When those fools try to levy such, they will likely find an outright revolt upon their hands.

Its nothing more than Democratic politicians coming up with new ways to separate money from wallets and bank accounts. It will be interesting to see how the Republicans go along in the face of widespread constituency clamor.

We can talk about about such, but getting it passed is something else altogether.

That's a tough one.

Many companies will decide that it no longer makes sense to do business in the US, as other countries are offering an environment which is more conducive to business. Unemployment will shoot up and government revenues will plummet. The carbon tax will get diverted to unemployment checks, to make sure that the unemployed reelect the Democrats who put them out of work. Of course, the unemployment check will be of little value because the cost of everything will skyrocket due to the carbon tax.

The Democrats will then respond with massive income taxes on the rich (i.e. over $75,000) in order to pay more welfare to keep their voting base happy.

Co-Presidents Obama/Clinton/Clinton/Gore will start a new WPA and TVA so that they can later take credit for pulling the US out of depression. Meanwhile pollution will get much worse because people won't be willing to pay for pollution control and Hugo Chavez will come bail out the US with cheap oil.

I always thought that these BHDG's (bleeding heart do gooders) were dangerous ......e.g. forcing a tax first and dreaming up how to use the money only later ........Boy, have I got some neat waterfront property that I'd sell to Komanoff .... as soon as the tide went out !

Re-distribution of wealth under the guise of saving the world. I'm sure he feels warm and fuzzy already ! LOL

Bravo Bob Lutz! Its about time reality strikes back ! REAL pollution should be our target not CO2 ! Make vehicles that don't pollute and everone wins ! !

Will anyone ever come up with real numbers to support the pseudo solutions for CO2 ?

Take a look at the current fiasco surrounding bio-fuels.....Public policy is starting to be enforced while the science is now back peddling with respect to its efficiency of CO2 reduction

But I guess its better to do everything wrong that to do nothing right ? ? ?

Yet another way to drain the people of thier personal power economically speaking. Does anyone honestly think the Government will be responcible and give us anything back in the way of Taxes? Be real, we average folks are being deliberately driven off the cliff by those with power and wealth of unimaginable scale. Our slavemasters if you will. With the trillions of tax dollars gone unaccounted for, W and Rummy got away with theft of our national wealth and blood of our youth and genocide in Iraq and Afganistan. I try not to voice political opinions here as I think we need to stay on the topic of truth and science and climate. But this interview (thanks again Katie!) was over the top, truly indicating just how much more criminal taxation of our people is in store for us. Changing infrastructure and technolgies will not be accomplished by punishing end users ( us) with more taxes that have no specific purpose other than make us drive less, eat less and heat less. These Carbon Taxes will go down the same Black Budget rabit holes as does most of our current taxes. The sky had beautifull Cirrus clouds today, being relentlessly chemtrailed by the sprayer planes. Weather Modification, Geo Engineering folks, go out and LOOK at the sky.

the dollar is falling, jobs going overseas, gas prices are rising, government waste, cost of everything is going up, housing market, etc etc

I have a great idea

Let's create a new tax

I'll be interested to see what kind of tax rebates they have in mind. To focus on transportation: as it stands, though it IS a user tax (kind of like tolls), it's heavily biased against rural populations that have significantly less access to public transit. We're lucky here in the greater Seattle area to have a pretty good public transit system; I only use my car a couple times a week. Most rural areas don't have that option.

I don't have a problem with a carbon tax in principle if they're going to balance the increase by cutting social security or income taxes, but if they do levy a carbon tax, they need to make sure it's equitable.

Is this AlGore facts or satire?

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO0802/S00344.htm

I'm sorry, what a bunch of bull cakes. I went on their web site and read their FAQs and their so called myths. There is not enough room on this blog to point out all the holes and fallacies in their reasoning for why they think this carbon tax will work.

Basically, the carbon tax they envision is a way to micromanage every American's way of living. They want to tax the wealthy (the ones buying all the Prius's and solar panels and energy efficient appliances and such) and give the money as dividends to the low income who can't afford to buy energy efficient stuff. Shoot, maybe I will just cut back on my consulting work, qualify as low income and rake in all the dividends (i.e., carbon tax taken from the wealthy)

The carbon tax will rise year after year until there is an acceptable level of *appropriate living* by Americans, determined by those in power in the government. Why does the book *1984" come to mind right now.

Do they think that the Middle East and all those countries that have all the oil, will just go, oh well, Americans aren't buying oil anymore, I guess we won't use pump it anymore and we won't sell it to anyone else. Good grief, the sheiks will be laying by their pools in their air-conditioned cabanas eating lobster, laughing at the stupid Americans.

I'll be riding a bicycle dressed like an eskimo generating my own electricity so I can heat up my can of soup for dinner.

Bottom line - control by the elite over the masses through carbon taxes.

Last week:

(Canadian province) introduces carbon tax in 'green' budget:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080219/bc_tax_080219/20080219

(Canadian Federal Gov't) won't follow B.C. lead on carbon tax:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080220/carbon_tax_080220/20080220

How will a carbon tax impact me? I will be utterly infuriated! Infuriated that my hard earned money is fraudulently being taken away from me for NO GOOD REASON! I'm very irate that this religion has gone so far that it's now just a tax on the stupid. Irate that any politician would buy into it with no evidence whatsoever and pass laws that will do NOTHING to affect the temperature, but will restrict my freedom that my uncle died in WW2 for!
The sane people that are still among us have to get more vocal and promise to defeat any politician who is pro-AGW.

Absolute drivel! Since when did imposing one tax result in some other department or local government reducing a tax. In Canada, income tax was introduced as a 'temporary measure' in 1917 and it's still here; the Goods and Services Tax was to reduce the deficit and all it did was line pockets and get fed into general revenue. This is the usual nonsense about protecting the climate from a non-existent threat. Do these people only ever listen to the one-sided rhetoric from the ecowarriors and not think or research for themselves?

Who is this guy? Carbon tax? Here it comes folks. Big brother will control your entire life. Carbon tax.....food tax.....sin tax......whatever tax........even when you die, inheritance tax. They want money. It's a money grab. Who does this guy work for? Who's backing him? I notice that appears to be lacking the report.

These cowardly 'carbod dweebs' are the most pathetic people alive. To be so concerned about such a small and unimportant detail when there is the immediacy of the global terriorism is amazing. Grow up you yellow spined pin heads!!

