June 2, 2008

Obamanomics 101

Hatched by Dafydd

When the Democrats seized Congress in 2006, they promised, among the many promises they made -- among the seemingly millions of promises they made -- to move immediately to solve "global warming" (they hadn't yet gotten the memo about calling it "global climate change," so as to include global warming, global cooling, and global unusual stability). They swore they would reduce America's "carbon footprint." They vowed to cure the Earth's "fever" by any means necessary (a progressive term of art that means "no matter what you great unwashed, with your false consciousness, may think you want").

After two years of concerted action to surrender in Iraq, they have now turned to this particular promise. They have decided that the time for talk is over, and what we need now is action, action, action! Today, the Democrats in the Senate, having trampled underfoot a more moderate climate plan supported by John McCain and the Senate Republicans ("false consciousness!"), introduced their own draconian vision.

It demands a 67% reduction of CO2 emissions by the year 2050, along with (I know you're shocked to read this) a massive, massive tax to create a gargantuan new carbon-regulatory system:

The proposal would cap carbon dioxide releases at 2005 levels by 2012. Additional reductions would follow annually so that by 2050, total U.S. greenhouse emissions would be about one-third of current levels.

The bill would create a pollution allowance trading system. That would generate billions of dollars a year to help people offset expected higher energy costs, promote low-carbon energy alternatives and help industries deal with the transition. Part of the $6.7 trillion projected to be collected from the allowances over 40 years would go toward $800 billion in tax breaks to offset people's higher energy costs.

These reductions "will not only enable us to avoid the ravages of unchecked global warming, but will create millions of new jobs," contends Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, who heads the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

But this bill is only a pale shadow of what we will have if Barack H. Obama is elected; no piker he, Obama has proposed, as part of his own energy policy, a scheme to reduce carbon emissions by 80% over the next 41 years. This would not just cripple the economy; achieving such a cut in so little time would require us to paraplegicize our economy. (I don't care if there's no such word; there ought to be.) As Sen. O. puts it on his campaign web site:

Well, I don't believe that climate change is just an issue that's convenient to bring up during a campaign. I believe it's one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation.

(I wondered whether Obama considers Islamic terrorism another of the "greatest moral challenges" of our generation; but I can't tell, because, so far as I can tell, he doesn't actually mention terrorism or al-Qaeda on his website. But there's no search function either, so I can't be certain.)

Welcome to Obamanomics: You may think that you don't want to go back to the 1940s level of energy use, but that's just pesky, old false consciousness again. Just ask Barack; he'll tell you what to think. (If you don't understand what I mean, please buy and read Jonah Goldberg's tour de force, Liberal Fascism.)

But the Democrats have discovered, to their shock and anguish, that voters might actually be more concerned about their own bank accounts than the American carbon footprint. Not only that, but Republican senators and President Bush are not the irrelevancies that Democrats, in their hubris, imagine them. For now it appears nearly certain that this bill is D.O.A.... at least for this session:

With gasoline at $4 per gallon and home heating and cooling costs soaring, it is getting harder to sell a bill that would transform the country's energy industries and - as critics will argue - cause energy prices to rise even more....

The debate on global warming is viewed as a watershed in climate change politics. Yet both sides acknowledge the prospects for passage are slim this election year.

Several GOP senators are promising a filibuster; the bill's supporters are expressing doubt they can find the 60 votes to overcome the delaying tactic. [Not to mention having to find 67 votes to override a promised presidential veto.]

The problem, of course, is in the economic details hinted at by the quotation above; can any sane, sober person read the following without lurching back a bit and saying, "What the -- ?"

The bill would create a pollution allowance trading system. That would generate billions of dollars a year to help people offset expected higher energy costs, promote low-carbon energy alternatives and help industries deal with the transition. Part of the $6.7 trillion projected to be collected from the allowances over 40 years would go toward $800 billion in tax breaks to offset people's higher energy costs.

