Thursday, December 3, 2009
Will Cap and Trade Abolish Your Home Equity Value?
Jim Crum had sent me a copy of the Cap and Trade bill. Notice section 202, which creates a federal regulatory authority over home energy standards. The authority could not be controlled by state or local government. What would stop the regulator from establishing insulation standards that are so expensive that your home equity is reduced or eliminated? What would stop them from establishing regulations that force homeowners in rural areas to move to cities, creating large, empty parks regions? Might Congressman Hinchey's recent proposal to turn the Hudson Valley into a federal park dovetail with section 202 of the Cap and Trade proposal?
Enviro-totalitarians Plato's Successors
Jim Crum writes
I happened to hear the NPR program on the "Climategate" or "Climaquiddick"- the scandal no one wants to mention in the old media. For them it is hardly an issue, an event only worth a brief mention as they barrel down the abyss by trying to fix an unproven planetary issue by taxing us into the stone age. It was very bizarre to listen to the report and it became quite clear that the denial tag is firmly in the court of those promoting global warming and all of its taxing and wealth redistribution programs.
If "consensus" has been reached by using falsified data, purposely distorting programming, and suppressing opposing views, then what type of consensus is that? If those with questions then find that the source data has been lost or dumped, what does that say about the scientific method being followed? It means that this endeavor has regressed from science to dogma.
It's my job to pay, their job to think. I am a moron who just works for a living to support these intellectual giants who set policy and national agenda.
Since HUGE money is involved, perhaps this is just Climatological Alchemy.
JJC.
My response
In Open Society and Its Enemies I-Plato Karl Popper shows that Plato advocated a strict totalitarian society divided among the "guardians" who had wisdom and could think, a warrior class who would enforce the guardians' views, and the workers, everyone else. Roughly, says Popper, these were equivalent to a shepherd (the guardian class), a sheep dog, the warrior class, and the sheep, the general public. Plato was reacting specifically to the change, progress, and individualism that had evolved under Athenian democracy. Plato was contemptuous of democracy and individual choice. To Plato, justice meant that the sheep should stay in their place. Plato's vision has served as a model for successive generations of totalitarians. In America, authoritarian socialists, following Plato, have used a scheme whereby they call themselves moderate or mainstream, advertise their brand of totalitarianism as "social democracy", and establish political correctness, clamp down on alternative speech, and train themselves to think in unison, guided by the Ochs Sulzbergers, their Wall Street friends, the guardian class, and, in universities.
The Democratic Party's vision of society is totalitarian but differs from Plato's in that he saw academics as comprising the guardian class, whereas the Ochs Sulzbergers and Wall Street, a business elite, comprise the guardian class in the Democratic Party's scheme. Academics and the Democratic Party media are part of the warrior class. Incidentally, much like today's Democrats, Plato strongly argued that weapons should only be in the hands of the warrior class.
The current enviro-totalitarians are one more in a long line of followers of Plato's reactionary vision of society as a single organism. Plato was interested in arresting change. His theory of forms is that an unchanging ideal is real, the changing phenomena of the sensual world are inferior, degraded versions of an unchanging reality that the forms constitute.
His prescription was to reinstate the world as it had existed in primitive times. This is the vision of the enviro-totalitarians. It is a totalitarian, reactionary and elitist position.
I happened to hear the NPR program on the "Climategate" or "Climaquiddick"- the scandal no one wants to mention in the old media. For them it is hardly an issue, an event only worth a brief mention as they barrel down the abyss by trying to fix an unproven planetary issue by taxing us into the stone age. It was very bizarre to listen to the report and it became quite clear that the denial tag is firmly in the court of those promoting global warming and all of its taxing and wealth redistribution programs.
If "consensus" has been reached by using falsified data, purposely distorting programming, and suppressing opposing views, then what type of consensus is that? If those with questions then find that the source data has been lost or dumped, what does that say about the scientific method being followed? It means that this endeavor has regressed from science to dogma.
It's my job to pay, their job to think. I am a moron who just works for a living to support these intellectual giants who set policy and national agenda.
Since HUGE money is involved, perhaps this is just Climatological Alchemy.
JJC.
