What was the point of this video? All I hear is how nationally he doesn't think anybody has a right to pollute the air, water, or neighbor's property.
He also says, in terms of international relations like China, we shouldn't send troops to China and effectively force them to close down or fix their plants.... Which will start another war or expensive conflict.
Nothing about being against clean energy. Perhaps you should rephrase your claim because this isn't proving anything.
What was the point of this video? All I hear is how nationally he doesn't think anybody has a right to pollute the air, water, or neighbor's property.
He also says, in terms of international relations like China, we shouldn't send troops to China and effectively force them to close down or fix their plants.... Which will start another war or expensive conflict.
Nothing about being against clean energy. Perhaps you should rephrase your claim because this isn't proving anything.
What was the point of this video? All I hear is how nationally he doesn't think anybody has a right to pollute the air, water, or neighbor's property.
He also says, in terms of international relations like China, we shouldn't send troops to China and effectively force them to close down or fix their plants.... Which will start another war or expensive conflict.
Nothing about being against clean energy. Perhaps you should rephrase your claim because this isn't proving anything.
It's funny you show scenes of pollution while in the background you have an audio clip of Ron Paul saying people shouldn't be allowed to pollute other people's property.
RON PAUL 2012. Give me Liberty Or give me Death. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence”
how many mpg does a tank or a drone get when they kill innocent people. the most polluted places in the world are on property that is not private. the less property rights that an area has will tend to increase the odds of pollution, USSR, China, public water ways. Property rights would essentially outlaw pollution. The EPA regualtions are written by the polluters and then they get bailed out.
This video looks to be about on par with PETA style terrorist activisim. Cleaning up the environment is a good cause, but why are you tarnishing the cause by lying and attacking good people?
Ratings are disabled because there would be an overwhelming number of thumbs down.
In this video, Ron Paul says:
"You have no right to pollute the air, or the water, or your neighbors property..."
and
"I'm not willing to tax you, or send troops over there to close down plants..."
If you've ever heard Ron Paul speak (although in this video it's hard to hear him due to the distracting sounds), you know that he would NEVER invade another country. He wants to bring ALL of our troops home.
he disabled ratings because hes an obvious troll. Ron Paul is not going to make the citizen pay taxes for clean energy he wants to leave it to the free market. Clean energy as being efficient as it is will be demanded once the market is really free. When i say free i mean when the Federal Reserve is shut down.
It isn't about dependence, it's about people being free to decide for themselves. He isn't AGAINST clean energy, he just took the reasonable stance of let people go about their businesses, pollution is best solved by protecting property rights anyways.
All of your videos expose you as a collectivist. Not a free-market advocate. Therefore I consider you my enemy or foolish dupe of the left. Which is it?
Besides the fact that I disagree with your biased, incomplete and twisted political loyalties, you do have good skills at video production. Too bad you cannot see the errors of your ways and come over the side of freedom and liberty for the individual. True freedom is not without its problems but it beats your communist style collectivism!
I'd really like to know Paul's position on this subject but there's so many SOUND EFFECTS and MUSIC that are louder than he is, so I can't fucking hear him!! Makes the video totally worthless, unless you just want to annoy the fuck out of people.
He did not deny that there is a problem with pollution.He only said that it is blown out of proportion.How can anyone take global warming seriously when Gore is living in a wasteful palace while trying to tell everyone elese to drive electric cars?Is everyone aware of the HUGE changes in climate that have happened in history with no help from man?
water pollution is down in rich countries, air pollution is down in rich countries. If humans are to live we will either harm the environment greatly or in a controlled manner. Making us poor gets rid of our control of the damage we can do.
just follow the money and who benefits. rockefeller rothschilds are in this. if that doesnt ring a bell you sould research these families and you will come to the conclusion that this is just another money making scam no doubt. whats it to mother nature if you drive your car and pay a tax on carbon emissions after wards? do people really think there will be less fossil-fuel vehicle usage due to this cap n trade? wake up. it wont go down neither will shell switch to other fuels. its a scam!
Anthropogenic global warm is nonsense. Cap and Trade is just another means of control and taking from the poor and giving to the rich. Solar activity - not CO2 - has a tremendous effect on the climate of this planet. Are our CO2 emissions causing global warming on the other planets in our system? Wake up.
Sigh... believe what you want. It still baffles me that people still believe this nonsense after everything that has come out in the last year or two on this subject, but some people just want to believe nonsense so they can feel important. It's solar activity - not CO2. By the way - nice necroposting.
Ron Paul is dead on... He knows that it is a loaded question, but what he should have called out is that the bill wasn't a climate change bill, it was a bill to subsidize certain industries and tax and penalize others... Also that our car emmissions have been reduced 95% since the 70's! and that cars are becoming even more fuel efficient, but no, that is not enough for the environmentalistmovement until we destroy all productive capacity in this country... China has no standards what so ever...
Are you saying you support the Climate Change bill that just passed congress? That bill is total junk along with the 300 page amendum that is tacked on the rear of it. I understand wanting to help protect the earth. But using government to try to force it upon people is far from being the right way to do it. Please this video does not help your cause or yourself in the end.
Even GREENPEACE says that they do not supprt "Cap and Trade" as it is all about politics.
Regardless, we have had the "EPA" since 1970. Just like most government agency, it has failed. Think about it. If they had actually achieved environmental protection, why would we need "Cap and Trade"?
Besides, there is 4.3 BILLION dollars in that bill for unemployment benefits that will result in the loss, not gain, of jobs.
Who did you vote for???? I guarantee that person was claiming that we needed to pass "Cap and Trade" because it was going to produce "jobs, jobs, jobs."
Are you SO stupid that you cannot understand that this bill includes 4.3 BILLION dollars in unemployment benefits because the KNOW it is going to cost us a massive amount of jobs????
Even GREENPEACE is against this bill. What does that tell you?
Dumb like you dont understand it that GREENPEACE might have been against this bill because they wanted a much stronger climate change and green energy bill not because GREENPEACE is climate change denier like Ron Paul. I totally understand their position. I would also like to see a much stronger but given the political circumstance this bill does have server a starting point and does have a potential to incorporate much stronger requirements.
You can wipe your ass with 4.3 billion dollars while 700 billion dollars goes down the toilet every year buying foreign oil.
You Ron Paul inspired conspiracy theories like "9/11 was an inside job" or "North American Superhighway" was resoundingly rejected by Americans when he twice ran for President of the US, wasnt it ?
Actually I have watched only the teasers of Al Gore's movie but I have surely watched full documentaries by BBC on why the city London (Britain) has been forced to build more flood gates on river Thames in addition to why the flood waters on Bhrmaputra river is staying longer in flood plains of Bangladesh in recent decades.
ok, listen up. This isn't something you can just change. Climate change has been going on since the beginning of our planet. From extreme colds to extreme hots and everywhere in between. Is this to say we shouldn't use wind and solar energy? No, actually it's a fantastic idea because those industries are developed in America and gets rid of our need for foreign fuels. However, global warming isn't something we can stop or change unless you have a machine to take out 25% of the greenhouse gases
@kevinz1985 And a whole shit ton more disagree...it's not just Al Gore vs. 30,000 "scientists." Al Gore just happens to agree with a whole lot more scientists than 30,000.
@kevinz1985 i have not heard of these '30000 scientists'... so please send me a link to somewhere that shows this. i do agree the climate debate is more complicated than many say but you trying to tell yourself it's 'a hoax' is so painfully delusional. i'd assume you're just trying to hold on to what you have, and resisting change.
industrial civilization IS NOT, AND CANNOT BE SUSTAINABLE. please google: "Derrick Jensen endgame 25 premises" and please send me a link that sites the 400000.thanks
Could you twist and mutate reality anymore? You obviously just have it out for Ron Paul because you don't require any facts for your arguments. You just post rapid fire garbage in hopes that someone will buy your tripe. You're very stupid, and I hope for your sake you can come to that conclusion.
Like global warming deniers, tobacco companies once used to tell people that smoking does not cause cancer in addition to the unforgettable fact that in 1994 Congressional hearing tobacco executives told the Congress that Nicotine was not addictive.
And are you any less responsible for your own decisions? If you think it's ridiculous to trust major corporations to be moral and tell you the truth, then it is equally as ignorant to hope big government will do the same. Your policies are shit and so is your view on what this country was based off. It's people like you that do not understand what this country was founded on that create their own problems by implementing infringing ideological legislation, then implement more to fix the prior
I believe Dr. Paul was referring to the fact that global warming exists however, is not influenced as heavily by the human population as we think. There is a 1200 year solar cycle that actually drives this trend and the entire system is heating up also.
