Just in case you were afraid that you wouldn’t have much of a choice in the upcoming presidential election, rest assured that there is a significant difference between the candidates. For instance, on the important issues of government interference in energy matters and the craven capitulation to environmentalists, the June 6th Wall Street Journal summarizes the positions of Mr. Obama and Mr. McCain as follows:
ENERGY
The two men agree on urgent action to address climate change and the nation’s dependence on expensive foreign oil. Both support a “cap-and-trade” system that requires companies that exceed caps on their carbon emissions to buy emission credits from companies that pollute less. But they differ on important details. (1)
They differ on important details? Well I hope so, because with that description they sound pretty much alike. So, how do they differ? The Journal tells us:
CARBON EMISSIONS GOAL
Obama - 80% reduction by 2050.
McCain - 60% reduction by 2050.
Whew! And I was afraid I wouldn’t be able to tell them apart.
(For some more commentary on the disgusting lack of choices in the upcoming presidential election, check out Gina Liggett’s post Anyone Got an Aspirin? over on NoodleFood.)
NOTES
Wall Street Journal, Friday, June 6, 2008, p. A7.
Posts
1 comment:
It's a good thing that I'll be 85 by then. I hope that I'll barely notice that 20% difference! Geesh.
What's interesting is how exactly they propose this reduction will all come about. Doesn't the "cap and trade" plan seem a lot like the absurdity of indulgences? What's the point? I guess it's to make polluting hurt - which makes the environmentalists really happy.
No matter how you look at it, government forcing of emission control is all a little sickening game. Why is everyone so interesting in playing it?
Post a Comment