STEP RIGHT UP! PURCHASE YOUR CARBON CALCULATOR! CALCULATE YOUR CARBON FOOTPRINT AND YOUR ASSOCIATED TAX!

after calculating your associated taxes, peruse the handy site underneath to check out some cool advice on how to decrease your money-grubbing footprint thus slightly alleviating your tax burden.....

http://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx
http://w.plant-a-tree-today.org/NewQuickOffset.asp

"The average personal carbon dioxide emissions for an individual in the developed world is 9.675 metric tons.".....(oh, Lord, there goes that second bowel movement I've been working on in my quest for regularity.....)

geez, louise! these people say this stuff with a straight face......

Its nothing more than Democratic politicians coming up with new ways to separate money from wallets and bank accounts.

In the last year, we see Exxon/Mobil reporting the largest profits ever recorded in US history -- while the pump price continues to climb. It isn't very "new", but it surely is separating a LOT of money from "wallets and bank accounts".

The reason the subprime market collapsed is that major institutions have been writing high-interest loans to people who can't possibly pay them back -- and then creatively repackaging those into "innovative" credit instruments, labeling them as "high quality", and reselling them to investors at inflated prices. New, creative, and -- ultimately -- again separating a LOT of money from "wallets and bank accounts".

In the last eight years, the banking and credit industries had their Washington lackeys rewrite the personal bankruptcy laws to make it even easier to suck the blood out of working-class men and women with high-interest, high-fee credit cards -- at usurious rates -- and then make it impossible for any of them to get out from under the resulting crushing debt burdens. Separating still more money from "wallets and bank accounts".

I'd say the current party in power has demonstrated a wide variety of ingenious ways to separate astronomical amounts of money from wallets and bank accounts -- and put all of it into their own.

Anybody tried to buy health insurance for a family these days?

Got kids in college? Have you looked at what THAT is going to cost next fall?

You can rant at "Democratic politicians" if you want -- but, as Rush Limbaugh and Mitt Romney are figuring out, nobody is listening.

You guys had your chance, and all you have to do is look around to see what your guys have done for people's "wallets and bank accounts".

SUPER AMERICANS:
What we need to do are three things. Make the wealthy pay their fare share of taxes. Secondly by the year 2010 outlaw all suv's,and make carpooling into cities mandantory,the way they are doing it now in NYC. Thirdly teach conservation as we do science and math. This way Nature will become as important to people, as Walmart is to Wall Street. Other counties in Europe are socialist and if we don't want big brother on our backs than we must take personal responsilbility, and efficiency, an American story. There are obvious reasons for big business and technologies, to find energy solutions. We are running out of Oil.
KIPP
http://motls.blogspot.com/2007/03/skeptics-vs-alarmists-4642.html

KIPP

Have to agree with Steve. However, many politicians now go along with AGW just so they don't have to argue the point...... because they are unable, or uninterested.

However, if indeed the solar cycle has changed and a cooling trend is established and documented the carbon tax will be a moot point and the carbon traders left like a pack of winded wolves.

all the best

Aaron

I thought corporate apologists were in favor of consumption taxes over income taxes? Well, the carbon tax is a consumption tax. Lower the income tax and institute the carbon tax, and we have a system that is taxed more on consumption rather than income.

Of course, deniers and their right-wing ilk don't like the "carbon" word in front of tax. If it was called the FairTax, like Huckabee proposes, they'd support it.

Kipp, Kipp, Kipp:
You too BT.

Make the rich pay their fair share? And who decides what share that is Kipp? 30%? 40%? 50? You know the Beatles all moved to the U.S. when they found themselves in a 95% tax bracket in England. Where will OUR rich folks go..... or why should they even bother to try and be rich at all? That's the peril of tax brackets. At some point it doesn't make any sense to work harder or longer because you lose all the gain in taxes. I've seen people in this very fix: faced with the prospect of taking on additional responsibility and longer hours to get a raise in pay. But upon close examination they realized that the raise put them in a higher tax bracket so that in effect they are doing more for less.

Here's the deal: If you begrudge the rich, it's because you've been convinced or convinced yourself that there's no way you're ever going to be rich. How pathetic is that? You're never going to amount to anything Kipp. Face it. That's not true is it Kipp? I really hope that you get that picture of the year.

And what do you teach as conservation? Turn the light off when you leave the room? Along with science and math? They already indoctrinate kids with this AGW crap starting in Head Start for crying out loud. I'm having to make my 13 year old read oposing articles just to keep her from falling over, her course work is so slanted. She already thinks Al Gore is like Yoda, only less entertaining. It makes me sick, and it worrys me because she's one of the smart ones.

And this bit takes the cake:

""What we need to do are three things. Make the wealthy pay their fare share of taxes. Secondly by the year 2010 outlaw all suv's,and make carpooling into cities mandantory,the way they are doing it now in NYC. Thirdly teach conservation as we do science and math.""

If you don't call the redistribution of wealth, controling what can and can not be manufactured and purchased, controling how citizens can and can't travel, and the indoctrination of children halmarks of a socialistic, Big Brother type government, I would be curious to know what you DO call it.

We will run out of oil when we run out of oil. It's only a matter of time, and everyone knows it's true. The thing is, it won't happen over night. It will happen over time, and as it does, the supply will start to drop and the price to rise. As this happens, at some point, it will be more economical to use something else, and we will. Don't get you panties in a bunch Kipp. It'll be okay.

All the best,

Aaron

Brookline Tom:

I am not sure you realize this but congress is made up of both democrats and republicans. Also what is wrong today was started a very long time ago by both parties. The average citizen has believed for a very long time that once they vote they have done their civic duty and they stop being involved which is a HUGE mistake. The Washington system is very corrupt no matter who is in power because the people that put them there stop paying attention to them. If you believe anything different you are living in a dreamworld. The American dream is based on the premise that working hard means more dollars for that person with the reasonable expectation that the "rich" will pay more tax than those making less money. I don't know about you, but I do not for one minute begrudge those that make more money than I do. I also don't expect them to provide for me. Equally I am not the least interested in providing for others for the simple reason that I have absolutely no control over other people's decision making process. If you want to look at people's wallets and bank accounts, let's start with notable figures such as Gore, Edwards, Clinton. The Bush years have been great for these guys. In fact the past 7 years have been tremendous for them. Clinton started in the hole and is now worth 40 million. Most property owners up until very recently have seen their property values increase substantially. The market until recently was showing some decent returns. During the past 7 years the government took in record revenue. Please it was not all bad at least not for many. Not that I agree with her politics, but recently a well known celeb named Whoopie took great offense at the notion that somehow rich people should be made to feel bad about their wealth and somehow they just plain didn't deserve that wealth. Every time elected officials want to create another entitlement they immediately descend on those awful rich people that need to pay more. It is rich people that often give generous donations that keep many community programs alive. They become benefactors for many worthwhile organizations. We need their generosity and we should be thankful. Whether the dems realize it or not, the rich people are the ones that create jobs. Rich of course is a relative term because those of us that are willing to take a chance and start new companies give jobs to those that otherwise would be jobless. If the corporate tax rate was cut tomorrow, I absolutely assure you that many programs sitting on the sidelines waiting for more capital money would immediately get approval and thus create more jobs. But of course we wouldn't want to encourage those power hungry corporations with any sort of incentives, but instead tax them more so that they take all the jobs out of the US because they will find cheaper labor and they will find more friendly terms elsewhere. It is not necessary every 4 years to completely change course. Every administration has done some things pretty good with other issues getting no attention at all. It would be nice to see each newly elected president acknowledge what is working fairly well and build on that and then focus on issues that perhaps were largely ignored.