For the innumerate, a trillion is a thousand billion; so $6.7 trillion is the same as $6,700 billion. Divided by 41 years (2009 through 2050) gives us an annual collection of "allowances" (that is, a tax on businesses and on energy sales) of $163.4 billion per year... and even that assumes that the Democrats didn't lowball their own estimate; if it's business as usual, their own internal figures probably show twice that big a tax -- $326.8 billion per year -- which will also certainly be written in such a way that it grows much faster than inflation (every tax seems to do that).

By way of contrast, the estimated expenses of Medicare Part D -- the Medicare prescription-drug benefit enacted in 2003 -- which has elicited screams of anguish not only from conservatives but even many moderates of both parties -- is a mere $36 billion per year. This brand new, carbon-rationing bureaucracy will be more than 4.5 times as large as Medicare Part D, even by the Democrats' own tendentious estimate. Under the more realistic speculation, it will be nine times as big.

But wait, not all of that $6.7 trillion dollars collected will be kept by the federal government! Heaven forbid we accuse "progressives" of wanting to tax us into oblivion: They pledge to give us "tax breaks" of $800 billion. As Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA, 80% -- actually 89%, if we don't count her two skipped votes last year) said, that will "enable us to avoid the ravages of unchecked global warming [and] create millions of new jobs" to boot.

Sorry, more math (arithmetic, actually): They squeeze $163.4 billion per year out of businesses -- who will pass the bill along to their customers (that's you!), of course, since the alternative is to go bankrupt; but then the same new bureaucracy will kick back $19.5 billion per year to favored clients. This will, of course, create "millions of new jobs."

Of course, they would never do this via earmarks to special interests, for Obama is an honorable man. So are Democrats all, all honorable men. And women.

(As a complete non-sequitur, did you all know that Obama earmarked $100,000 for a certain Catholic priest who has been much discussed in the news recently? According to the New York Times, "Typical of Mr. Obama’s earmarks was a $100,000 grant for a youth center at a Catholic church run by the Rev. Michael Pfleger, a controversial priest who was one of the few South Side clergymen to back Mr. Obama against Mr. Rush." I'm not sure what made me think of this...)

So by all means, rejectionist Republicans: Go ahead and boycott the election, allowing Barack H. Obama to become president by default. I'm sure our nation will be able to weather:

  • Declaring defeat and running home from Iraq;
  • Coffee klatches with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (and his sock-puppet, Bashar Assad), Kim Jong-Il, Raul Castro, and Oogo Chavez -- all without any preconditions;
  • The total government takeover of the health-care industry;
  • A complete and mercilessly enforced ban on drilling for oil anywhere that isn't already tapped out, coupled with an energy policy that jacks gasoline prices up to $7 a gallon -- but which subsidizes windmills;
  • A federal bench, including the Supreme Court, packed with lifetime appointments of clones of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer, whom Obama himself said were his favorite justices and the model of his future appointments;
  • Same-sex marriage nationwide, imposed by those judges;
  • And staggering tax increases on everyone, not only via repealing the Bush tax cuts but also by raising capital-gains tax and business taxes.

Would we really easily survive as a world superpower with such radical U-turns in our national policy -- all at the same time? Would we then just pick ourselves up and elect Pat Buchanan or Tom Tancredo, and all would be right with the world?

Some appear to believe so. But for the rest of us, I think it's time not just to vote for John McCain ourselves, but for each of us to resolve to get our posteriors out into the streets and work for victory.

Remember, in war and politics, you don't win by losing... you win by winning. So unless you really, really like subsisting on yams and tofu, sweltering in the summer and freezing in winter, never going anywhere beyond walking distance, and living from welfare check to welfare check, it's time to get busy and make sure this particular liberal fascist from Chicago never has occasion to move his offices a mile west, across the National Mall to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW.

