Biorhythms comment : The debt ceiling and the environment
-
-
- JanforGore
- added this
Correction: In the video I erroneously stated the debt limit raise as 2.4 million when it is trillion.
-
- groups:
- Community, Tech, Green, Earth and Science, 5 more
-
- tags:
- Politics, Environment, Health, Economy, 20 more
-
-
kennymotown
-
Good one Jan, this bull shit debt deal will definitely effect the environment!
- 10 months ago
-
kennymotown
-
-
JanforGore
-
Thanks to those who took a genuine interest in the effects this debt deal will have on our environment. A shame more people really don't.
- 10 months ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
Warren_Merrill
-
Which cuts were made in the budget ceiling legislation that impacted the enviroment? What has been rolled back?
Why do we need to focus and invest on jobs in a (green) market that isn't booming? Shouldn't the market drive the need?
I see you're made at the oil companies. You should boycott usage of gas and plastic products.
- 10 months ago
-
Warren_Merrill
-
-
JanforGore
-
Warren_Merrill:
Of course I'm mad. OIL KILLS. I don't drive and I don't use plastic if I can help it and I support renewable energy that will keep this world cleaner and healthier. Fossil fuels need to be phased out if we are to have a habitable planet and if there is anything I can do to help that along I will. And if you want to know what is being prepared for the cutting board all you have to do is read. And if you want to see a booming market in renewables, stop trying to sabotage it for your profit. And imo demand should drive the market and the demand would be there much more than it already is if oil company executives and their denier proteges buying politicians like the Tea Party weren't spending billions LYING to people.
- 10 months ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
coolplanet
-
Warren_Merrill:
The almighty market is what has driven us to this tipping point!!!
Jan is absolutely correct. The only thing that can get us out of this massive economic and ecologic mess is investing in domestic solar, wind, tidal and geothermal energy ASAP. - 10 months ago
-
coolplanet
-
-
JanforGore
-
coolplanet:
I find it so coincidental that not even a half hour after I typed that response my computer was attacked. I wonder who is monitoring this site.
- 10 months ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
coolplanet
-
JanforGore:
I've had numerous similar experiences and have only noticed it on posts related to climate change and related biodistress.
One tip: NEVER click a denier site!
- 10 months ago
-
coolplanet
-
-
Warren_Merrill
-
coolplanet:
You can't sell product there isn't demand for. You can't brainwash people into thinking they need to buy something.
- 10 months ago
-
Warren_Merrill
-
-
Warren_Merrill
-
coolplanet:
I guess it's payback. If I come to this site during heavy usage hours my pc is under constant attack. It blocks most of the attacks. Sometimes I get knocked offline. There are a lot of immature adults on this site.
- 10 months ago
-
Warren_Merrill
-
-
coolplanet
-
Warren_Merrill:
God i agree with you on this one!
All we need is MORE STUFF (to throw away).
But when it comes to the survival of the planet (f* humans) what we purchase really matters in the long run.For instance: Energy-efficient light bulbs.
One would think that a bulb proven to save $40 and last 10+ times longer than a standard bulb would appeal to everyone, even though it costs a few dollars more to buy. But "conservatives" are paranoid that this is some communist plot.What if the new energy-efficient lightbulbs were labeled: "This lightbulb will prevent one ton of carbon dioxide from going into the atmosphere."
If saving money doesn't matter, then how about saving entire ecosystems???
- 10 months ago
-
coolplanet
-
-
JanforGore
-
Warren_Merrill:
What do you think oil companies do? It's called brainwashing, lying, obfuscating and BUYING POLICY. NECESSITY and REALITY however, are the factors now. There is no brainwashing regarding the need to transition to cleaner sources of energy that do not exacerbate climate change. Peak Oil is also a reality that will see these same people who force Americans to continue buying their gas because they obstruct progress changing their tune. And you know what, I don't have to be "cordial" to you here. You have done nothing but insult my support of Al Gore and my stances here. Matter of fact, you blamed me for flagging you on another thread after calling me emotionally unbalanced when I didn't. You also didn't vote every post down on here but your own? Please don't think you can come here saying there are "other " immature adults" on this site and try to sugarcoat your own intentions.
- 10 months ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
Warren_Merrill
-
coolplanet:
The problem with the new bulbs are the mercury in them. For years the left told us to watch out for mercury. Now it's ok. Have you seen the instructions on these new bulbs if they break? It's like a hazmat routine.
- 10 months ago
-
Warren_Merrill
-
-
Warren_Merrill
-
JanforGore:
* The oil companies haven't brainwashed me. I buy gas so I can get from point A to point B.
* I disagree with you. I question your points. I don't insult you (except once, I apologize).
* The next post I vote on either way will be my first other than accidently hitting a vote on one thread once.
* I don't have intentions on this site other than debate with the handful of people who can intelligently articulate their thoughts. The other 90% of posters amuse me.
- 10 months ago
-
Warren_Merrill
-
-
coolplanet
-
Warren_Merrill:
Too much carbon dioxide is a hell of a lot more harmful to life on Earth than mercury.
A common thermometer contains far more mercury that a compact flourescent lightbulb.