I Couldn't even bring myself to watch the video. [Sorry Miss Katie] This has definitley replaced the Whale in my Nightmares !!! Now if you'll all please excuse me while I step outside to go HANG myself !!!!!!! Oh yeh , BTW what IS UP with that article Steve Rowland Linked to ? This can't possibly be for real ........... Can It ?

I suppose that dang Bush administration was responsible for the clouds here today too right?

How come all of the statements have nothing to do with taxes? Isn't that what we're chatting about?

Beyond that, I kinda think that some of the issues were created well before Bush showed up.

I do have to ask though, how come the people wanting to tax the batcrap out of us all look like they belong in a grateful dead concert?

Kipp:

Seriously, what is fair for the wealthy? I believe they pay a whole lot more in both percentage and actual money than I do, and I make pretty good money. How is that fair? Shouldn't I pay the same as they do percentage wise?

Our kids suck at science and math as I understand it. Why do you want them to suck at conservation too? Besides, they get lots of enviro training now. So much so that they are as annoying as hell about it. I had some little brat tell me that I needed to buy a CFL bulb instead of the standard bulbs I was holding in the checkout line. I leaned over and told him that the CFLs give you a nasty rash and can cause you to go blind so I wanted none of it. He seemed confused but said he would check that out when he got home. Then his mom gave me the evil eye. I paid for the devil lights and left. With a big smile.

And I ain't even gonna comment on the crazy talk about SUVs. What do you have against keeping our kids safe anyway?

Oh and we ain't running out of oil, at least for us and kids' kids time. Or more. Except I do recall that I was told that in elementary school. Of course they did say that it would be by 1990 or so.

Better on the post though, keep it simple and short 'k?

Hi Kipp,

The top 50% of wage earners pay 96% of the taxes in this country.

In 1915 the highest tax bracket was 7%. Now it is 35% base + 9% Social Security + 4% Medicare + 8% AMT + 10% State + 4% Property Tax + 9% sales tax + Capital Gains + gasoline tax.....

In California, many high wage earners spend in excess of 60% of their income on taxes. You, like many in Congress, have no idea what you are talking about.

Steve,my carbon tax is $151.50 which I'm not willing to pay.Oh I'm able,just not willing to pay for nonsense reasons.If I want to plant 14 trees in the U.K. at $336.80 that's another option but I'm still not willing to pay,.But since I've already planted about 30,000 trees in my lifetime so I figure I've got about a $700,000 credit so I should not have to pay during my lifetime,correct? Yeah right! What a bunch of garbage.

It has almost become something of a joke when some "global warming" conference has to be canceled because of a snowstorm or bitterly cold weather.

But stampedes and hysteria are no joke - and creating stampedes and hysteria has become a major activity of those hyping a global-warming "crisis."

They mobilize like-minded people from a variety of occupations, call them all "scientists" and then claim that "all" the experts agree on a global-warming crisis.

Their biggest argument is that there is no argument.

A whole cottage industry has sprung up among people who get grants, government agencies who get appropriations, politicians who get publicity, and the perpetually indignant who get something new to be indignant about. It gives teachers something to talk about in school instead of teaching.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/02/29/opinion/main3893146.shtml

Two global warming bills that have passed the state House and are now in the Senate could lead to tolls on Puget Sound highways.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004250770_apwaclimatetolls.html

on the one hand, we're worried about social security, medicare, medicaid
because too many people are going to be on it

That means too many people are going to retire and be on a fixed income

Now we are creating a carbon tax, that will raise the cost of everything.

Why don't we just go on and kill all those retirees and be done with it? or is it more fun to price them out of existance slowly?

.

BT, WAKE UP ! ! !

No matter from which side you choose to look at this (or anything), its always going to be two wings of the same bird! ! !

Lay off the rhetoric and propaganda from what ever side and understand how you are being lead to the benefit of someone else's beliefs.

To be so concerned about such a small and unimportant detail when there is the immediacy of the global terriorism is amazing

I find it alarming that people think that "terrorism" is actually a more immediate and greater threat than global climate change today! I just count myself lucky that I'm not as brainwashed as they are! Terrorsim only exists in the minds of terrorised people (terrorised by the possibility of having to fork-out more money to run their rediculously over-sized vehicles?!). Yes, terrorism exists within corrupt and unstable societies, eg in Middle East. To live there and witness the undertones of violence and volatility is to be terrorised... to live in USA is not to be terrorised (except for the fact that it is legal to bear arms which is slightly alarming) Surely the prospect of ecological collapse and subsequent starvation among the masses is more worrying? I certainly think so...

Well, from what I have seen over the past years the reasons I don't buy into it. #1 the goverment mandated pollution controls on cars way back in 1974 in an effort to stop it. So far it's only increased the amount of controls, including the fuel. But the earth is still warming up. The only thing they can't control is construction, more people living in the US legal or illegal, people building 5,000sqft homes that only 2 people live in?? Dual heating systems, dual AC units, it all adds up. The fact is that there is too many people living in the US. People come here and buy car's, homes, get jobs use up more gas and oil which adds pollutants. Not to mention all the blue collar fund the government a new tax like that will only start a revolt. I for one am all for it, it is about time the government started listing to "we the people". I also have a question, since when do you need millions of dollars to run for president or any government office....from where I stand it seems that it's always the rich who control the government, which is probably the main reason no one has been able to change the tax code. Where we all would pay a fair share, and no deductions.