Hatched by Dafydd on this day, June 2, 2008, at the time of 9:14 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/3048

Comments

The following hissed in response by: cdquarles

Will someone tell me how this will work as advertised? Do the Dhimmicrats not understand the law of diminishing returns, the law of unintended consequences, opportunity costs, or the facts of life? [Rhetorical question, the answer is no.]

Another rhetorical question. Do Dhimmicrats learn from history, or why do we have to relive the 70s, only this time as a farce?

The goal, Dafydd, is the destruction of the United States of America. Why Dhimmicrats think that the world will be better after said destruction elude me.

Oh well, who is John Galt?

The above hissed in response by: cdquarles [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 2, 2008 10:27 PM

The following hissed in response by: BarbaraS

Very illuminating post, Dafydd. And on top of that I just read on Fox the the government has given Trinity church at least 15 million dollars over the last 15 years in grants. Tax payer money. Guess who paid for Wright's 10 million dollar house the church so graciously gave him.

The above hissed in response by: BarbaraS [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 12:26 AM

The following hissed in response by: BarbaraS

The democrats understand nothing except what feels good, sounds good and can get them the most money. And of course, last but not least they are against anything that Bush is for. Automatically. Withouse a second thought.

The above hissed in response by: BarbaraS [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 12:30 AM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

CDQuarles:

Oh well, who is John Galt?

Heh, without looking it up, do you know what her working title for that novel was? (If you don't already know, when you see what it was, you'll realize immediately why that couldn't be the publication title.)

BarbaraS:

The democrats understand nothing except what feels good, sounds good and can get them the most money. And of course, last but not least they are against anything that Bush is for. Automatically. Withouse a second thought.

So what would happen if President Bush endorsed Barack H. Obama for president?

Would it be like Scanners?

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 1:21 AM

The following hissed in response by: Baggi

So instead of jumping in with both feet, we'll elect John McCain, who also believes in this Global Warming, Cooling, Change crap and we'll slowly work our way into the water and hope no one notices?

Sometimes a shock to the system is a needed wake up call that gets people to change their behavior (like supporting Democrats). We've had it pretty darn good since 1994 and the people who vote now weren't old enough then, or conveniently have forgotten life under Democrat rule.

Instead of slowly turning all Republicans into "moderates" like John McCain, why not show everyone the direction we are headed in and see what happens when we get a shock to the system?

We still live in a Republic, after all. We can always throw the bums out and change things back to the way they were.

The above hissed in response by: Baggi [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 1:46 AM

The following hissed in response by: rightwingprof

why not show everyone the direction we are headed in and see what happens when we get a shock to the system?

Because no entitlement program, once established, has ever been repealed. The damage will have been done, and we will be unable to do anything about it.

And how did that "Let's teach them a lesson!" idiocy work in 2006?

The above hissed in response by: rightwingprof [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 2:25 AM

The following hissed in response by: Dan Kauffman

Was it any consulation during the 90s to be able to say

Don't blame me, I voted for Perot

The above hissed in response by: Dan Kauffman [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 3:54 AM

The following hissed in response by: blinkNoodle

"When the Democrats seized Congress in 2006..."

This is not worthy of you. This is the sort of writing I would expect in the NYT. You imply that the Democrats weren't legally entitled to become the majority. You know that isn't the case. The stupidity of the Republicans (then AND now) was the prime reason.

A little exaggeration here and there, humor, etc.--but let's not descend to the truly warped style of MSM, DK, and the rest of that side ... please.

The above hissed in response by: blinkNoodle [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 5:56 AM

The following hissed in response by: Michael Babbitt

So the US political world has come to this: run by the most ignorant, scientifically challenged, ideologically attached bunch of poseurs (as leaders) that you might be able to imagine. To ruin a great economy for a scientifc phantom. Now that's scary.

The above hissed in response by: Michael Babbitt [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 8:25 AM

The following hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist

We’re still trying to recover from the mess that Clinton left, and the former ‘Dem-Duo’ is about to become the ‘Dem-Trio’, i.e. Carter-Clinton-Obama.