My response
In Open Society and Its Enemies I-Plato Karl Popper shows that Plato advocated a strict totalitarian society divided among the "guardians" who had wisdom and could think, a warrior class who would enforce the guardians' views, and the workers, everyone else. Roughly, says Popper, these were equivalent to a shepherd (the guardian class), a sheep dog, the warrior class, and the sheep, the general public. Plato was reacting specifically to the change, progress, and individualism that had evolved under Athenian democracy. Plato was contemptuous of democracy and individual choice. To Plato, justice meant that the sheep should stay in their place. Plato's vision has served as a model for successive generations of totalitarians. In America, authoritarian socialists, following Plato, have used a scheme whereby they call themselves moderate or mainstream, advertise their brand of totalitarianism as "social democracy", and establish political correctness, clamp down on alternative speech, and train themselves to think in unison, guided by the Ochs Sulzbergers, their Wall Street friends, the guardian class, and, in universities.
The Democratic Party's vision of society is totalitarian but differs from Plato's in that he saw academics as comprising the guardian class, whereas the Ochs Sulzbergers and Wall Street, a business elite, comprise the guardian class in the Democratic Party's scheme. Academics and the Democratic Party media are part of the warrior class. Incidentally, much like today's Democrats, Plato strongly argued that weapons should only be in the hands of the warrior class.
The current enviro-totalitarians are one more in a long line of followers of Plato's reactionary vision of society as a single organism. Plato was interested in arresting change. His theory of forms is that an unchanging ideal is real, the changing phenomena of the sensual world are inferior, degraded versions of an unchanging reality that the forms constitute.
His prescription was to reinstate the world as it had existed in primitive times. This is the vision of the enviro-totalitarians. It is a totalitarian, reactionary and elitist position.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
US Park Service: Legal Ramifications of Hudson Valley Park Unknowable
In response to the November 3rd Kingston Freeman article stating that Maurice Hinchey has proposed a bill to turn the Hudson Valley into a federal park, I have (a) contacted Congressman Hinchey's office for a copy of the bill and (b) inquired with the National Parks Service as to the legal implications of designating the Hudson Valley a national park.
In the Adirondack Park, a state park, construction of new septic tanks has been largely stopped and much residential construction is limited or illegal. New jobs rarely enter the Adirondack Park. If a citizen of Long Lake, Blue Mountain Lake or Speculator wants to start a business of any stature, they will have to move elsewhere. In the Town of Olive, New York City and State own about 70 percent of the land, so development is largely impossible. The city reservoir is located in Olive.
In the future, stricter regulations concerning wood burning, hunting and home sales are likely to ensue from various federal laws, specifically including the "cap and trade" proposal currently before Congress. Thus, law directly governing many ordinary citizens, specifically including those adhering to "alternative" lifestyles, farming, communal living and the like can easily become directly affected.
The following is an exchange I had with a representative of the US Park Service who says it is unknowable how much flexibility the Park Service will have in implementing regulation--or how responsive they will have to be to various external pressure groups. For example, Congressman Hinchey is a direct recipient of campaign contributions from numerous political action committees (PACs) in the agribusiness field. Might there be a tie-in between Hinchey's agribusiness interests and his focus on instituting park regulations?
Langbert: I live in the Catskills about 25 miles from Kingston, NY. In the November 3 issue of the Kingston Freeman, a local newspaper, there was an article that stated that Congressman Maurice Hinchey has proposed a bill to turn the Hudson Valley into a national park. I have a number of questions for you as the article was not descriptive the effects of this policy.
a. What regulations normally accompany the establishment of a federal park in a developed region? Here in New York we have the Catskill Park, in which I happen to live, and the Adirondack Park. There are regulations that apply in the Catskill and Adirondack Parks that do not apply elsewhere.
b. Do you have a model or a developed set of regulations for another park region that would be similar to the regulations that would be put into effect should the Hinchey bill pass?
c. What would be the effect of establishing a park on economic freedom in the following areas:
--building houses
--building septic tanks
--sale of real estate
--liens on property not deemed environmentally acceptable?
d. Would there be an effect on construction such as limitations on the amount of real estate development, and/or restrictions on how sewage systems are designed, and/or limits on size, drainage and other environmental effects of real estate construction?
e. Would there be effects on hunting, the introduction of wildlife, the use of firearms and/or on fishing.
Park Service: DEAR MR. LANGBERT: Thank you for your thoughtful inquiry regarding the proposed study of the suitability and feasibility of creating some form of national park system unit in the Hudson River Valley. I note that Congressman Hinchey's bill would require the NPS to examine approaches that would (1) encompass large areas of non-Federal lands within their designated boundaries, (2) foster public and private collaborative arrangements for achieving National Park Service objectives, and (3) protect and respect the rights of private land owners. I have referred your inquiry to others who have been working more closely on this particular issue, and they will respond as soon as possible to your specific questions.
