David Frum is known as one of the more sensible, policy-oriented conservative writers —he parted ways with the hyper-ideological National Review over non-lockstep comments about the woeful state of the Republican Party. So I came to his posts on cap-and-trade hoping to find some glimmer of ... something. Maybe hope that there is a way to connect with reasonable conservatives, common ground from which to begin a dialog.
First Frum wrote a post that got virtually everything about the policy wrong. Ezra Klein tried to set him straight. Frum responded with ... more misunderstandings. (Ezra tried again.) In particular I want to focus on two bits:
Yes people can escape the tax by using less electricity. But the tax is still falling on them - they are just feeling its effects in a different form, by reducing their consumption. They are still worse off, just worse off in a different way.
Uh ... there’s literally no way to use less electricity without being "worse off"? There’s no such thing as energy efficiency?
And then:
(Sorry - I know Ezra will say that the point is to persuade the utilities to rely on windmills instead. But that’s energy fantasy, not energy policy!)
There’s no such thing as renewable energy either!
I was in the midst of grappling with some reasonable way of responding to someone who doesn’t believe in energy efficiency or renewable energy when I came across this comment on the post, from reader sinz54:
There is a big difference here: If an American company dumps waste into the Hudson River, they are hurting mostly AMERICANS. So that’s a national problem for our fellow citizens. Whereas if an American company dumps carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, it is primarily the undeveloped world that will be hurt by it. Unlike America, nearly all of Bangladesh (population 200 million) will be flooded out when the north polar ice cap melts. So we Americans are essentially restricting our economy, and impoverishing our own people, to keep the undeveloped world safe from global warming. Why are we doing them this multi-trillion-dollar favor without them paying us for it? The world cannot control global warming without U.S. cooperation. We should strike a very hard bargain for that cooperation. For example, I would insist that Bangladesh clean up its act and kick *ALL* radical Islamists out of their country before we do anything to keep their country from being flooded. We’ve got the political leverage. Let’s use it!
I am rarely speechless, but ... I really don’t know what to say about this stuff. I don’t see how a group of people in this universe are going to make it back to the real world in time to create bipartisan climate policy.
Delaying an international climate treaty: not as bad as it looks
One reason Congress might consider scrapping the filibuster
Comments
View as Flat
sindark Posted 6:18 am
02 Mar 2009
I just realized something. People are walking all around the city I live with money in their pockets. By not getting a gun and robbing them, I am obviously doing them a considerable favour. Why aren't they paying me for my restraint?
a sibilant intake of breath
Permalink
hapa Posted 6:43 am
02 Mar 2009
Permalink
Spence Posted 6:53 am
02 Mar 2009
Besides, we all know that the real most important biggest everest threat to Americans are Islamic radicals. With box cutters. In Bangladesh.
Permalink
Pompey Road Posted 7:18 am
02 Mar 2009
The eons of time and nature was good to us down here. It was not until we become civilized that destroying our habitat become fathomable or fashionable.
Permalink
ids Posted 7:29 am
02 Mar 2009
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/03/rahm_emanuel_on_c ...
SCHIEFFER: What the Republicans also say, it raises taxes on everybody. I think everybody expected that taxes on upper-income people were going to go up. Barack Obama said during the campaign that that's what he planned to do. But Newt Gingrich and some of the other Republicans say when people find out that when you're talking about these things you're talking about on the energy front, it's going to be a new tax on everybody that uses electricity, who drives a car, and there's going to be tax increases in myriad other ways.
EMANUEL: Well, first of all, let's be very clear. Because I've seen these scare tactic before. You've seen it too, Bob. 95 percent of Americans, working Americans, will have a tax cut. . .
Permalink
ce1907 Posted 7:59 am
02 Mar 2009
just use all your wiles
and give away all necessary
to get a meaningful cap
Permalink
GreenMom Posted 10:20 am
02 Mar 2009
I really think Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert have done more for the planet than almost anyone, just by helping the wingers to marginalize themselves. But the rest of us need to pitch in and nail them at every opportunity.
Oh, and also keep repeating the green jobs and energy independence memes. Those really appeal to a wider audience. Also energy efficiency -- honestly, David Frum notwithstanding, most people do readily understand energy efficiency as simple common sense.
Permalink
Pompey Road Posted 10:46 am
02 Mar 2009
But I digress, I guess this would fall into the category of environmental protectionism, no that ain't right either.
I know how about an environmental firing squad formed in a circle?
The eons of time and nature was good to us down here. It was not until we become civilized that destroying our habitat become fathomable or fashionable.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 2:32 pm
02 Mar 2009
Hehey, threaten the poorest of the starving poor with more poverty, so they will expunge terrorism?
That would be like bombing the utility and water systems in Iraq, killing a 100,000 children from water bourne disease as a result, with the aim of making Saddam give himself up.
Or bombing Pakistani mud homes to get Bin laden and defeat al queda.
I'm beginning to see a pattern here. Survival of the dimmest? The dopier and more sadistic the limboob, the higher up in the realm of limboobery they rise. With limboob himself occupying the highest position, that of hillbilly heroin addicted, big mouthed, vapid, 300 pound porker.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink
Laura K Posted 3:13 am
04 Mar 2009
"relying" on windmills is fantasy, (which could reasonably be interpreted as saying we don't currently have enough wind energy potential - or even by extension, enough renewable energy sources - that could feasibly replace all our fossil fuel use on a practical schedule) and
using less energy in order to avoid a tax places other burdens on people that are similar to a tax - another reasonable statement since people have to either change their behavior or spend time or money to become more energy efficient.
I don't know anything about Frum, but it seems apparent to me that his statements are being exaggerated and interpreted in order to make him look like a fool. I fail to see how this helps those on the other side look more reasonable.
I also question whether the mocking and sarcasm of the comments is helping or hurting the cause. Come on people, don't stoop to the level of the worst you see in the other side.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 3:27 am
04 Mar 2009
Boss limboob really does need a "Bro" or a "Manzere" if he is going to bounce around on primetime teevee. FCC fines could be levied now that the regulators are back in town.
http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin
Permalink