(08-29-2018, 10:31 PM)jj82284 Wrote:

(08-29-2018, 05:42 PM)mikesez Wrote: A) The National Socialist Party of Germany had the government dictating the choices made in key industries -both on the management side and the labor unions side - but the original owners of the factories were typically allowed to make and keep profits, so long as they were not Jewish, of course. You could argue that, to the extent that regulations are overbearing, our government today is dictating choices in industry. But one of our two parties wants to limit the choices available to management, while the other is trying to limit the choices available to labor unions.

B) Cap and trade is totally different from a carbon tax.  Read up on it.  Seriously.  I don't want to say you're an idiot, but to me, what you said is somewhere between saying health care and health insurance are the same thing, and saying dogs and children are the same thing

C) I honestly don't know what role a state senator in Illinois may have played in allowing banks all over the country to get over leveraged with risky loans that were labeled as "not risky."

A.) Go deeper.  The basic principal is that the state fundamentally controls everything as a function of state social policy.  The profit motive is driven not by personal innovation but by centrally planned state aims.  

And we aren't trying to limit options we are trying to limit coercion.  

B.) Liar liar, both are a means of taxation artificially making certain kinds of energy more expensive.   It's childish.  America lead the world in carbon reductions while the Paris countries actually increased carbon emissions.  The state can't make sure that soldiers have their toiletries but they can micro-manage the atmosphere?  Lol.  

C.) What did he believe.  What did he advocate.  How did that play out.  

DETENTION!!!!!  

LOL.

A) I don't think any of this is relevant to the point that either of us are trying to make.

B) a cap-and-trade scheme doesn't necessarily involve anybody giving more money to the government. The government does a one-time auction of pollution licenses, but the amount of money the government raises this way is not significant to the plan and the initial price is supposed to be low. These licenses can then be traded on the private Market as the individual needs of the companies that bought the licenses change. this gives you greater certainty about the amount of carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere in a given year, but the companies that have to buy and trade these licenses will not have very much certainty about the price from year to year. so as they do anything that is energy-intensive, they will face the uncertainty about the cost of the fuel itself plus the uncertainty of the cost of the license. and the government will not collect any revenue on an ongoing basis, just one time. The carbon tax allows the government to collect revenue on an ongoing basis and does not add to uncertainty.

C) the only thing that I know about Obama in his State Senate years were is speech against the Iraq War. so you tell me what he believed and advocated for and how that played out.

---