I'm a small government libertarian, and I personally don't think a carbon tax is such a bad idea. From a strictly market standpoint, the price of energy has long been too low, because the externalities of pollution have never been incorporated into the cost. This is a failure of the market (and remember, I'm a libertarian!).
If it was feasible, I'd much rather see a cap-and-trade system, but the European example of such caps prove that governments have serious incentive to make their cap levels ridiculously high, which makes the cap and trade system useless.

Tom:

Bakatchya!
'Record profits', yes there have been , BUT you need to check out their Percentage profit compared to other US industry. Should their profits be curtailed or confiscated by the government simply because they happen to have a commodity in top demand in this country? Oil futures are traded on the world market and much of the cost of oil is determined by market speculators.
Want to get the price down and decrease our dependence upon foreign oil? Open up ANWR and offshore.

The sub-prime market collapsed due to a prime factor (no pun intended)of lenders throwing out the door tried, true, and safe loan requirements of protecting the borrower from themselves. In addition, the lenders Were under pressure from the Democrats to make available more, more, and more sub-prime loans for minorities whom could not even qualify for a loan at any rate. Regardless, this is a market collapse brought on by several factors, not the least the greed of the bankers.Now that the chickens are coming home to roost, it appears you prefer the government to bail out the banks and babysit the borrowers.

Yes, laws have been passed to make it harder to file bankruptcy, but cases are still handled on a case-by-case basis by the trustee, but it is simply harder to unload a full debt if one is able to actually pay into it. Too many out in the buyers world are splurging on quick, easy credit cards then trying to unload. The banks again are the basic culprits: I must get at least 5 junk mailing every week offering me free credit cards. Trust me, the Democrats made a show of being for the 'little man', then turned around and allowed passage with a few show speeches.

Regardless of what you might hold true, Republicans or Democrats, we get the government we deserve. Every Time.

I pay over $800/month for health insurance. It hurts, but how is another bureaucracy run by the government going to outclass the already incompetent existing ones? The only ones to get any 'insurance' will be the career bureaucrats running the health insurance department.

I've already sent my kid to college. Do you think government in the colleges or government subsidies will benefit those in school? We are already paying for the high cost of Tenure, and other country club memberships for those basically teaching Marxism. Subsidies will simply pad the issue.

Lastly, what evidence do you claim to have that no one is listening to Rush? This one of yours is outright fantasy. Trust me, Rush has his listeners. Mitt who? Can't remember that guy.

I've got some tablets that you can take to avoid fainting the next time you go to see one of those vapid Obama speeches.

srr

Co-Presidents Obama/Clinton/Clinton/Gore will start a new WPA and TVA so that they can later take credit for pulling the US out of depression.

Anyone who can read a newspaper or a website knows that the US is already in a recession, rapidly headed for "depression" territory. Bush and the GOP have accomplished that feat without benefit of a carbon tax or Democratic majority. All of the indications are that it was Greenspan, together with the banking-industry lackeys in the administration, who have already done far worse than whatever specters Patrick Henry attempts to raise. The right-wing had six years of absolutely control over all three branches of government, and the result is clear: the right-wing dogma of un-regulated un-restrained laissez-faire capitalism has wrecked the US economy.

The dollar is shambles. Major US banks and insurers are insolvent. The housing market is in free-fall. All while we pursue an illegal war that we cannot win and cannot withdraw from.

No wonder PH and the other right-wingers are so desperately seeking a Democratic villain -- the harvest of their own seeds of corruption, arrogance, and pure greed is now pouring in.

Democratic scare tactic:PHASE 2: Scare em, then make them believe that only we democrats can save them. Sadly so many people fall for it. This tax is nothing more than creating money for someone for doing absolutely nothing. It would not change a thing except the brainstormers behind this idea would have more money in their pockets, but thankfully this will not be passed. What else can they think of to take peoples money who actually work for a living, if a democrat gets elected then the economy will go to crap because everyones money will go to pay their make belive problems taxes.

It won't be long before we each have a meter on our respiration system counting and taxing each breath. I believe I saw recent data which supports the notion of global cooling, not warming. What will be cited as the rationale behind that? IMO, the earth's temperature is affected more by solar radiation and its non symetrical orbit then by emissions. I agree with Lutz of GM, the vitriol is beyond reason. Unfortunately as Lenin said, the big lie is hard to overcome. Alas, it has now gotten so bad we have a generation of people who cannot add and subtract yet intuit global warming is a crisis. Beam me up Scotty.
Vince

Kipp:

These are from 2005 (don't suggest its any different in 2007):

The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $62,068) earned 67.5 percent of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86 percent). The top 1 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $364,657) earned approximately 21.2 percent of the nation's income (as defined by AGI), yet paid 39.4 percent of all federal income taxes. That means the top 1 percent of tax returns paid about the same amount of federal individual income taxes as the bottom 95 percent of tax returns.

Apparently you and others don't want to look at the Percentage of Income taken from a person, but the amount of income they make, soooo...if a person makes $300,000 a year, thats too much in you opinion so you want to kick them up having Half their income confiscated by the4 government?

Set me straight if I am incorrect, but exactly What do you immitiate is a "Fair Share"?

Number one problem-No one is going to give any money back to the people that cannot afford to be involved in this carbon tax scheme.Take that to the bank.More and more people that are at or below the Federal Poverty Level will experience some very long,cold winters in the northern climes.In the South,deaths will rise dramatically due to the unaffordability of air conditioning.The lives of low income people are about to become expendable.

BT says:

The reason the subprime market collapsed is that major institutions have been writing high-interest loans to people who can't possibly pay them back -- and then creatively repackaging those into "innovative" credit instruments, labeling them as "high quality", and reselling them to investors at inflated prices. New, creative, and -- ultimately -- again separating a LOT of money from "wallets and bank accounts".

In the last eight years, the banking and credit industries had their Washington lackeys rewrite the personal bankruptcy laws to make it even easier to suck the blood out of working-class men and women with high-interest, high-fee credit cards -- at usurious rates -- and then make it impossible for any of them to get out from under the resulting crushing debt burdens. Separating still more money from "wallets and bank accounts".
--------------
You will note that BT does not mention "personal responsibility". In his world...it is the government that needs to protect you from the evil corporations, eventhough anyone that knows how to read should know what THEY can afford. Consumers have been warned for EONS what proper ratios to follow for financial health. Did that change in the last 8 years....of course not. Also not mentioned, is the large percentage of people who got caught speculating in the RE market. Do they need mother-Washington to protect them also?