Langbert: Are parks normally governed through regulation rather than law? In other words, what would you say is the ratio of regulation to law? I used to work with pension plans and the regulation/law ratio might have been 40-60 or something like that. What would you say it is in parks governance? Thanks, Mitchell.
Park Service: MR. LANGBERT: As of right now, there are 392 units in the National Park System. They range in size from less than an acre to several millions of acres. Each one has its own mission or purpose for existing, usually as defined by Congress. The parks are governed by a combination of laws, regulations, and policies that work in tandem, and I do not generally think
of them as applying in any particular ratio. The laws, regulations, and policies that would apply to a particular park will also vary, depending on the resources and values that characterize the park, and depending on any particular instructions that the law that established a park has imparted to us. I would invite you to visit the Office of Policy website at www.nps.gov/policy and browse through the wide range of laws, regulations, and policies that come into play. In particular, you might want to look at the Introduction and chapter 1 of NPS Management Policies 2006 (http://www.nps.gov/policy/mp/policies.html), which provide a pretty good context for understanding how we manage the National Park System
Langbert: Thank you very much for the information. I really appreciate it. If you hear anything else from your contacts please let me know. Thanks again.
In the Adirondack Park, a state park, construction of new septic tanks has been largely stopped and much residential construction is limited or illegal. New jobs rarely enter the Adirondack Park. If a citizen of Long Lake, Blue Mountain Lake or Speculator wants to start a business of any stature, they will have to move elsewhere. In the Town of Olive, New York City and State own about 70 percent of the land, so development is largely impossible. The city reservoir is located in Olive.
In the future, stricter regulations concerning wood burning, hunting and home sales are likely to ensue from various federal laws, specifically including the "cap and trade" proposal currently before Congress. Thus, law directly governing many ordinary citizens, specifically including those adhering to "alternative" lifestyles, farming, communal living and the like can easily become directly affected.
The following is an exchange I had with a representative of the US Park Service who says it is unknowable how much flexibility the Park Service will have in implementing regulation--or how responsive they will have to be to various external pressure groups. For example, Congressman Hinchey is a direct recipient of campaign contributions from numerous political action committees (PACs) in the agribusiness field. Might there be a tie-in between Hinchey's agribusiness interests and his focus on instituting park regulations?
Langbert: I live in the Catskills about 25 miles from Kingston, NY. In the November 3 issue of the Kingston Freeman, a local newspaper, there was an article that stated that Congressman Maurice Hinchey has proposed a bill to turn the Hudson Valley into a national park. I have a number of questions for you as the article was not descriptive the effects of this policy.
a. What regulations normally accompany the establishment of a federal park in a developed region? Here in New York we have the Catskill Park, in which I happen to live, and the Adirondack Park. There are regulations that apply in the Catskill and Adirondack Parks that do not apply elsewhere.
b. Do you have a model or a developed set of regulations for another park region that would be similar to the regulations that would be put into effect should the Hinchey bill pass?
c. What would be the effect of establishing a park on economic freedom in the following areas:
--building houses
--building septic tanks
--sale of real estate
--liens on property not deemed environmentally acceptable?
d. Would there be an effect on construction such as limitations on the amount of real estate development, and/or restrictions on how sewage systems are designed, and/or limits on size, drainage and other environmental effects of real estate construction?
e. Would there be effects on hunting, the introduction of wildlife, the use of firearms and/or on fishing.
Park Service: DEAR MR. LANGBERT: Thank you for your thoughtful inquiry regarding the proposed study of the suitability and feasibility of creating some form of national park system unit in the Hudson River Valley. I note that Congressman Hinchey's bill would require the NPS to examine approaches that would (1) encompass large areas of non-Federal lands within their designated boundaries, (2) foster public and private collaborative arrangements for achieving National Park Service objectives, and (3) protect and respect the rights of private land owners. I have referred your inquiry to others who have been working more closely on this particular issue, and they will respond as soon as possible to your specific questions.
Langbert: Are parks normally governed through regulation rather than law? In other words, what would you say is the ratio of regulation to law? I used to work with pension plans and the regulation/law ratio might have been 40-60 or something like that. What would you say it is in parks governance? Thanks, Mitchell.