More Global Warming crap. What a joke. Its all about the core samples done in the Arctic. For millions of years this planet has warmed and cooled. It is a natural cycle. Why is it you global warming fear mongers NEVER mention what uses CO2 and produces O2? Why are you not protecting forests, and making developers replenish some of the trees that get wiped away when they build their $300,000 crap townhouses that arent really worth $150,000? Nah, just tax us some more. Fools.
It's a hard pill to swallow...seeing what people think of your "work."
Better to just disable the ratings and think your being maligned by a handful of people. It's much easier that way...The sad fact is that this vid won't see 1000 views and if it does...it's because people were searching for Ron Paul.
If only you would use your excellent production skills for the spreading of truth instead of overt deception. Your propaganda will hopefully have no impact, but you are welcome to try.
I am unfamiliar with those newsletters. If you could provide a link that would be helpful.
Make no mistake though, UnsavoryMen is/are in the business of outright lying to discredit Congressman Ron Paul. Look to their video on Dr. Paul's vote on the resolution on Iran, and then find a transcript of what he stated as his reasons for the vote, and the contrast that with the title and content of the video produced by UnsavoryMen.
Ron Paul Wants a democratic republic where 51 % Mom rule doesn't win, why do you think it takes more then 51% of the states to ratify & change the constitution.
I said a democratic republic look it up, the states should decide & regulate education to health care to drugs to be illegal, legal what regulations etc. Their is a legitimate form of federal govt that doesn't discuss these issues and the democratically elected officials of each different states and counties in the union sets it policy on such issues. Also the majority does have opinion but if Florida wants to do something different then Indianan let them. Misinterpret me again, please.
So that a gay couple married in Maine have absolutely no legal status in South Carolina and live like a second class citizens or Alabama may like to go back to school segregation because they want to do it their way. Is it not what you mean
Last I knew white people were the minority in those areas if you take in everyone vote so are you say blacks and women would vote themselves no rights once again. we live in different social norms and when this system was practiced last it was practiced with only white male had the right to vote, therefore by ignoring a given population contribution is not very free market like. So tell me will the blacks who outnumber the white in vote votes themselves back into slavery. ProGay states too
Even if all Blacks, Asians, Hispanics,Native Americans etc were to vote in a particular state they still will not have enough numerical superiority to overcome those bigoted policies.
Look at the example of California, they voted for their bigoted policy to outlaw gay marriage.
Free market theories dont work so well in social justice issues.
You "say example of California, they voted for their bigoted policy to outlaw gay marriage." Remember what you said "you are saying is majority has no legitimacy to rule. Which also means there is no point of having elections." 99%, Cali didn't vote that way. Sure if you allowed counties to make the vote some gay couples if wanted to marry would move to these counties but they can travel anywhere in the state, and allowing them to pick anywhere might infuriate a neighbor into double murder
Indiana State Senator Greg Walker of District 41, (R-Columbus), has filed Senate Bill 0453
We, the undersigned citizens of Indiana, wish to respectfully and clearly declare that we support the Indiana Honest Money Act.
We wish to remind our elected representatives of their oaths to uphold the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Indiana, and remind them that both of these documents specifically specify gold and silver as legal tender............
We implore you as well to endeavor to support and enact the Indiana Honest Money Act to fulfill your constitutional responsibilities and protect our economic liberty.
We further wish to remind you that we consider the protection of our economic liberties and independence of the utmost importance and urgency, and urge you to consider this in your actions as our elected representatives.
Things like this would get passed if Ron Paul was President. As this is a honestly a state decision if they wanted to use another currency they must feel a reason for it, why block states from doing stuff they feel important ignore them long enough. or at least if Ron Paul was president this would be a in house vote of Indiana choice etc.
If this is issue were sent the the local level at counties I'm willing to bet there would be thousands of pro gay counties for marriage and other basic rights where people would be really happy. I know a lot of people who are not gay but support gay rights but cant do nothing at a federal level but pull enough sway in the community to get real change. Also there would be some counties against and that is their right. How backward do you think people are? Do you have no faith in your friends.
So if such issues were to be decided at county level. One would assume that some counties will ban gay marriage and some counties will allow it, so as soon as gay couples move from one county to another for a number of reasons their marriage status gets into a limbo ? This also mean they have to restrict their movement to only those counties that allow gay marriage or may have to go into exile into gay friendly counties
Yes some states would that's why it should be a counties decision because many counties and people in the state didn't vote that way, in wasn't 99% that voted against gay marriage in Cali, and a national law for it would infuriate so many to violence is it any better at a national level. If it was at the county level they could move to any state they chose because in every state, I don't think counties are as limited as you think. exile they can travel to other counties.
How are you saying South California Would make gay second class citizen by denying what? Second class citizens usally don't have the right to vote, so your telling me the State is going to make Gays illegal to vote. If someone is gonna hurt a gay bad no law will stop it that's Why we Have Hate Law and Hate crimes, and under that law gays are protected, women used it, every individual who can vote is protected. so good way for counties that don't like marriage find a legal way around that.
that hypothetical couple living in Maine, if they lived in Maine if they traveled anywhere the status would beheld up by Maine law, you would get your benefits, you could travel, vacation, your status wouldn't be subject till they decided to move to hypothetical south Cali where they did not have the right. Also in Maine they would be integrating with people who would respect them, and protest peacefully against South Cali instead of integrating into a population that may be violent.
We have alcohol free counties, they work, so many of these issue can be handled locally or at the state level. So if Florida wants legalize pot and New york state want to Ban it, stop neither, its their right, their shouldn't be a national law for marijuana or against it. same with most department at the federal level. Such national laws; some states may not want the financial burden. Think about how many American jobs in Hemp production get sent here to Canada.
It would not have been a problem if the entire nation were more or less progressive enough to not use those 'state rights' to advance their bigoted agendas like anti-gay or anti-women or anti-minority agendas
I think the state could be more progressive given the chance once again. when was the last time sates had these powers, Under different social norms I understand your argument but we as humans have different morals and social norm as a majority now then we did in 1960,70, 20, 30's. Plus when something goes wrong people have to blame themselves not one man and get back to work.
Then I say, the earth belongs to each of these generations during its course, fully and in its own right. The second generation receives it; clear of the debts and incumbrances of the first, the third of the second, and so on. For if the first could charge it with a debt, then the earth would belong to the dead and not to the living generation. Then, no generation can contract debts greater than may be paid during the course of its own existence. Try to figure out who said that.
It too Utopian, first If the US stops consuming 25% of the world resources it make energy cheaper only for foreigners since America has to deal with a ever increasingly weak dollar. China/India make 36% of world pop as they trade and trade in itself creates wealth will begin to consume more to keep a floor under prices and even drive them up going from here. So really unless countries that are the fastest growing use green safe measures any gain we make will be canceled out by 2020.
That was the result of a weak dollar and inflation no amount of legislation can stop rising costs due a weak dollar. Look at one chart of the USD year over Year and you can see why we had a rise in all goods and services. Obama states himself this bill will rise the cost of energy not lower it & creating a new derivative market for speculators to trade in, and banks like GoldmanSachs. Also I 100% believe we will break the 07 lows and see higher fuel and energy prices has my previous sources say
So in your view paying 700 billion dollars a year to foreign oil instead of making lifestyle energy efficient and developing home grown renewable energy sources is cheaper for you ?
That 700 billion would only be about 22 billion if our money was worth what it was in 1921 when they stopped minting to about just 300 billion maybe 10, 12 years ago, just because the value of the dollar has deteriorated badly since nixon sever the gold standard so much and in that time since Americas dollar has weakened year over year what has it sold what will it sell or start to produce. Obama talks nothing about production, all about consumers need to spend, how can they with a really bad$
If you look per joule of energy compared to wind and solar is sure as hell is cheaper.
Did you ever bother to look at the studies of the European experience with these power sources. No reduction in CO2, why well because you have to idle turbine and boilers from generators that use hydrocarbons, in support....
If the west never listened to progressives regarding nuclear power we would have been much better off..
That said climate change is still very uncertain. GISS-ER was way off.
No I am actually a marine geologist.. You know sure there is a huge divergence between the GISS and UAH data sets. Sure IPCC 4AG WG Section 9 states out right that they have next to no knowledge of feedback process and internal variability that might lead to a very small degree of climate sensitivity.
Sure there is a Mann and Briffia have the problem with Paleo climate studies and got caught merging different data sets at the inflection points of their graphs but you know better..
Naturally, why would Europe's CO2 emission go down when Russia and nearby Baltic states are sitting there pumping up oil to turn themselves into one the largest suppliers of oil in the world.
That oil will eventually get burnt somewhere in Europe or somewhere else and gets emitted into the atmosphere as greenhouse gases right ?
It creates even more urgent need to move away from hydrocarbon based fuels.
