President Obama says green energy will not only save the environment, the new jobs it creates will revitalize the economy. Dr. Kenneth Green joins John to take issue with that contention. www.LibertyPen.com
Video Rating: 4 / 5
www.cspan.org Aug. 18, 2011 http www.newsbusters.org www.fool.com www.survivaltopics.com
stossel needs a better song something as classy as he is
Good show Mr. Stossel.The green coin needs some scrutiny.
who’s got their wallets? we can dump our money into a ditch or subsidize “green” jobs
@aussieconservative If BP can be charged for the damages created on foreign land then we should be able to sue China or foreign countries for their pollution damaging our property in some type of international court, or actually our own court, because the damage is occurring on our property. It’s the same thing if they were to launch missiles at us or something, but not so drastic.
Pollution, such as products of combustion, carcinogens/benzene/etc anything detrimental to human health&enviro.
@rockhardxrocker And yet you would use punitive measures on your own people while other countries can still do the same things your talking about or worse to the atmosphere. and what are you talking about when you say smog. are you talking about carbon monoxide a deadly gas that become oxygenated the second it enters the atmosphere (becoming carbon dioxide also known as plant food essential for photosynthisis to occur), or are you talking about water vapour which isn’t deadly at all.
@groam6666 but you forget that if one person damages another person’s property, the damager must pay compensation. Look above for my arguments above, paying for the damages to the environment and people’s lungs, etc. (which are their property). So after factoring in those compensation costs, if it’s still economical to buy polluting fuel, then that’s your choice.
Electric cars was one example of green, there’s also biodiesel etc. The electric cars owners have the option of green electricity.
@rockhardxrocker So, we essentially agree. There is no point in buying a more expensive green car when it functions the same, and no one has an incentive to buy it. It’s not just the “freeloader” argument. When people are given a choice, then how are they freeloading? The fact is, I doubt anyone want’s to live in a paternalistic society, in which society is synonymous with government.
Even with electric cars, we get the majority of electricity from coal. So it’s not a solution at all.
@groam6666 “quality cars”? you are trying to confuse/make ambiguous quality with green for your argument. A quality car is a car that functions well. A green car is one that functions but does not pollute as much. Gas cars of equal function to an electric/green car are usually cheaper, and thus ppl buy the gas. Sure most people now can probably afford electric cars, but if it’s even .01 more there is no incentive. Some other sucker can buy the green stuff, you can just freeload and buy booze.
@rockhardxrocker Wouldn’t society be disinclined to purchase vehicles that emits to much pollution, or at least discouraged to buy them? What about the prices of better cars. The price would drop with government deregulation and actual free trade (competition). I highly doubt many people will specifically choose the car that belches as much smog as possible. If people can afford quality cars, then 90% of the time they will buy those goods and not the substitutes. Macroeconomics 101.
@aussieconservative the problem is people can be freeloaders. They can buy the cheaper car that shits out smog to save money for themselves, while putting a cost onto everyone else by polluting the environment; and and no one can stop them under your paradigm. Even if you pay more for cleaner technology, some other guy can pollute more, save money for himself, and offset what you paid, but you both get the same environment. That’s bullshit.
@aussieconservative CO2 is not the only component of smog. Do you think anything is a pollutant?
p.s. CO2 is toxic to humans. If you were to hold your breath, you would die from the toxicity of the rising co2 in your body, before you would die from the oxygen deprivation.
Companies exist soly to take in money from buyers. If the government is your biggest buyer then your company only exists to take money from the government. You sould take that as a clue when examining your own economic viability.
you want green energy? then how about nuclear? or gasification, or how every president not cut funding to the fusion reactor project.
Seems to me that when it comes to polical beliefs green is the new red.
@rockhardxrocker CO2 is not a pollutant.
@bsabruzzo due to increase in wealth the smog of england has largely disapeared. once people can afford to buy a better environment they do. but they cant be forced into such things. it needs to be economically viable. wealth drives environmentally friendly activity not government.
I live in Germany and we are big on wind farms and renewable energy. It really sucks, because energy prices are much, much higher than in America. We pay all this money and tax cheap energy so renewable is competitively. Not one person dies of any cancer related pollution in the modern world, rarely I should say.
All these green policies are just raising the cost of living for people, not to mention the cost of industry. China is going to pound all the worlds economies into the dirt.
“Investing in green” jobs is such a crock. It certainly won’t help the economy and won’t even improve the environment. It’s just some political spin to win votes from the gullible
@rockhardxrocker Last, “you can’t pinpoint which factory this smog came from” Because this is true, you can’t determine if the “smog” actually caused the damage.
