Cap and Trade Passes Level 1

http://www.foxnews.com/static/fn2/ws/politics/html/calculator-waxman.html

Go there and find out what you are going to pay if it passes final votes.  Do the poll too.

This is a fantasy tax.  It taxes the fantastic notion that CO2 is harmful.  Even though 31,000 plus scientists disagree, but hey these are the most intelligent politicians ever right?

Opinion “C” is: This is going to pass just like ObamaCare.  It will be a great motivator for November.

Climate Change; Frost Bite

It’s not funny when someone gets frost bite, unless of course it is in an attempt to prove global warming.  It’s not enough for some people that over 31,000 scientists are launching a lawsuit over the fact that this is all an attempt to tax people for CO2, I.E. breath, when it has proven to help our climate.   It’s a hoax folks.  But it’s not just one idiot.  Read this link:

Herald Sun

Opinion “C” is: Don’t kill yourself by ever decreasing sub zero temps trying to prove that the climate is warming.  Cold…is not  the new warm.  As mom used to say, bundle up! (was that in the Herald SUN?)

WA Backs Climate Change Hoax

FIRST REPLY FROM WASHINGTON STATE OFFICIAL

Hello Mr. Connolly,

Thank you for your message and your interest in our web site.  I’ve referred your email to our lead staff on climate change issues, but unfortunately he is out of the office until next week.  However, he is very prompt about responding to his messages and I’m sure he’ll get back to you as soon as he can once he’s back in the office.  His name is Seth Preston, so you can expect an email from him within a week or so.  I hope that meets your needs.

Thanks again for your interest!

Tami Dahlgren

Air Quality Program

ORIGINAL POST FOLLOWS

As part of doing the right thing with regard to knowing my requirements for emission testing, I ran into claims on the Washington Ecology Site that claim we are creating climate change with our vehicles without providing any proof to the claim!

Here is my statement to the state using their comment form:

“I am interested in the studies used to make these claims.  I am sure there is some truth to some of it, but I don’t think it is wise to throw unqualified opinions about problems that may or may not exist without references.  I especially would not do this if I were using it to justify taxation or fees used to solve these problems.  Here is the content that you post currently:

Three Greater Than Ten?

According to Reuters, while at a New York Historical Society event on Tuesday, Paul Volcker stated: “If at the end of the day we need to raise taxes, we should raise taxes.” In context, he is talking about two specific taxes that people are very divided over: VAT & Carbon Tax.

My question is, did anyone at that dinner who actually understands history from a high fact oriented perspective have the intestinal fortitude to stand up and ask him why we would ever need to raise taxes? In that History and Science show a different solution.  Namely that Ronald Reagan who lowered taxes actually proved tax rate reductions created more revenue for the Federal Government because more business was accomplished and therefore more revenue generated.  Did anyone show a graph of history depicting what happens when the stranglelold of taxation was loosened?  I think I can answer that question with an emphatic “no”.  If it had been asked, the outraged tax lovers would have run the person out of the dinner and that would have been a bigger story than Paul’s lapse in judgement statement.