By the way you totally dismissed the fact that the goods that were produced with much energy efficient production chain in Europe in the past are now being produced at factories in third world nations that have way less energy efficient production chain and most of those third world world nation dont even have environmental regulations or have very weak environmental regulations
Great comeback by the way.. did you also have an explanation as to how small reductions in CO2 will reduce temperature when the response of temperature to CO2 concentration is logarithmic and the "AGM" theroy is based on amplification of this small increase in temperature by incomplete models of internal variability of the climate system.
Also I should remind you for your response the word "Peer Reviewed " will not trump "Results Replicated"...
By the way, even if for some yet unknown reason somehow you prove to be right, what is the point for entire world to fight over or engage in bidding war over a energy resource that is getting more and more scarce ?
Regardless of the environmental impacts oil prices will still get a whole lot expensive because of supply and demand imbalance
True and that's why we should be looking at real alternative energy solutions, nuclear, tidal wave research, etc; their are some relay ground breaking results in hydroelectricity, but something other then Solar which this bill does nothing for, Its a tax bill to pay for health care. if EasyEs is correct on CO2 emissions this Bill As Is; grossly distorts the economy and wont change anything if EasyEs is correct has the way we measure CO2 and its sources are incorrect, I havent herd that 1.
Current oil scarcity is more a function of state run oil companies that happen to have good geological fortune squandering their resources. Look at Mexico and Russia and Venezuela, both have huge petroleum basins but falling oil production. Why because getting recover from the reservoir over 15% requires investment in geoscience and engineering. Exxon Mobil can get almost 50% recovery from reservoirs and can book them as reserves which most nations can not. Lots of oil left, easy stuff is gone.
You entire premise is based on having to rely on foreign sources of oil. Why should we wait for years or decades for these state controlled petroleum producers in other countries to come up with much more efficient way of extracting their oil ?
The other thing is the cost. Why send over 100s of billions of dollars a year to foreign country ? Paying for petroleum imports from foreign nation accounts for one of the biggest factors in growing out trade deficit.
Well why doesn't America open up the potential for their petroleum reserves then. Also once they reach their production capacity they will ask western nations to come in an boost production. That means more money for American shareholders and jobs for Americans. Chavez is already asking Chevron to come back to his country.
Solar wind and Bio mass will never replace oil, Nuclear may be able to take a large chunk though.
The reduction of CO2 emissions, which is the goal of this bill, will most likely fail to happen due to the fact that India and China will continue to sit on the sidelines. Many environmentalists contend that without the worlds participation, the U.S.s reduction will amount to little to no change.
US which is 5% of world population consumes over 25 percent of world's total energy consumption. When the biggest consumer will not set standards why the hell will Chinese and Indians do it.
My suggestion is put a carbon tax on goods coming from polluting producers in China and India and we will see where the hell will they sell their cheap goods which in fact has only helped trade deficit grow by unthinkable size.
WoW China, and India are devolving at a much faster rate, even now, they our creditors, they have money they don't need to borrow and they will consume more, china's is buy,buy,buy and that's not stopping, the recent rise in commodities hasn't fallen, its paused and likely to continue despite rising unemployment.
cap and trade will further rise prices and in fact the bill does nothing to stop searching the globe for refined products that dont carry the same level of carbon costs.
If this bill as merit why you support something Located in section 217 of the bill and the Shower Nazi units puts a three-to five-minute limit on showers.
You blame china, why did Hilary, Tim Geither beg China to buy Us Treasuries, If you put a carbon tax on China's Goods They'll sell their UST holdings try again. protectionism will only lead to more neighboring protectionism. Also Americas Imports 80% more then It produces so Any trade War now really only hurts the US, unlike 1930 when the US was a creditor and produced more. A tax maybe when times were good but then that's against what America stands for. Hell China wants SDR as the new reserve
No they sell it to their people and other emerging countries because as the us dollar gets weaker other countries currencies are stronger resulting in stronger import power thus more consumption. do you believe Americans were put on this earth to be the only consumers or will it be like history where many different peoples have enjoyed the fruits of their labor, to the Romans of the past, to the Turkish empire, to the British empire, to the USA. Consumption is a gift of Production.
A weaker dollar hurts the US Has they for the sacrifice will have to accept higher prices for goods, a higher standard of living and accept conditions like china or worse because that's what a significant weak dollar does, raises costs for everything. secondly, we have to build and rebuild factories, re tool them update, etc, while foreigners can skip that since they have more factories etc and retool for whatever good they start pumping out from Vancouver to Paris to Tokyo to hong kong
The winners of this legislation would be companies like, AIG, Goldman Sachs and GE, all stand to make billions by buying, selling and trading carbon derivatives. All these companies have been in the center of the recent financial meltdown which has sent the economy crashing.
So called amendments that were put down by Republicans was really an attempt to back stop portions of the bill, Republicans tried and failed, to add three amendments: a suspension of the bill if gas hits $5 per gallon, suspend the bill if electricity prices rise more than 10 percent and suspend the bill if unemployment jumped past the 15 percent mark. All were turned down in the Democratic-written bill. Note out hey didn't say cancel just suspend to probably rewrite a failed bill.
Another aspect that no one is talking about is the fact that Pelosi, Markey and Al Gore are positioned to make a lot of money through investments in companies whose stock is worth nothing now, but will increase dramatically if cap-and-trade is passed in the Senate and signed by President Obama.
Gore is positioned to become the first global-warming billionaire. He owns multiple companies that would track carbon footprints of businesses.
Proponents of the bill need to look no further than Spain, where the cap-and trade concept has sent unemployment to the 20 percent mark and with every one green job created, they have lost 2.2 jobs. Not exactly a success story.
For the Reasons stated I hope enough people supports the congressmen that voted against this bill AS Is, Congrats to Ron Paul, and support the senators who vote No on this bill.
This bill taking in context with everything else is a pretty bad written bill.
Cap-and-trade bill as written will rewrite the American dream home ownership and provide heavy tax burdens for generations. Provisions within the largest tax increase in the countrys history will change the way you buy and sell a home, use energy and shop for goods and services.
Adding to skyrocketing energy and fuel costs, the API estimate that carbon permits would add 77 cent per gallon to the cost of gasoline.
This cost alone will slam commuters, air travelers and trucking companies. Again, ordinary Americans would eventually feel the brunt of the rising energy costs.
According to the Carbon Dioxide Information Analyst Center, CDIAC, if the country wants to curtail carbon dioxide the country should be building nuclear and hydroelectric plants. They are cheaper, carbon-neutral and 100 percent domestically sourced.
Cap and trade legislation translates into 17 percent of the U.S. economy and health care takes up 16 percent of the economy. Worse, Washington D.C. runs the auto industry and some financial sectors as well. Where does it end?
Note Gerald Celente Said " If we were really serious about alternative energy we would be researching hydroelectricity..." nuclear etc. Solar and wind those were solutions of the past when times were good. Also People at the local level and states know this why doesn't Federal.
RP would allow each state to set its policy not a nationalized standard on energy and climate, one of the most diverse and ever-changing across the states, no national law can be done, States/Counties are different.
MIT states American families will see a $3,000 increase per year in energy taxes all for a 2/10ths of one degree reduction in temperatures in the next 100 years.
As with any increase in costs the low-income families would be hit the hardest; however the government insists it will offer rebates to those hurt the most, which translates into another tax for the middleclass to pay for those rebates.
When the consumer thinks of energy they think electricity and oil consumption. This legislation will do nothing to curb our foreign-oil disease.
Instead of reducing dependency on overseas energy suppliers, Americans would be more dependant than ever, says Clayton Mahaffey an analyst at Redchip Co. in Florida. Theyll be searching the globe for refined products that dont carry the same level of carbon costs.
Heritage also contends that consumers will pay hidden taxes in grocery, gas and anything manufactured because business owners will simply pass the added cost onto taxpayers.
The farming community will also pay a hefty price with cap-and-trade. They will virtually be wiped out of the food export business because their field to market cost will no longer be competitive with foreign countries who don't implement similar bills.
However, according to the Heritage Foundation by 2012, the average taxpayer will see an additional increase of $436 per year and the number will eventually hit $1,241 a year plus 2.5 million in U.S. job loses from the old existing & fading energy sector so the new one energy sector promising to be creating 1 trillion does not offset the losses.
Also included in the massive 1,500-page bill is water rationing. The federal government has set up a shower manager. One website selling a shower manager calls the gadget the Shower Nazi. Located in section 217 of the bill and the Shower Nazi units puts a three-to five-minute limit on showers.
Controlling other aspects of your life will be seen in the mandatory 20 percent wind/solar consumption to start; this would definitely lead to energy rationing if there was not enough wind turbines and solar panels in place.
A new government bureaucracy created within the bill will force homeowners who wish to sell their homes to retrofit their houses to be environmentally-friendly. The costs would fall to the homeowners possibly injuring an already fragile real estate marketplace. So they can't sell only give the bank the house and let them environmentally outfit the houses, you cant even sell your houses without be environmentally friendly no offense, the gov't is going to do this in a recession WOW.
