Hang 10... or as they now say...hit the lip!

2nd Light Forums
Decrease font size
Increase font size
Topic Title: The "carbon" industry is now like the Tobacco industry.
Topic Summary: the answer may be in court.
Created On: 10/22/2019 08:37 AM
Linear : Threading : Single : Branch
1 2 Next Last unread
Topic Tools Topic Tools
View topic in raw text format. Print this topic.
 10/22/2019 08:37 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 15045
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

"The novel legal innovation this time is that plaintiffs are aiming to sue in state courts. States have common law provisions that allow for claims under two legal theories: public nuisance, that a party is interfering with the rights of citizens, or product liability, that the dangers of using a product must be communicated to the public. Plaintiffs are trying to make the case that energy companies that extract, transport or market fuels are a public nuisance because they are destroying their residents' enjoyment of a stable climate and forcing costs on them. Under product liability, plaintiffs are arguing that the companies pushed those products into the market knowing these probable, damaging outcomes."

http://www.politico.com/agenda...climate-change-001290





-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

 10/22/2019 09:35 AM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


somebodyelse

Posts: 6156
Joined Forum: 06/29/2006

When the tobacco companies were sued, did it put them out of business? NO? Did it affect the PRICE OF TOBACCO TO THE USERS? Probably the costs of the lawsuits were passed on to the users. ALL OF US.... All of us are users of this product..... The price of using the product will be passed on to US, WE will bear the costs. Think about the Malaise that happened during the Obama years when the cost of Gasoline limited employment and opportunities.

-------------------------
 10/22/2019 09:47 AM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 21588
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

So in order to preserve the all important capitalist consumption/infinite expansion model, we must destroy the environment and deny future generations a livable planet.

Got it. You'll be dead by then, fuck the kids.

-------------------------
You need at this time especially to know that you are fit for something better than slavery and cannon fodder. You need to know that you were not created to work and produce and impoverish yourself to enrich an idle exploiter… – Eugene V. Debs
 10/22/2019 09:49 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


3rdworldlover

Posts: 20422
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

The economic costs of carbon pollution will be far greater than the cost of a tax to mitigate the impacts.
One of the fundamental flaws of capitalism is that it assumes unlimited resources and fails to ascribe the true long term value of natural resources. Try putting your ideology aside and consider the laws of nature.
 10/22/2019 10:40 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 30920
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Great concept, progs. You will pay more for energy, which will go to lawyers. How can I possibly argue against that? To the contrary, I applaud your effort to make me richer. But then, you followed up that brilliant idea with this:
One of the fundamental flaws of capitalism is that it assumes unlimited resources and fails to ascribe the true long term value of natural resources. Try putting your ideology aside and consider the laws of nature.
That is completely wrong. Capitalism specifically incorporates limited resources into its operation. That is called the law of supply and demand. The lower the supply, the higher the price. Thus the limited items get used more efficiently. Not one of the progs on this forum appear to have even a minimal grasp of basic economic fundamentals. Guess it is the nature of progs to be ignorant.

-------------------------
I :heart; Putin

 10/22/2019 11:24 AM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 21588
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Originally posted by: tpapablo

Great concept, progs. You will pay more for energy, which will go to lawyers. How can I possibly argue against that? To the contrary, I applaud your effort to make me richer. But then, you followed up that brilliant idea with this:

One of the fundamental flaws of capitalism is that it assumes unlimited resources and fails to ascribe the true long term value of natural resources. Try putting your ideology aside and consider the laws of nature.


That is completely wrong. Capitalism specifically incorporates limited resources into its operation. That is called the law of supply and demand. The lower the supply, the higher the price. Thus the limited items get used more efficiently. Not one of the progs on this forum appear to have even a minimal grasp of basic economic fundamentals. Guess it is the nature of progs to be ignorant.


No I'm afraid it's you who has misunderstood what's meant by resources. Of course capitalism incorporates scarcity into it's profit model, in fact it often creates it artificially. The capitalist will destroy a product rather than lower it's price or provide it for free to those who cannot afford it. We throw away almost half of the food produced in this country while people in the street go hungry. Even kids at school are denied lunches if they can't pay the private contractors who run the cafeterias for profit.