Personal responsibility...give it a try.

"The reason the subprime market collapsed is that major institutions have been writing high-interest loans to people who can't possibly pay them back -- and then creatively repackaging those into "innovative" credit instruments, labeling them as "high quality", and reselling them to investors at inflated prices."

BT, Greenspan lowered long term interest rates to below 3% and kept them there for almost 3 years. Using Keynes methodology, he sought to reinflate the credit markets, but he also took risk out of the equation. Foreign investors poured hundreds of billions into Wall St chasing high risk investments at very low interest rates. No one forced them. If anything, it just goes to show you how much an Ivy League MBA is worth. Thousands of our best and brightest on Wall St, in London, Hong Kong, and Geneva poured cash into very high risk securities.

BTW, a carbon tax at this juncture of our economy would personally be difficult for the firm I work for. It's the kind of business that liberals constantly decry we are losing (manufacturing). A carbon tax would certainly force my firm to look to do business with firms that do not have this extra cost. Who knows, it could get so bad, my firm would relocate to Mexico or China.

What anti-American vitriol. You must be the same people who supported a two trillion dollar tax break to the rich at a time of war! Is it OK to let our children and grandchildren pay for our 9 trillion debt? Is it OK to have our grandchildren face increasing sea levels, drought, famine, climate refugees, extreme weather, etc.

Oh! I forgot. Extreme weather has already dramatically increased!
http://www.publicaffairs.noaa.gov/releases2000/sep00/noaa00r314.html

Tax cuts first, the health of the nation second.

All your scare tactics about a carbon tax are not grounded in reality (like your attitudes about climate chaos). Europe has not suffered any of these effects and they have a basic carbon tax.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax

It is even support by business groups in this country. Including the heads of Exxon-Mobil, Dynergy, FPL, Duke, APPA, API.

http://www.carbontax.org/who-supports/opinion-leaders/

Are the deniers confusing cap and trade with a carbon tax? Do you know the difference? Or is this a knee jerk reaction, like when you read the words Gore or Hansen? Or is this like talking about melting ice caps on Mars, without mentioning that the Martian atmosphere is 95% CO2?

The Antarctic summer has ended, having reached a blistering -13F at Vostok for the summer's high. Temperatures have fortunately dropped back to a more comfortable -78F.
http://www.wunderground.com/history/station/89606/2008/3/1/MonthlyHistory.html
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/current.365.south.jpg

Oh my ... the devastation of global warming.

All,

Here is a good AGW blog explaining why your opinion doesn't matter, and should be censored.
http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/2008/02/climate_consensus_is_opinion_e.html

Unless you happen to be of similar mindset to Steve Bloom.

NON-PROFIT Carbon tax Center? An oxymoron if I ever heard one.

Instead of the tax how about the Democratic controlled Congress start on a meaningful way to get us off foreign oil? or is putting it off because they are trying to win an election more important that their constituents???
Oh I'm sorry their lack of interest has already given us the answer.
LOL both side of the aisle should be ashamed of themselves.

BT,

Your points once again reflect why I refuse to register with either major party (or any party) for that matter. Regarding the economy, I'm of the opinion that generally speaking, the less the government does, the better. Interest rates should not have been lowered to 1% the first time around, and now they're doing it again to "fix" the problem? How is it fixing anything to repeat what caused the problem in the first place?

Yes, I see the point the right wing makes about personal responsibility and how it was ultimately the people who signed up for loans they couldn't afford. I live by the standard that I am responsible for what I do and ultimately how I end up. But come on--can either party seriously say that the problem wasn't caused by the fact that it was the Government of the United States who created and even condoned these ridiculous economic instruments to try to avoid taking the medicine due to the tech bubble, which developed under a Democratic President? This is more than a left-wing, right-wing issue, where we stand now has been building up for a decade and a half during which both parties have controlled Congress and both parties have been Presidents.

But now a carbon tax on top of $103 oil? If that doesn't get the "non-existant" inflation going, nothing will. 7.5% inflation for January, a 2% increase in food, oil has gone up 500% in seven years, home prices down 30% in some areas, wages haven't moved since 2002, but there's no recession coming? Bush's hard-headedness never ceases to astound me...Unless he's actually implying that the recession is already here, not that it is coming...

BrooklineTom:
In the last year, we see Exxon/Mobil reporting the largest profits ever recorded in US history -- while the pump price continues to climb.

Tom, this is about the most idiotic argument there is.

Do you think these companies will just close the doors and give up being in the energy business?

The only difference will be, you will be saying the same thing about corn
that you are saying about petroleum right now.

Did anyone else happen to notice the sign in the Professors office.

'I ride a bike and I vote'

Great if you live on campus and get anywhere you would like easily while sucking off the government research teat. That doesn't cut it if you need to travel 18-20 miles to work or to purchase foodstuffs especially in this 'global warming' winter in Pittsburgh or anywhere else for that matter.

When did we start to take this personality type seriously.

Ralph Nader is his guy

IPCC FALLACIES:
In case you didn't know(which I doubt),there are several reasons not to believe the IPCC Report.
I learned my first Science here so please give me a break. First BOB Carter, a Paleo-climatologist from Australia has documented that warming started at least fifty years prior to the Industrial Revolution. The IPCC has no knowledge or detail about the effects of cooling that wind has on the ocean currents. The IPCC has concluded Its opinion about Global Warming without including the possible short term effects of Global cooling. This means that if there is an increase of Ice and snow for just a few years, that the infrared spectrum could be reflecting much more warmth back out into space than assumed.
Also, the increase of CO2 and CO4 does not determine the temperature, but the temperature determines how much CO2 and CO4 there is.
Finally a Danish team of scientists showed that negative IONS by cosmic Rays increase the Nuclei of clouds. Increased solar magnetic activity has reduced cosmic rays, and a decreased amount of
Clouds would lessen the greenhouse gas theory. So the facts of the IPCC and their subjective models are irrelevant.
KIPP

Kipp: For the second and third time, please stop the multiple posts. The last time I told you you had posted the same comment 3 consecutive times. Today, you had posted the same comment 5 times and another one twice, one right after the other, therefore, all 7 of those posts will be not posted. There are a lot of comments that I have to post each day and doing this, whether on purpose or not, is just making the process of posting these comments that much longer for me. Brett.

If you take a walk I'll tax your feet
If you try to sit, I'll tax your seat
If you drive a car, I'll tax the street
If you eat a burger, I'll tax the meat.