Potential replacement items required would range from eco-friendly hot-water heaters to windows. The homes in California have already seen values fall through the floor and homeowners see no way to recoup the expensive upgrades the state and federal government would require.
A. there are fundamentally two schools of scientific belief (many of which are switching to the latter) regarding the direction of global climate. More and more scientists are switching sides, considering that CO2 emissions arent the sole source and has significantly less impact than previously thought.
B. You postulate that this piece of legislation is about clean energy, when in fact it is creating a broader scheme larger than the current-unwinding derivatives scam
I know that the truth is secondary or, more accurately, irrelevant when you are on the side of the angels. The left think they are on the side of the angels. The right thinks God is on their side. They are both wrong.
You completely distorted Ron Paul's argument in this video. And on your page for that matter. How about you look at Ron Paul's argument on paper, dissect it and analyze it without your special effects and unrelated imagery. It's great work you've done with the editing but how about a real analysis of Paul's positions?
Well how bout you tell us about his stand on clean energy. He is against everything that the majority of the people want. I have seen his videos without the effects and he just wants to control everything. I know longer care about what Ron Paul and his supporters want. Now if the constitution can be attached somehow to clean energy you know it will be done. Take a look at this country. No one cares what he thinks.
well you are right only about one thing here. no one seems to care what he thinks. and look where this country is now. swirling around the top of the toilet bowl waiting to be flushed by our own overindulgence and irresponsible fiscal policy.
Since you question his stance ill tell you. His stance is that people as consumers and markets will ultimately decide best as they contain the most knowledge of any situation. you cannot subsidize one industry w/o neglecting all the others. (fascism?)
So Ron Paul would solve everything? That is pretty arrogant. How would he deal with the Congress? How about answering to the American people that he could care less about? When you think you know everything then that means we will be under a dictatorship and be controlled by one man. Ron Paul obnoxious. He is always right. And that is why he will never be president.
Again, right only about one thing. He'll never be president bc people cant accept that their preconceived notions may be incorrect, and hate people who even elude to counterpoints in conflict with their beliefs of reality (your response bears evidence of this basic human nature).
No one claims he knows everything. obama is the closest thing to dictatorship we've had since FDR. Presidents dont "deal" with congress. thats not their job. Ron would end US foreign aggression and cease dom. survey.
RP wont solve everything, Find one clip where he said that he is always right. In fact he said he doesn't know, and that's why he would give the states elected officials the power that left to them to fix their problems.
You better first look out for neo-Nazis in Ron Paul campaign like Randy Gray of Michigan (Ron Paul's Michigan Fundraiser), former Grand Wizard of KKK David Duke, Don Black etc.
WoW Hitler a real NAZI, Supported Jesus I guess Jesus was a bad guy by your logic. (The term Nazi is derived from the first two syllables of Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, the official German language name of the National Socialist German Workers Party )
You are absolutely right he is a racist. Ever notice that shitty little grin he has? What better way to control whites than fill their heads with useless propaganda that they cannot understand. And not tell them that their hero will never get elected. They have never answered how they plan to make this man president cause it is a foreign question to them. Until Ron Paul tells them they won't answer these questions. Kinda like Hitlers Germany.
RON PAUL our only hope.
PayneDarryl 5 hours ago
just... die
PyroManiacFagumz 2 weeks ago in playlist More videos from UnsavoryMen
This has been flagged as spam show
What was the point of this video? All I hear is how nationally he doesn't think anybody has a right to pollute the air, water, or neighbor's property.
He also says, in terms of international relations like China, we shouldn't send troops to China and effectively force them to close down or fix their plants.... Which will start another war or expensive conflict.
Nothing about being against clean energy. Perhaps you should rephrase your claim because this isn't proving anything.
mirioki 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
What was the point of this video? All I hear is how nationally he doesn't think anybody has a right to pollute the air, water, or neighbor's property.
He also says, in terms of international relations like China, we shouldn't send troops to China and effectively force them to close down or fix their plants.... Which will start another war or expensive conflict.
Nothing about being against clean energy. Perhaps you should rephrase your claim because this isn't proving anything.
mirioki 1 month ago
What was the point of this video? All I hear is how nationally he doesn't think anybody has a right to pollute the air, water, or neighbor's property.
He also says, in terms of international relations like China, we shouldn't send troops to China and effectively force them to close down or fix their plants.... Which will start another war or expensive conflict.
Nothing about being against clean energy. Perhaps you should rephrase your claim because this isn't proving anything.
mirioki 1 month ago
It's funny you show scenes of pollution while in the background you have an audio clip of Ron Paul saying people shouldn't be allowed to pollute other people's property.
BloodskullMannoroth 1 month ago in playlist Uploaded videos
RON PAUL 2012. Give me Liberty Or give me Death. “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence”
futer3669 1 month ago
Co2 is required for plants to create oxygen. that's Bio 101
climate change is a natural event.
1700+ views, sure it would have about 1700+ dislikes too
scudberry 1 month ago
DISABLED RATING BECAUSE HE KNEW THIS WAS A CRAP VIDEO
scudberry 1 month ago
THE WORLD ISN'T AN OFFICE BUILDING.
There is bad weather, there are natural disasters
fuggotry 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Nice pictures of natural weather.
IRUSIpanzermaster 2 months ago
RON PAUL IS THE MOST OVERRATED PIECE OF POLITICAL SHIT THERE IS. Dennis Kucinich 2012
erik4727 2 months ago
how many mpg does a tank or a drone get when they kill innocent people. the most polluted places in the world are on property that is not private. the less property rights that an area has will tend to increase the odds of pollution, USSR, China, public water ways. Property rights would essentially outlaw pollution. The EPA regualtions are written by the polluters and then they get bailed out.
upgrade01a 5 months ago
Ron Paul in 2012. Restore America Now
jscottupton 6 months ago
This video looks to be about on par with PETA style terrorist activisim. Cleaning up the environment is a good cause, but why are you tarnishing the cause by lying and attacking good people?
toasterwaterable 6 months ago
Ratings are disabled because there would be an overwhelming number of thumbs down.
In this video, Ron Paul says:
"You have no right to pollute the air, or the water, or your neighbors property..."
and
"I'm not willing to tax you, or send troops over there to close down plants..."
If you've ever heard Ron Paul speak (although in this video it's hard to hear him due to the distracting sounds), you know that he would NEVER invade another country. He wants to bring ALL of our troops home.
toasterwaterable 6 months ago
w t f is with this video troll
guitatac 6 months ago
he disabled ratings because hes an obvious troll. Ron Paul is not going to make the citizen pay taxes for clean energy he wants to leave it to the free market. Clean energy as being efficient as it is will be demanded once the market is really free. When i say free i mean when the Federal Reserve is shut down.
streetz23 7 months ago
It isn't about dependence, it's about people being free to decide for themselves. He isn't AGAINST clean energy, he just took the reasonable stance of let people go about their businesses, pollution is best solved by protecting property rights anyways.
nobody24601 7 months ago
Considering Earth is millions of years old, even 1000 years of rising temperatures is hardly indicative of a trend. End of debate.
cvict6 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Thanks for uploading a useless video, and a misleading title.
kevinstube13 7 months ago
Do not watch the video, just listen to it starting at 10 seconds till 25 seconds. It'll prove this video is crap.
YellowSSS 9 months ago
All of your videos expose you as a collectivist. Not a free-market advocate. Therefore I consider you my enemy or foolish dupe of the left. Which is it?
Besides the fact that I disagree with your biased, incomplete and twisted political loyalties, you do have good skills at video production. Too bad you cannot see the errors of your ways and come over the side of freedom and liberty for the individual. True freedom is not without its problems but it beats your communist style collectivism!
nalejbank 9 months ago
I'd really like to know Paul's position on this subject but there's so many SOUND EFFECTS and MUSIC that are louder than he is, so I can't fucking hear him!! Makes the video totally worthless, unless you just want to annoy the fuck out of people.
schmoborama 9 months ago
Ron Paul never said no to clean energy.... ass.
MrBucellato 1 year ago
This is a video made by the feds. No debate or rating. Thats why there are only 850 views...
NuclearSiege 1 year ago
THIS ENTIRE CHANNEL IS PROPAGANDA
LaughingMage 1 year ago
terrible propaganda....
lilchico4wg 1 year ago
He did not deny that there is a problem with pollution.He only said that it is blown out of proportion.How can anyone take global warming seriously when Gore is living in a wasteful palace while trying to tell everyone elese to drive electric cars?Is everyone aware of the HUGE changes in climate that have happened in history with no help from man?
