Green Green Business

How about three cheers for the White House and Obama for getting them to do this instead of waiting for the U.S. If the world’s biggest economy can turn green by cooperating, why can’t we?
I meant to say the world’s biggest emitter, I think we still have the larger economy.

I am neither a republican or democrat, I tend to lean conservative, but vote for whatever candidate I believe is best, regardless of party.

That being said, how many of you feel that none of the candidates we have this year can fix America?

Both McCain and Obama are soft on the boders and illegal aliens.

McCain and Obama support Lieberman’s bill that would tax energy to reduce green house gases. This bill would not only cripple the economy, but it will also eliminate roughly 9% of America’s remaining factory jobs. Thus creating us to depend even more on consuming to support our economy.

After doing research on both candidates, I really hope there is a viable third party candidate.

Does anyone else feel this way?
I don’t think you can classify Bush as a true conservative.

His policy has been to spend to make government bigger, that’s not what a true conservative is.

A true conservative is someone that believes in small government with minimal taxes and states rights to decide over the federal government.

Going Green/Alternative Energy has failed in SPAIN and yet the Democrats in the Congress, Senate and even the Democrat President are copying this failed plan.

Spain has over an 18% Un Employment Rate and the Green Jobs didn’t create JOBS they added to the UN EMPLOYMENT RATE.

WHY?

Why can’t the Democrats in our Government use our Natural Resourse and stop going with a FAILED PLAN?

Below is the LINK:

_____________________________________________________

http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/editorials/stories/2009/06/24/will24.ART_ART_06-24-09_A11_MLE94UP.html?sid=101

Let’s not envy Spain’s green jobs

Wednesday, June 24, 2009 3:00 AM

By George F. Will

Why, Gabriel Calzada wonders, is the U.S. president recommending that America emulate the Spanish model for creating "green jobs" in "alternative energy" even though Spain’s unemployment rate is 18.1 percent — more than double the European Union average — partly because of spending on such jobs?

Calzada, 36, an economics professor at Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, has produced a report that, if true, is inconvenient for the Obama administration’s green agenda.

Calzada says Spain’s torrential spending — no other nation has so aggressively supported production of electricity from renewable sources — on wind farms and other forms of alternative energy has indeed created jobs. But Calzada’s report concludes that they often are temporary and have received 2,000 to 0,000 each in subsidies — wind industry jobs cost even more, .4 million each. And each new job entails the loss of 2.2 other jobs that are either lost or not created in other industries because of the political allocation of capital. Calzada says the creation of jobs in alternative energy has subtracted about 110,000 jobs from elsewhere in Spain’s economy.

The president’s press secretary, Robert Gibbs, was asked about the report’s contention that the political diversion of capital into green jobs has cost Spain jobs. The White House transcript contained this exchange:

Gibbs: "It seems weird that we’re importing wind turbine parts from Spain in order to build — to meet renewable energy demand here if that were even remotely the case."

Questioner: "Is that a suggestion that his study is simply flat wrong?"

Gibbs: "I haven’t read the study, but I think, yes."

Questioner: "Well, then. (Laughter.)"

Actually, what is weird is this idea: A sobering report about Spain’s experience must be false because otherwise the behavior of some American importers, seeking to cash in on the U.S. government’s promotion of wind power, might be participating in an economically unproductive project.

It is true Calzada has come to conclusions that he, as a libertarian, finds congenial. And his study was supported by a like-minded think tank (the Institute for Energy Research, for which this columnist has given a paid speech). Still, it is notable that, rather than refute his report, many Spanish critics have impugned his patriotism for faulting something for which Spain was praised by Obama and others.

You can find similar conclusions in "Yellow Light on Green Jobs," a report by Republican Sen. Kit Bond, ranking member of the Subcommittee on Green Jobs and the New Economy.

What matters most is not that reports such as Calzada’s and the Republicans’ are right in every particular. It is, however, hardly counterintuitive that politically driven investments are economically counterproductive. Indeed, environmentalists with the courage of their convictions should argue that the point of such investments is to subordinate market rationality to the higher agenda of planetary salvation.

