0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 22, 2010, 09:28:53 AMQuote from: Nuts Kicked on December 21, 2010, 11:17:15 PMQuote from: AzCat on December 21, 2010, 11:11:40 PMQuote from: pike on December 21, 2010, 04:55:07 PMAnd to the libtards that support this, companies buyong carbon credits only helps the business they buy them from cause it doesn't help the environment at all, which is a duh. But the point is that consumers will pay more for products because this law is just because having to buy credits is an imput to whatever you're consuming. So Californians can expect to pay more for food, electricity, gas, etc. The list goes on...In the case of the BC power scam it's even better than that: BC sells "green" hydroelectric power at premium rates to CA, BC buys "non-green" power at non-premium rates to replace "green" power sold to CA, coal fired generators in WA buy carbon credits in part from third world thugocracies in order to meet WA's "green" mandate. Net effect: CA demand shifted to coal-fired plants in other states, third world dictators, residents of WA and Canadians profit at CA's expense, no net carbon reduction but a nice redistribution of wealth. That's AGW / carbon regulation in a nutshell. How is it a scam if California is getting clean power? WA and BC are free to supply their own power needs however they see fit. CA using hydro power, WA using coal, and BC using coal emits less pollution than CA, WA, and BC all using coal.Why should we care if CA is stupid enough to care about emissions in Canada?California and New York are liberal experiments conducted by unions. Texas is the exact opposite. The results are in, and Texas wins by a landslide.shhhh......Texas has an 18 to 25 billion dollar budget shortfall..........don't tell anyone that Texas isn't doing it right either.
Quote from: Nuts Kicked on December 21, 2010, 11:17:15 PMQuote from: AzCat on December 21, 2010, 11:11:40 PMQuote from: pike on December 21, 2010, 04:55:07 PMAnd to the libtards that support this, companies buyong carbon credits only helps the business they buy them from cause it doesn't help the environment at all, which is a duh. But the point is that consumers will pay more for products because this law is just because having to buy credits is an imput to whatever you're consuming. So Californians can expect to pay more for food, electricity, gas, etc. The list goes on...In the case of the BC power scam it's even better than that: BC sells "green" hydroelectric power at premium rates to CA, BC buys "non-green" power at non-premium rates to replace "green" power sold to CA, coal fired generators in WA buy carbon credits in part from third world thugocracies in order to meet WA's "green" mandate. Net effect: CA demand shifted to coal-fired plants in other states, third world dictators, residents of WA and Canadians profit at CA's expense, no net carbon reduction but a nice redistribution of wealth. That's AGW / carbon regulation in a nutshell. How is it a scam if California is getting clean power? WA and BC are free to supply their own power needs however they see fit. CA using hydro power, WA using coal, and BC using coal emits less pollution than CA, WA, and BC all using coal.Why should we care if CA is stupid enough to care about emissions in Canada?California and New York are liberal experiments conducted by unions. Texas is the exact opposite. The results are in, and Texas wins by a landslide.
Quote from: AzCat on December 21, 2010, 11:11:40 PMQuote from: pike on December 21, 2010, 04:55:07 PMAnd to the libtards that support this, companies buyong carbon credits only helps the business they buy them from cause it doesn't help the environment at all, which is a duh. But the point is that consumers will pay more for products because this law is just because having to buy credits is an imput to whatever you're consuming. So Californians can expect to pay more for food, electricity, gas, etc. The list goes on...In the case of the BC power scam it's even better than that: BC sells "green" hydroelectric power at premium rates to CA, BC buys "non-green" power at non-premium rates to replace "green" power sold to CA, coal fired generators in WA buy carbon credits in part from third world thugocracies in order to meet WA's "green" mandate. Net effect: CA demand shifted to coal-fired plants in other states, third world dictators, residents of WA and Canadians profit at CA's expense, no net carbon reduction but a nice redistribution of wealth. That's AGW / carbon regulation in a nutshell. How is it a scam if California is getting clean power? WA and BC are free to supply their own power needs however they see fit. CA using hydro power, WA using coal, and BC using coal emits less pollution than CA, WA, and BC all using coal.Why should we care if CA is stupid enough to care about emissions in Canada?