MrSafetymeeting 1 year ago
Go prove global warming to me. Just do it.
water pollution is down in rich countries, air pollution is down in rich countries. If humans are to live we will either harm the environment greatly or in a controlled manner. Making us poor gets rid of our control of the damage we can do.
Scoforever 2 years ago
VOTE NO ON DOCTOR NO!!!!
bassman5588 2 years ago
just follow the money and who benefits. rockefeller rothschilds are in this. if that doesnt ring a bell you sould research these families and you will come to the conclusion that this is just another money making scam no doubt. whats it to mother nature if you drive your car and pay a tax on carbon emissions after wards? do people really think there will be less fossil-fuel vehicle usage due to this cap n trade? wake up. it wont go down neither will shell switch to other fuels. its a scam!
LemonAndYoghurt 2 years ago
This looks like a video you show to someone with their eyelids taped to their head.
robitussin217 2 years ago
Anthropogenic global warm is nonsense. Cap and Trade is just another means of control and taking from the poor and giving to the rich. Solar activity - not CO2 - has a tremendous effect on the climate of this planet. Are our CO2 emissions causing global warming on the other planets in our system? Wake up.
deke76 2 years ago
@deke76 umm... our CO2 emissions don't reach other planets...
god0fmusic 1 year ago
@god0fmusic
Good for you. Thus the warming going on on those planets pretty much helps to disprove that CO2 is not responsible got climate change here.
deke76 1 year ago
@deke76 what you say is very inconclusive, our planet is not like other planets. that sais nothing about wether CO2 helps or not global warming.
god0fmusic 1 year ago
@god0fmusic
I'm guessing you don't have a background in science.
deke76 1 year ago
@deke76 umm... i´m guessing you don't have a background in logic...
im arguing neither for nor against the idea that CO2 causes global warming. im just questioning your argument because it's inconclusive.
god0fmusic 1 year ago
@god0fmusic
Sigh... believe what you want. It still baffles me that people still believe this nonsense after everything that has come out in the last year or two on this subject, but some people just want to believe nonsense so they can feel important. It's solar activity - not CO2. By the way - nice necroposting.
deke76 1 year ago
I don't believe in global warming (by man) anymore. I think its a hype. The truth is that the sun is in its usual cycle of increasing activity.
I don't know, what do you think?
TheMagicPiper 2 years ago
Ron Paul is dead on... He knows that it is a loaded question, but what he should have called out is that the bill wasn't a climate change bill, it was a bill to subsidize certain industries and tax and penalize others... Also that our car emmissions have been reduced 95% since the 70's! and that cars are becoming even more fuel efficient, but no, that is not enough for the environmentalistmovement until we destroy all productive capacity in this country... China has no standards what so ever...
soliloqy 2 years ago
This is Why i Love Ron Paul, he just explained why Government should be out of the Business of the Environment!
Ron Paul Reserves the Rights to Clean energy to the States!
Ron Paul Sets a Good Example!
yourboyken 2 years ago
interesting
boundtogetdown 2 years ago
Playing music louder than his words doesn't erase their truth.
Kogerii 2 years ago
Are you saying you support the Climate Change bill that just passed congress? That bill is total junk along with the 300 page amendum that is tacked on the rear of it. I understand wanting to help protect the earth. But using government to try to force it upon people is far from being the right way to do it. Please this video does not help your cause or yourself in the end.
raininginhell 2 years ago
This video is bullshit......
Even GREENPEACE says that they do not supprt "Cap and Trade" as it is all about politics.
Regardless, we have had the "EPA" since 1970. Just like most government agency, it has failed. Think about it. If they had actually achieved environmental protection, why would we need "Cap and Trade"?
Besides, there is 4.3 BILLION dollars in that bill for unemployment benefits that will result in the loss, not gain, of jobs.
Yeah... "jobs, jobs, jobs" my ass!!!!
IPOMonsturd 2 years ago
You wrote, "...4.3 BILLION dollars in that bill for unemployment benefits...."
4.3 billion dollars vs 700 dollar spending a year in importing foreign oil. Do your math.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
UnsavoryMen...........
Who did you vote for???? I guarantee that person was claiming that we needed to pass "Cap and Trade" because it was going to produce "jobs, jobs, jobs."
Are you SO stupid that you cannot understand that this bill includes 4.3 BILLION dollars in unemployment benefits because the KNOW it is going to cost us a massive amount of jobs????
Even GREENPEACE is against this bill. What does that tell you?
Who did YOU Vote for, you COWARDLY PUSSY?
IPOMonsturd 2 years ago
Dumb like you dont understand it that GREENPEACE might have been against this bill because they wanted a much stronger climate change and green energy bill not because GREENPEACE is climate change denier like Ron Paul. I totally understand their position. I would also like to see a much stronger but given the political circumstance this bill does have server a starting point and does have a potential to incorporate much stronger requirements.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
UnsavoryMen....Answer the question! Why did they put 4.3 BILLION dollars worth of unemployment in this bill if it going to create jobs????
The Democrats claimed that this bill's most important factor is that it will create "jobs, jobs, jobs."
How does that jive in that liberally deranged mind of yours?
Just like most liberal douchebags....You wan't to have your cake and eat it too.
IPOMonsturd 2 years ago
You can wipe your ass with 4.3 billion dollars while 700 billion dollars goes down the toilet every year buying foreign oil.
You Ron Paul inspired conspiracy theories like "9/11 was an inside job" or "North American Superhighway" was resoundingly rejected by Americans when he twice ran for President of the US, wasnt it ?
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
@UnsavoryMen Ron Paul never said 9/11 was an inside job.
caseyjonas86 1 year ago
Why do you disable ratings ?
Have you heard about the 30000 scientists calling this climate change a fraud ?
30000.. do you understand this number ?
kevinz1985 2 years ago
Is your claim just like "9/11 was an inside job" kind of conspiracy theory ?
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
My claim is that 30 000 scientists including 9000 PhDs are saying human activity/CO2 is not causing the earth to warm up.
And I find strange that no debate is allowed on this issue and that Mr Al Gore's message is the only one acceptable.
It's a bit like your last message. Calling people crazy when they bring something they don't like on the table :)
kevinz1985 2 years ago
Actually I have watched only the teasers of Al Gore's movie but I have surely watched full documentaries by BBC on why the city London (Britain) has been forced to build more flood gates on river Thames in addition to why the flood waters on Bhrmaputra river is staying longer in flood plains of Bangladesh in recent decades.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
ok, listen up. This isn't something you can just change. Climate change has been going on since the beginning of our planet. From extreme colds to extreme hots and everywhere in between. Is this to say we shouldn't use wind and solar energy? No, actually it's a fantastic idea because those industries are developed in America and gets rid of our need for foreign fuels. However, global warming isn't something we can stop or change unless you have a machine to take out 25% of the greenhouse gases
thenewpunkrockkid 1 year ago
@kevinz1985 Can you please site where you got the "30,000 scientist" number from.
ShenFromTerraTraba 6 months ago
@ShenFromTerraTraba Sure:
petitionproject(.)org
kevinz1985 6 months ago
@kevinz1985 thanks
ShenFromTerraTraba 6 months ago
@kevinz1985 And a whole shit ton more disagree...it's not just Al Gore vs. 30,000 "scientists." Al Gore just happens to agree with a whole lot more scientists than 30,000.
andysj531 4 months ago
@kevinz1985 i have not heard of these '30000 scientists'... so please send me a link to somewhere that shows this. i do agree the climate debate is more complicated than many say but you trying to tell yourself it's 'a hoax' is so painfully delusional. i'd assume you're just trying to hold on to what you have, and resisting change.
industrial civilization IS NOT, AND CANNOT BE SUSTAINABLE. please google: "Derrick Jensen endgame 25 premises" and please send me a link that sites the 400000.thanks
Liteboyiam 3 months ago
Comment removed
kevinz1985 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Liteboyiam I've posted a link in a comment below.
I'm sorry that I don't take for granted what the political class (or some individuals) would like me to believe without questioning.
As for your recommendation again I am sorry, but I have put a red flag on Marxist ideology.
kevinz1985 3 months ago
0:18 this is lake mead?
or lake powell, either way. this whole clip is nothin more then quick flashy photos. and poor propaganda editing.
p.s
do you work for the federal Govt?
src0872 2 years ago
Do you work for dirty coal company ?
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
Could you twist and mutate reality anymore? You obviously just have it out for Ron Paul because you don't require any facts for your arguments. You just post rapid fire garbage in hopes that someone will buy your tripe. You're very stupid, and I hope for your sake you can come to that conclusion.
dropkickglobalism 2 years ago
Like global warming deniers, tobacco companies once used to tell people that smoking does not cause cancer in addition to the unforgettable fact that in 1994 Congressional hearing tobacco executives told the Congress that Nicotine was not addictive.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
And are you any less responsible for your own decisions? If you think it's ridiculous to trust major corporations to be moral and tell you the truth, then it is equally as ignorant to hope big government will do the same. Your policies are shit and so is your view on what this country was based off. It's people like you that do not understand what this country was founded on that create their own problems by implementing infringing ideological legislation, then implement more to fix the prior
dropkickglobalism 2 years ago
:\ Just because Ron Paul doesn't believe global warming is as bad as hippy tree huggers do doesn't mean he is against clean energy.
owchywawa 2 years ago
Interesting to note that these UnsavoryMen won't even allow rating/voting one their BS videos or the comments.
