Uncomfortable Revelations About Cap and Trade

by Morgan Freeberg | May 3, 2009 10:59 am

Woe be unto us, when we call skepticism gullibility, and gullibility skepticism[1]…

Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, told CNSNews.com that to attain that reduction, it is “likely true” that energy costs for Americans will go up.

“I think the system is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and I think that it is likely true that, in order to put in place an effective reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, you’re going to see higher costs for energy going forward,” Bingaman told CNSNews.com.

“That’s not because of the design of the system, that’s just the reality that utilities [utility companies] will be making decisions which will require additional investment – and we’re trying to encourage them to make those decisions,” he said.

Bingaman, however, said it is not yet “clear” what the government is going to do with the revenue made from auctioning carbon permits.

“Well, I don’t think it’s clear what – I think that’s one of the parts of the debate that we need to have – is what happens to any revenue that is generated from the auctioning off of allowances – and I think there are various proposals that call for different ways to distribute that wealth,” he said.

When asked if he had an idea about how the revenue should be distributed, Bingaman said, “Well, I think there’s a general consensus we ought to return as much of it as possible to rate payers, but beyond that I don’t think there’s any specifics agreed upon.”

We pay an artificially high price for something that doesn’t really need to cost that much.

The surplus money we pay disappears into the rat-hole we call the federal government.

The feds then “give it back” by plying it upon whoever they please, a fortunate constituency group some shyster has decided to caption with the wonderful euphemism of “the poor.”

When there aren’t “any specifics agreed upon,” one would hope the few details thus far agreed-upon would be the core functions, those which would yield the most obvious benefit. But those functions are limited to: Energy costs more just because someone wants it to cost more, more money goes to the feds to distribute as they see fit, and…that’s it.


Update: If I was a real mover-and-shaker in the Republican party, my “alternative plan” would be a donation barrel. I’d be out there sayin’ “The proceeds from my fund go to exactly the same place as Chairman Bingaman’s cap-and-trade fund…just as soon as he figures out where that is, anyway. The difference is, my fund is strictly opt-in. You send a check to the Treasury, if you think you can afford to, and designate that it’s going to go into my fund because you think climate change is an important issue. My fund operates on your good judgment. His operates on coercion and force.”

Just take every single issue that comes up, that way. Define the split that way, all the way down the line. Make the democrat-party come out and say: Our defining premise is that we have to force people to do things, and they can’t decide them for themselves.

Update: Forgive my current state of scatterbrainedness, but the risibility of Bingaman’s comments has left me shell-shocked. It’s as if a hand reached out of the laptop screen and smacked me straight across the face.

Two further thoughts…

…first, this is where a true moderate would cry foul. He’d say “Well, being a moderate, naturally I’m very concerned about the environment & globular-wormening & all that stuff…but…by your own admission, Chairman Bingaman, you don’t really have any ideas about this yet, you just want to take our money away through our power bills and other everyday energy-related expenses. So — why don’t you come back when you’ve decided on some useful things, other than how to relieve us of our money. I’ll be here, ready to hear out your ideas. When you have them.”

Secondly: In the last four or five years, I’ve seen two movie characters Bingaman and his cronies have managed to replicate in reality, perfectly. Frito[2] is a rather ordinary fellow who lives in the futureworld in Idiocracy[3] — which means Frito is abysmally stupid. Idiocracy, which should be required viewing for high school graduation and voting, postulates that now that all of man’s natural predators have been eliminated, the human genome is in an evolutionary condition that makes it stupider as time goes on. The protagonist is then placed in suspended animation for five centuries and wakes up surrounded by people like Frito. It is amazing, all the things they can’t do.

Frito’s favorite line, which he delivers as if he’s trying to start a dialogue about really deep philosophical concepts, is “I like money.” But he isn’t being deep, of course. He just likes money.

The other character was Mr. Krabs[4] from The Spongebob Squarepants Movie[5]. Slightly different story…same tagline. He’s Spongebob’s boss, and, you know, he likes money. Says so a lot. Cluelessly, as if people are supposed to point at him and say “Oh my goodness, how unique! That sea creature over there likes money!”

I don’t understand how people put up with this but I do know what it reveals: Bingaman’s party is the Frito-Krabs party. It wants all this back-patting and congratulations for saving the planet…when all it’s really figured out about anything, is that it just plain likes money.

Meanwhile, the rest of us are “greedy” simply because we want to hang on to ours.

Republicans are facing a stiff challenge in the years ahead? Really? Competing with these guys?

Cross-posted at House of Eratosthenes[6].

  1. gullibility skepticism: http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=47387
  2. Frito: http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0013854/
  3. Idiocracy: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/
  4. Mr. Krabs: http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0017143/
  5. The Spongebob Squarepants Movie: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0345950/
  6. House of Eratosthenes: http://mkfreeberg.webloggin.com/uncomfortable-revelations-about-cap-and-trade/

Source URL: https://rightwingnews.com/top-news/uncomfortable-revelations-about-cap-and-trade/