the tax breaks and direct subsidies wind and solar get along with all the tax breaks their suppliers get? Including those which are "mineral" companies?

If the answer is the oil companies get much more the reason is one of scale. Nothing more.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

No, I do not agree with subsidies, period. Some Research subsidies maybe, not subsidies for producing companies who are in it for profit.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Fire And Ice General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Website Traffic Analysis