But LED technology is really the way to go. - 10 months ago
-
coolplanet
-
-
queenofit
-
So, I just posted that portion of Richard Wolff's interview, now back to what you are saying Jan. Of course the big money folks don't give a hoot about our environment or our future, if they are looking to make their big bucks in other parts of the world, we are just pawns no more important[to them] than those who are starving in Somalia right now. If it is true that the Corporations have decided to move away from the US population and make their money elsewhere, where does that leave us? I wonder, if this is true, it makes so much sense, they are giving up on the citizens here, we are getting shafted, our legs knocked out from under us. Which means, we must be smarter, more aware, and get serious about hammering out change in this "new world order". If Wolff is on to something, and I believe he is, then it makes all the sense in the world why this is happening. I would like to hear what your take is on it? Thanks!
- 10 months ago
-
queenofit
-
-
JanforGore
-
queenofit:
I don't know if it so much that they are giving up on us. I think they are simply taking advantage of the situation after tiring and weakening us. It's like a boxing match and we are the contender backed into the corner getting gut punched as they stand there smiling as they throw the punches. We have to then find that uncommon spark like the underdog does in those "Hollywood" movies who throws the winning blow in the last minute. At this point that won't be easy. It will take more than one punch and a lot of educating.
- 10 months ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
queenofit
-
Great hearing you speak out Jan, everything you say is true and as I said, thank you for speaking out. I have a piece of an interview that Amy Goodman on Democracy Now last week did with economist Richard Wolff. It may not seem like it pertains to what you are saying but in essence, I feel it is pertinent to much of what is going on I would like to to share it. I did put it on another page as well, but I don't think anyone read it? no one commented on it?
RICHARD WOLFF: "Yes, but we are still dealing with corporations that have their bases, most of them, here in the United States. Are they more global than ever? Yes. Is that a serious problem? Absolutely. You know, 30, 40 years ago, we spoke about corporations moving production jobs out of the United States. Ten or 15 years ago, we began to talk about outsourcing, moving white-collar jobs out. The most recent addition to that is the decision of corporations, as they look around the world, to say, you know, the growth of our market, the growth of demand, it’s in Asia, it’s in Latin America, it’s in parts of—it’s not here. The American people are exhausted. Their wages are going nowhere. We have high unemployment. And the fact is, no one is going to lend them much more money because they’re tapped out. So they’re not a growing market.
So you see American corporations literally focused, for production and for consumption, elsewhere. That means they’re going to take care of themselves in the world. And if we don’t want to be left behind, if we don’t want the United States to become a backwater, then the freedom of corporations to do what they want has to be reined in. And that’s a difficult issue for Americans to confront and deal with. And we live in an ideology in which we’re supposed to believe that what corporations choose to do will magically be the best for all of us. It hasn’t worked that way. That’s why we are where we are. Basic change is the order of the day." read (or watch) the entire transcript Democracy Now
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/7/28/richard_wolff_debt_showdown_is_political
- 10 months ago
-
queenofit
-
-
JanforGore
-
queenofit:
It is a difficult issue for Americans on the whole to confront because this country has become so dependent on corporations for everything even down to the water we drink. We are losing our ability to be self sufficient. And I think that was their plan. Look at the seed market and big ag market and how they are monopolized by a few large companies while small farmers are marginalised with their global reach. And companies like Monsanto explicitly go to other countries because there is literally no regulation or oversight regarding what they do. Therefore their environmental destruction has no borders and the more power and money they gain because of it the more they can control and the more policy they can buy .And this debt deal just gives them more control over the environment (now holding that "super committee" and the trigger mechansim over our heads) and that is definitely not a good thing for us.
- 10 months ago
-
JanforGore
-
-
JanforGore
-
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60399.html
The warning is already out.
________
"Popular energy and environmental programs should prepare for a decade of spending cuts under the debt deal reached late Sunday between the White House and congressional leaders.Less clear, however, is the effect that the landmark agreement will have on popular tax incentives for the oil, gas, renewable and other energy industries.
Constituencies fighting in the trenches for every dollar insist that their programs are small relative to other big-ticket items in the annual appropriations process. But there's still plenty of concern that everything from wastewater grants to air pollution monitoring and biofuels research and development will face the scalpel as lawmakers start cutting about $2.7 trillion in spending over the next decade.
"The numbers are just too vague, but obviously we don't feel we're in a good place," said Scott Slesinger, legislative director at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
“These guys are looking at 20 percent real cuts in the next two or three or four years,” said GOP strategist Mike McKenna said. “That’s a big, big hit for an agency to take.”
Under the agreement set for House and Senate votes as early as Monday, Congress will make the dramatic discretionary spending cuts in exchange for raising the debt ceiling by $2.4 trillion.
Those spending cuts will come in waves.
For starters, there's $917 billion in discretionary reductions over 10 years. Also, a new joint congressional committee will be charged with coming up with $1.5 trillion in additional deficit reduction starting in fiscal year 2013.
Budget experts said they expect the spending cuts to really start kicking in after Congress finishes up its fiscal 2012 spending bills.
"The next appropriations cycle is when they would start to feel the pain," said James Walsh, a former New York Republican congressman and chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee that handled the EPA's budget."
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/60399.html#ixzz1TuPitrAt
- 10 months ago
-
JanforGore