Wealthy Liberals And The Environment
Apr 6, 2015 Commentary
California is in the middle of a water shortage partly because of a drought and partly because of environmental policies that rob people of water. Things are so bad that Governor Moonbeam Brown has imposed water restrictions for the first time in the state’s history. People will be fined for using too much water.
Want a long hot shower? Too bad! You stay in the shower too long and it will cost you a little more.
The wealthy though don’t seem to care too much. Their water usage is much higher than the peon class.
I am sure some of those wealthy folks are conservatives but given the wealthy areas in question and given the demographics of the state it is safe to assume that most of the wealthy who are using all the water are liberals.
These folks are supposed to be the ones who care about the environment and mother earth. I guess that all goes down the drain (pun intended) when their beautifully landscaped properties are involved.
All these rich people are ignoring the environment and the serious water crisis so that they can have lush green lawns and healthy productive fruit trees.
The poor have to cut back and skip showers to avoid fines while the rich ignore the problem because they want the water and can afford any fines they get.
This is not an uncommon thought pattern for liberals. They keep pushing the myth about manmade global warming and then ride in limousines, chartered airplanes and private helicopters to jaunt around town. They use plenty of fossil fuels to provide them with convenience and comfort while telling the rest of us to cut back before we melt from the temperature rise.
They scream that we all need to pay more in taxes and then they find ways to avoid paying them.
Liberals in the entertainment business claim to support unions and then do their work in Canada using non union labor while paying lower wage rates.
So in reality it should surprise absolutely no one that these folks are not complying with water restrictions.
These inconveniences do not apply to them and they will not comply with the restrictions.
Moonbeam will not go too hard on them because he needs their political donations.
And if things get too bad they can afford to move someplace else. Maybe they can try Massachusetts.
After last winter they have enough water to supply just about everyone…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: brown, california, drought, fines, lies, manmade disaster, moonbeam, water restrictions
An Out Of Control Government
Jan 10, 2012 Political
Suppose the federal government required all people in the US to buy clothing impregnated with a special fire retardant and that failure to buy clothing with the fire retardant would result in a $1000 fine. It would be bad enough that the government required us to have such things in our clothes but now suppose that the fire retardant did not exist.
That’s right. The government requires you to buy clothing with a substance in it that does not exist and then fines you when you are unable to do the impossible.
Not many Americans would stand for this kind of nonsense so Big Dog, how could you even suggest such a silly thing? The government would never require people to use something that does not exist and then fine them when they were unable to do so.
Not so. The federal government will receive about $6.8 million in fines (for 2011) assessed to oil companies because they failed to mix a biofuel additive in with their gasoline and diesel. The companies expect to pay even more this year for failing to use the biofuel.
The problem is, the biofuel does not exist outside of labs. It has not been developed for use so it cannot be used but that has not stopped the government from assessing penalties on companies because they cannot possibly meet the demands the government has placed on them.
Penalizing the fuel suppliers demonstrates what happens when the federal government really, really wants something that technology is not ready to provide. In fact, while it may seem harsh that the Environmental Protection Agency is penalizing them for failing to do the impossible, the agency is being lenient by the standards of the law, the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act. NYT
This is absolutely ridiculous and clearly demonstrates an out of control government. This is what happens when government mandates compliance with things that are not yet possible or will not be when compliance laws take effect. This is the same problem we will face if government mandates movement to certain “green” energy sources by specific dates and then those not yet invented sources do not come to be.
I would imagine the oil companies will take legal action to keep from paying a penalty that they cannot possibly avoid.
If not then how long will it be before we are all held hostage to the impossible demands of an impossibly inept government?
Cave canem
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: biofuel, fines, foolish government, impossible demands, oil companies, penalties, tyranny
$3,800 Fine If You Don’t Get Health Insurance
Sep 9, 2009 Political
The newest version of the health care takeover bill making its way around has a provision to fine families up to $3,800 for not obtaining health insurance. The geniuses working on this plan figure that they can solve the problem of people not being able to afford health insurance by fining them. This is like a bank charging you $35 for an overdraft check. They fine you what they know you don’t have. For those who can afford it and choose not to get it, power to them.
There are plenty of things wrong with this whole idea. The first is the idea that you can be forced to buy health insurance.
The plan from Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana would make health insurance mandatory, just like auto coverage.
Auto insurance is only mandatory if you decide to get a vehicle. If you do not want to pay for car insurance you have the option to not get a car. In other words, you have the freedom to choose whether or not you want to incur this expense. Health insurance is quite different because you have no choice in the matter. You can opt out of car insurance by not driving. The only way to opt out of health insurance is to stop living. While that might make the government happy, it will not be good for you. While we are on the comparison to auto insurance perhaps we could make health insurance like auto insurance in that you have to pay for routine check ups. You have car insurance but it does not cover new tires and oil changes. When you go to the doctor you should have to pay for the routine stuff. That would lower the cost of premiums.
I also note that even with the mandatory requirement for auto insurance (if you have a car) there are still plenty of people driving around without insurance. A huge number of them are ILLEGAL aliens and they have a lot of accidents. Perhaps if they wanted to charge fines for not having insurance they could do it in the auto insurance arena. That would be much more productive.
Another issue here deals with our basic freedoms. We have the freedom to choose (just ask any pro abortion zealot) and should have that freedom when it comes to health insurance. You have every right NOT to buy insurance. My only thing in that regard is, if you get hurt then you pay the bill out of pocket or over time but you have to pay it. If you don’t then they get to come take your stuff to satisfy the bill. I really don’t care if you lose all your worldly possessions because you decided not to get health insurance but I will fight to my death defending your right to take that decision.
The last thing here is the heavy handed approach the government is taking. What it is basically saying is; “Either you will do exactly what we want and buy something that we say you have to have or we will heavily fine you.”
I have stated many times that this is about control. The health care bill is not about health and it is not about care, it is about government control over your life. They will make a rule that you have to buy insurance or you will be fined. Later on they can say that if you don’t have a certain kind of insurance you will be fined. Then they can change some other rule under the threat of a fine.
What next? Will they fine you if your Body Mass Index (BMI) is too high? Will they fine you if your cholesterol is elevated? Will they decide that every American must join a gym and attend three times a week or be fined?
Where does it end?
Can someone explain why we allow the government to do this? Why do they have a say in how we live our lives? Why are so many willing to let them have near total control over their lives?
I would also like to know how it is that a woman cannot be denied an abortion. States keep working on anti abortion laws but liberals are against all that. They are even against parental notification. It is not the role of government, they say, to impose these things on women thus denying them their right to choose. So what gives government the right to choose for the rest of us? What gives it the right to take decisions on our behalf and to force us to do things we might not want to.
Where is our right to choose?
We need to defeat this health care bill completely. They need to start from scratch and keep it simple by fixing what is broken and leaving the rest alone.
They also need to stop attempting to violate our rights by fining us for choosing how we live our lives and what we do and do not buy.
Vote them all out in 2010. We must end the redundancy of incumbency.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]