Now we know who the UnSavoryMen REALLY are!
You shall know them by their DEEDS and Progressives, NeoCons and other Statists HATE free speech they disagrees with.
Pure cockroaches!
yakyakyak69 2 years ago
I believe Dr. Paul was referring to the fact that global warming exists however, is not influenced as heavily by the human population as we think. There is a 1200 year solar cycle that actually drives this trend and the entire system is heating up also.
/watch?v=RobmsMg8ghA
/watch?v=aKOSiYWwcio
dscglfr00 2 years ago
Hey moron, why dont you try reading the bill first:
w w w. opencongress. org / bill / 111-h2454 / show
weneedhelp 2 years ago
So Ron Paul fanatics jumping on this guy.
TheFringeCult 2 years ago
More Global Warming crap. What a joke. Its all about the core samples done in the Arctic. For millions of years this planet has warmed and cooled. It is a natural cycle. Why is it you global warming fear mongers NEVER mention what uses CO2 and produces O2? Why are you not protecting forests, and making developers replenish some of the trees that get wiped away when they build their $300,000 crap townhouses that arent really worth $150,000? Nah, just tax us some more. Fools.
weneedhelp 2 years ago
Retard fuck like you are the most regressive piece of shit in this planet .
TheFringeCult 2 years ago
It's a hard pill to swallow...seeing what people think of your "work."
Better to just disable the ratings and think your being maligned by a handful of people. It's much easier that way...The sad fact is that this vid won't see 1000 views and if it does...it's because people were searching for Ron Paul.
googlevideodaddy 2 years ago
Looks like another neo-con video.
The visual-distraction-to-avoid-the-verbal-cues thing has been done before....and better.
ThePresidentialTouch 2 years ago
Nice way to squeeze more taxes out of people...its really disgusting to witness how the government just rips citizens off.
boots920 2 years ago
Cap and Trade will not stop pollution or support new types of energy. It is a TAX.
Our energy costs will double and big corps. will make even more money.
You are right about climate change.
It's getting COLDER, like it did in the 70's.
tomrdee 2 years ago
If only you would use your excellent production skills for the spreading of truth instead of overt deception. Your propaganda will hopefully have no impact, but you are welcome to try.
TinCanToNA 2 years ago
How about those newsletters punblished by Ron paul during 1990s ?
VoodooPolitics101 2 years ago
I am unfamiliar with those newsletters. If you could provide a link that would be helpful.
Make no mistake though, UnsavoryMen is/are in the business of outright lying to discredit Congressman Ron Paul. Look to their video on Dr. Paul's vote on the resolution on Iran, and then find a transcript of what he stated as his reasons for the vote, and the contrast that with the title and content of the video produced by UnsavoryMen.
TinCanToNA 2 years ago
RP is for NOs NO IRS, Banks, NO money standard. Carry gold coins is good enough.
RP is YES for "Social Darwinism", every man is an island philosophy
teleutube 2 years ago
Somalia is the best place to practice Ron Paul's "every man is an island philosophy" Its been government free since early 1990s.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
Ron Paul Wants a democratic republic where 51 % Mom rule doesn't win, why do you think it takes more then 51% of the states to ratify & change the constitution.
bl782 2 years ago
What you are saying is majority has no legitimacy to rule. Which also means there is no point of having elections.
Isnt the very point of having elections is to figure out who will rule for next set period by showing they have the votes ?
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
I said a democratic republic look it up, the states should decide & regulate education to health care to drugs to be illegal, legal what regulations etc. Their is a legitimate form of federal govt that doesn't discuss these issues and the democratically elected officials of each different states and counties in the union sets it policy on such issues. Also the majority does have opinion but if Florida wants to do something different then Indianan let them. Misinterpret me again, please.
bl782 2 years ago
So that a gay couple married in Maine have absolutely no legal status in South Carolina and live like a second class citizens or Alabama may like to go back to school segregation because they want to do it their way. Is it not what you mean
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
Last I knew white people were the minority in those areas if you take in everyone vote so are you say blacks and women would vote themselves no rights once again. we live in different social norms and when this system was practiced last it was practiced with only white male had the right to vote, therefore by ignoring a given population contribution is not very free market like. So tell me will the blacks who outnumber the white in vote votes themselves back into slavery. ProGay states too
bl782 2 years ago
Even if all Blacks, Asians, Hispanics,Native Americans etc were to vote in a particular state they still will not have enough numerical superiority to overcome those bigoted policies.
Look at the example of California, they voted for their bigoted policy to outlaw gay marriage.
Free market theories dont work so well in social justice issues.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
You "say example of California, they voted for their bigoted policy to outlaw gay marriage." Remember what you said "you are saying is majority has no legitimacy to rule. Which also means there is no point of having elections." 99%, Cali didn't vote that way. Sure if you allowed counties to make the vote some gay couples if wanted to marry would move to these counties but they can travel anywhere in the state, and allowing them to pick anywhere might infuriate a neighbor into double murder
bl782 2 years ago
Indiana State Senator Greg Walker of District 41, (R-Columbus), has filed Senate Bill 0453
We, the undersigned citizens of Indiana, wish to respectfully and clearly declare that we support the Indiana Honest Money Act.
We wish to remind our elected representatives of their oaths to uphold the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Indiana, and remind them that both of these documents specifically specify gold and silver as legal tender............
bl782 2 years ago
We implore you as well to endeavor to support and enact the Indiana Honest Money Act to fulfill your constitutional responsibilities and protect our economic liberty.
We further wish to remind you that we consider the protection of our economic liberties and independence of the utmost importance and urgency, and urge you to consider this in your actions as our elected representatives.
bl782 2 years ago
Things like this would get passed if Ron Paul was President. As this is a honestly a state decision if they wanted to use another currency they must feel a reason for it, why block states from doing stuff they feel important ignore them long enough. or at least if Ron Paul was president this would be a in house vote of Indiana choice etc.
bl782 2 years ago
If this is issue were sent the the local level at counties I'm willing to bet there would be thousands of pro gay counties for marriage and other basic rights where people would be really happy. I know a lot of people who are not gay but support gay rights but cant do nothing at a federal level but pull enough sway in the community to get real change. Also there would be some counties against and that is their right. How backward do you think people are? Do you have no faith in your friends.
bl782 2 years ago
So if such issues were to be decided at county level. One would assume that some counties will ban gay marriage and some counties will allow it, so as soon as gay couples move from one county to another for a number of reasons their marriage status gets into a limbo ? This also mean they have to restrict their movement to only those counties that allow gay marriage or may have to go into exile into gay friendly counties
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
Yes some states would that's why it should be a counties decision because many counties and people in the state didn't vote that way, in wasn't 99% that voted against gay marriage in Cali, and a national law for it would infuriate so many to violence is it any better at a national level. If it was at the county level they could move to any state they chose because in every state, I don't think counties are as limited as you think. exile they can travel to other counties.
bl782 2 years ago
How are you saying South California Would make gay second class citizen by denying what? Second class citizens usally don't have the right to vote, so your telling me the State is going to make Gays illegal to vote. If someone is gonna hurt a gay bad no law will stop it that's Why we Have Hate Law and Hate crimes, and under that law gays are protected, women used it, every individual who can vote is protected. so good way for counties that don't like marriage find a legal way around that.
bl782 2 years ago
that hypothetical couple living in Maine, if they lived in Maine if they traveled anywhere the status would beheld up by Maine law, you would get your benefits, you could travel, vacation, your status wouldn't be subject till they decided to move to hypothetical south Cali where they did not have the right. Also in Maine they would be integrating with people who would respect them, and protest peacefully against South Cali instead of integrating into a population that may be violent.
bl782 2 years ago
We have alcohol free counties, they work, so many of these issue can be handled locally or at the state level. So if Florida wants legalize pot and New york state want to Ban it, stop neither, its their right, their shouldn't be a national law for marijuana or against it. same with most department at the federal level. Such national laws; some states may not want the financial burden. Think about how many American jobs in Hemp production get sent here to Canada.
bl782 2 years ago
It would not have been a problem if the entire nation were more or less progressive enough to not use those 'state rights' to advance their bigoted agendas like anti-gay or anti-women or anti-minority agendas
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
I think the state could be more progressive given the chance once again. when was the last time sates had these powers, Under different social norms I understand your argument but we as humans have different morals and social norm as a majority now then we did in 1960,70, 20, 30's. Plus when something goes wrong people have to blame themselves not one man and get back to work.
bl782 2 years ago
Then I say, the earth belongs to each of these generations during its course, fully and in its own right. The second generation receives it; clear of the debts and incumbrances of the first, the third of the second, and so on. For if the first could charge it with a debt, then the earth would belong to the dead and not to the living generation. Then, no generation can contract debts greater than may be paid during the course of its own existence. Try to figure out who said that.
bl782 2 years ago
Guess who will reap the great benefits of polluted air land and water left on by this generation ?
