When you’re rich, really eight-figure inherited/married wealth rich, a recession means you might opt for the pre-owned Gulfstream IV over the new. If only to let the little people know that you feel their pain.
When you’re poor, bad times threaten your job, your family, your health, or your life. Bad times hurt people at the margins.
The liberal ruling class displays an astonishingly callous disregard of the human cost of bad economic times on the huddled masses whose interests they claim to safeguard.
But even the most clueless patrician among our elected elite would never suggest that a recession is a good thing.
Would he?
Get this:
John Kerry: If You Enjoyed This Year’s Recession, Just Wait for Cap and Trade
Let me emphasize something very strongly as we begin this discussion. The United States has already this year alone achieved a 6 percent reduction in emissions simply because of the downturn in the economy, so we are effectively saying we need to go another 14 percent. [emphasis added]
So it’s the nebulous value of a speculative decline in atmospheric carbon dioxide, measured as a change in concentration of a few parts per million, versus the tangible certainty of human hunger, pain and privation for millions of Americans.
John Calabrese at the North Star National elaborates:
What did Kerry just unwittingly admit? He admitted that cap-and-trade advocates and like-minded global warming believers see economic prosperity as a huge source of the supposed problem. That’s why they’re proposing the perfect solution – from their perspective – in the form of a massive tax increase directly on industry.Nothing discourages productive economic activity like confiscatory taxes on said activity. The same people who lament the loss of manufacturing jobs in the United States now seek to multiply these losses many times over by making it economically impossible for manufacturers to operate. …
But the recession, hey, that’s working like a dream. Carbon emissions are down 6 percent. Damn. How many more big industrial conglomerates do we have to put out of business to get to 20 percent?
If ever anyone "needed killin'" nt
Achance Thursday, October 8th at 12:53AM EDT (link)In Vino Veritas
we wouldn't have a quorum in Congress.
The_Gadfly Thursday, October 8th at 7:38AM EDT (link)But we’re not supposed to say things like that where tender ears might hear them.
We’ve been called racists enough now that it shouldn’t bother us any more.
-AChance, http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/11/03/what-men-may-do-we-have-done/#comment-24463
If NY23 was a beat down for Conservatives, what do you call what happened to Progressives in NJ and VA?
inspired by ColdWarrior, http://www.redstate.com/hooah_mac/2009/11/04/ny-23-the-agony-of-defeat-not-so-much/#comment-156
Oh, hayull yeah! Kin I git me a huntin' license here?
blooch Thursday, October 8th at 9:07AM EDT (link)http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/fstack/can_i_get_me_a_hunting_license_here.guest.html
“I have to admit that Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a smart man. He was, in many ways, a psychologist.”–drealoth
Only Kerry's "pretzel Logic" could come up with that. nt
TNJim Thursday, October 8th at 1:13AM EDT (link)Join the RedState Strike Force
“No. You can’t” -Moe Lane
Hey Massachusetts
redpens Thursday, October 8th at 4:24AM EDT (link)Why do you people insist on re-electing this out of touch elitist snob? He knows nothing about what regular people endure on a daily basis.
Please retire him to his Gulf Stream jet when Sen. Lurch is up for re-election.
If it weren't for the fact that MA was full of the same,
Steph C Thursday, October 8th at 7:24AM EDT (link)I’d opine that it was to keep him out of their hair.
“[I]f the public are bound to yield obedience to laws to which they cannot give their approbation, they are slaves to those who make such laws and enforce them.” –Candidus in the Boston Gazette, 1772
Hillbilly Politics
The Kerry Curve vs. the Laffer Curve
SoFiMil Thursday, October 8th at 6:57AM EDT (link)Vlad, can you give us some back-of-the-envelope numbers for what would happen to the U.S. (and world) economy if the U.S. should decrease emissions by an additional 70% to achieve Kerry’s utopia?
http://www.suvstrategery.blogspot.com
Statistics not available.
Vladimir Thursday, October 8th at 7:34AM EDT (link)The #1 industry, if we did that, would be “foraging”. The #1 energy source would be cow flops, and I can’t find those statistics on Google.
There is no opinion, however absurd, which men will not readily embrace as soon as they can be brought to the conviction that it is generally adopted. - Arthur Schopenhauer
The first honest statement I've heard on the topic
Next93 Thursday, October 8th at 9:01AM EDT (link)It appears that the majority of “green jobs” to come about so far is the creation of statistics pulled directly from one’s posterior.
For example, can someone tell me how every person on an airliner has a carbon footprint of “tons”, when the aircraft itself carries at best one ton of fuel?
