CLOSED!!Political Discussion - A Place to &quot;duke it out&quot; (7400+)

Top 974. Aug 7, 2003 6:06 AM

» Fred2000 - Re: The Return of Smog

In response to message posted by Fred2000:

"L.A. in Smog Alert for First Time in Five Years, More Cities May Follow."

Evidence that the Bush programs are starting to work.

-- posted by Fred2000

Top 975. Aug 7, 2003 6:42 AM

» Fred2000 - Re: The clowns

In response to message posted by Fred2000:

"Republicans are making a mockery of democracy and the democratic process."

What's that noise in the distance? Sounds like a calliope. It is. The circus is comming to town.

And in the center ring, Arnold, a moderate, an actor, took lessons from the Kennedy's, pro choice, for all the things conservatives hate.

Additional choices... Larry Flint, Angeline, Gary Coleman, Galagher and Arianna Huffington. Good slate. Only thing hurt is democracy.

Della... I don't see your name on the slate. All it takes is $3500 and you could run for governor. Why not start a pledge campaign to help fund your run. I'm sure you'll have the support of the conservative posters on this board. They have confidence that you could do the job. Do you have the confidence in yourself?

-- posted by Fred2000

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/cctimes/news/...

Top 976. Aug 7, 2003 6:45 AM

» Lawhawk - Re: Re: The Return of Smog

In response to message posted by Fred2000:

Weather patterns have nothing to do with this? I can make an idiotic statement like "Does EU policy dictate that Europe suffer from the hottest weather in years?" but the truth is you have no evidence to back up your statement. Where's your evidence?

Wait, here's evidence that the Bush EPA policies have little to do with the ozone alerts:

Joe Cassmassi, a meteorologist with the AQMD, said the current spike is partly due to a strong high pressure weather system that creates inversion layers that trap pollutants in the basin.
"The severe meteorological conditions created a lot more stagnation and more potential for ozone formation," he said.
Environmentalists argue the root of the problem is too many people driving too many cars, especially sport utility vehicles and trucks.
Todd Campbell, policy director at the Coalition for Clean Air in Santa Monica, said more action is needed on cutting tailpipe emissions.
He said one way would be to increase tax incentives for Southern California residents who purchase alternative-fuel vehicles. He also suggested giving tax incentives to encourage residents to give up older vehicles, which spew more pollutants per mile than newer models.
"We can't change growth in the region, but what we can do is give better consumer choices," he said.
Atwood said the South Coast Air Quality Management District has done about all it can to reduce pollution from factories, power plants and oil refineries, but it needs state and federal regulators to regulate other sources of air pollution.

Well, environmentalists would have to complain that it's all because of state or federal policy not being active enough, but a simple weather pattern change is enough to clear out the air over LA. Same thing would happen over on the East Coast if the stationary front would clear out all the rain that the NYC metro area has received since this weekend (some areas have received more than 6 inches).

-- posted by Lawhawk

Top 977. Aug 7, 2003 6:50 AM

» Lawhawk - Re: Re: The clowns

In response to message posted by Fred2000:

Fred, how is a recall a mockery of the democratic process? It is a permissible way to maintain accountability in government (at least according to California law). Having tons of candidates doesn't make a mockery of the democratic process. It's the most invigorating thing that California politics has seen in years. People are actually going to have more than one choice for governor if the recall effort succeeds. That's a big if. There's no guarantee that the recall is going to even be successful. Throwing your hat into the race is practically risk-free. There's no harm if you throw it in and the recall fails. Candidates who might never have been given a chance because of party politics are going to be able to get their views out into the public arena. That's a good thing.

How is it a bad thing? BTW, just because there are actors, impresarios, and other infamous individuals who are in the race, doesn't make the race any less important. Some may actually have valid points and principled stands on the issues that concern the voters out there. That's up to the voters to decide. Heck, if I were out in CA, I would consider throwing my hat in. Paring down a 99 billion dollar budget sounds like an interesting challenge.