Yep, that's the solution to all our problems. Tax Tax Tax Tax Tax Tax Tax Tax and More Tax!!!!!! Even for crap that doesn't exist like Glo-BULL Warming!!!!......

Time to revolt against this nonsense, people. Time to revolt against the Global Warmng Marxists and their enviro-nazi friends.

As for you BT, and these comment:

In the last year, we see Exxon/Mobil reporting the largest profits ever recorded in US history.

REPLY: Jealous? Wha Wha!!! They are making money and I am not...I am a class envy cry baby!!!!!...Maybe if you liberals would allow this country to drill for oil off shore like your buddies, the RED Chinese, or in Alaska at the expense of the Caribou and the Fiddler Crab, GAS PRICES MIGHT COME DOWN!

You can rant at "Democratic politicians" if you want -- but, as Rush Limbaugh and Mitt Romney are figuring out, nobody is listening.

Oh, we philistines are listening, buddy boy. And we are listening closly. Closely to what Mr. Osama and Mrs. Clinton are saying. And we will listen right up until November!

What we need to do are three things. Make the wealthy pay their fare share of taxes. Secondly by the year 2010 outlaw all suv's,and make carpooling into cities mandantory,the way they are doing it now in NYC.

REPLY: Kipp, I think you need to spend a little time in North Korea, there paly. Because you sir, are clueless!

Hi BT,

No surprise that 18 months after the Democratic takeover of Congress and threat of a Democratic President, the economy is free-falling. What sane investor would want to wade into that swamp?

Now lets elect Obama, raise taxes, drive jobs away and create a full-blown depression.

BTW - here is a great NYT article describing the epic battle of "scientists" vs. Marc Morano. I wonder if they will be able to go the whole week without mentioning the ICCC Conference on their doorstep?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/science/02cold.html?ex=1205038800&en=33ffc45ee4c4a580&ei=5070&emc=eta1

Brett: Sorry about the double or triple posts. My computer is filling up, and getting slower. I will delete some stuff, to speed it up,perhaps switch to mozilla firefox. Sorry Kipp

Thank you Kipp.

Hi Getting Cold,

Are you suggesting that AGW has altered the chemistry of the Martian atmosphere?

BT:
I continue to be amazed at how you come to some of your conclusions. I guess as long as the libs have the cooperation of the MSM it's going to be an uphill battle to get the truth out to the people.
Kipp:
In 2005 the top 50% of the income earners paid 97% of the income tax. How do you propose that we make that any more equitable?

Welcome Conor Ryan and Govmentmule:
It is good to hear some reason here. Your points are well taken, and you desrve to have your points of view freely heard. The last time I checked this was a Democracy. We don't need more taxes, but if people cannot change than, the next in charge might. I am reffering to Barack Obama of course. Welcome
KIPP

PH and antarctica: what is really interesting is the early increase in SH ice and it's still anomalously high. Bit surprised that cryosphere NH mid-feb data glitch still has not been fixed because according to the graphs at the moment artic ice would be right on normal and going above. Also ice thickness (concentration%) is appearing thicker than previous.
The el nino-nina graph on this blog NYtimes
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/science/02cold.html?ex=1205038800&en=33ffc45ee4c4a580&ei=5070&emc=eta1
suggests that the current cold spell MAY NOT be solely due to La Nina. Note how 2008 temps appear to decrease much more than the La Nina effect to date compared to previous similar events

A carbon tax will cause humanity to save eneregy. That will make the world a better place. As an inhabitant of the world, I will benefit - as will everyone else (inc you) - forever. That's a good thing. Pretty simple.

Even Hillary's campaign is starting to understand how the press systematically distorts the truth.

"Our democracy depends upon the fourth estate to fulfill the uniquely critical role of informing voters about the important issues facing our nation," Shorenstein wrote. "Yet far too often, the campaign coverage has been biased, blase, or baseless."

http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/

Dear BT,

This one is from your local paper.

Apparently, global warming kooks don't worry about brain damage. For them it's a pre-existing condition.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1077143&srvc=rss

Hi Vincent,

I love how the AGW faithful refer to "La Nina" as if it were some alien invader which arrives periodically to confuse the simple-minded civilians of our planet, and keep them from paying their homage and taxes to the global warming gods.

Whatever names they give to their excuses, the earth is not warming the way any of Hansen's three "Goldilocks" models predict.

The revolutionary war was fought over 5% taxes. I now pay close to 50%.

Hi Bob Wild,

No doubt that saving energy is important. There are sensible ways and not so sensible ways to do it.

Greenpeace would be thrilled if the rest of us were unemployed, starving and cold. They would be even happier if we didn't exhale (CO2.) As an extreme example, Auschwitz was very effective at trading greenhouse gases for other ones.

I don't buy into the idea that "anything" which reduces energy usage is sensible. Poor societies tend to be much more polluted than prosperous ones.

The last time I checked this was a Democracy. We don't need more taxes, but if people cannot change than, the next in charge might. I am reffering to Barack Obama of course.

REPLY: Big surprise there, Kipp baby. I have one other question for ya. What kind of vehicle do you drive? And, with all due respect, your dad? (that is if he is who you say he is). What's he driving? With all of the millions he made playing his horn and exploiting other artists by selling records over the last 4+ decades, I am sure he never in his life owned a Hugo, or is planning on buying that skateboard from India that came out earlier this year. Please do tell tells us how corporate greed and expoliation has benefited your family? I am sure many of us would like to know.

DENY DENY DENY THE GLOBAL WARMING LIE!!!!!!!

Apparently, global warming kooks don't worry about brain damage. For them it's a pre-existing condition.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opinion/op_ed/view.bg?articleid=1077143&srvc=rss

REPLY: Careful there Marie. The author of this article is someone I am sure BT and Mark would just love to have scilenced. (So much for free speech). You may have just put this Michael Graham on BT's "pie in the face" list! Wouldn't put it past him!....LOL!!!!....

This was just sent to me by a fellow researcher....
http://www.dailytech.com/Temperature+Monitors+Report+Worldwide+Global+Cooling/article10866.htm

Here Come the Green Car-Jackers:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/here_come_the_green_carjackers.html

Excerpt:
No amount of energy efficiency will ever do the trick -- the only way to save the planet is to surrender your car altogether. That's the conclusion reached by a group of Australian energy experts from last week's partial release of Professor Ross Garnaut's long-awaited climate change report.
You need to give up your car and essentially forget about world travel.

And maybe that's enough - for now.

You still buying this?

