Pavlov, Lemmings, BS, & Strawberries

i dunno how a grown man can be so poor at understanding what a carbon tax is.

read slowly.

some politicians favor a "carbon" tax. carbon is an element. in carbon dioxide, carbon functions as a "greenouse gas". this means that it may restrict heat from escaping from earth and cause warming. some people are opposed to releasing c02 because they figure it will cause problems.

ok, are you with me?

now, in order to restrict this carbon from being emitted, there are various proposals. one is that there would be a cap on how much of the stuff that we can release into the atmosphere. folks would be given allocations of how much they are allowed to emit, then they can sell and trade their allocations. this would reward folks who do not emit much, and make it costly for those that did. presumably this would motivate folks to find alternative to the evil carbon. this is called "cap and trade".

with me still? good.

there is another plan for dealing with carbon emissions called "carbon tax". with some versions of this plan, the government would place a tax on emissions. the tax would be high enough so that the government revenue would replace the income from payroll taxes. again, this would reward industries that are not pollutin gthe atmosphere, while motivating the ones that did. there would be no loss in revenue for the government, and no higher tax burden for the people. instead of taxing folks for earning money like we do now, we would tax folks for emissions.

i am a very good writer, and i can rephrase this so it is an even simpler read if necessary.

do you favor either of those proposals, based on the general ideas?

barack obama favors some sort of cap and trade proposal, would you agree that a plan like that is necessary, given what science is telling us about the environment? keep in mind that the science is ever so true.

 

as far as i can remember, you took took the middle of the road wishy-washy educated white person viewpoint on all those issues. it is almost as if you are running for office and you take the position least disagreeable to the most folks.

one thing you do that i enjoy is judge a politicians effectiveness by his popularity in the polls.

but in your defense, it is socially a smart move to pretend. i dont go around telling pretty girls i dont care about the environments when i am trying to get some. to some extent sometimes even i care about not being perceived as a crazy extremist, even though i am. there are times when it makes sense to temper your views. but we are all friends here, bub, you can say what you think without crafting your views into a ball of boring safeness.

 

what core personal beliefs were specifically instilled from your parents. you know, were they strict catholics, god-fearing, anti-abortion, flower children live and let live, etc. And were they instrumental in forming your current core of beliefs.

you can still choose middle ground between 2 arbitrary points. extremes are relative anyhow.

no

dont confuse martin for ramah

so you just consider both sides and usually determine things are best done in the middle?

im just trying to understand it. im sure its just my inability to grasp something so abstract.

let's just stick to global warming.

who cares what others think. we can veer back and forth trying to solve the riddle of red while also discussing global warming. its imperative in understanding your non-positions sometimes.

 

that was too long to read. but i did catch the beginning.

cant? or wont?

dont be silly we all know i am the best witer here by a wide margin.

i cant read the rest. was it a yes or no on carbon tax and cap and trade?

 

That would be your G-D given right. Called free will

Can't argue that point....although by comparison to the current occupant, he will end up looking like Washington or Jefferson. Sad what neocons and pinkos have done to this once great Republic.

 

wow. extreme. that may the most obvious fact on the planet. congrats, you are not an extremist religious lunatic.

o lord yes. pretty much the stance of the average person of your ethnicity and education. i would be stunned if you thought anything else.

gun control is an issue i almost care zero about and dont really think about, like your position on the politics of global warming. and i dunno what you think. but given who you are i suppose you support pragmatic gun control, which allows law abiding citizens to have weapons. yunno, the position of least resistance.