Quote from: pike on December 21, 2010, 04:55:07 PMAnd to the libtards that support this, companies buyong carbon credits only helps the business they buy them from cause it doesn't help the environment at all, which is a duh. But the point is that consumers will pay more for products because this law is just because having to buy credits is an imput to whatever you're consuming. So Californians can expect to pay more for food, electricity, gas, etc. The list goes on...In the case of the BC power scam it's even better than that: BC sells "green" hydroelectric power at premium rates to CA, BC buys "non-green" power at non-premium rates to replace "green" power sold to CA, coal fired generators in WA buy carbon credits in part from third world thugocracies in order to meet WA's "green" mandate. Net effect: CA demand shifted to coal-fired plants in other states, third world dictators, residents of WA and Canadians profit at CA's expense, no net carbon reduction but a nice redistribution of wealth. That's AGW / carbon regulation in a nutshell.
And to the libtards that support this, companies buyong carbon credits only helps the business they buy them from cause it doesn't help the environment at all, which is a duh. But the point is that consumers will pay more for products because this law is just because having to buy credits is an imput to whatever you're consuming. So Californians can expect to pay more for food, electricity, gas, etc. The list goes on...
As of 2008, Texas had a gross state product (GSP) of $1.224 trillion, the second highest in the U.S.[142][143] Its GSP is comparable to the GDP of India or Canada which are ranked 12th and 11th worldwide. Texas's economy is the third largest in the world of country subdivisions behind California and Tokyo Prefecture. Its Per Capita personal income in 2009 was $36,484, ranking 29th in the nation. Texas's large population, abundance of natural resources, and diverse population and geography have led to a large and diverse economy. Since oil was discovered, the state's economy has reflected the state of the petroleum industry. In recent times, urban centers of the state have increased in size, containing two-thirds of the population in 2005. The state's economic growth has led to urban sprawl and its associated symptoms.[144]As of January 2010, the states unemployment rate is 8.2%.[145]Texas has a "low taxes, low services" reputation.[133] According to the Tax Foundation, Texans' state and local tax burdens rank among the lowest in the nation, 7th lowest nationally; state and local taxes cost $3,580 per capita, or 8.4% of resident incomes.[146] Texas is one of seven states that lack a state income tax.[146][147] Instead, the state collects revenue from a state sales tax, which is charged at the rate of 6.25%,[146] but local taxing jurisdictions (cities, counties, special purpose districts, and transit authorities) may also impose sales and use tax up to 2% for a total maximum combined rate of 8.25%.[148] Texas is a "tax donor state"; in 2005, for every dollar Texans paid to the federal government in federal income taxes, the state received approximately $0.94 in benefits.[146]In 2004, Site Selection Magazine ranked Texas as the most business-friendly state in the nation in part because of the state's three-billion-dollar Texas Enterprise Fund.[149] The state holds the most Fortune 500 company headquarters in the United States.[150][151]In 2010, there were 346,000 millionaires in the state, second highest in the nation.[152][153]
Anyone that thinks Austin is the best place to live in Texas has never been to Texas. Texas is easily the best state in the union. If I was the state of Texas I would secede from the union.
Quote from: ednksu on December 27, 2010, 05:35:02 AMshhhh......Texas has an 18 to 25 billion dollar budget shortfall..........don't tell anyone that Texas isn't doing it right either. Texas GDP is 1,225 billion dollars. I think they can handle it.QuoteAs of 2008, Texas had a gross state product (GSP) of $1.224 trillion, the second highest in the U.S.[142][143] Its GSP is comparable to the GDP of India or Canada which are ranked 12th and 11th worldwide. Texas's economy is the third largest in the world of country subdivisions behind California and Tokyo Prefecture. Its Per Capita personal income in 2009 was $36,484, ranking 29th in the nation. Texas's large population, abundance of natural resources, and diverse population and geography have led to a large and diverse economy. Since oil was discovered, the state's economy has reflected the state of the petroleum industry. In recent times, urban centers of the state have increased in size, containing two-thirds of the population in 2005. The state's economic growth has led to urban sprawl and its associated symptoms.[144]As of January 2010, the states unemployment rate is 8.2%.[145]Texas has a "low taxes, low services" reputation.[133] According to the Tax Foundation, Texans' state and local tax burdens rank among the lowest in the nation, 7th lowest nationally; state and local taxes cost $3,580 per capita, or 8.4% of resident incomes.[146] Texas is one of seven states that lack a state income tax.[146][147] Instead, the state collects revenue from a state sales tax, which is charged at the rate of 6.25%,[146] but local taxing jurisdictions (cities, counties, special purpose districts, and transit authorities) may also impose sales and use tax up to 2% for a total maximum combined rate of 8.25%.[148] Texas is a "tax donor state"; in 2005, for every dollar Texans paid to the federal government in federal income taxes, the state received approximately $0.94 in benefits.[146]In 2004, Site Selection Magazine ranked Texas as the most business-friendly state in the nation in part because of the state's three-billion-dollar Texas Enterprise Fund.[149] The state holds the most Fortune 500 company headquarters in the United States.[150][151]In 2010, there were 346,000 millionaires in the state, second highest in the nation.[152][153]Anyone that thinks Austin is the best place to live in Texas has never been to Texas. Texas is easily the best state in the union. If I was the state of Texas I would secede from the union.
shhhh......Texas has an 18 to 25 billion dollar budget shortfall..........don't tell anyone that Texas isn't doing it right either.
Quote from: Sugar Dick on December 28, 2010, 04:12:37 PMQuote from: ednksu on December 27, 2010, 05:35:02 AMshhhh......Texas has an 18 to 25 billion dollar budget shortfall..........don't tell anyone that Texas isn't doing it right either. Texas GDP is 1,225 billion dollars. I think they can handle it.QuoteAs of 2008, Texas had a gross state product (GSP) of $1.224 trillion, the second highest in the U.S.[142][143] Its GSP is comparable to the GDP of India or Canada which are ranked 12th and 11th worldwide. Texas's economy is the third largest in the world of country subdivisions behind California and Tokyo Prefecture. Its Per Capita personal income in 2009 was $36,484, ranking 29th in the nation. Texas's large population, abundance of natural resources, and diverse population and geography have led to a large and diverse economy. Since oil was discovered, the state's economy has reflected the state of the petroleum industry. In recent times, urban centers of the state have increased in size, containing two-thirds of the population in 2005. The state's economic growth has led to urban sprawl and its associated symptoms.[144]As of January 2010, the states unemployment rate is 8.2%.[145]Texas has a "low taxes, low services" reputation.[133] According to the Tax Foundation, Texans' state and local tax burdens rank among the lowest in the nation, 7th lowest nationally; state and local taxes cost $3,580 per capita, or 8.4% of resident incomes.[146] Texas is one of seven states that lack a state income tax.[146][147] Instead, the state collects revenue from a state sales tax, which is charged at the rate of 6.25%,[146] but local taxing jurisdictions (cities, counties, special purpose districts, and transit authorities) may also impose sales and use tax up to 2% for a total maximum combined rate of 8.25%.[148] Texas is a "tax donor state"; in 2005, for every dollar Texans paid to the federal government in federal income taxes, the state received approximately $0.94 in benefits.[146]In 2004, Site Selection Magazine ranked Texas as the most business-friendly state in the nation in part because of the state's three-billion-dollar Texas Enterprise Fund.[149] The state holds the most Fortune 500 company headquarters in the United States.[150][151]In 2010, there were 346,000 millionaires in the state, second highest in the nation.[152][153]Anyone that thinks Austin is the best place to live in Texas has never been to Texas. Texas is easily the best state in the union. If I was the state of Texas I would secede from the union.Yeah, Texas sure owns California!
Texas is an absolutely horrible place to live if you like to apply reason and logic to everyday situations, oh and if you don't buy into Texan Establishment bullcac. It's probably as close to paradise as you can get if you're a christian conservative that's constantly looking for a pat on the back for being a moral upstanding citizen.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-jackson-california-poverty-20180114-story.htmlThis article says CA has the lowest per capita income of any state in America. The stats in this article are dumbfounding. Democrats are excoriated. Sad but wow.