Powered by TypePad

« Saturday AM | Main | Hope And Change Mugged By Reality In Iraq »

June 23, 2014



It is just a little insurance, just in case. Of course those that get in on the ground floor could stand to profit, just a little bit.

Stephanie tortoise not the hare

We've been cooling since the 30s. Climate change is a farce for crony payoffs. Let them eat unicorn!



The way the data is being massaged in 5 years the 30's will become a veritable ice age.


Steyer has as much science background* as Al Gore. Ditto for Paulson.

Tommy majored in PoliSci. The feather passer was a PhD candidate in PoliSci at the same time. Do they still share a feather?

Janet - the districts lie fallow, while the Capitol gorges itself

I suggest Hank Paulson, Michael R. Bloomberg, & Tom Steyer give all their OWN money to the federal government as a precaution against climate catastrophe. GO FOR IT!


Wait, is this some kind of subtle TomM attack on crony 'carbon' deals. I certainlty hope so; for what a real environmentalist (who doesn't live off of government grants) thinks about Skydragon Carbon, see this link: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/19/CO2-is-good-for-us-climate-change-is-bunk-greens-are-raging-extremists-says-Greenpeace-co-founder

Stephanie tortoise not the hare

Love it Janet! If they feel so strongly about it, let them fix it.


It would be a great demonstration of their sincerity, too, and a good example for all. Algore, too.

Stephanie tortoise not the hare

One time 90% tax on all Tahitian, Bahamian etc private trusts. If they are doing it for the children, the kids shouldn't mind, right?

Thomas Collins

I'm going to have to defend poly. sci., henry. A crucial aspect of the poly. sci. discipline is analyzing whose ox is being gored, and whose ox is being fed. In the context of climate, a rigorous poly. sci. analysis would look at why in the space of the last four or five decades "settled climate science" has morphed from global cooling will kill us to global warming will kill us to hinky weather will kill us. A rigorous poly. sci. researcher would also undertake the discipline of learning enough about stats to be able to evaluate at an overall level the various claims of those writing on climate change.

To understand the overall center of gravity of this debate, it is helpful to go back to the political scientist of all political scientists, Plato. Paulson is one of those holding the bogeyman climate change artifacts, the shadows of which are reflected on the wall at which the gullible ones are looking. Most of the gullible ones, including those supposedly highly educated, will never even turn to observe that the images they are looking at are not even up to the level of artifacts, but constitute shadows of artifacts.

As far as training in science in general allowing one to see through this charade, perhaps it is where I live, but many of those at social settings I have attended who mouth climate change garbage are highly credentialled in natural science and computer engineering.

Being so willfully blind that one cannot see is an affliction that can infect all humans, not just those trained in the social sciences.

Agree with me or not, one cannot say that my rants defending practitioners of law and political scientists are done to enhance my popularity! :-))



Cecil Turner

Carbon emissions are currently unregulated, unpriced and unowned, which means that IF they are dangerous . . .

I'd suggest the existing taxes on fuel, gas, heating oil and coal already regulate the market as much as any new tax will. And I remain unconvinced a new sexy tax (like a VAT) will do anything other than provide politicians with another fund they can overdraw and mismanage.

Color me unpersuaded.


It's a visceral reaction to the "greenhouse" thing. Subliminally, it affects people with claustrophobic tendencies. Even intelligent scientists can harbor an inordinate fear of being closed in. Held down. Buried alive. With nothing but a small tube, 6 feet long, through which to breathe. In the dark.

Danube of Thought



It's all an excuse to drive up fossil fuel prices to force us into cities because of costs where we are easily subject to these deliberative democracy plans I wrote about today. Katz really did have a big mouth. I find the Bilderburg invite this month to be a verification the cronies believe these theories work for them. I also find the invite to ATL mayor Reed confirmation that ATL plans to be a test case without bothering to inform anyone who does not read ARC reports.

Just submit really is the watchword for these people.

Thomas Collins


Apparently the Aussie PM isn't too impressed by the reasoning of the Paulsons of the world.


I thought the CXX or the 'green' deal at the CME had gone defunct or something along those lines. Plus, had lost a bunch of money.

Hope our Chi town friend weighs in.

Eric in Boise

When they say it's about the climate, the children, or the community, it's usually about the other 'C', control.

Or sometimes cash.


glasatar-it was bought by cme/ICE that has since bought the NYSE. Based in ATL. I know some of the people there.


'Revenue-neutral' is code for taking enormous amounts of money from people who drive cars and tractors and giving it to people who live in cities.

Rick B


Isn't it more that if we agree to tax the air we breathe, we will have achieved the Platonic ideal of the self plucking chicken, thoughtfully guided by the 'best and brightest' credentialed morons which the sophists running the Ivy League agora are capable of producing? We will finally have realized the 'kinder, gentler Spartan utopia' envisioned in The Republic.