Park Service: MR. LANGBERT: As of right now, there are 392 units in the National Park System. They range in size from less than an acre to several millions of acres. Each one has its own mission or purpose for existing, usually as defined by Congress. The parks are governed by a combination of laws, regulations, and policies that work in tandem, and I do not generally think
of them as applying in any particular ratio. The laws, regulations, and policies that would apply to a particular park will also vary, depending on the resources and values that characterize the park, and depending on any particular instructions that the law that established a park has imparted to us. I would invite you to visit the Office of Policy website at www.nps.gov/policy and browse through the wide range of laws, regulations, and policies that come into play. In particular, you might want to look at the Introduction and chapter 1 of NPS Management Policies 2006 (http://www.nps.gov/policy/mp/policies.html), which provide a pretty good context for understanding how we manage the National Park System
Langbert: Thank you very much for the information. I really appreciate it. If you hear anything else from your contacts please let me know. Thanks again.
New York Valdez: The Tragedy Begins
I just received this e-mail from Governor Patterson (D-NY) (h/t Cindy Johansen). This is only the beginning. The drunken sailors are crashing into the rocks, the oil tank is broken and they know it, but they are chronic alcoholics and blame everyone else for their drinking, crashing and the leaking oil.
The tragedy begins.
Subject: Fwd: GOVERNOR PATERSON CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION ON BUDGET DEFICIT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: governorpaterson@chamber.state.ny.us
To: maine5752@aol.com
Sent: 11/24/2009 12:40:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: GOVERNOR PATERSON CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION ON BUDGET DEFICIT
GOVERNOR PATERSON CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION ON BUDGET DEFICIT
Outlines Consequences of Inaction in Open Letter to Legislators
Earlier this week, Governor David A. Paterson sent an open letter to every New York State legislator calling for immediate action to address the State’s budget deficit. The full text of that letter appears below:
November 22, 2009
Dear Legislators:
One month ago, I presented a responsible $3.2 billion Deficit Reduction Plan that contained reductions across every area of State spending, including health care and School Aid. I proposed this series of difficult choices to help address the State's severe revenue shortfall, which could threaten to delay State aid payments to school districts, health care providers, and local governments.
Since that time, we have worked together to try and craft a final agreement, but have not yet been successful. Unfortunately, this failure to act has put New York at risk for a number of dire fiscal consequences and raised serious questions among independent financial monitors.
On Friday, the Office of the State Comptroller issued a report titled: “New York State’s Cash Flow Crunch”. In it, Comptroller DiNapoli states: “The State's continuing failure to address its worsening structural budget imbalance have combined to create a severe cash flow crunch.” Put simply, the State is running out of money. In my conversations with the Division of the Budget, we have begun to discuss a number of options for this eventuality, including delaying payments to school districts, non-profit providers, and local governments, among others.
On Thursday, Moody's Investor Services also issued an analysis of the State's finances, saying that, “If there is no action taken by the State to close the gap, or if action is taken but is largely-one-time in nature (therefore increasing the structural imbalance in the outyears)” our strong credit rating will be in danger of a downgrade. The Comptroller has echoed these concerns, imploring the State Legislature not to resort to “fiscal gimmicks or debt, which would only push the State’s budget problems into the future at a higher cost to taxpayers.”
Above all, Moody's and Comptroller DiNapoli have indicated that we must focus our efforts on reducing spending. Moody's warned that one of our State's credit weaknesses are “high-recurring expenditure demands” and “spending pressures that contribute to chronic projected structural imbalances.” The Comptroller has also indicated that “New Yorkers understand difficult spending choices must be made . . . one-time revenue [does] nothing to address the State’s structural imbalance.”
It is clear that failure to address our deficit responsibly could have very real and serious potential consequences for taxpayers across New York. Time is running out and the costs of inaction will be felt in every corner of our State.
Payment delays could create a trickledown effect on local governments and service providers in every region of New York as those organizations continue to face similar revenue shortfalls of their own. A credit rating downgrade means it will be more expensive for the State to borrow money. As a result, more of our limited resources will be dedicated to paying back bondholders, rather than providing critical services.
There is only one path to avoid these unacceptable consequences – responsible, recurring spending reductions across every area of the budget.
I believe that any final Deficit Reduction Plan must include actions that are at least 40 percent recurring. Additionally, any consensus agreement must include reductions to health care and School Aid.
