Posts Tagged ‘greenhouse gases’

Repudiate Obama’s Carbon Regulation Plans to Start Economic Recovery

March 4, 2009

Banking problems and “toxic assets” are major contributors to the ongoing decline in the stock market, but it is quite likely that investors took them into account last year. The 800 pound gorilla in the living room that nobody seems to want to talk about consists of Barack Obama’s agenda (per his State of the Union Address) to impose taxes on all fossil fuels, or require users of fossil fuels to buy carbon offset credits from the modern counterparts of medieval indulgence peddlers.

As long as this agenda continues to menace the United States, investors are rightly reluctant to invest in American manufacturing, transportation, and other energy-intensive sectors. If, however, enough Senators (including Democrats from coal-producing and manufacturing states) pledged to vote against and filibuster Obama’s cap-and-trade agenda, it would restore investor confidence, break the downward momentum of the stock market, and set the stage for an economic recovery. (more…)

“Carbon Credit Bookmakers” and “Corporate Welfare Seekers”

December 12, 2007

Physicians for Civil Defense’s “Money and Power” (November 2007) has an outstanding perspective on cap-and-trade proposals for carbon emissions, and other greenhouse gas regulations.

Under a cap and trade scheme, success will depend on skill in predicting or manipulating government policy. Bookmakers such as Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs would broker the carbon credit trading they support, making money from the forced purchases and sales, whatever the market did. Placing big bets are the 10 corporate welfare seekers that formed the Climate Action Partnership (USCAP). These include Duke Energy, PG&E, FPL, PNM Resources, Alcoa, BP, Caterpillar, Dupont, General Electric, PepsiCo, and others (see, hoping for $1.3 trillion in free money.

We encourage anyone who owns stock in any of these companies to introduce a stockholder resolution, in accordance with SEC requirements, that denounces carbon emission trading and emission caps as a scam from which the company should disassociate itself (while encouraging energy efficiencies that reduce costs for consumers while increasing company profits).

Royal Philips Electric, which is seeking legislation to force people to buy its compact fluorescent lights (we buy CFLs, but not from Philips) is yet another problem, and it was a sponsor of the Live Earth Concert.