Wake up, greenies -- you're being used as well-meaning pawns by those who have neither your's nor your planet's best interest at heart.

It's no secret why the business community has been shifting more to the Democrats. There was a time not too long ago where nearly 100% of the business community was in the Republican camp. Now it's more of a 60/40 split, still favoring Republicans, but it's clearly not the constituency the Republicans once had.

And it's no secret why.

Republicans have had the same economic message for fifty years: tax cut this, tax cut that. The problem is that, while this message once had great relevance, especially during the overtaxed and over-regulated 1970s, it no longer has the same pertinence. Some people will always want their taxes lower, but from a macroeconomic point of view, there is little value add-in from cutting taxes further at this point. Conversely, it has been proven that slight increases in tax rates haven't had any harmful effect, either. Case in point: Clinton raised taxes and the economy not only did not suffer, but it went on to be the best economic times of our history. Also, the recession under Bush Sr. ended right after Bush Sr raised taxes.

If Republicans want to regain their lock on the business community, they need to retool their economic message to be more in line with today's globalized economy.

McCarthyists like Ozio and Patrick Henry continue to drive people away from the Republican party. If the Democrats recapture the executive branch, they truly have nobody to blame but themselves.

Bob Wild:
You Said: A carbon tax will cause humanity to save eneregy. That will make the world a better place. As an inhabitant of the world, I will benefit - as will everyone else (inc you) - forever. That's a good thing. Pretty simple.

Just wondering. Do you think energy is somehow finite? Do you think we will eventuall use it all up or somthing.
Or are you just suggesting that saving energy will cut down GHGs?
You do realize that we have so many sources of energy that the overall supply is virtually limitless right?
Sometimes it seem like Greenies think energy itself is in short supply of that the use of it in just plane evil for some wird reason.

Please clerify.

PH:
You said: The revolutionary war was fought over 5% taxes. I now pay close to 50%

Come live in Canada for a while. Your tax load in the US is paltry compared to our Socialist tax rape.

And our idiot legislators are talking carbon taxes on top of everythng else.

Soon it just won't be worth working.

Brookline tom,

You don't know the definition of a recession. Yet your bush derangement syndrome shines through. A recession is two consectutive quarters of negative growth. Haven't had one yet, but we will. Our problem is we are spending too much money and not taking RESPOSIBILITY for it. But of course a socialist will say more taxes. fre health care, 4000 dollars to every student. Complete nonsense. If you can't afford healthcare get medicaid. if you don't qualify for it. PRIORITIZE your money!

Hi Gary,

I hear you about Canada and the looming carbon taxes. Carbon taxes, by definition go after the most productive members of society.

In the US the taxes are split up into so many different categories that it is difficult to keep track of them. Income , social security , Medicare, AMT, capital gains, state, local, property, sales, carbon, etc. In addition, as your income increases the types of allowable deductions decrease.

I was shocked to discover in December that most of the income from my second job was going to taxes. So I hear you, it is barely worth the effort to work any more. The Democrats need to keep their voting base happy (illegals/welfare recipients/felons/etc.) so they keep piling it on the working people.

Hi Mark,

The current political climate is primarily due to the fact that the MSM is largely controlled by people who refuse to report both sides of the story.

They won't acknowledge climate skeptics, because they don't want to be responsible for delaying the important work of saving the earth. They won't discuss the cold and snow this winter in terms of AGW for the same reasons. They won't report good news out of Iraq because they don't want to be accused of encouraging warmongers.

People who rely primarily on newspapers and TV for their information generally hear only one side of every story. That is sad, and it appears that the Internet is the primary hope for recovery from this pathological state.

Hi Gary. Question For you. Down Here in New York we have a "Cost of Living" tax burden which is somewhere around 52-54 percent. That would include everything from taxes to hidden surcharges and all the other neat little tricks government plays to seperate us from our money. Just curious as to how much you figure yours is .

How does taxing the general public, make us change to alternative fuels like solar and wind? People still need to drive to work and to the store to buy groceries. Thanks to Wal-Mart and others, most small towns have seen local grocery/department/meat stores go out of business. Now you must drive 10 or 20 miles to buy food. How about consolidation of farming over the past 100 years? Before the 20th century and large scale farming, you could buy milk, meat and eggs from a local family farm. Now there are less and less farms every year. At least here in Pennsylvania it seems that way. That means the average citizen will have to travel farther for basic neccessities like food. A carbon tax, if implemented incorrectly, has a potential to affect the wrong people.

On the other hand, what incentives do the huge oil companies have to develop alternative fuels? Anyone?

The technology developed around the automobile and oil, was developed at a time when there was a large amount of competition. There were dozens of car companies, and dozens of oil companies. Now there are a handful of each. To compete in today's market, one must have a TON of money. Most start up alternative fuel businesses DONT have that much money.

If we are to force a change to cleaner alternative fuels, we must start at the source. Forcing Exxon/Mobil and others to spend their outrageous profits on that technology may be better than adding more taxes to an already over taxed public.

Mark:

Your recollection of history is amazing. Are you stating that the increase of taxes is good for the economy? What an odd view of economic principles.

The Clinton years economic boon were based solely upon the inflated value being promulgated by a media that had a vested self interest in seeing a liberal do well. Every night the news would state how great things were. They had no proof other than what they were saying. People believed it because that was what they "thought" they were supposed to say. This is called a self-fulfilling prophecy and really has no basis in reality. The Obama campaign is doing well because the media says it is doing well.

Tell you what, since you feel so strongly that taxation is a good thing. You pay mine and you can feel twice as good about yourself. For one thing, your helping out the government and another, your saving the planet.

Mark:

Duh? So tax INCREASES make for an economic boom? Thanks for the economics lesson. I'll have to remember that one.

"The Clinton years economic boon were based solely upon the inflated value being promulgated by a media that had a vested self interest in seeing a liberal do well."

LOL...wow, Darren, I've heard some ridiculous things on this blog, but your comment might take the prize on this one. So our economic boom was simply a mirage created by the 'liberal' media? Were our large GDP growth rates simply created by some positive random number generator? I guess those 23 million new jobs were all from illegal immigrants jumping the fence, right Darren?

I can't stop laughing right now.

"Are you stating that the increase of taxes is good for the economy?"

Where did I say that? I said that there is little empirical evidence of a slight increase in taxes hurting the economy, as the radical right-wing proclaims as if it was written in the gospel. The last two tax increases -- from Bush Sr and Clinton -- were followed by economic growth. This evidence doesn't support the scare-tactics of your right-wing friends, Darren.