No one wants to cut health care or education. These are priorities for which I have fought my entire career. But given that they make up more than half of the entire budget, we simply have no other choice but to make reductions to health care and education if we want to demonstrate that we are serious about putting New York on the road to fiscal recovery. As other states that are now grappling with unmanageable deficits learned far too late, it is better to cut now, than gut later.
We must put politics aside and put the people of our State first -- not the special interests. We must reach a responsible final agreement that protects our State's finances and embodies the principles I have outlined above. The warnings are clear and those who choose to ignore them do so at their own peril. In the days ahead, I look forward to your cooperation as we make the difficult choices that are necessary to put New York's fiscal house in order.
Sincerely,
David A. Paterson
The tragedy begins.
Subject: Fwd: GOVERNOR PATERSON CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION ON BUDGET DEFICIT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: governorpaterson@chamber.state.ny.us
To: maine5752@aol.com
Sent: 11/24/2009 12:40:03 P.M. Eastern Standard Time
Subj: GOVERNOR PATERSON CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION ON BUDGET DEFICIT
GOVERNOR PATERSON CALLS FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION ON BUDGET DEFICIT
Outlines Consequences of Inaction in Open Letter to Legislators
Earlier this week, Governor David A. Paterson sent an open letter to every New York State legislator calling for immediate action to address the State’s budget deficit. The full text of that letter appears below:
November 22, 2009
Dear Legislators:
One month ago, I presented a responsible $3.2 billion Deficit Reduction Plan that contained reductions across every area of State spending, including health care and School Aid. I proposed this series of difficult choices to help address the State's severe revenue shortfall, which could threaten to delay State aid payments to school districts, health care providers, and local governments.
Since that time, we have worked together to try and craft a final agreement, but have not yet been successful. Unfortunately, this failure to act has put New York at risk for a number of dire fiscal consequences and raised serious questions among independent financial monitors.
On Friday, the Office of the State Comptroller issued a report titled: “New York State’s Cash Flow Crunch”. In it, Comptroller DiNapoli states: “The State's continuing failure to address its worsening structural budget imbalance have combined to create a severe cash flow crunch.” Put simply, the State is running out of money. In my conversations with the Division of the Budget, we have begun to discuss a number of options for this eventuality, including delaying payments to school districts, non-profit providers, and local governments, among others.
On Thursday, Moody's Investor Services also issued an analysis of the State's finances, saying that, “If there is no action taken by the State to close the gap, or if action is taken but is largely-one-time in nature (therefore increasing the structural imbalance in the outyears)” our strong credit rating will be in danger of a downgrade. The Comptroller has echoed these concerns, imploring the State Legislature not to resort to “fiscal gimmicks or debt, which would only push the State’s budget problems into the future at a higher cost to taxpayers.”
Above all, Moody's and Comptroller DiNapoli have indicated that we must focus our efforts on reducing spending. Moody's warned that one of our State's credit weaknesses are “high-recurring expenditure demands” and “spending pressures that contribute to chronic projected structural imbalances.” The Comptroller has also indicated that “New Yorkers understand difficult spending choices must be made . . . one-time revenue [does] nothing to address the State’s structural imbalance.”
It is clear that failure to address our deficit responsibly could have very real and serious potential consequences for taxpayers across New York. Time is running out and the costs of inaction will be felt in every corner of our State.
Payment delays could create a trickledown effect on local governments and service providers in every region of New York as those organizations continue to face similar revenue shortfalls of their own. A credit rating downgrade means it will be more expensive for the State to borrow money. As a result, more of our limited resources will be dedicated to paying back bondholders, rather than providing critical services.
There is only one path to avoid these unacceptable consequences – responsible, recurring spending reductions across every area of the budget.
I believe that any final Deficit Reduction Plan must include actions that are at least 40 percent recurring. Additionally, any consensus agreement must include reductions to health care and School Aid.
No one wants to cut health care or education. These are priorities for which I have fought my entire career. But given that they make up more than half of the entire budget, we simply have no other choice but to make reductions to health care and education if we want to demonstrate that we are serious about putting New York on the road to fiscal recovery. As other states that are now grappling with unmanageable deficits learned far too late, it is better to cut now, than gut later.
We must put politics aside and put the people of our State first -- not the special interests. We must reach a responsible final agreement that protects our State's finances and embodies the principles I have outlined above. The warnings are clear and those who choose to ignore them do so at their own peril. In the days ahead, I look forward to your cooperation as we make the difficult choices that are necessary to put New York's fiscal house in order.
Sincerely,
David A. Paterson
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