Were it not for the impact of uncontrollable exogenous factors involving the same reversion below mean of succeeding generations of our Guardian oligarchs, we might get there this time. If it just weren't for damned reality intruding upon fantasy, life might yet be perfectible.

Captain Hate

Whoa, Tammy Bruce reports that Miriam Ibrahim has been released from prison. Unprecedentedly good news from Sudan.

Dave (in MA)

She's probably less safe now.


Rick-it's a world where unicorns not only exist, but they can fly.

It has been decreed so by political power as a necessary enabler of social integration for all and social control of all.

It is terribly mean of you to point out that the world cannot in fact live off the corpus of the tax free foundations. Their vital work with no need to worry about consequences allows those imaginations to soar in the most creative ways. Every body who is anybody on the cocktail circuit says so.

Old Lurker

Can anybody explain what SCOTUS said to the EPA today? Gobblygook to me it seems.


The lovey-dovey public relationship between Oprah Winfrey and the President and Michelle Obama is a mirage, according to a new book that says first lady badgers the TV giant for favors and makes the fellow Chicagoan feel “jumpy.”

In his latest political book, “Blood Feud: The Clintons vs. the Obamas,” best-selling author Edward Klein also reveals that “Oprah feels slighted by the Obamas” but would walk on hot coals for Bill and Hillary Clinton, who she is eager to help in a 2016 presidential election.
Sign Up for the Paul Bedard newsletter!

Klein writes: “ ‘I have a much warmer relationship with Hillary than I do with either Michelle or Barack,’ Oprah said. ‘The Clintons make me feel at ease 100 percent of the time. But even when the Obamas think they are being charming, they hold you at arm’s length. They make me jumpy, even when the obviously don’t mean to.' ”

Klein, whose critical book about Obama, “The Amateur,” was best-seller, writes in his new work that the first lady and top aide Valerie Jarrett are needy. “Being with them over a period of time can be tiresome,” he quotes Winfrey saying.

“They’re always badgering you for something,” wrote Klein on page 261. “I’ve spent much of my life fending off powerful and not-so-powerful people who want things from me. But these two women are something else again. They’re walking agendas. Their wish list never stops.”

As a result, he concludes, Winfrey “feels slighted.” He quotes a friend of Winfrey who said that the Obamas “have been incredibly thoughtless in the way they have treated her. It’s been unfair and hurtful.”

But he described a different relationship with the Clintons, explaining that she has been open to their efforts to win her endorsement in 2016, even as Vice President Joe Biden also woos Winfrey’s support should he run for the presidency.

Quoting a Clinton insider, Klein writes, “Bill and Hillary have both had long talks with Oprah. They’ve made it clear they’re planning a run for the White House and would appreciate her support. They want her to do for Hillary what she did for Obama in his first campaign in 2008. They think her support is worth a million votes, and maybe more. Hillary says she’s convinced that Oprah is going to come on board.”


Larry Kudlow was very excited about this Carbon Tax idea on his show 2 weeks ago, therefore I know it is a terrible idea.


Remember when those more highly evolved "Republicans" were telling us that a $5 per gallon gas tax was going to solve all our energy problems? Even Buckley bought into that. It was utopian nonsense at best and useful idiocy at worst then and it still is.


I think they split the baby, OL:



Here's Kudlow to Steven Hayward on his 7 June Program:

Kudlow: (49:22) last question, and this is a long shot. Some people have argued we could have a Carbon Tax. I don't know what the Tax would be but something like a Sales Tax on Carbon, but, but, every nickel of that Carbon Tax Revenue, should go to lowering marginal Tax Rates for individuals and for Corporations and everybody else. In other words, Yeah, Okay, higher Carbon Taxes to create a disincentive there, but it should all go to lower Tax Rates for Economic Growth incentives in the rest of the country. Does that make any sense at all?

Steve Hayward: Well I think that makes some sense Larry as an exercise in abstract Tax Reform. I'm with you I'm for having Consumption Taxes over Capital Income Taxes, however I wonder if we'd ever get that or if we could make that deal stick, right, I mean the great fear is that you would get the Carbon Tax going up constantly and then the Income Tax Rates creeping back up again. We saw that under Bush and Clinton and that's why I think it's a non-starter politically even though in the abstract you and I could agree that it might make economic sense.

Captain Hate

Kudlow is Exhibit A of the long term impact of being on the pipe. He used to be Mr Free Market which now gets included in "None of the Above". I have no idea what WFB's excuse was for buying into that nonsense. Are you sure it wasn't his idiot son?

Old Lurker

I think so too, Narc. More proof that the high court is not the solution to our problems.