Natural resources are consumed by the capitalist for use in private production AS IF they were unlimited, and when they are truly exhausted the capitalist will walk away, dissolve their corporation, and leave the environmental and social costs to those left behind.

It's a corrupt and immoral system folks, don't be fooled by fast (or slow) talking lawyers or bidnessmans.

-------------------------
You need at this time especially to know that you are fit for something better than slavery and cannon fodder. You need to know that you were not created to work and produce and impoverish yourself to enrich an idle exploiter… – Eugene V. Debs
 10/22/2019 11:50 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


3rdworldlover

Posts: 20422
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

I have a 25 year old environmental policy textbook on my shelf with risk assessment and cost benefit calculations supporting policies of mitigation via fossil fuel taxes. It concludes with a prediction that we'd arrive at finger pointing and using courts to recoup the costs of harmful impacts. Cheers to the fossil fuel lobby and their armies of attorneys and ministers of disinformation.
 10/22/2019 12:15 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 30920
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

We throw away almost half of the food produced in this country while people in the street go hungry. WHAT? I have pigs, people. I will gladly take any food that you wish to throw away. They eat damn near anything, except they don't like citrus fruits. The pigs recycle that food into a product that I use in my compost heap, which in turn is used to fertilize the soil to grow more food. Nothing wasted.

-------------------------
I :heart; Putin

 10/22/2019 12:24 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 15045
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Don't be so hard on your party.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

 10/22/2019 12:34 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 30920
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Originally posted by: 3rdworldlover I have a 25 year old environmental policy textbook on my shelf with risk assessment and cost benefit calculations supporting policies of mitigation via fossil fuel taxes. It concludes with a prediction that we'd arrive at finger pointing and using courts to recoup the costs of harmful impacts. Cheers to the fossil fuel lobby and their armies of attorneys and ministers of disinformation.
Well, fossil fuels don't cause any harmful impacts until you and others use them or the energy they produce or products made from them. Why shouldn't consumers have to pay for these harmful impacts?

-------------------------
I :heart; Putin

 10/22/2019 03:17 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 15045
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Blaming the end user and not the product?

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

 10/22/2019 03:52 PM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


tpapablo

Posts: 30920
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Originally posted by: johnnyboy Blaming the end user and not the product?
My actual point was that the consumer will be paying for it in any event. The pols will not make the consumers pay directly, of course, because the voters would rebel. Tacking on these costs to the big, evil corporations, on the other hand, is politically palatable even though it is still us who will pay. (There is a reason why Californians are paying the highest prices for energy.) The insidious thing is that it hurts the lower income levels the worst. Indeed, enacting all these grand schemes on the backs of the poor/middle class is what is making it more difficult for them to escape their economic level. Warren's white, college educated voters can feel good about themselves for a couple of thousand a year that they can easily afford, while the poorer folks are going without to afford gas and heating. When they learn this - and they are starting to - watch out.

-------------------------
I :heart; Putin

 10/23/2019 10:20 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 15045
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

If the end user could see all of the costs of fossil fuels in terms of global warming, climate change, the severity of storms and the long term effects of more CO2 in the oceans, gas would be the last resort.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

 10/23/2019 11:34 AM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


somebodyelse

Posts: 6156
Joined Forum: 06/29/2006

If the end user could see all of the costs of fossil fuel...etc... No sorry Johnny, I call bullshit, The very people screaming the loudest about global warming and CO2 fly private planes and drive limos to global warming events... The very people who make this a religion still drive cars, air condition their homes, eat foods flown in across the country and wear clothing made in China and shipped around the world...

-------------------------
 10/24/2019 08:08 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


johnnyboy

Posts: 15045
Joined Forum: 07/22/2003

Those high profile millionaires and their hypocritical jets are a very small number of voices in the growing chorus. Changing the status quo starts like this. Under your view, no one could be critical of fossil fuels and still drive a car or use FPL. This is how it starts.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

 10/24/2019 08:24 AM
User is online View Users Profile Print this message


RustyTruck

Posts: 21588
Joined Forum: 08/02/2004

Too many people think like Somebody, there's really no hope for significant reduction until the effects are tangible and painful for the them personally. Then these guys will most likely gravitate toward Eco-fascism, where the main focus will be on preventing climate refugees from accessing resources horded by the wealthy global north. We've already heard some on this forum suggest that mass extinction of people in poor/equatorial regions would be good for the planet. Yeah, the future is not bright, and there's no need for shades.

