Court upholds California’s cap-and-trade system

grist.org...

Some California polluters don’t think they should have to pay for the right to pump greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, so they sued the state to try to block its year-old carbon-trading system.

But a state judge this week rejected those lawsuits. One of the suits was filed by the California Chamber of Commerce . The other was filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation , a nonprofit that aims to “protect businesses against unfair burdens,” part of its master plan for “rescuing liberty from coast to coast.” The chamber and the liberty rescuers both pledged to appeal the ruling.

Rescuing LIBERTY for corporate people not natural people.

Since when is 'profit' a right.

If so, then I've the same right to 'profit' and should be able to write off 'expenses' as a corporate person.

We need a corporate death penalty...

We have left a huge mess for future generations to clean up, in order for a miniscule percentage of the people to live in huge mansions, and jet around the planet.

All too many in the boomer generation lived excessive lives, and happy to justify the abuse of the planet.

This is the part that the people who support a companies right to pollute the planet will concentrate on.

The state has already raised nearly $1.1 billion from the sale of tradable carbon allowances. That money is supposed to go toward climate and environmental programs, but Gov. Jerry Brown (D) has borrowed $500 million from the fund to help pay for unrelated programs. He says it will be repaid with interest.

Then the whole it's a scam to rip off the energy sector will begin. But for some reason these people never stop to think about how long these companies have been ripping us off.

FyreByrd
Rescuing LIBERTY for corporate people not natural people.

Since when is 'profit' a right.

If so, then I've the same right to 'profit' and should be able to write off 'expenses' as a corporate person.

We need a corporate death penalty...

edit on 16-11-2013 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)

I applaud your sentiments. This is something that's been bothering me for a while now. I have come to suspect, that when many conservatives (and I don't necessarily mean your common, average joe conservative like many of the people here... I mean the guys running the GOP, the guys at the top, the guys with lots and lots of money)... the feeling that when some conservatives say that they're in favor of "smaller government" and "less government" and "greater freedom from government" that this is exactly the kind of thing they have in mind.


Not that they necessarily think we should have privacy, or end the harmful War On Drugs, or yadda yadda yadda. But rather, that we shouldn't have to deal with these pesky environmental laws, and those annoying minimum wage laws, and many other laws that protect the environment, the country, the consumer, the "little guy" and so on.


"Bad for business, bad for the economy" you will often hear them cry.



What they are really saying, is they don't want any governmental roadblocks to raping the earth and pillaging the common folks, so they can turn a profit.



Maybe that's an overly cynical view, but it's very much what I've come to suspect. And it's what I think of almost every time I hear conservatives cry for smaller government.

reply to post by FyreByrd


S&F. Corporations need to clean up their mess. These are core values that should have been taught to CEO's when they were children. It's an anti-litter law. If they didn't learn to clean up as children because there was someone to do it for them, then they need to hire someone to do it for them now if they're old dogs.

reply to post by buster2010


Nicely put, Buster2010.

reply to post by iwilliam


If you ignore what conservatives say, and look at what they do, what you say is exactly what they do.

They want to get rid of the federal government, and reinstate feudalism at the state level, from what I see.

poet1b
reply to post by iwilliam

 

If you ignore what conservatives say, and look at what they do, what you say is exactly what they do.

They want to get rid of the federal government, and reinstate feudalism at the state level, from what I see.

Well I suppose you are right - it's the old Federalist vs Anti-Federalist debate continued. Both sides have valid points.

Along those lines it's traditional North vs South ideology as well. But it seems to me that whole debate has been sumsumed by corporate interests rather then governance one and perhaps I'm naive to think it was ever any different. I don't really know a lot about the debate (took the requisite class in college, yadda, yadda) but while the partisanship remains the actual impementation is identical.

If only the left and right could jointly remove themselves from the coporately defined playing field - we might just have a choice.

Take a lead from our founders (Jefferson and Adams in extreme) and take a single point of agreement (independence from British rule) focus on creating that reality and worry about the partisanship and details later (constitution and bill of rights).

Public financing of all candidates at all levels of government. Period. Public servants cannot take a private job at any company worth over XXX for XXX number of years. Stop the revolving door, stop money=speech and repeal corporate personhood (except, as originally envisoned, in the ability to sign contracts).

"Yes, I'm a dreamer and I'm not the only one."