Still, one can be agnostic about both reports while being dismayed by the frequency with which such findings are ignored simply because they question policies that are so invested with righteousness that methodical economic reasoning about their costs and benefits seems unimportant.

For fervent believers in governments’ abilities to control the climate and in the urgent need for them to do so, believing is seeing: They see, through their ideological lenses, governments’ green spending as always paying for itself. This is a free-lunch faith comparable to that of those conservatives who believe tax cuts always pay for themselves by stimulating compensating revenues from economic growth.

Windmills are iconic in the land of Don Quixote, whose tilting at them became emblematic of comic futility. Spain’s new windmills are neither amusing nor emblematic of policies America should emulate.

reading along, trying to get a grip on what legislation will pass the senate (cap & trade bill passed by the house of reps already at the urging of mr. obama, who refuses to consider offshore drilling for oil until our alternate energy is good enough…), i came across a news article about the state of missouri and how its governor is proudly announcing a new cost to consumers of energy in MO which, he claims, will end up costing missouri businesses and citizens less than what they will be charged… huh, you say? me too:

http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/story/1307200.html

how is it that government gets away with making us pay more now and promises that we will recoup those costs in the future? have you ever had any new tax recouped to you? what was it, a tax credit? what good does a tax CREDIT do for you if you go broker every day?

how about the taxes charged on toll roads? that’s a great example! when toll roads were built, everyone paid a toll to use them, supposedly a temporary tax only until the road was finished. but the crooked politicians NEVER stopped, but they did increase, the amount of the tolls that were paid. the tolls are a TAX.

inflation, especially to those of you without a job, is also a TAX. now the governor of MO says that the new energy-conservation tax must be charged NOW and that it will get "recouped" back to businesses, which are going to have to lay more workers off because of the increase that they will pay to the utility companies. when the workers are laid off, how will the utility bills at home be paid?

politicians in DC are getting quite excited learning about the governor of missouri’s ideas to help utility company contain costs, but when our president took the oath, he told us that we’d have to wait 8 months to learn if offshore drilling for oil would be allowed, since, he said, he wants rigs (which take about 2 years each to build) to be powered entirely by alternate forms of energy themselves! i have not heard a peep out of obama lately or within the 8 weeks after he gained the office of president, about offshore oil drilling. huh! the chinese are drilling for it off of cuba, which is actually part of our own eastern continental shelf. oh, yeah, but they are communists (as though that makes any difference)…???

democrats in the house, who control the house, say that cap & trade will only cost the consumer about 0 a year, but republicans say that it will cost (initially) somewhere around 0 per year and more than that, since alternative energy forms and "green industry" is certainly NOT in place now. we really have a long way to go on that. so who cares if the united states becomes the *shining example* of countries that are ahead of the game of conventional energy consumption?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/06/26/house-passes-milestone-energy-climate-change/

i say, who cares, since if these increased costs (taxes) are going to put you out of a job, how will the federal government pay for more research and implementation of this foreseen, but not yet concrete, plan to run entirely on the new green energy? if you are out of a job, you will not pay income taxes, will you? and won’t you cut back on what you spend in the general marketplace? so, it is another domino effect, just like when the housing bubble broke. do you realize how many small companies have gone under after that? in chicago, i see more and more and more small businesses closing their doors, leaving their storefronts vacant. it is happening here ALL OVER our city of about 2.5 million people! and, it is happening ALL OVER all of the big cities and everywhere in our country, isn’t it?

so, do you think that we will have no federal taxation to offset research and development, as well as implementation of perfected green energy machines? how so?

what will you tell your senator? what will you do to prevent the house of reps and your state’s politicians from pulling the wool out from under you?

Some ‘green’ code about energy conservationism? So now I may have to spend thousands of dollars to meet some eco-nazis idea of ‘green’ just to sell my house?

Oh, hell no to Obama!

Because of the "Clean" or "Green" Energy jobs. If that is true, why does Obama tout Spain as a good example of these types of policies?