To use your analogy (as bad as it is), I step on a landmine and sue you, a landmine manufacturer. But I have no idea who actually placed them. I could have placed them there myself. Are you at fault?
Just because there is oil, aren’t I at fault for driving my car or heating my house or surfing the net? I chose to do these.
@rockhardxrocker “they need to be taxed for it duh” Taxes are not a punishment. Taxes are just for paying for the functions of the government. Punishments come from courts and the rulings. Clean-up is not the function of the US federal government, but states might have that power.
Again, currently in the US there is little to no smog. Factories and refineries do have a number of emisions, but smog is a combination of large particle pollution and water vapor (smoke + fog).
@rockhardxrocker “Ok if I lay mines in your backyard” Bad analogy. Yes, you my, if you give me a map and there is a need, like fighting an invasion. We are then both responsible for the result. But, if you just randomly enter my property and I don’t need mines, you violate so many of my rights.
I agreed to using oil and all the benefits and liabilities. We are all stewards of the Earth, we all work to protect it.
By the way, smog isn’t a broblem. They are fighting over CO2 now.
@bsabruzzo Basically what I’m saying is you can’t pinpoint which factory this smog came from. But the fact that any of them is producing smog means they need to be taxed for it duh. If their smog is both the same, then it will eventually cause the same damage. Is it Ok if I lay mines in your backyard? I’ll pay you for damages once you step on them and die. It’s just absurd. The environment doesn’t belong to them, they don’t have permission to pollute. Pollution=damage=they need to compensate.
@PipeManChuck There are bigger problems with wind and solar than just being more expensive. Electrical grids need to maintain as constant a pressure as they can, just like water delivered through your pipes. Both wind and solar are too unpredictable to maintain this constant flow by themselves. One of two things has to occur. Either you limit electrical usage to wind and solar conditions to windy sunny days or you dump huge amounts of electricity into the ground during overnight wind storms.
@gustjorodedheo The market is not running efficiently, because the government imposes so many taxes and regulations on coal, oil and natural gas. They do this so that “renewable” energy is more “efficient.” Energy prices would plummet if the government didn’t tax it or regulate it, and then come to the price it should be.
It’s interesting how the left blames businesses for being greedy, when it’s the government that makes businesses raise their prices, they can’t operate at a loss after all.
How do you know that “The Market” wouldn’t select renewable energy? Maybe if oil companies stopped buying up the technology and hiding it, we could see some actual growth, and as it became more expedient and cheaper, we could use it instead of oil.
@rockhardxrocker “What if Oil Co. says Oil Inc.” A last thought for now. If Oil, Inc. is at fault, then Little Guy should charge and sue them. But currently he is suing Oil Co., so this has nothing to do with Oil, Inc.
in fact, the courts can only concern themselves with the case before them. So, Oil, Inc. is a non-factor.
@rockhardxrocker When the system is boiled down to personal responsibility, the oil co. would walk into the court with all the data of how much oil produced, how much waste, the composition of the oil and waste and so on. The police would have taken samples when the charge is made and tested them and doctors (who all are on record for decades) will present the medical ramifications. The plantif would show his personal use (or misuse) of the product. Lawyers present. Judge refs. Jury rules. Done.
“Let’s face it: If the president had a plan to create jobs, he wouldn’t have kept it under wraps until now. Why take flak from Republicans and heat from the public if you have what it takes to turn the economy and labor market around?
Barack Obama doesn’t have a plan to create jobs. Nor is that his job. The government’s role is to provide an environment in which the private sector will create them. That should be his goal.” –Carolyn Baum, Bloomberg
Our stimulus goes to other countries? Yes. The U.S. Department of Energy revealed $60 million of the $1.2 billion given to the agency in economic stimulus funds to study climate change. While some might consider the expenditure frivolous, especially given the nation’s financial woes, it should be noted that some of the equipment was not even intended for use in the U.S. but rather was deployed? to facilities in the Maldives, India and Australia. Money that could have gone to US unemployment ???
WTF would vote for this nobody? That’s right – California. People in that state as dumb as stumps – Maxine Waters, Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein – no wonder their state is such a mess.
Whole climategate eco con outed on YouTube: …Obama, Joel Rogers & Van Jones in Collusion, Knowledge of The Lie
Watch YouTube = Van Jones Espousing Communism & Progressive Socialist Activism
Niggers are real good at buying shoes and big ass rims. They were slaves for a reason.