Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

  1. #1
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696

    Is Obama Just Trying to Tank the Economy? With the new EPA regs it’s tempting to say

    June 5, 2014 1:00 PM

    Is Obama Just Trying to Tank the Economy?

    With the new EPA regs, it’s tempting to say the answer is yes.

    By Stephen Moore



    (President Obama: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

    Comments 71

    Everywhere I go around the country — whether talking to financial advisers, business leaders, tea-party groups, or college students — I am almost always asked the same question: Is Barack Obama intentionally trying to destroy the economy? And for five and a half years, I’ve always flatly rejected that notion. This is a good man with the right intentions; it’s just that he has completely the wrong economic model floating around in his head.
    After Monday’s announcement of imbecilic and destructive new carbon-emission standards, I’m not so sure that the White House is well-meaning or that this president really cares about the working men and women of this country. These regulations on energy use and carbon dioxide emissions will be a severe self-imposed wound to an economy already stuck in a slow-growth rut.
    How ironic that a president who has talked endlessly about income inequality for the past two years will impose one of the most regressive taxes imaginable — and this is a tax — on the nation’s poor. If the rest of the world is foolish enough to follow our lead (China, which is hyper-obsessed with growth, hints they will, but surely they won’t) with these economically masochistic policies, the primary victims will be the hundreds of millions of the poorest people on the planet for whom cheap electricity is a passport out of poverty. Doesn’t it seem just like yesterday when the Left cared about the poor? Now they are expendable in the course of the Left’s grander and grandiose mission to save the planet from global warming or cooling, or droughts, or floods, or whatever the latest eco-catastrophe is designated to be.
    And which Americans will lose jobs from these energy regulations? Hundreds of thousands of coal miners, construction workers, pipefitters, truckers, and manufacturing workers. I have long argued that what is needed for our economy to grow and the middle class to again flourish is a strategic alliance between blue-collar unions and conservatives to defeat our common enemy of the radical green movement that’s dedicated to the deindustrialization of America. That moment has arrived.
    Just as another aside: Is there anything more deranged than the movement by some Christian and Catholic groups allying themselves with the radical greens who promote abortion, peddle population-control programs that have led to the genocide of tens of millions of babies in China and other nations, and at their core believe that people are the ultimate pollution and that trees and animals have the same rights as human beings? Today, the radical green movement is a much greater threat to Christian values than Planned Parenthood is.
    Back to the issue of whether these regulations are intended to destroy or at least wound the economy: Let us suppose that the long-run strategy were to undermine our free-enterprise system and replace it with something else. Is there a better way to accomplish that mission than by making the “master resource” — energy — more expensive and more scarce? If you want to move America and the world back to “a simpler time” – say, the Middle Ages — force people to use the inefficient forms of energy used in the Middle Ages, like, say, windmills. Indoctrinate the masses with the idea that all forms of cheap and abundant energy — coal, natural gas, oil, nuclear, hydro — are immoral planet destroyers. Tell people that if they care about future generations, we must shrink the economy, not grow it.
    The problem for the greens is that people like growth. They like their iPads and iPhones, their big-screen TVs and microwaves and SUVs, and their Harley-Davidsons. And they don’t want to pay $5 a gallon for gasoline or see their utility bills rise each month. When rate payers are asked whether they’d be willing to pay more on their monthly bills for green energy, almost every American says, “Hell no.”
    So the White House developed the ingenious spin that these new EPA regulations will mean more jobs and will mean more growth and smaller electric bills, because we’ll conserve more. That’s the word out of the EPA. Like Obamacare: This is going to be good for you. But after the fiasco of green-energy investment programs and the mirage of millions of green jobs dating back to 2009, it’s hard to believe that anyone in the White House really still believes this big green lie.
    What is more probable is that Barack Obama really does have a Messiah complex. He really does believe that his legacy will be to save the planet from extinction and that future generations will praise him for his courage and foresight in stopping the planet from melting (or freezing). Perhaps the goal is a second Nobel Peace Prize.
    In the meantime, the American worker and family will suffer. These regs will make us poorer by thousands of dollars per family over a decade — and the terrible irony is that those demographic groups that voted in greatest numbers for Obama will suffer the most. An economy that shrank in the first quarter of this year will now take a new $50 billion-a-year hit.
    I still strongly doubt this economic destruction is intentional on the president’s part. But does that even matter?
    — Stephen Moore is chief economist at the Heritage Foundation.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...-stephen-moore
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

  2. #2
    Senior Member AirborneSapper7's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    South West Florida (Behind friendly lines but still in Occupied Territory)
    Posts
    117,696
    Report: EPA Rules Will "Necessarily Skyrocket" US Electricity Prices

    Michael Bastasch 11 hours ago
    3 Comments

    U.S. electricity rates are set to rise more than 10 percent by 2020 because of onerous federal environmental regulations on coal-fired power plants, according to an analysis by American Action Forum.
    This means consumers could be forced to pay $150 more each year for electricity due to Obama administration power plant regulations.

