It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


In Team Obama's world US workers are 'collateral damage' to green agenda

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 01:32 PM

One of the leading leftwing environmentalists last week described the hundreds of thousands of Americans who may lose their jobs due to the Obama administration's new anti-carbon regulations as "collateral damage" in the fight against global warming.

The offensive comments were issued by William S. Becker, the head of the Climate Action Project, a well-funded environmental group.

He said that the pain and suffering to the estimated 200,000 families put out of work is an "evolutionary step in technology and the economy" and a move toward "economic progress."

My guess is this guy won't have trouble feeding HIS family due to the draconian and heavy handed actions by our emperor-in-chief.

The "let them eat cake" attitude may strike readers as unbelievably offensive and cavalier. Imagine the outcry if a Republican referred to middle class job losers as acceptable "collateral damage." The story would be on the front page of every newspaper in the country and if Mr. Becker were the head of an industry group he would almost surely be facing intense pressure to resign.

It's true. The self-proclaimed 'champions of the middle class' will get away with this because of a complicit media.

One study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce finds that the new EPA regulations will destroy 200,000 mostly blue collar energy jobs, reduce the U.S. GDP by about $50 billion a year and cost families thousands of dollars over the next decade in higher energy costs.

That's $50 billion dollars folks. Poof, gone, due to one stroke of Obama's mighty pen as he once again circumvents congress and our representatives to rule by royal decree.

I know there are many of you that actually believe this climate nonsense and have been fooled into thinking it is more than an Agenda 21 power grab by the powers that be, but at least consider the economic cost of what you doing to hard working, American families.

Wars have been started for less than taking away the livelihood of 200,000 people and taking food from the plates of their family.

Disgusting, liberal destruction of our economy over what amounts to a symbolic move to satisfy the global warming agenda.


posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 01:52 PM
I belive you mean neo-liberals. (Reagan, Clinton, Obama; contrast with neo-cons Bush sr. & jr.).. Neo-liberals crushed unions without creating systems to take their place/fill the void left behind.

Stephen Moore is a Fox News contributor. He serves as chief economist at the Heritage Foundation.

your source is an op-ed from a guy who works at a right-wing pro-business think-tank. one that surely gets a lot of donations from big-oil companies.

there would be more jobs if nafta was repealed, but that would hurt the bottom line of his (the writers) employers.

heck we could have plenty of jobs by reviving the conservation corps.
edit on 22-6-2014 by NonsensicalUserName because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 02:03 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

I think this is a "greatest lie ever told" type

For example, if we were to swap to solar energy, that would take far more jobs then just continuing to run the plants we already have. The thing is the money would go to some one else instead of big oil or coal. So they pretend it'll be worse for us. When really it'll just be worse for the oil/coal Barron's and better for us.

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 02:12 PM
a reply to: ArtemisE

Solar energy in it's present form is a joke. There are a few places where it is feasible. If we were really serious we would be talking about NUCLEAR energy. Solar is mainly being used as a scam. How many billions of dollars have gone the way of Solyndra?

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 02:30 PM
a reply to: Metallicus
Please help me by explaining your problem with this mans words. Do you disagree that technological advancements bring job loss? And yes, steps to mitigate the pernicious effects of the man made side of climate change will inevidabely lead to some job loss. The study is just one study and is not wholly indicative of the actual monetary loss that would ensue, or job loss for that matter.

edit on 22-6-2014 by XxRagingxPandaxX because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-6-2014 by XxRagingxPandaxX because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 02:33 PM
"" In Team Obama's world US workers are 'collateral damage' to green agenda ""

U.S. workers are definitely collateral damage in their eyes.

That's why they are doing many things to diminish the lower end of the Middle Class.

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 03:19 PM
Another question. Is your aversion to job loss in the name of environmental restoration contingent on your belief that there is nothing to restore? In other words, would you be against job loss if you did believe climate change was induced or exasterbated by humans?

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 04:50 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

Yeah because "the green agenda" doesn't create any jobs or anything. Oh wait...

US Solar Jobs Growing Ten Times Faster than National Average Employment Growth

William Becker is just speaking plain facts - any economic paradigm shift results in lost jobs for some, it's happened time and time again throughout history. That doesn't mean it's a bad thing overall, just that people need to properly adapt, and more importantly - have enough foresight to see the need to adapt, rather than live in mindlessly stubborn denial.

NonsensicalUserName's post above sums it all up - Stephen Moore is just another shill for the fossil fuel lobby trying to keep everyone in mindlessly stubborn denial. Fox News is a notorious soapbox for this propaganda:

Here's 100% Proof That FOX News Are Straight Up Lying, Corporate Shills.

How do you guys seriously keep posting this nonsense and not see it for what it is? It is deeply disturbing, the spell these corporate cronies seem to have over you.

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 05:25 PM
a reply to: mc_squared

Of *Course* the ultra-Progressive sources are all highlighting the "Green" agenda.

What else would a well funded special interest kronie shill group do?

Can you find some actual real-time "Green Jobs" listings?

Here's a rebuttal article......

“Green” job creation, almost always supported by massive government subsidies, does not further economic activity — it is actually harmful. Assigning massive amounts of capital, private or government, to a business or industry with a negative payback is a misallocation of resources, much like a car company spending hundreds of millions on a vehicle that either fails to sell, or sells at less than it costs to produce.

The wind turbine industry, as well as the current generation of solar cells, are prime examples of “new” industries created in the name of “sustainability.” With massive infusions of taxpayer capital, accompanied by mandates that energy companies have to use a certain percentage of the output “or else,” new “green” workers are hired. .......

The Green Jobs Scam

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 06:12 PM
a reply to: mc_squared

the problem has to do with implementation, funding, and public-relations.

in the modern day any slight slip-up gets the program branded as a failure, and hysterical calls for budget cuts are made.

these budget cuts only ensure there is more failure as parts of the project are under-funded, in the long-run it ends up costing more, this in turn just ensures more budget cuts and compromizes until we reach a point where its a mess.

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 06:36 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

I'm actually glad this happened.

Now that the leftist-progressives have come clean about their intentions, they can't really argue about raising the minimum wage anymore!

Any time they do, we can just call it "collateral damage" and source this moron!

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 06:37 PM
a reply to: xuenchen

Pretty funny coming from the guy behind the Chevy Volt. I guess making components for and manufacturing electric and hybrid cars don't count as green jobs — or maybe Chevy Volts are made by oompa loompas (orange jobs?) who work for chocolate bars. Bob Lutz talks out both sides of his mouth (and his ass too).

Fossil fuel companies don't suck down government subsidy?

Ever heard of the Percentage Depletion Allowance? The oil industry alone gets a fat $4 billion a year tax break by deducting the diminished value of oil fields. Same deal with coal companies and their mines. Couple that with the fact that under the General Mining Act of 1872, a couple billion dollars worth of material is extracted from publicly owned lands for FREE.

How's that for subsidization?

The future is coming, and we can be the innovators we've always been and stay at the front of the curve or we can ensure that we'll be buying crap from China indefinitely and importing single drop of oil in Saudi Arabia. Right now we're importing about something like 1,400,000 barrels of oil a day from Saudi Arabia at a price somewhere north of $100 a barrel. That works out to be about $50 billion dollars a year and that's just one country who supplies somewhere around 13% of our crude oil imports. We're talking $330 billion dollars a year spent on imported crude. We spend another $50 billion on importing refined products. At this rate we'll be dumping half a trillion dollars a year in no time.

edit on 2014-6-22 by theantediluvian because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 06:57 PM
First off the myth of green energy needs to be addressed. How many components for the electric car battery decimate the environment? Take a look at the components for it and look into how it gets extracted. See how much oil would still be needed for wind turbines. There is more to what go's into "green energy" than ever gets admitted to. A typical failing of those who want to be trend setters, a lack of concern for the new problems they will cause.

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 07:04 PM
a reply to: theantediluvian

Perhaps we need some enlightenment.

How does the U.S. Government make money from oil imports-exports?

We know how the Saudis do it.


posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 07:05 PM
Green cars, electric cars run on electricity.

Coal-powered plants produce electricity.

Close out the coal powered plants, less electricity, higher cost electricity.

Not enough power for electric cars.

200K more people unemployed. More on the government dole.

Progressives are the enemy of the people.

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 07:41 PM
I used to work for one of the large oil companies and lower profits DO NOT necessarily lead to layoffs or costs passed on to consumers! Sometimes, they just mean lower profits for very wealthy corporations.

There isn't a direct correlation between a decrease in profits and layoffs. Sure, increased costs could be one factor in layoffs but more than likely it's due to decreased consumer demand.

Besides, for something like environmental damage, there is a cost - except it's passed on to individuals. They are the ones who have to pay for the cost of increased illness.

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 07:54 PM
Wow, I just read this guy's actual remarks and they have been entirely taken out of context.

Here's a link to the entire article:

What he was trying to say is when technology changes to different jobs, it's difficult for people who do things the old way (like manual typewriters).

He then goes on to try to encourage job retraining for these communities that support coal.

But of course, your little tea party friends probably knew this and realize before your lie is exposed, you can get a bunch of comments in so the truth gets hidden.

Here's the part the tea party didn't want you to read:

"But the clean energy transition is different. Fossil energy is so pervasive an influence in our lives that the switch to clean power will be a bigger challenge to more people than any energy transition in the past. There will be good new jobs. Improvements in energy efficiency will put new money in the pocket of every consumer. But before the economy stands solidly on the foundation of clean energy, there will be birth pains.

What should the Obama administration do to ensure that the transition in coal country is as fair as possible?

First, it should focus current federal job training and economic development "

edit on June 22nd 2014 by Daughter2 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 22 2014 @ 07:57 PM
a reply to: Metallicus

Why didn't you include the part that he said there will be MORE jobs AND more money to the consumer?

He also said there should be job re-training - you seemed to exclude that remark!

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 01:30 AM
How about building photovoltaic (solar) powered electrical generators which use the electrical powered cars as batteries? As you know, the solar power is there to be used, and the problem of storing it would be EASILY solved by a huge number of cars with a combined storingpower in the GWh or even TWh-range..

Tesla-cars is on the right way, and many, many others, too.

But there is the old, the mega-lobbied, heavy influence-wielding industrial moloch of the fossile energies. Yes, of course is nuclear power a huge part of that!

And there might be losses in the working class as long as you only look at the closing/reducing in the fossile branch of energy-production!

But those numbers will be completely outmatched by the new ones, created by companies who WORK FOR THE FUTURE!

Really, how could anyone support those big b***ds who promote the consumption of fossile fuels to be the only possible savior of the civilised world?! THAT IS BULLCRAP! It is a game with a dwindling ressource, and as long as we all are forced to play this game, and only this game with its limited and completely access-restricted ressources (oil & gas & coal, if you forgot what I am talking about, and they are in the possession of some of the wealthiest and most brutal industries on the planet!), we ALL will loose.

And will loose our money, our possessions, our health and so many other ressources of this planet. All thanks to big fossile companies.

How can anyone who is not a completely brainless, dumbed-down monkey on a keyboard promote this?

Aren't you able to foresee what will happen in 10, 20, 50 years from now?
Do you really want to have a planet which had to endure much more intense exploitation to gather up the last of
those fuels?

And all you people care about are some layoffs?

posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 06:37 PM
n Team Obama's world US workers are 'collateral damage' to green agenda

The 'green' agenda ?

Isn't about alternative energy.

Raising the minimum wage isn't about a 'living wage'.

The green agenda also known as the global warming agenda.


The poor have already been destroyed.

The rich have all but been destroyed.

The middle class HAS TO BE destroyed before cloward and piven can be fully implimented.

EVERY issue we fight over with regards to the economy, immigration, minmum wage, WALL STREET.

ARE ALL the means to the 'justified' end.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in