-------------------------
You need at this time especially to know that you are fit for something better than slavery and cannon fodder. You need to know that you were not created to work and produce and impoverish yourself to enrich an idle exploiter… – Eugene V. Debs
 10/24/2019 08:24 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


scombrid

Posts: 14632
Joined Forum: 07/24/2003

Originally posted by: somebodyelse When the tobacco companies were sued, did it put them out of business? NO? Did it affect the PRICE OF TOBACCO TO THE USERS? Probably the costs of the lawsuits were passed on to the users. ALL OF US.... All of us are users of this product..... The price of using the product will be passed on to US, WE will bear the costs. Think about the Malaise that happened during the Obama years when the cost of Gasoline limited employment and opportunities.
This is why we have environmental regulations as opposed to letting people and "the market" just do the right thing. The average consumer acting in natural rational economic short term self interest will always drive a commons towards ruin. Air, water, fisheries, timber, pasture...no agreed rules and third party enforcer and it will be over-exploited, always.

-------------------------

...

 10/24/2019 08:28 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


scombrid

Posts: 14632
Joined Forum: 07/24/2003

Originally posted by: tpapablo The insidious thing is that it hurts the lower income levels the worst.
That depends entirely on how it is implemented. That also is not why the big energy corps are fighting this the same way the auto-industry fought air quality standards. Their profits increase the more negative externalities they can dump on the commons. They do not pass all the savings on. They privatize the profit will socializing the cost. The lower income levels are usually the first and worst hit by environmental degradation because they can least afford to buy their way out of harm's path. They also lack the political clout to mass successful NIMBY efforts.

-------------------------

...

 10/24/2019 08:48 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


3rdworldlover

Posts: 20422
Joined Forum: 07/25/2003

Originally posted by: tpapablo

Originally posted by: 3rdworldlover

I have a 25 year old environmental policy textbook on my shelf with risk assessment and cost benefit calculations supporting policies of mitigation via fossil fuel taxes. It concludes with a prediction that we'd arrive at finger pointing and using courts to recoup the costs of harmful impacts. Cheers to the fossil fuel lobby and their armies of attorneys and ministers of disinformation.



Well, fossil fuels don't cause any harmful impacts until you and others use them or the energy they produce or products made from them. Why shouldn't consumers have to pay for these harmful impacts?


The impacts of fossil fuels go well beyond the waste products of end users. There are huge impacts in the extraction processes alone: including contamination of water supplies, rivers, lakes, streams, estuaries, seas, soils, and the atmosphere. Then the energy costs and toxic byproducts from the industrial refining processed, and of course spills during transportation and storage.

But we're talking about taxing end users to mitigate the costs of just one aspect, the carbon pollution resulting from combustion of fossil fuels, which has already modified the chemistry and physical properties of the atmosphere and seas. Wouldn't this approach be far wiser than suing the industry after harm has already occurred?
 10/24/2019 08:49 AM
User is offline View Users Profile Print this message


scombrid

Posts: 14632
Joined Forum: 07/24/2003

Originally posted by: RustyTruck Too many people think like Somebody,
His is exactly the natural knee jerk tendency that is exploited by the propagandists. They did it with CFCs, sulfur, smog control devices on cars... Last time I was home I drove through the HRBT with the windows down. You didn't do that when I was a kid. Anybody remember what the air in the Shenandoah Valley looked like in the 1970s and 1980s before all the insidious low sulfur diesel formulations were forced on us?

-------------------------

...

Statistics
145978 users are registered to the 2nd Light Forums forum.
There are currently 7 users logged in to the forum.

FuseTalk Basic Edition - © 1999-2019 FuseTalk Inc. All rights reserved.

Hey Matt B ... How the hell o are you ??? :)