In fact, the last three recessions occurred under Republican presidents. If our current economic slowdown becomes a recession, then that would make it the last four recessions happening under Republican presidents. The stock market, historically, has done much better under Democratic presidents. Sorry, Darren, but one reason why I typically don't vote for Republicans is that I don't think they're very good with the economy. They have a one-dimensional view which is short-sighted and not applicable to today's globalized economy.

Mark says:

Republicans have had the same economic message for fifty years: tax cut this, tax cut that. The problem is that, ... Clinton raised taxes and the economy not only did not suffer, but it went on to be the best economic times of our history. Also, the recession under Bush Sr. ended right after Bush Sr raised taxes.
----------

Your revisionist history is breathtaking. Unlike folks that suffer from BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome), most people that are not rabidly partisan know that Clinton headed for the middle on most issues during his administration. Remember, he PUSHED NAFTA through...definitely NOT on the left wing agenda...and Hillary is taking a boat load of heat for it today, has done a 180 and speaks against it...amazing what folks running for office will say to get elected.

What Clinton gets a lot of undeserved economic credit for is the internet BOOM. He was a passenger on that tide of prosperity and did the smart thing and stayed out of the way. Most observers knew that that bubble would burst and it did. Of course because it was during Clinton's administration, he could do not wrong in the eyes of the MSM. Today however, wild eyed partisans like you and BT blame Bush and his lackeys for EVERYTHING wrong with the planet...including the collapse of the real estate BOOM, which has been predicted for years.

And now because some folks with a household income of $100k gross cannot make their $3000/mo house payments before taxes and expenses...it's Bush's fault. My young daughter could have been the financial adviser for these people and told them they couldn't afford it.

Good luck

PH and Dave H;
Oops. My tax burden is about the same as Dave's.
Wow. Could I have been WRONG!. Nah couldn't happen.
Wow, seriously though I would not have guessed your taxes were that high.
My nephew moved to Texas recently and has said many times he would never move back as his taxes decreased so much.

Guess it really depends on where you live and what you can write off.

But hey, you can still buy cars cheaper than I can even with a Par dollar.

anyway.. Cheers guys

Mark:

Glad I can make you laugh. That is something many liberals seem to have a real problem doing I've noticed.

So, prove me wrong. What policy did Clinton initiate that caused the economy to bounce upward at the start of his administration? Come to think of it, can you tell me one policy that Clinton did?

Funny, it seems to me that the stock market has done pretty well since the low time after 9/11. Oh, and by the way, it was already heading down before Mr. Clinton left office.

"So, prove me wrong. What policy did Clinton initiate that caused the economy to bounce upward at the start of his administration? Come to think of it, can you tell me one policy that Clinton did?"

Sure. He signed the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act in 1993. At the time, we had a huge budget deficit caused by your hero, Ronald Reagan, and this had caused a rise and both interest rates and inflation. The goal was to reduce the deficit through an increase in taxes on the wealthy and corporations and a decrease in government spending. This is anathema for right-wingers, who erroneously believe that cutting taxes on millionaires will have a "trickle down" effect on the rest of us and we will live happily ever after. The trickle-down theory took a serious blow during the 1990s, as our economy exploded after doing such heinous things as raising taxes.

I suggest that you read books about economics from all schools of thought. Simply reading books by Arthur Laffer gives you a very limited understanding of all the dynamics of our economy.

Well, I must say, you have indeed found a policy that Clinton championed and signed. I stand corrected and amazed. And, I have to admit, never heard of Arthur Laffer.

Though in the research I did, nothing ever said that the economy was directly helped by the Omnibus policy. I suppose you can make a case that it did by proxy. But I kinda think that I could also make a case that it was by chance as well as anything else.

So, I guess this explains why your for raising taxes huh? Tell me this, where does the money for taxes go, and how does that make the economy better.

BT -

"The right-wing had six years of absolutely control over all three branches of government,"

This is not quite true guy. The Repub's never had more than a simple majority control in the Senate. This means they had the power to set the agenda and timetables for debating legislation, and holding floor and committee votes. However they did not have the power to overcome a democrat filibuster; the democrats were able to, and did, block any and all legislation initiatives they wanted to - you know, like increasing the domestic sources of fuel by opening ANWR or offshore drilling, for instance, or blocking judicial nominees.

Yes, the dem's were in the minority, but they were anything but powerless. So don't ever say that the Repub's had "absolute power" again - only a total idiot would believe that.

Mark -

"Clinton raised taxes and the economy not only did not suffer, but it went on to be the best economic times of our history. Also, the recession under Bush Sr. ended right after Bush Sr raised taxes"

Two things here Mark : The recession was ending after Bush Sr. agreed to the tax increase because the Interest Rate decreases by Greenspan (which were too slow in coming according to Bush Sr.) were working their through the economy by that point (too late to save his presidency).

Second, Clinton had nothing to do with the good economic times in the 90's. They were wholly the product of the following circumstances : The Soviet collapse, allowing Clinton to drastically slash the armed forces and defense spending, the advent of cheap, fast PC's and the internet - exploding business and personal productivity exponentially, and the Y2k problem in the latter 1/2 of the 90's which forced 100's of billions into tech spending to eliminate any possibility that there would a problem that night.

Granted Clinton should get credit for not instituting any reckless policies which would muck up the fortunate economic times he stepped into, and he did pass NAFTA, ensuring cheap products would available for millions of Americans (even if a few tens of thousands had to lose their jobs).

Of course, if only he had signed the bill opening ANWR, (the one and only time the Republicans ever got a bill to the President) we would have already been receiving the benefits of that resource.

Anon:

Thanks for the reminders. I knew there was more to it, just did not have the time to look it up.

D

"So, I guess this explains why your for raising taxes huh?"

I'm not for or against raising taxes. I simply think the issue of taxes is unimportant and there are dozens of factors in the economy that are far more influential than a slightly increase or decrease in tax rates. Recent history proves this.

The right-wing obsession with taxes is what makes their economic message so stale. Taxes aren't the problem.

Uh Brett,

I believe I posted a reply along with the other two to something Mark said. Did you not receive it or did you not post it ?

Reply: How do I know? I do not know who you are.

Brett,

"Reply: How do I know? I do not know who you are."

If I can find the time I'll rewrite/resend.

I was not aware you received so many comments you ultimately do not post. I thought perhaps it was the only one or one of a small few at most.

Reply: I do get a lot of comments which is great, the more discussion the better. I do end up posting about 95% of the comments that come in.