These people are worse than Muslim fundamentalists (who have a tendancy to slip the decimal point one or two places to thier favor). I don’t trust a single number they put out anymore.
Constitutional limits on the powers of the federal government:
It’s not just the law, it’s a good idea!
It's more than a ton...
yoyo Thursday, October 8th at 10:05AM EDT (link)Depending on the aircraft:
I am intimately familiar with F-14’s and S-3’s [Navy aircraft] and I know that the F-14 carried ~ 18,000 lbs of fuel topped off (9 tons) and the S-3 carried ~ 17,000 lbs topped off (8.5 tons).
I would garner that an A-319/320 or a 737-600 would carry a lot more than either of the F-14 or S-3.
I am not disagreeing with your premise (that the statistics are bunk); only that the weight of fuel carried is a lot more than you thought.
Si Vis Pacem Para Bellum
‘If you seek peace, prepare for war!’
=============================
Pukin’ Dogs - The Fighting 143
Sans Reproache
=============================
The ‘yoyo’ replaced my cigarettes January 22, 2006….
CO2 calculation
The_Gadfly Friday, October 9th at 6:51AM EDT (link)Remember the plane only has to carry the fuel, not the oxidizer which it pulls from the atmosphere. This is one of the reasons the fuel requirements for space shots go up so quickly; they have to carry both fuel and oxidizer.
According to Boeing a 747 carries either 48,445 or 52,410 U.S. gal (183,380 L) of fuel. A completely accurate calculation requires knowing specific gravities determined experimentally and depends on batch processing, temperature and fuel type. Searching Google for a back of the envelope calculation I found this which seems to agree reasonably closely with a couple of other places I looked. So depending on fuel type we have 290670, 331363.8, 314460, and 358484.4 pounds of fuel for options. Using a weight converter (I didn’t recall the conversion factor and found this searching Google) we get 131.85, 150.3, 142.64, 162.61. But we’re not quite done yet. The atomic weight of carbon is 12.0107 and the atomic weight of oxygen is 15.9994. Which gives us a maximum output of 483.12, 550.73, 522.66, and 595.83 tons if we assume all of the fuel is carbon, which it is not. Working through the various passenger configurations and you wind up at maximum productions of between 1.05 and 1.63 tons per passenger. A Google search for direct conversions without the math shows a typical conversion rate of about 3 pounds of CO2 per pound of jet fuel, which accounts for water being the other primary output of the oxidation reaction. Using the higher 3.1 pound rate I saw in the Google blurbs the worst case tonnage is 0.89 to 1.38 tons per person, assuming all the fuel is burned on the trip.
So while the plural is wrong, about 1 ton of CO2 per passenger looks reasonable as a rule of thumb. The real issue isn’t so much whether the math is correct on these sorts of easily checked calculations, it is whether or not the models they use to predict the catastrophic warming have accounted for all of the feedback loops, including the ones that mitigate warming.
We’ve been called racists enough now that it shouldn’t bother us any more.
-AChance, http://www.redstate.com/moe_lane/2009/11/03/what-men-may-do-we-have-done/#comment-24463
If NY23 was a beat down for Conservatives, what do you call what happened to Progressives in NJ and VA?
inspired by ColdWarrior, http://www.redstate.com/hooah_mac/2009/11/04/ny-23-the-agony-of-defeat-not-so-much/#comment-156
#1 until all the cows are "foraged"
blooch Thursday, October 8th at 9:10AM EDT (link)They produce too much methane, anyway.
“I have to admit that Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a smart man. He was, in many ways, a psychologist.”–drealoth
Yet poor people
NightTwister Thursday, October 8th at 10:18AM EDT (link)who live at the margins all over the country continue to vote for people like John Kerry, believing that this time they’ll do something to get them out of the ghetto. It’s kinda like this…
Get Connected in Colorado.
Want to try for 20% Unemployment Kerry?
onlyme Friday, October 9th at 12:46AM EDT (link)In John Kerry’s own words:
“Let me emphasize something very strongly as we begin this discussion. The United States has already this year alone achieved a 6 percent reduction in emissions simply because of the downturn in the economy, so we are effectively saying we need to go another 14 percent.””
Yes, that is Kerry sayin in effect, we have reduced emissions by 6% and it has only cost 3.6% of the nations workforce losing their jobs in the past year so we only need to lose another 2.33 times that number of jobs to hit 20% reduction.
Yay for the US.
Maybe we can lose 20% MORE jobs and reduce CO2 emissions by 30%!!