Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Pops wrote:But a combination of creeping regulation and slowly escalating taxes on "carbon" is fine for another reason, it's probably the only way the Federals can force the populous to wean themselves from FF.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada wrote:Why this obsession with Government Force?
Pops wrote:Tanada wrote:Why this obsession with Government Force?
So "incentives" and education and subsidized PEVs materialize from thin air?
I'm ready to hear Ted Cruze on becoming more like the French, LOL
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Pops wrote:Ralfy, the bit about reinvesting savings only holds as long as the amount not spent on the commute is available. If the one-person commute is avoided because the commuter cannot afford the cost, there is no "savings".
Just because I don't own a Lear Jet doesn't mean I've "saved" enough to buy a ski lodge in Aspen. lol
Tanada wrote:I can vouch for that! In all the months I have been off work I have 'saved' an awful lot of gasoline, but it sure didn't put any money in my pocket to do something else with.
Pops wrote:My point T is that an excise tax on an unwanted behavior (carbon, tobacco, seatbelt-free driving) discourages the behavior society doesn't like but it only affects the entity involved in the unwanted behavior.
Conversely, a tax incentive or subsidy paid from a general fund "penalizes" everyone indiscriminately via "forced" taxation and benefits only the recipient of the subsidy, Solyndra for example.
As Timo (hi Timo) pointed out, a carbon tax isn't a way to raise funds, although I know that is hard for people extremely attached to money to understand. It is merely a way to penalize evil-doers into bending to the will of society. LOL
Do you really believe we are going to get government to subsidise nukes when half the government is crowing they cut head-start by 5%? We can't even get half the population to believe there is anything but a conspiracy by Al Gore to make money.
Government is not going to do anything as long as that is the plan of half the government.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Pops wrote:You aren't reading us Ralphie.
I didn't say no one in the world was saving money. I said avoiding an expense (i.e. living within walking distance of work) because I don't have the money to commute is not a savings because I didn't have the money to commute. I can't be saving money I didn't have.
That's where the part about me not owning a Lear Jet OR a place in Aspen comes in. I don't have the money to purchase a jet and no matter how many I don't buy, I still don't have money left over.
lol, sounds like a good system though, I'd not buy a jet a couple of times a week and bank the "savings"!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests