Moving manufacturing overseas
Posted by aogMonday, 29 June 2009 at 09:55 TrackBack Ping URL

I was aghast that the House of Representatives passed the “cap and trade” legislation. It’s a measure of how corrupt and pathetic rule by the Democratic Party has become that the fact that no one had actually even read the legislation doesn’t seem the worst part. I am sure that the chattering classes consider this new way of legislating by ignorance represents Hope and Change™ from the evil Rethuglican way, but I am just too much of a reactionary to support it.

What I thought was, isn’t this really the “Please Export All Manufacturing Jobs Overseas” legislation? China and India are not going to put such financial burdens on manufacturers which will put enormous pressure on any USA based manufacturing company to go ahead and move out. Or perhaps move to Europe — one notes (but Democratic Party caucus in Congress doesn’t) how their cap and trade worked out. It made a lot of money for the government, then collapses as politicians traded additional carbon dioxide permits for political support, collapsing the price. If some lobbiest were clever and wanted to make some serious cash, he would have slipped in a provision for equivalency for European and American permits. It would be easy, since no one has read the legislation anyway. And why not? Carbon dioxide emissions are no respecter of borders, so why shouldn’t they all be equivalent? Then you could (for a while) make a lot of commissions on buying the extremely cheap European permits and Americanizing them.

It seems to me that the EUlite have once again made a profit on their hypocrisy, generating revenue and political favors while, in the end, imposing little long term burden on their industries. Meanwhile, they get the Europhilic Democratic Party to impose real burdens on their major competitor. Proper revenge for the Marshall Plan?


Transterrestial Musings writes

Of course, the real problem is the willingness of legislators to vote for bills that they haven’t read, or even given time to read. Once that became acceptable, it was inevitable that they would start voting on wills of the wisp. I would dearly love to see everyone one of these criminals punished at the polls next year. Especially the Republican capntr8trs.

No, the problem is ultimately the voters, who are happy to re-elect representatives who vote on “Mad-Lib” legislation. We may also blame Old Media, who don’t want to investigate and report on this if it’s a government run by the Democratic Party.

Comments — Formatting by Textile
Harry Eagar Monday, 29 June 2009 at 16:11

It’s a bit more complicated than that, as I wrote up at Restating the Obvious, because there is a tariff stick in there to compel China or India to also reduce carbon credits.

I doubt whether either will consider that the US Congress was elected to legislate for them, but, as Sallie James and Pat Michaels point out, that kind of tariff is presumptively forbidden by the WTO treaties.

However, passing unread bills is nothing new. People in a position to know claim that no one has ever read all of the Employees Retirement Income Security Act.

Annoying Old Guy Monday, 29 June 2009 at 16:27

So we could get the devstating effects of this burden on the economy and a trade war? Once again, the Democratic Party demonstrates just how much it really cares about the working class.

Harry Eagar Monday, 29 June 2009 at 17:42

If they cared about the working class, they’d evict the 12 million illegal aliens. Ditto for the GOP.

But, yes, if the Senate goes along, we could get a jobs exportation act and a simultaneous trade war.

However, before you rush too far along the path of thinking that only Democrats pass bills without knowing what’s inside, read this.

Annoying Old Guy Monday, 29 June 2009 at 22:53

Did you fail to note that the legislation at the heart of that article was passed by a Congress with Democratic Party majorities in both houses? And that the legislation was opposed very strongly by the GOP, especially in the Senate? Based on the Eagar Standard that if you remember it / experienced it, that’s determinative of the general case, you just proved the exact opposite of your claim.

You really ought to think about breaking out that Narrative Cocoon you’re in. It’s not just coloring your interpretation of facts anymore, it’s rewriting them for you.

Harry Eagar Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 12:38

I remembered that, all right. Despite not being a Republican senator, I opposed it, too. The implementation, however, was in the hands of a Republican administration.

Too long live AIG!

Annoying Old Guy Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 13:22

The topic was passing legislation without reading it. Allow me to quote

before you rush too far along the path of thinking that only Democrats pass bills without knowing what’s inside

How is the poor implementation of legislation by the executive branch after its passage relevant? It’s not, you’re just throwing out a proximate fact to be distracting. You’re still locked in your Narrative, which renders you unable to respond to what I write, or even what you yourself write.

One might also note that this quote is a strawman you invented rather than address my point, but you are unable to sustain even that as a point of contention. Yet I remain confident that you will roll on your Narrative Cocoon1 to some other context in the hope that you can bury this with sufficient layers of obsfucation. I await it with bated keyboard.

1 Which I think is “All things the GOP does are evil, all evil things bear the mark of the GOP. Reagan sucks!”.

Annoying Old Guy Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 14:06

More job exporting

America’s biggest oil companies will probably cope with U.S. carbon legislation by closing fuel plants, cutting capital spending and increasing imports.

Under the Waxman-Markey climate bill that may be voted on today by the U.S. House, refiners would have to buy allowances for carbon dioxide spewed from their plants and from vehicles when motorists burn their fuel. Imports would need permits only for the latter […]

About 2 million barrels of daily U.S. refining capacity will shut down because carbon costs will be several times the operating profits for some plants, Ihne said. That’s equivalent to 12 percent of the nation’s fuel-making capacity.

And when the price of gas goes up $2 or $3 / gallon, I am sure it will be blamed on oil company greed.

Let’s not ignore this report from Spain on how Spanish efforts in this area destroyed jobs, companies, and cost a lot of money.

Harry Eagar Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 15:45

Lots of bills, probably most of the complex ones, get passed without anybody reading them. Not only in Congress. Robert Caro wrote two thick tomes about how Morris used to manipulate the N.Y. Legislature that way.

You are picking on this bill because 1) it is a stupid bill; and 2) it seems superficially to say something bad about Democrat procedure generally.

I’m saying it is not different enough from the procedure followed generally, everywhere and by both parties, to support that.

Annoying Old Guy Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 17:09

Talking to you is like talking to a journalist — semantics just don’t penetrate, only the keywords make it through and a response is generated based on that keyword search. Not only have I never stated that this is a phenomenon only of the Democratic Party, I explicitly denied it in my earlier comment. Yet you continue to beat not a dead horse, but an imaginary one.

I am picking on this bill because

  1. The lack of knowledge by the Congressmen on this bill and other recent ones is far more flagrant than before — this Congress apparently doesn’t think it worthwhile to even pretend.
  2. Not only does no one know what is in the bill, it is not even possible to know because of things like dropping a 300 page update on the bill in the wee hours of the morning before the vote and then not letting Congressmen look at it who have specifically requested to do so.
  3. The rush and lack of debate on the legislation, even in general terms. The Democratic Party made much of the “rush to war” with regard to Iraq, a debate which lasted over a year. But this bill may well be more significant yet there is a clear and strong effort to not discuss it in general or specific.
  4. It is a stupid and massively destructive bill.

I think the combination of the above says something deep about the Democratic Party, which is that ignorance is not an unfortunate byproduct of laziness and corruption but a specifically desired and fought for result. They don’t want to know and they don’t want anyone else to know either.

David Cohen Wednesday, 01 July 2009 at 09:49

Voters certainly deserve a lot of the blame, but I think we can let the voters off on this one. It’s one thing to accept that they’re going to pass bad policy, that they’ll vote the way the party tells them and that many if not all representatives won’t have read the bill. But as far as I can tell, this bill is unique in that it didn’t exist at the time of the vote so that even a representative who wanted to read it, or even have his staff read it, could not possibly have done so, and yet it passed. I’d like to think that, if I were ever in Congress, I would insist that the bills for which I vote actually exist.

Harry Eagar Thursday, 02 July 2009 at 13:38

‘The lack of knowledge by the Congressmen on this bill and other recent ones is far more flagrant than before’

Are you kidding me? It equals but hardly exceeds the ignorance that went into the war authorization.

Annoying Old Guy Thursday, 02 July 2009 at 13:49

No, the ignorance level of this vote massively exceeds that of the war authorization vote for reasons by I and Mr. Cohen have laid in out great detail in previous comments.

David Cohen Thursday, 02 July 2009 at 16:22

Here’s the authorization of force. Show me the ignorance.

Annoying Old Guy Saturday, 11 July 2009 at 11:40

Note: Representatives Waxman and Markey spent $3.5 billion of taxpayer money to buy a one vote for their bill. Should this be filed under the Grant III watch?

Post a comment