-- posted by Lawhawk

Top 978. Aug 7, 2003 7:01 AM

» Lawhawk - Re: Re: The Return of Smog

In response to message posted by Fred2000:

You're the one accusing Bush of causing an ozone alert in LA, without any proof. Analogy isn't enough. I provided a link that suggests that it's a weather pattern. (IIRC, we're in a La Nina cycle, so that would affect weather patterns far more than any other cause. Growth in the Central Valley and the LA Basin would have an effect as well. You do remember growth - that's economic growth stimulating the economy with more people using vehicles, energy, and other resouces to produce goods and services. You can't have growth without some kind of increase in pollution unless there's a corresponding greater decrease in pollution from point sources. There isn't much more that can be wrung out of point sources, so it comes down to vehicles, and CA has already instituted SULEV standards that exceed every other state. With more vehicles on the road, it will take additional years to reap the benefits of the additional SULEV standards.

What's your proof that Bush caused the ozone? Hope?

-- posted by Lawhawk

Top 979. Aug 7, 2003 7:05 AM

» Fred2000 - Re: The Return of Smog

In response to message posted by Lawhawk:

"L.A. in Smog Alert for First Time in Five Years, More Cities May Follow."

Evidence that the Bush programs are starting to work.

Lawhawk... This is the first time you won't attribute success to one of Bush's programs. Where is your proof that he's not responsible?

Texas had the most or second most polluted air of all the states. Bush was governor. Now California has the first smog alert in five years. Bush is president. Coincidence? No....

Unfortunately, his tax cut programs stand the chance of a snowball in hell to stimulate the economy. But you can't wil them all, can you?

-- posted by Fred2000

Top 980. Aug 7, 2003 7:06 AM

» Fred2000 - Re: The Return of Smog

In response to message posted by Lawhawk:

"Wait, here's evidence that the Bush EPA policies have little to do with the ozone alerts:"

Lawhawk... You've lost all your credibility. You post an URL but fail to post it in entirety. Why would one do that? Here's the paragraph that follows:

"For the most part, we're primarily focused on industry within our boundaries," Atwood said. The federal government is responsible for regulating pollution from ships, aircraft and interstate trucks and trains, and state regulators are responsible for consumer products, such as antiperspirants, and the types of fuels vehicles burn.

"We've come ahead of schedule in terms of what we do to reduce pollution from business," Atwood said.

"In contrast, the federal government, according to the plan we laid out, is slightly behind schedule. They need to speed up," he said.

-- posted by Fred2000

Top 981. Aug 7, 2003 7:28 AM

» Lawhawk - Re: Re: The Return of Smog

In response to message posted by Fred2000:

I didn't because I summarized that the environmentalists claim that it is the failure of the federal and state to do more.

-- posted by Lawhawk

Top 982. Aug 7, 2003 7:34 AM

» Fred2000 - Banks Moved Billions

.
Banks Moved Billions to Shelter Income From Taxes
Thu Aug 7, 1:03 AM ET

Some of the nation's biggest banks have sheltered hundreds of millions of dollars from state taxes by creating investment funds that didn't sell shares publicly but paid tax-exempt dividends to the banks, Thursday's Wall Street Journal reported.

A review of Securities and Exchange Commission (news - web sites) records shows that at least 10 major banks shifted more than $17 billion into such funds. Bank of America Corp. (BAC) alone transferred at least $8 billion into its fund, sheltering more than $750 million in income from 1999 through last May. The banks contend the funds were legitimate vehicles for raising investment capital, but many appear to have served little purpose beyond sheltering income. In effect, the funds converted interest income from the banks' loan portfolios into tax-exempt dividends.

All but one of the known funds -- 11 in all -- were set up with advice from KPMG LLP, an accounting firm whose tax shelter practices are under scrutiny by the Internal Revenue Service (news - web sites). They were created in 1999 and 2000, but have been gradually shut down over the last two years, after the SEC and California revenue officials quietly began looking into the practice. It is not known if more such funds remain active. California officials, calling the maneuver " outrageous" and "egregious," are auditing several banks' tax returns in an effort to recoup lost revenues and looking as far back as 1993. The officials declined to identify the banks, citing tax-confidentiality laws.

"We do not believe this is appropriate," California controller Steve Westly said of the funds. "This is something we need to fix." New York State tax authorities also are examining the issue. It's unclear how many other states might be affected.

-- posted by Fred2000