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
It isn't the 5,000 Patriots that died in Iraq !!!
boots920 2 years ago
It too Utopian, first If the US stops consuming 25% of the world resources it make energy cheaper only for foreigners since America has to deal with a ever increasingly weak dollar. China/India make 36% of world pop as they trade and trade in itself creates wealth will begin to consume more to keep a floor under prices and even drive them up going from here. So really unless countries that are the fastest growing use green safe measures any gain we make will be canceled out by 2020.
bl782 2 years ago
You are right 150$ barrel or 4.50 $ a gallon gas during last September was cheap
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
That was the result of a weak dollar and inflation no amount of legislation can stop rising costs due a weak dollar. Look at one chart of the USD year over Year and you can see why we had a rise in all goods and services. Obama states himself this bill will rise the cost of energy not lower it & creating a new derivative market for speculators to trade in, and banks like GoldmanSachs. Also I 100% believe we will break the 07 lows and see higher fuel and energy prices has my previous sources say
bl782 2 years ago
So in your view paying 700 billion dollars a year to foreign oil instead of making lifestyle energy efficient and developing home grown renewable energy sources is cheaper for you ?
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
That 700 billion would only be about 22 billion if our money was worth what it was in 1921 when they stopped minting to about just 300 billion maybe 10, 12 years ago, just because the value of the dollar has deteriorated badly since nixon sever the gold standard so much and in that time since Americas dollar has weakened year over year what has it sold what will it sell or start to produce. Obama talks nothing about production, all about consumers need to spend, how can they with a really bad$
bl782 2 years ago
If you look per joule of energy compared to wind and solar is sure as hell is cheaper.
Did you ever bother to look at the studies of the European experience with these power sources. No reduction in CO2, why well because you have to idle turbine and boilers from generators that use hydrocarbons, in support....
If the west never listened to progressives regarding nuclear power we would have been much better off..
That said climate change is still very uncertain. GISS-ER was way off.
EasyEs 2 years ago
You are one of those same guys who as recently as 1994 told that Nicotine is not addictive and smoking does not cause cancer.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
No I am actually a marine geologist.. You know sure there is a huge divergence between the GISS and UAH data sets. Sure IPCC 4AG WG Section 9 states out right that they have next to no knowledge of feedback process and internal variability that might lead to a very small degree of climate sensitivity.
Sure there is a Mann and Briffia have the problem with Paleo climate studies and got caught merging different data sets at the inflection points of their graphs but you know better..
EasyEs 2 years ago
Naturally, why would Europe's CO2 emission go down when Russia and nearby Baltic states are sitting there pumping up oil to turn themselves into one the largest suppliers of oil in the world.
That oil will eventually get burnt somewhere in Europe or somewhere else and gets emitted into the atmosphere as greenhouse gases right ?
It creates even more urgent need to move away from hydrocarbon based fuels.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
By the way you totally dismissed the fact that the goods that were produced with much energy efficient production chain in Europe in the past are now being produced at factories in third world nations that have way less energy efficient production chain and most of those third world world nation dont even have environmental regulations or have very weak environmental regulations
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
Great comeback by the way.. did you also have an explanation as to how small reductions in CO2 will reduce temperature when the response of temperature to CO2 concentration is logarithmic and the "AGM" theroy is based on amplification of this small increase in temperature by incomplete models of internal variability of the climate system.
Also I should remind you for your response the word "Peer Reviewed " will not trump "Results Replicated"...
EasyEs 2 years ago
By the way, even if for some yet unknown reason somehow you prove to be right, what is the point for entire world to fight over or engage in bidding war over a energy resource that is getting more and more scarce ?
Regardless of the environmental impacts oil prices will still get a whole lot expensive because of supply and demand imbalance
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
True and that's why we should be looking at real alternative energy solutions, nuclear, tidal wave research, etc; their are some relay ground breaking results in hydroelectricity, but something other then Solar which this bill does nothing for, Its a tax bill to pay for health care. if EasyEs is correct on CO2 emissions this Bill As Is; grossly distorts the economy and wont change anything if EasyEs is correct has the way we measure CO2 and its sources are incorrect, I havent herd that 1.
bl782 2 years ago
Current oil scarcity is more a function of state run oil companies that happen to have good geological fortune squandering their resources. Look at Mexico and Russia and Venezuela, both have huge petroleum basins but falling oil production. Why because getting recover from the reservoir over 15% requires investment in geoscience and engineering. Exxon Mobil can get almost 50% recovery from reservoirs and can book them as reserves which most nations can not. Lots of oil left, easy stuff is gone.
EasyEs 2 years ago
You entire premise is based on having to rely on foreign sources of oil. Why should we wait for years or decades for these state controlled petroleum producers in other countries to come up with much more efficient way of extracting their oil ?
The other thing is the cost. Why send over 100s of billions of dollars a year to foreign country ? Paying for petroleum imports from foreign nation accounts for one of the biggest factors in growing out trade deficit.
VoodooPolitics101 2 years ago
Well why doesn't America open up the potential for their petroleum reserves then. Also once they reach their production capacity they will ask western nations to come in an boost production. That means more money for American shareholders and jobs for Americans. Chavez is already asking Chevron to come back to his country.
Solar wind and Bio mass will never replace oil, Nuclear may be able to take a large chunk though.
EasyEs 2 years ago
Comment removed
bl782 2 years ago
The reduction of CO2 emissions, which is the goal of this bill, will most likely fail to happen due to the fact that India and China will continue to sit on the sidelines. Many environmentalists contend that without the worlds participation, the U.S.s reduction will amount to little to no change.
bl782 2 years ago
US which is 5% of world population consumes over 25 percent of world's total energy consumption. When the biggest consumer will not set standards why the hell will Chinese and Indians do it.
My suggestion is put a carbon tax on goods coming from polluting producers in China and India and we will see where the hell will they sell their cheap goods which in fact has only helped trade deficit grow by unthinkable size.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
WoW China, and India are devolving at a much faster rate, even now, they our creditors, they have money they don't need to borrow and they will consume more, china's is buy,buy,buy and that's not stopping, the recent rise in commodities hasn't fallen, its paused and likely to continue despite rising unemployment.
cap and trade will further rise prices and in fact the bill does nothing to stop searching the globe for refined products that dont carry the same level of carbon costs.
bl782 2 years ago
If this bill as merit why you support something Located in section 217 of the bill and the Shower Nazi units puts a three-to five-minute limit on showers.
bl782 2 years ago
You blame china, why did Hilary, Tim Geither beg China to buy Us Treasuries, If you put a carbon tax on China's Goods They'll sell their UST holdings try again. protectionism will only lead to more neighboring protectionism. Also Americas Imports 80% more then It produces so Any trade War now really only hurts the US, unlike 1930 when the US was a creditor and produced more. A tax maybe when times were good but then that's against what America stands for. Hell China wants SDR as the new reserve
bl782 2 years ago
They have no choice but to hold US debts. Are they going to sell their exports to Mars or some other planet ?
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
No they sell it to their people and other emerging countries because as the us dollar gets weaker other countries currencies are stronger resulting in stronger import power thus more consumption. do you believe Americans were put on this earth to be the only consumers or will it be like history where many different peoples have enjoyed the fruits of their labor, to the Romans of the past, to the Turkish empire, to the British empire, to the USA. Consumption is a gift of Production.
bl782 2 years ago
So the weaker US dollar against other currencies is not bad after all..is it ?
So does it not make US manufactured goods cheaper for foreign countries to buy from the US ?
So does it not help make US trade deficits decline ?
