June 5, 2014

BOHICA America

The Obama promised us our electric bills would necessarily skyrocket with his agenda. Since he could not get his eco-friendly agenda passed through the Democrat-controlled Congress in his first term, nor the Republican-controlled House in this term, he has dictated tough new standards for coal-burning plants through fiat via the EPA. Experts predict your electric rates will increase by as much as 30% with these new rules.

For a party that claims to be all for the poor and the middle class, the Democrats sure do push for policies which hurt those very groups the most. A kilowatt of energy costs the same whether it is going to an affluent suburb or a tenement in the heart of the metropolis. That means electricity is a smaller part of a wealthy person's monthly expenditures and a large percentage of a poor person's. Increasing electric rates will hurt the poor the most. Similarly, a wealthy person is more likely to have newer, more energy efficient appliances and HVAC systems.

Every single business, factory, and store in America uses electricity. If their costs go up, the price of their goods and services will increase. Who is hurt most by those price increases?  You guessed it -- the poor and middle class.

I am all for lessening our dependence on fossil fuels.  The problem is there is no viable alternative at this time. I want clean air, but I also recognize that carbon is an essential life force on planet Earth and eliminating CO2 means the death of us all. I wonder if Obama was out partying with the Chum Gang when they covered organic chemistry in high school? Climate science is far from settled, and there is no proof these new standards are needed or will have any effect on the climate.

Obama has withheld vast areas of the oceans from oil exploration, he has refused to allow the XL Pipeline. Both measures would reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce the costs of gas and oil (and plastics and chemicals) for the average American. Again, these policies hurt the poor and middle class disproportionately. Why is Obama opposed to helping you and me? Because wealthy special interests have paid him off with campaign contributions. Opponents all claim their opposition to the XL Pipeline is about protecting the environment.  Which is more likely to spill, a pipeline or a tanker truck?  Which uses more energy and fossil fuels, a pipeline or a tanker truck?  Which spews more CO2 into the air, a pipeline or a tanker truck? So can someone explain to me how a pipeline is not better than fleets of trucks?

If you are still so naive to believe the Democrat party cares about the working man I have some oceanfront property here in Indiana to sell you.


Anonymous said...

Junk science pushed by a Junk President.

James Old Guy

Ed Bonderenka said...

It's all about controlling the energy sector, and the health care sector, and the ...

Unknown said...

"Fat in Indiana" has been included in Sites To See #376. Be assured that I hope this helps to point many new visitors in your direction.


Joe said...

Thanks jerry!

Anonymous said...

Since you moderate, this will never be seen. Science deniers never let discussion get in their way. How does CO2 contribute to ground water contamination? Maybe oil doesn't contaminate water (science denial).

Joe said...

Wrong! Here is your comment

I only moderate comments on old posts, mostly so I have a means to know they are there. I never moderate comments on new posts.

Every one is free to share their opinion.

You use a clever ploy painting anyone who disagrees as "science deniers" as if those who do not accept the tenet of man made global warming also refuse to accept gravity, boyles laws, or the existence of Shroedingers cat.

Is there climate change? Sure. Is it man made? I doubt it. When you can account for the warming that melted the previous ice ages or the warming period in the middle ages I will listen.

Unknown said...

Very well said, Joe!

Consider everything here that is of original content copyrighted as of March 2005