Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hey twowolves, remember that thread you posted that said that the Health care bill was going to make U.S. citizens have microchips implanted in them? Where'd you go when it was immediately debunked? I hope you don't do that with this thread....
The Congressional Budget Office (supposedly non-partisan) estimates that in just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be $6,800 per year.
No one is excludedThe Congressional Budget Office (supposedly non-partisan) estimates that in just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be $6,800 per year.
No one is excluded
The latest variation of this comes in a chain e-mail that contends the cap-and-trade plan will require more energy-efficient homes (a claim we rated Pants on Fire ). The e-mail says, "The Congressional Budget Office -- supposedly non-partisan -- estimates that in just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be $6,800 per year. No one is excluded."
In June 2009, the CBO released an analysis of the House bill, saying that the economywide cost of the cap-and-trade program in 2020 would be $22 billion -- or about $175 per household.
We traced the $6,800 estimate back to a report from the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank that has been very critical of the cap-and-trade plan. In the report, the group criticizes the CBO for failing to consider the harm that the cap-and-trade plan could do to the economy. The conservative group says the law could cause companies to produce less, which would reduce the GDP in 2020 by $161 billion in 2009 dollars. By 2035, it would be $650 billion lower, which works out to about $6,800 per family of four per year.
So the chain e-mail has taken the estimate from a conservative think tank and falsely attributed it to the CBO, a nonpartisan branch of Congress. There are many legitimate questions that can be raised about the cost of cap-and-trade, but it's simply incorrect to say the CBO came up with the $6,800 figure. We find this claim False.
everybody knows that waxman and markey did not write this over 1,000 page monstrosity themselves. this is going to be more regulation, more government in your face, and more costly for ALL americans.
Factcheck.com debunks this and includes it in their "Biggest Whoppers of 2009" category.
Home Sales: House Republican Leader Boehner and radio host Rush Limbaugh both claimed that the House legislation required home owners to have an "energy audit" or "survey" conducted before they could sell their homes. Such claims quickly became a chain e-mail and morphed into the assertion that home owners would need a "license" to sell their homes. None of that is true. The bill does set new efficiency standards for new residential and commercial construction — but not existing homes. "Energy Bill and Existing Homes," July 20
Inflated Cost Claims: The GOP drastically overstated how much proposed cap-and-trade legislation would affect the average family’s energy costs — Republicans said costs would increase by $3,100 a year, more than twice the estimate of the conservative Heritage Foundation. On NBC’s "Meet the Press," House Minority Leader John Boehner cited a figure closer to the Heritage Foundation’s estimate — $1,700 per year — attributing it to the Treasury Department. But that number really came from a back-of-envelope calculation by a CBS News blogger. The Treasury Department has called the figure "flat-out wrong," and the Congressional Budget Office’s much lower estimate is $455 per year over the 2012-2050 period. "Cap and Trade Cost Inflation," May 28; "Boehner and the Cost of Cap and Trade," Sept. 22
here is just a small section of this bill. CAN YOU IMAGINE HOW MUCH THIS WILL COST US?
Section 201, Greater Energy Efficiency in Building Codes:
Amends the Energy Conservation and Production Act to require the Secretary of Energy to support consensus code-setting organizations to establish building codes achieving 30% and 50% higher energy efficiency targets in 2010 and 2016, respectively, to establish codes directly if such organizations fail to do so, to include cool roofs standards, and to support state and local adoption of such advanced codes by supporting training and funding for energy efficiency code enforcement.
Section 202, Building Retrofit Program:
Establishes a program under which the Administrator of EPA, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy, supports development of standards and processes for retrofitting existing residential and nonresidential buildings. Authorizes the Secretary of Energy to provide funding to states to conduct cost-effective building retrofits, using local governments, other agencies or entities to carry out the work, through flexible forms of financial assistance up to 50% of the costs of retrofits, with funding increasing in proportion to efficiency achievement. Also supports retrofits of historic buildings.
Section 203, Energy Efficient Manufactured Homes:
Establishes a program to provide federal rebates of up to $7,500 toward purchases of new Energy Star-rated manufactured homes for low- income families residing in pre-1976 manufactured homes.
Section 204, Building Energy Performance Labeling Program:
Establishes an EPA program to develop procedures to label buildings for their energy performance characteristics, using building type and consumption data to be developed by the Energy Information Administration. The program would be implemented by states in a manner suited to increasing public knowledge of building energy performance without hindering real estate transactions. GOOD LUCK WITH THAT...
Section 211, Lighting Efficiency Standards:
Amends the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to adopt negotiated agreements on technical standards for lighting, including outdoor lighting - street lights, parking lot lights, and parking structure lights - and portable light fixtures such as typical household and commercial plug-in lamps.
Section 212, Other Appliance Efficiency Standards:
Amends the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to adopt consensus agreements on technical standards for hot food holding cabinets, bottle-type drinking water dispensers, portable spas (hot tubs), and commercial-grade natural gas furnaces.
Section 213, Appliance Efficiency Determinations and Procedures:
Amends the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to improve the Department of Energy process for setting energy-efficiency standards by enabling adoption of consensus testing procedures; requiring the adoption of a new television standard; improving standard-setting cost-effectiveness formula; authorizing the Secretary to obtain product-specific information as needed; authorizing state injunctive enforcement of standards violations; changing the role of appliance efficiency in building codes; and including greenhouse gas emissions, smart grid capability, and availability of more-efficient models among factors affecting efficiency standard ratings.
just look at all this retrofitting buildings, complying with standards, moving to more "energy efficient" properties, etc.
everybody knows that waxman and markey did not write this over 1,000 page monstrosity themselves. this is going to be more regulation, more government in your face, and more costly for ALL americans.
i would like somebody to deny that.
You want someone to deny that something that hasn't happened isn't going to happen? Do I have that right?
Hey twowolves, remember that thread you posted that said that the Health care bill was going to make U.S. citizens have microchips implanted in them? Where'd you go when it was immediately debunked? I hope you don't do that with this thread....
Wasn't that a scene ripped from the film Idiocracy? The library they're using seems to be confused- fiction from non fiction, who authored what? Just tear out pages of random books and call it history.
That's the story how Joe DiMaggio became our 30th president after the fact. Someone ought to wake the man in his grave and let him know.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
