Free Markets, Free People

How Not To Handle A Recession, Yet Take Advantage Of A “Crisis”

Unproven science is apparently going to drive an administrative (instead of legislative) push to regulate carbon dioxide. In the middle of a “crisis” which President Obama calls the worst since the 1930s, the EPA is apparently going to drastically raise the cost to do business in critical sectors:

The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to act for the first time to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that scientists blame for the warming of the planet, according to top Obama administration officials.

The decision, which most likely would play out in stages over a period of months, would have a profound impact on transportation, manufacturing costs and how utilities generate power. It could accelerate the progress of energy and climate change legislation in Congress and form a basis for the United States’ negotiating position at United Nations climate talks set for December in Copenhagen.

Note that none of the “change” appears to be good for the US or its consumers. Instead, we’re likely to see it put even further stress on families on the margin and drive more layoffs and higher unemployment.  But the world will love us, or at least the UN.

I don’t think there’s any question at the moment as to whether Obama is going to govern as a centrist or liberal, is there?


Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

9 Responses to How Not To Handle A Recession, Yet Take Advantage Of A “Crisis”

  • O/T – but I joked in the KS post that Gov. Sebulius was the perfect Commerce nominee.

    Well, looks like she’s getting Daschle’s HHS spot in the administration instead.

    Amatuer  hour at the White House continues… 

  • Is this guy trying to become a one term president? 

  • This should come as no surprise.   Obama did warn us that he would cause energy prices to “skyrocket.”  Apparently, 52% of America was good with that.

  • I’m surprised he’s not proposing a breathing tax. Just imagine how much harmful CO2 is expended everyday by 300 million people! Based on my Googling, a little calculation and some conversion of grams to pounds to tons, we’re talking at least 36 million tons of CO2 each year! That’s about 10% of the CO2 produced by our cars!

    Say … do you suppose if we all hold our breath Global Warming will go away?

  • The breathing point is interesting. It sure puts into perspective the mass murder Mao, Pol Pot, and Stalin engaged in. They must have been real visionaries, killing off all those poluters, and trying to save Mother Earth.

  • I’ve been wondering when someone would think about CO2 and humans.
    Now, what are they going to do about all these 5K, 10K runs and marathons that cause excessive CO2 into our fragile atmosphere?

  • And we haven’t even addressed methane!  I propose a ban on Tex-Mex food.

  • The problem is that Obama won’t be assigned responsibility for this.  In Massachussetts v. EPA the Supreme Court ruled that  that carbon dioxide impacts the environment via AGW and, therefore, the EPA was bound by the Clean Air Act to regulate it.  That ruling was issued in April 2007, so Obama will correctly claim that he has nothing to do with it.  It was a decision by the Supreme Court that pertained to the EPA and was issued during the Bush Administration.  The whole purpose for creation of the EPA and much of the federal government’s regulatory structure was to allow politicians in congress to avoid responsibility for the impositionun of unpopular regulations.  This is a text book case of how it works.  Obama will claim that the experts at the EPA are merely complying with the court’s ruling.  Although, technically, the court didn’t specify exactly what the EPA must do, just that it must  promulgate some regulation on CO2 emissions.I am not sure if the EPA has the authority to create a cap and trade system on its own, but if it does, look for them to create it so that the messiah can distance himself from the inevitable increase in the cost of energy.      

  • This is why during the campaign I laughed so hard at our trolls pointing to Obama saying he wouldn’t pass a law on gun control and telling us all we were paranoid wingnuts. Why bother passing a law when you can just regulate? “Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Kinda cool.”