Cap and Trade? For or Against and Why?

Against.

First. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is only about 3.6% of the total greenhouse gases. Of that 3.6%, only about 3.4% comes from man made sources. Even if cap and trade eliminated all of the man made CO2, it would only reduce greenhouse gases by 0.12%.

Next, it really does nothing to cut emissions. If your company can't cut emissions, just pay for credits. Pass the cost on to your users.

Third, it will only reduce overall global temps by around 0.1°C by 2095. I am thinking there are better ways to work toward a cleaner environment.

Then, let's talk about the end cost to the consumer. By Obama's own admission, electric rates will skyrocket under his cap and trade plan.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid14...

(watch the video, it's only 36 secs long)

There's a good way to stimulate the economy. When families are already trying to make the decision to spend money on electricity or food, make the electric ridiculously expensive.

Total economic cost estimates for the Cap&Trade systems are in the $1.9 Trillion range. Let's put that in perspective. If you earned $1 Million a year, you would have to work one million nine hundred thousand years to make that amount.

Also, the technology required to significantly reduce carbon emissions is pretty much in its infancy, it has not proven to be effective, and it is extremely expensive. Even if we do manage to scrub the carbon out of the exhaust stacks, what do we do with it afterward? How do we then prevent it from escaping into the atmosphere anyway?

And, let me reiterate one very important point. The overall effect of the plan, per EPA documentation, is a whopping reduction in global temps of almost nothing.

I'm against it as I understand it, but admit that I may not understand it fully or my understanding may be faulty. I'm against it because it doesn't make sense as I understand it. Company A meets or exceeds meeting its reduction of carbon emissions. Company B doesn't it, so it can buy or carbon credits from Company A? How can these things accurately be measured? What's the incentive really for Company B to ever comply? I don't see how it helps if companies are allowed to continue to pollute. Why not require all companies to comply in a reasonable time(whatever that is) and either give tax breaks to the ones that meet the requirements or fine the ones that don't comply.

I welcome anyone who can correct my misunderstandings.

Both I hope and this time do not listen to the Dems running as conservatives they are wolves in sheep's clothing. We need to change the makeup of Congress big time. No one vote for an incumbent that means Dems and Reps throw the bums out and let them get real jobs for a change. We need to stop the class of the political and get on with doing good for the country not special interest groups like the Sierra Club, the Teachers Unions, Acorn and the whole freakin lot of em.

Against

1. It is a tax.

2. It will raise utility bills. (Not good for the economy)

3. It is based on the theory that our planet is warming and that this warming is bad.