CEOs plead for mandatory emissions caps - Page 2

motivez · 01-26-2007, 12:38 PM

He's saying many small businesses already can't compete with Walmart because of their prices.

Thorgrim · 01-26-2007, 12:38 PM

Well you are talking about problems in business getting advantages, I was wondering how we were going to fight them all

Phantom · 01-26-2007, 12:48 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

I'm not sure I buy the idea that a level playing field is going to hamper someones ability more than someone else's.. perhaps you can provide some real world example of how this would drive a competitor out of business

When you limit pollution for certain industries you limit the production potential (total supply) of those industries. The larger companies will be able to out-bid the smaller ones and cut out their competition in the process. After the smaller guys are out of the business, the way is open for the holders to increase their prices.

motivez · 01-26-2007, 01:02 PM

Er, maybe I read it wrong, but I thought it was mandatory emissions caps per company, not industry.

01-26-2007, 01:38 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Er, maybe I read it wrong, but I thought it was mandatory emissions caps per company, not industry.

They dunno yet, there's talk of doing it either way and allowing credit exchanges among the companies.

Phantom · 01-26-2007, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

They dunno yet, there's talk of doing it either way and allowing credit exchanges among the companies.

I've never heard of per company credits. This seems way too easy to get around and wouldn't limit total pollution, but I wouldn't put it past any Congress to go with such a plan.

DosEquis · 01-26-2007, 02:08 PM

Hmm. Business serving their own self interests under the guise that they are looking out for the common good. This never happens. I just wish that people were this suspicious every time. Whether it is legislation to screw over workers or legislation to screw over competition, I think they deserve equal attention. Unfortunately SOME people out there only care when it affects other business and not the average guy who makes their business even possible.

01-26-2007, 02:10 PM

Originally Posted by Phantom

I've never heard of per company credits. This seems way too easy to get around and wouldn't limit total pollution, but I wouldn't put it past any Congress to go with such a plan.

There's been several per company plans kicked around and its done on a local level all the time.

01-26-2007, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Hmm. Business serving their own self interests under the guise that they are looking out for the common good. This never happens. I just wish that people were this suspicious every time. Whether it is legislation to screw over workers or legislation to screw over competition, I think they deserve equal attention. Unfortunately SOME people out there only care when it affects other business and not the average guy who makes their business even possible.

True, and not all companies are doin this for the wrong reasons and maybe they're all doing it for the right reasons and hoping for the competative advantage? I just find that hard to beleive...I think yo uhave some good apples and a few bad apples on this deal.

motivez · 01-28-2007, 09:20 AM

Well, I think if it's done right it would be a good thing. Regardless of whether or not one believes in global warming, less pollution is always a good thing.

01-28-2007, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Well, I think if it's done right it would be a good thing. Regardless of whether or not one believes in global warming, less pollution is always a good thing.

yes sir absolutely.

Kytro · 01-28-2007, 11:43 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

People also can't compete with Wal-marts low prices, how are we going to regulate that?

People cut their own throats, I have no sympathy

JSmythe · 01-29-2007, 12:06 AM

Government based regulation sucks. Market regulation would be better. The gov. should create an official stamp if a certain product is made by a company that offsets its environmental footprint. That way people would be able to know they are buying a product that didn't hurt the environment as much. It would be interesting to see how the "fair trade" foodstuffs are effecting consumer habits as a comparison to my idea.

JaJae · 01-29-2007, 03:05 PM

Originally Posted by JSmythe

Government based regulation sucks. Market regulation would be better. The gov. should create an official stamp if a certain product is made by a company that offsets its environmental footprint. That way people would be able to know they are buying a product that didn't hurt the environment as much. It would be interesting to see how the "fair trade" foodstuffs are effecting consumer habits as a comparison to my idea.

Corporations are welcome to label their own products saying they're environmentally friendly. Saying government based regulation sucks and then asking to set up a government regulatory system of which products are worthy of a seal is contradictory.

I agree though, this is a good idea.