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
A weaker dollar hurts the US Has they for the sacrifice will have to accept higher prices for goods, a higher standard of living and accept conditions like china or worse because that's what a significant weak dollar does, raises costs for everything. secondly, we have to build and rebuild factories, re tool them update, etc, while foreigners can skip that since they have more factories etc and retool for whatever good they start pumping out from Vancouver to Paris to Tokyo to hong kong
bl782 2 years ago
The winners of this legislation would be companies like, AIG, Goldman Sachs and GE, all stand to make billions by buying, selling and trading carbon derivatives. All these companies have been in the center of the recent financial meltdown which has sent the economy crashing.
bl782 2 years ago
So called amendments that were put down by Republicans was really an attempt to back stop portions of the bill, Republicans tried and failed, to add three amendments: a suspension of the bill if gas hits $5 per gallon, suspend the bill if electricity prices rise more than 10 percent and suspend the bill if unemployment jumped past the 15 percent mark. All were turned down in the Democratic-written bill. Note out hey didn't say cancel just suspend to probably rewrite a failed bill.
bl782 2 years ago
Also based on Obam's "promises" this would never happen so why not put them in so they never going to blossom.
bl782 2 years ago
Another aspect that no one is talking about is the fact that Pelosi, Markey and Al Gore are positioned to make a lot of money through investments in companies whose stock is worth nothing now, but will increase dramatically if cap-and-trade is passed in the Senate and signed by President Obama.
Gore is positioned to become the first global-warming billionaire. He owns multiple companies that would track carbon footprints of businesses.
bl782 2 years ago
Proponents of the bill need to look no further than Spain, where the cap-and trade concept has sent unemployment to the 20 percent mark and with every one green job created, they have lost 2.2 jobs. Not exactly a success story.
bl782 2 years ago
For the Reasons stated I hope enough people supports the congressmen that voted against this bill AS Is, Congrats to Ron Paul, and support the senators who vote No on this bill.
This bill taking in context with everything else is a pretty bad written bill.
bl782 2 years ago
Cap-and-trade bill as written will rewrite the American dream home ownership and provide heavy tax burdens for generations. Provisions within the largest tax increase in the countrys history will change the way you buy and sell a home, use energy and shop for goods and services.
bl782 2 years ago
Adding to skyrocketing energy and fuel costs, the API estimate that carbon permits would add 77 cent per gallon to the cost of gasoline.
This cost alone will slam commuters, air travelers and trucking companies. Again, ordinary Americans would eventually feel the brunt of the rising energy costs.
bl782 2 years ago
According to the Carbon Dioxide Information Analyst Center, CDIAC, if the country wants to curtail carbon dioxide the country should be building nuclear and hydroelectric plants. They are cheaper, carbon-neutral and 100 percent domestically sourced.
Cap and trade legislation translates into 17 percent of the U.S. economy and health care takes up 16 percent of the economy. Worse, Washington D.C. runs the auto industry and some financial sectors as well. Where does it end?
bl782 2 years ago
Note Gerald Celente Said " If we were really serious about alternative energy we would be researching hydroelectricity..." nuclear etc. Solar and wind those were solutions of the past when times were good. Also People at the local level and states know this why doesn't Federal.
RP would allow each state to set its policy not a nationalized standard on energy and climate, one of the most diverse and ever-changing across the states, no national law can be done, States/Counties are different.
bl782 2 years ago
MIT states American families will see a $3,000 increase per year in energy taxes all for a 2/10ths of one degree reduction in temperatures in the next 100 years.
bl782 2 years ago
As with any increase in costs the low-income families would be hit the hardest; however the government insists it will offer rebates to those hurt the most, which translates into another tax for the middleclass to pay for those rebates.
bl782 2 years ago
When the consumer thinks of energy they think electricity and oil consumption. This legislation will do nothing to curb our foreign-oil disease.
Instead of reducing dependency on overseas energy suppliers, Americans would be more dependant than ever, says Clayton Mahaffey an analyst at Redchip Co. in Florida. Theyll be searching the globe for refined products that dont carry the same level of carbon costs.
bl782 2 years ago
Heritage also contends that consumers will pay hidden taxes in grocery, gas and anything manufactured because business owners will simply pass the added cost onto taxpayers.
The farming community will also pay a hefty price with cap-and-trade. They will virtually be wiped out of the food export business because their field to market cost will no longer be competitive with foreign countries who don't implement similar bills.
bl782 2 years ago
However, according to the Heritage Foundation by 2012, the average taxpayer will see an additional increase of $436 per year and the number will eventually hit $1,241 a year plus 2.5 million in U.S. job loses from the old existing & fading energy sector so the new one energy sector promising to be creating 1 trillion does not offset the losses.
bl782 2 years ago
Also included in the massive 1,500-page bill is water rationing. The federal government has set up a shower manager. One website selling a shower manager calls the gadget the Shower Nazi. Located in section 217 of the bill and the Shower Nazi units puts a three-to five-minute limit on showers.
bl782 2 years ago
Controlling other aspects of your life will be seen in the mandatory 20 percent wind/solar consumption to start; this would definitely lead to energy rationing if there was not enough wind turbines and solar panels in place.
bl782 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A new government bureaucracy created within the bill will force homeowners who wish to sell their homes to retrofit their houses to be environmentally-friendly. The costs would fall to the homeowners possibly injuring an already fragile real estate marketplace. So they can't sell only give the bank the house and let them environmentally outfit the houses, you cant even sell your houses without be environmentally friendly no offense, the gov't is going to do this in a recession WOW.
bl782 2 years ago
Potential replacement items required would range from eco-friendly hot-water heaters to windows. The homes in California have already seen values fall through the floor and homeowners see no way to recoup the expensive upgrades the state and federal government would require.
bl782 2 years ago
this video is garbage.
A. there are fundamentally two schools of scientific belief (many of which are switching to the latter) regarding the direction of global climate. More and more scientists are switching sides, considering that CO2 emissions arent the sole source and has significantly less impact than previously thought.
B. You postulate that this piece of legislation is about clean energy, when in fact it is creating a broader scheme larger than the current-unwinding derivatives scam
bl0ven 2 years ago
I know that the truth is secondary or, more accurately, irrelevant when you are on the side of the angels. The left think they are on the side of the angels. The right thinks God is on their side. They are both wrong.
dwcarkuff 2 years ago
Just another lie.
bbburton 2 years ago
You completely distorted Ron Paul's argument in this video. And on your page for that matter. How about you look at Ron Paul's argument on paper, dissect it and analyze it without your special effects and unrelated imagery. It's great work you've done with the editing but how about a real analysis of Paul's positions?
serfdomthwart 2 years ago
Well how bout you tell us about his stand on clean energy. He is against everything that the majority of the people want. I have seen his videos without the effects and he just wants to control everything. I know longer care about what Ron Paul and his supporters want. Now if the constitution can be attached somehow to clean energy you know it will be done. Take a look at this country. No one cares what he thinks.
Mychaels 2 years ago
well you are right only about one thing here. no one seems to care what he thinks. and look where this country is now. swirling around the top of the toilet bowl waiting to be flushed by our own overindulgence and irresponsible fiscal policy.
Since you question his stance ill tell you. His stance is that people as consumers and markets will ultimately decide best as they contain the most knowledge of any situation. you cannot subsidize one industry w/o neglecting all the others. (fascism?)
bl0ven 2 years ago
So Ron Paul would solve everything? That is pretty arrogant. How would he deal with the Congress? How about answering to the American people that he could care less about? When you think you know everything then that means we will be under a dictatorship and be controlled by one man. Ron Paul obnoxious. He is always right. And that is why he will never be president.
Mychaels 2 years ago
Again, right only about one thing. He'll never be president bc people cant accept that their preconceived notions may be incorrect, and hate people who even elude to counterpoints in conflict with their beliefs of reality (your response bears evidence of this basic human nature).
No one claims he knows everything. obama is the closest thing to dictatorship we've had since FDR. Presidents dont "deal" with congress. thats not their job. Ron would end US foreign aggression and cease dom. survey.
bl0ven 2 years ago
RP wont solve everything, Find one clip where he said that he is always right. In fact he said he doesn't know, and that's why he would give the states elected officials the power that left to them to fix their problems.
bl782 2 years ago
You better first look out for neo-Nazis in Ron Paul campaign like Randy Gray of Michigan (Ron Paul's Michigan Fundraiser), former Grand Wizard of KKK David Duke, Don Black etc.
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
WoW Hitler a real NAZI, Supported Jesus I guess Jesus was a bad guy by your logic. (The term Nazi is derived from the first two syllables of Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, the official German language name of the National Socialist German Workers Party )
bl782 2 years ago
By your logic if Hitler was a real NAZI and Supported Jesus. What you mean is Jesus supported carnage of 6 million Jews.
Isnt it odd that the same people who condemn Nazis had neo-Nazis running the show in Ron Paul's presidential Campaign ?
UnsavoryMen 2 years ago
You are absolutely right he is a racist. Ever notice that shitty little grin he has? What better way to control whites than fill their heads with useless propaganda that they cannot understand. And not tell them that their hero will never get elected. They have never answered how they plan to make this man president cause it is a foreign question to them. Until Ron Paul tells them they won't answer these questions. Kinda like Hitlers Germany.
Mychaels 2 years ago
At least he's intelligent :
"Useless propaganda"
- the Central Bank is counterfeiting the US dollar into oblivion, c