    The Environmental Protection Agency’s recently announced carbon dioxide limits for existing power plants claims the rule would “shrink electricity bills roughly 8 percent.” But these supposed savings come in 2030 after electricity prices increase “between 5.9 and 6.5 percent in 2020.”
    “To no one’s surprise, this proposal carries high costs, burdens states with a short compliance timeline, and could threaten the reliability of national electricity markets,” wrote AAF policy analysts Catrina Rorke and Sam Batkins.
    But this 6.5 percent increase from carbon dioxide limits is only the tip of the iceberg. Adding the 6.5 percent to the already projected 4.8 percent increase in electricity prices from EPA rules already on the books, means Americans will see 10.3 percent higher power bills by 2020 — adding $150 to their annual power costs by the end of the decade.
    Higher power costs, however, will not be spread evenly throughout the country, according to AAF. The pain will particularly be felt in regions of the country that are more reliant on coal and are major energy producers.
    For example, AAF found that the EPA’s carbon dioxide caps for power plants would cost Texas alone $812 million in compliance costs based on the high number of fossil-fueled power plants in the state. Louisiana would have to to pay $464 million to lower their carbon dioxide emissions based on the EPA’s proposed rule.
    Other states will have a much easier time meeting EPA rules, according to AAF.
    “Some states, like California, if you count their whole clean energy fleet, their already in compliance with EPA rules,” Catrina Rorke told The Daily Caller News Foundation.
    California, along with nine eastern states, already have operating cap-and-trade programs as well. One of the ways the EPA is going to allow states to comply with the rule is to impose state-based cap-and-trade systems.
    “This outsources passing cap-and-trade legislation to the states,” Batkins told TheDCNF. “I’m curious how many states will refuse to participate.”

    States that elect the cap-and-trade option will actually get more time to comply with EPA-mandated emissions cuts — a nice incentive for some states to extend the rule’s short implementation deadline.
    “It certainly takes the pressure off of EPA… it’s a lot easier from a compliance oversight perspective,” Batkins said.
    The Obama administration and the EPA have tried to defend the rule by saying it would create jobs and benefit public health. But AAF analysts broke down EPA’s jobs projections and found them lacking.
    EPA says its carbon dioxide limits will create 28,000 “job-years” in the “electricity, coal, and natural gas sectors” in 2020 along with 78,800 jobs in “demand-side energy efficiency employment.”
    But even the EPA admits its job claims are unsupported. The agency said its job impacts “of demand-side energy efficiency programs have not been extensively studied in the peer-reviewed, published economic literature.”
    AAF also notes that a “job-year” is not equivalent to an actual job. So when the EPA says 28,000 job-years, it could mean the equivalent number of full-time employees or even 56,000 part-time employees. But no matter how many job-years are created, they only last for a year.
    “No one expected EPA to come out and say the rule would cut more jobs,” Batkins said. “It’s merely going to transfer jobs from one side of the economy to the other.”

    Source

    Don't forget to Like Freedom Outpost on Facebook, Google Plus, Tea Party Community & Twitter.

    You can also get Freedom Outpost delivered to your Amazon Kindle device here.

    http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/06/re...ricity-prices/
    Join our efforts to Secure America's Borders and End Illegal Immigration by Joining ALIPAC's E-Mail Alerts network (CLICK HERE)

Similar Threads

  1. Obama admin changed language of Obamacare regs to hide loss of private insurance
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-29-2013, 11:50 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-22-2012, 10:31 AM
  3. Global Think-Tank: Jobs Crisis to Linger as Economy Struggles
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-11-2012, 05:11 PM
  4. Is this the end of American empire? It's tempting to answer
    By AirborneSapper7 in forum Other Topics News and Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-09-2011, 05:12 PM
  5. Obama:The idea of doing things on my own is very tempting
    By OneNationUnderGod in forum illegal immigration News Stories & Reports
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 07-25-2011, 07:48 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •