Saving the Planet, One Tax at a Time (Reaction-No Consequence)


I am about as Conservative as any 29 year old could hope to be.  By the grace of God I was born a Conservative, then by the grace of my wonderful mother, who taught me how to think I have managed to stay that way.  Even while my friends seem to be dropping like flies in to the fiery hell that is Liberalism.

However, I am a bit of an environmentalist, just not in the sense of the word that has come to be environmentalists today.  I have always been an avid animal lover (we have had strays in our house that range from dogs to cats, to horses, ferrets, any and ever type of amphibian and reptile) have, since a very early age promoted less consumption, etc.  I don’t eat meat.  I am left with very little trash at the end of the week because I am a recycle-nazi, etc., etc., etc.  In other words I was an environmentalist before Gore made it “cool”.   I don’t believe in man-made global warming, I don’t believe in the environmental “whacko” movement, I don’t believe it is up to the government to tax/police individuals in their homes regarding the planet.  I some how manage to look at the science and conclude that this Earth that has survived so much cannot possibly be destoyed by a couple of billion humans.

I cannot seem to get where the liberals are coming from on their policies, tax ideas, regarding “saving the planet”.  Of course I will openly admit that I have a major flaw in my thinking…I assume all people are rational, but we all know rational is not something you can assume about a liberal.

It still does not seem to cease to amaze me at how backwards the thought process of the liberal (progressive?) movement continues to be.  There seems to be the ever growing notion that raising taxes and ever increasing government spending will save us all from any/all crisis.  We are currently trying to spend ourselves into debt that we have never seen before to save our economy.  All the while state-after-state is looking to raise taxes for environmental purposes. 

In Arkansas for instance, clean coal plants and the Fayettville shale project have both been taken major hits due to the environmental movement.  We are talking possible jobs, lower cost energy, and economic growth in general.  But clean coal is not clean enough.  Drilling for natural gas may endanger that Ivory Billed Woodpecker…or something like that.

So, what is the consequence?  Higher prices.  Even while natural gas prices fall, in Arkansas our price has gone up with tax increases.  We have to save the environment right? But at what cost?  Liberals are suppose to be standing up for the “little guy”.  So what happens to the little guy when the cost of energy continues to rise?  All people need energy.  They need to put gas in their cars.  They need heat/air for their homes.  They need some form of energy to be able to cook, to be able to simply exist in their homes. 

Suddenly those people don’t matter.  I have done the math, and in Arkansas you can live a comfortable but simple life on about $17,900/year (if you do not have children).  Rent runs about $525/average, utilities total about $250/month on average, if you have a car, car insurance, some health insurance, etc, the basics you can live on a pretty lean budget. 

These are the people however who simply cannot afford increases in their fuel or to heat/air their home.  Cost increases on such things don’t hurt the Walton’s or the Dillard’s…but it does hurt the middle-class and lower-class people and families.  I find this to be outragious.  The idea that “saving” the planet by price gauging the very things we All need hurts me to my very core.  Raising the taxes on such things of course all raises the cost on other things we all need, like food and other groceries.

Suddenly the middle to lower-class families don’t matter so much to Gore, Pelosi, Edwards, etc.  Center for Climate Strategies (CCS) is going from state-to-state to “help” assist them in developing a strategy to combat global warming in their state.  To use their services however you must assume man-made global warming is in fact factual, not theoretical.  They do not offer both sides of the coin.

Bottom line, in government in general and especially within the Liberal thought (or lack of) respond first, don’t consider consequences.  We are doing it with the “bail out”, we did it with ethanol, we are doing it with the great new light bulbs which by the way contain Mercury, and we we working our way there with the idea that we must save the planet from man-made global warming.

Try asking a Liberal what will happen in 12 years when our landfills are full of these Mercury lightbulbs.  The bulbs may not have enough Mercury to harm you (though you have to call in hazmat if you break one) but THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS filling our landfills in a few years?  I wonder what the consequences may be for people when they are taxed into the poorer poor house for the good of the environment?

I wonder when anyone in “power” will think these things through?