What do we have that might be able to beat Obama? McCain. We have kept moving to the left for so long, that the far-far-far-LEFT is now upon us. Heck, even if Obama loses, the far-far-far-LEFT is expecting enough gains in Congress to override any threatened vetoes by McCain.

“$100,000” for Pfleger's church? Who knows how much the figure actually is?! EXAMPLE: “When Obama was in the Illinois Legislature, he helped land more than $200,000 in state grants for outreach programs run by Pfleger's church.” Also, as BarbaraS notes above, at least $15-million has gone to the TUCC.

Look at our Congress…American voters, not the politicians, have created that mess. Look at our school system…American voters, not the teachers, have created that mess. We may have won the Cold War, but the spread of Communist ideology never slowed down here in America, e.g. look at our school system…which produces our voters, our politicians, our teachers, our reporters, our workers, our leaders, etc.

At some point recovery becomes nearly impossible, and America has reached that point. Bush 43 made mistakes, but he tried to fix the problems, e.g. Social Security and defense. He was never even given the chance on the Social Security issue. After the 911 attacks, Bush 43 decided that America should stand up and fight the enemy…at first, most Americans backed him, basically letting him climb out onto the limb and then sawing it off behind him. So, who’s America’s most dangerous ENEMY here – Radical Islam or Americans themselves?

As the comedian Jerry Clower once told, in A Coon Huntin' Story, that John Eubanks had climbed a tree to get at a coon. Turns out that it was not a coon, but a lynx (aka “Supped Up Wildcat” in Mississippi) that John poked with a sharp stick, and the lynx attacked John after the poking.

Well, just shoot up in here amongst us…one of us got to have some relief! – John Eubanks

The above hissed in response by: KarmiCommunist [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 9:30 AM

The following hissed in response by: David M

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the - Web Reconnaissance for 06/03/2008 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day...so check back often.

The above hissed in response by: David M [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 10:08 AM

The following hissed in response by: Baggi

Because no entitlement program, once established, has ever been repealed. The damage will have been done, and we will be unable to do anything about it.

Ive never been much of a defeatist but I get your point. We're doomed no matter what we do so we might as well slow our course to destruction as much as possible.

Some of us are actually possitive about our future though and think instead of slowing the rapid decline of our society we can actually turn the boat around and start it moving away from the waterfall.

The above hissed in response by: Baggi [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 1:27 PM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

Baggi:

Some of us are actually possitive about our future though and think instead of slowing the rapid decline of our society we can actually turn the boat around and start it moving away from the waterfall.

...By handing the tiller over to the passenger who wants to go right up to the edge of the pretty waterfall. You're confident that once the boat goes over the falls, crashing down on the rocks 150 feet below, everybody in the boat will realize that you should have been in charge all along -- and they'll all be really, really sorry that the waterfall guy ever took command.

Well, everybody who's still left alive, that is.

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 2:31 PM

The following hissed in response by: hunter

The AGW fear mongers are in a hurry, since the jig is about up on selling the sheep this particular apocalypse.
If they don't get their ridiculous pseudo-religion/pseudo-science turned into law in the next several months, they know in their hearts it is going to fizzle out.

The above hissed in response by: hunter [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 7:14 PM

The following hissed in response by: BarbaraS

We still live in a Republic, after all. We can always throw the bums out and change things back to the way they were.

Unless we have a marxist dem president and veto proof senate and house. Then they can change and make laws according to their whims and with a majority in the SC who is going to stop them before it is too late.

OT that tidbit about Trinity church I posted above was taken down this morning. I wonder why. It was one of the items under the first big headline on breaking news Fox at 2:00 am etthis morning.

The above hissed in response by: BarbaraS [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 7:59 PM

The following hissed in response by: BarbaraS

So what would happen if President Bush endorsed Barack H. Obama for president?

That point is moot. He would never do such a thing. You do go off on a tangent sometimes don't you?