CaptH-- Nothing to do with Coke-- it's about the Dollars. Kudlow's tax liabilities differ greatly from ours. He'd personally -- and all of his rich cohorts Tom M?)-- would love to see a broadbased carbon tax that reduced marginal income and capital gains rates. He'd basically pay the same 'carbon' tax as working stiffs, but his income/cap gains tax liability could be reduced orders of magnitude more. 'Revenue Neutral' can mean many things.


there was a time around 2006-2007, when Buckley pere was musing Spenglerian, about Iraq and other things,

I would have thought this would have been a slam dunk for Nino, kind of dissapointed, but you know, also happy they didn't come up with a 'right to arm bears,'

Old Lurker

Where Kudlow is a fricken fool, though, is thinking that accepting ANY brand new sweeping tax in "trade" for some reduction (vs elimination) in an existing tax is ever a deal which will stick. The next Congress will jack the rates on the new tax and jack back up the rates on the old tax and laugh all the way to the bank.

The examples are too numerous to list.

As I said.

Fricken Fool.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/06/23/scotus-rejects-epas-rewrite-of-the-clean-air-act-but-ghg-regulation-will-go-forward/ is for OL.


OL-- that's where the cronies get suckered in the end as well. They believe that their hotshot lobbyists and pricey lawyers will prevent their ox from being gored when the lying politicians reneg. They may win on the margins, but the pols will stick it to their rich cronies too.

Happy, happy, joy, joy Ignatz

--a revenue-neutral carbon tax (offset by a cut in ther Social Security payroll tax)--

Anyone who uses the terms "revenue neutral" or "offset by a cut" regarding the supermassive blackhole in DC is engaged in self refutation.

Captain Hate

NK, Kudlow's tax liabilities differed greatly from mine back when he made sense. I have to believe it's something other than that. Maybe I'm wrong but he used to be str8 outta Milton Friedman.


CH--it was Buckley and it was back in the '80's as I recall. Used to make we wonder about him, even though he was a huge hero of mine. I think that one of his biggest charms as well as his weakness was that he genuinely liked and even trusted the sincerity of the intellectual lefties who he jousted (and socialized) with, as well as the good government types, so he was capable of believing that such schemes could work if handled by the right people.
Me not so much--ever.


CH-- whatever the reason, Kudlow is flat wrong about this.


>>>Carbon emissions are currently unregulated, unpriced and unowned ...<<<

others nibbled on this but that is a puzzler TM.

Heavily regulated http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards

Price discovery (the credits are routinely worth zero) Chicago (defunct)https://www.theice.com/ccx.jhtml
Europe https://www.eex.com/en#/en

Ownership? airgas ... http://www.airgas.com/content/products.aspx?id=9002008002000 (retail is about a buck fifty per pound) ...

climate change ... a solution in search of a problem.

Old Lurker

If Kudlow gets his way, we all move to Oz:

"Australian PM introduces bill to repeal carbon tax"


no new taxes. period. end of story. read what old lurker wrote at 2:27. Out loud. with the windows open.

Thomas Collins

It won't stop with a carbon tax. Next will be a VAT. Neither will be revenue neutral. It will be pay early and pay often time, even more than it is now.

Jim Miller

Tom - One thing you don't discuss is the distributional effects of a carbon tax.

I am not particularly criticizing you for that, since I haven't seen anyone else discuss it, either. (Including me, though I have mentioned it from time to time.)

Here's my guess at some of those it would affect the most: People in energy intensive industries, of course. Tourism that depends on air travel. And, of course, the plane manufacturing business.

Or, looking at it another way, the rural poor and working class, who often have to travel long distances for work, shopping, and services.

Who would be affected by it least? Well-off urbanites, for example, Henry Paulson.

Any corresponding general tax cut would not cancel those distributional effects.

(I think you mean a tax on carbon dioxide, though there is an argument for a tax on carbon. I have seen claims that soot is reponsible for about 20 percent of the anthropogenic global warming.)


Why Jim;

The urban rich can't simply expect to take the subway. That would be beneath them. And those $5,000/month/car parking garages mean less of the Premier Cru around the penthouse. Why do you think Hillary is so adamant about her hard times? $100 Million simply doesn't go that far anymore.

Most of the soot generated these days is from China and India. Our sootprint is small. We maintain our power plants better and they are generally very efficient.

The days of London Fogs and dead forests are receding very quickly. And yet the volume is reaching the level of a Who concert trying to drown out disagreement.

The was a lovely article in the Orange County Register about Tijuana and Newport Beach flooding away because of global warming. The only problem is that it is completely at odds with the facts.

Ever now and then we get extremely high tides because of the moon's gravitational force and an especially high tide. They flood the streets down on the Peninsula. But we haven't had anything close for nigh on 10 years now.

By the Warmists logic, we should be having them more frequently. Tijuana, I don't know but their sewage system sucks. Ask DoT.

The comments to this entry are closed.