The above hissed in response by: BarbaraS [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 8:02 PM

The following hissed in response by: scrapiron

If you have never had a real job, owned a business or managed one, never honestly earned a dime, and every thing in your life has been taxpayer subsidized, what's a few billion/trillion dollars of someone else's money. That's Hussein O. He probably joins Chrissie with the tingle in the legs and giggles when spending it.

The above hissed in response by: scrapiron [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 10:03 PM

The following hissed in response by: cdquarles

Dafydd,

I must say that I remember something about that, but I don't remember exactly what that working title was now, but wasn't it The Strike? It has been quite a few years now since I read Atlas Shrugged.

The above hissed in response by: cdquarles [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 3, 2008 10:44 PM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

CDQuarles:

Yup, that was it... so you see why that couldn't be the publication title: It would give away the central mystery of what was going on!

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 4, 2008 1:10 PM

The following hissed in response by: chsw

It's a bird! It's a plane! No, it's EcoloMan! Powered by his own methane and carbon dioxide, EcoloMan lowers oceans by generating new polar ice and icebergs. EcoloMan lowers greenhouse gases by halting all economic development in China, India and the developing world. EcoloMan generates new job growth in America by expanding government. EcoloMan brings peace to the Middle East and the world by retreating! EcoloMan! He wants to heal the earth by poulticing our planet with the carbon of excess natal hominoid interlopers!

Vote EcoloMan on Election Day!

chsw

The above hissed in response by: chsw [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 4, 2008 2:13 PM

The following hissed in response by: xennady

Well, Dafydd, this is another great post in a long line of great posts. I don't dispute a word (not that you have any reason to care) and lately when I visit here I don't find much to disagree with and thus not much to comment upon.

But I remember that in a comment I made here a while back I predicted political disaster would spring from the Bush response to the illegal issue.

Well, who cares. But what has happened since is pretty much what I thought would happen. Id Est, the effective collapse of the GOP coalition that won and kept control of congress in 1994 and on. Millions of Americans including myself simply ceased believing in the effectiveness of the GOP on any level.

I recently was shocked when I noticed that I was unwilling to check the Republican box in an online petition. Again, who cares, but in 2006 I was serious enough to send 100$ to Rick Santorum and more to various other candidates. If such a committed GOPer as me bails what happens to the barely involved? Well, they don't show up. Which is what happened in the last 3 special elections for the house.

Yeah, whatever. But I fear my predictions back then were correct. If I'm right about what I think will happen next- God help this country.

The above hissed in response by: xennady [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 4, 2008 5:45 PM

The following hissed in response by: xennady

Whoops- the Bush response to the illegal IMMIGRATION issue. Sorry about that.

The above hissed in response by: xennady [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 4, 2008 5:48 PM

The following hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh

Xennady:

But I remember that in a comment I made here a while back I predicted political disaster would spring from the Bush response to the illegal issue.

You don't think it could have anything to do with the out-of-control spending, could it?

(By the way, as I recall, conservatives in the GOP remained unified and filibustered to death the McCain immigration bill; how could such a "victory" cause them to lose heart?)

Dafydd

The above hissed in response by: Dafydd ab Hugh [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 4, 2008 8:21 PM

The following hissed in response by: xennady

So GOP conservatives filibustered the Mccain-Kennedy bill? What?

You make it seem like the evil conservatives conspired together to block a popular bill. Nope. In fact the conservative grass roots mobilized and shutdown the Senate switchboard to block a bill pushed hard by the GOP leadership. What made conservatives lose heart was the sense of betrayal that I feel and I believe most rank-and-file conservatives feel but you apparently don't.

Yes, conservatives weren't happy about the spending but tolerated it after 1998, 2000,2002, and still turned to vote. What changed after that? Well, we disagree. But I don't really think there any point discussing it now. The GOP's goose is cooked, and is about to be eaten.

The above hissed in response by: xennady [TypeKey Profile Page] at June 5, 2008 5:59 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)

(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)


Remember me unto the end of days?


© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved