Comments about ‘My view: Sacrifice money, save our planet’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Nov. 21 2013 12:00 a.m. MST

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Tooele, UT

Re: "I don’t deny that a carbon tax wouldn’t be a financial burden on Americans in these trying times, but . . . ."

And, of course, what you don't mention [maybe your USU prof forgot to mention it] is that the deranged financial burden on American families you demand, would have not the slightest effect on either atmospheric CO2 levels, or on global warming.

It would greatly benefit the UN and bloated, unaccountable, unsustainable government and its liberal cronies and supporters, but no one else.

No real people.

Why do liberals hate young, struggling American families so much?

Bountiful, UT

For about the past 15 years global warming hasn't happened. (Something the mainstream media isn't likely to tell you).

Nevertheless here are ideas that would be good if they were implemented.

1) Put a tax on all imported oil sufficient to pay for the military force necessary to ensure it remains available.

2) Make use of Yellowstone and all other geothermal in the United States.

Were we to impose this tax on imported oil, then renewable energy wouldn't be as expensive in comparison.

Hayden, ID

Remote Sensing highlights NASA satellite data which shows that the atmosphere has been shedding heat long before United Nations computer models predicted global warming. And the study indicates that far less future global warming will occur than global warming zealots have claimed. Well, there we have it! The earth is not warming and the computer models are wrong!

Salt Lake City, UT

procurator: "Why do liberals hate young, struggling American families so much?"

Sheesh. Why do conservatives so easily fall for reactionary rhetoric? Why do you so easily believe that voting against the interests of the middle class and your own futures is the right thing to do? Why do you so belligerently reject scientific reality? Do you think that if you just plug your fingers in your ears, close your eyes and whistle loudly that the science of global climate change will just go away?

The only down side to the carbon tax is that it will _slowly_ begin to shift our economy away from the worst polluting sources of energy and towards less damaging energy production. The result will be cleaner air and water, less dependence on unstable foreign regimes for our energy and a badly needed economic kick in the pants in the area where the US still excels, barely - technology.

Yep - with a tax on carbon you might discover that a 10 mpg SUV and a home forty miles from where you work isn't the wisest use of your money, but it's your choice. Is that bad? I don't think so.

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT



Sign it.

There once was a time when America led the world and set the better standards,
We are now 30 years behind the times, and behind rest of the world.

It's time to catch up, and be the world's leader - and not it's follower.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Is the air cleaner in Utah today than it was fifty years ago? I remember well the first year that we lived in Salt Lake City, 1955. The winter air was full of smoke from the wood and coal burning furnaces that many people used to heat their homes. As the years went by and as people converted to natural gas, much of the haze disappeared. Of course we still have a problem, but that problem is the result of living in a bowl. Most of the people in Utah live in a bowl. With the right weather conditions, pollution is trapped in the bottom of the bowl. If all driving were banned during those times, we would still have significant pollution. Would the letter writer have us turn off our furnaces?

America is a much cleaner country than most other countries in the world. Taxing us into oblivion will not clean up the air, even if man-caused CO2 pollution were actually a viable problem.

Dietrich, ID

We did not create this planet how can we save it? Human survival is dependent on doing what this author says not to do. We need fuel to survive. This is an attempt to control people over things they can't control and destroy progress.

Salt Lake City, UT

cjb: "For about the past 15 years global warming hasn't happened. (Something the mainstream media isn't likely to tell you)."

They doesn't "tell you" because it isn't true. Land-Sea temperatures in the 2000-2010 decade are far warmer than the previous decade, which was far warmer than the previous decade, etc.

The only way to get the "no warming in 15 years" is to severely cherry pick data. A global, decade-to-decade perspective is as narrow a filter as you dare apply and still have honest research. "No warming in 15 years" is a cynical, intentional distortion of the science.

Atmospheric CO2 levels are now 400+ ppm, higher than in hundreds of thousands of years. Analysis of atmospheric carbon shows that it's from burning fossil fuels, not natural sources. Changes in solar output has been studied and eliminated as a source for warming.

Sea levels _are_ rising, there's a lot more heat energy now in the oceans, and together this means a greater expected frequency of powerful storms.

Climate is changing tremendously faster than any natural climate change, and species can't adapt that fast.

We own this problem, and it's our responsibility to act on it.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Amber says, "It’s easy to say what needs to be done for our planet"...

Please Amber... tell us what needs to be done!

You only mentioned ONE thing... (A Tax). Is that all it takes? A tax?

IF a tax would fix it... I'm pretty sure we would do that. Problem is... we all know a tax wouldn't fix it.

A new tax is NOT the solution to every problem. I wish tax-headed liberals could understand that.

I wish someone would tell us what is evidently so obvious to Amber... The obvious thing we all know we need to do to fix global warming. It's not that obvious to me. I want to see if everybody agrees on what needs to be done. Please... everybody post what YOU think needs to be done. Let's see if Amber is right, and we all agree.


Pleasant Grove, UT

Subtext: everything I know about the environment I learned by watching Captain Planet.

Hayden, ID

@ Blue. Read the UN climate change report published recently, "Why the earth has not warmed for 16 years". It is an excellent report and explains the hoax of manmade global warming and what miscalculations were made by global warming advocates. The final comment was, "Apparently the earth's atmosphere is much more efficient in reflecting the sun's energy back into space than we originally thought".

Los Angeles, CA

Good article, but the carbon tax could be "free". A carbon tax could return all proceeds to citizens. This would "pay for" any price spikes at the pump. In Canada BC has a carbon tax that reduces other taxes. This has cut emissions by almost 20% and yet BC is growing faster than other provinces.

Emissions are cut because the "free market"gives low carbon solutions a boost, once dirty energy is charged for pollution.

Orem, UT

I would be totally in favor of this tax on one condition - it is that all the carbon tax collected goes into my bank account.

If the goal of the author and like-minded individuals is really to reduce CO2 and not just to concentrate wealth into the hands of a bunch of bureaucrats, then the author should be just fine with my proposal, right?

What is important is that behavior is changed and the planet is saved, so it shouldn't matter if all the money goes to me. I can probably put all that money to much better use than could the UN or any other tax collecting body.

Liberal Ted
Salt Lake City, UT

Let's start by banning our elected officials from using anything that emits CO2 gasses. That's right Pelosi, no more private air force rides for you. You can use your solar car to drive from San Francisco to DC whenever you need it.

After all these people are the "true believers" in the religion of give us your money and we'll take better care of you than you can of yourself. They should at least follow and live their religion before they come and force us to follow them and give our wealth to them.

Is that asking too much?

The fact is we can't even balance our budget and pay off the national debt. Do we really believe that we are in a position to lecture other countries on how to build their economy? We can't afford to buy off countries anymore.

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

Mountanman (sic) - Are you referring to the UN IPCC report that was published in September of this year? You know, the one in which the UN and all participating countries found, with 95-100% confidence, that based on observations of the atmosphere, land, oceans, and cryosphere it it is extremely likely that humans are the primary cause of climate change.

Can you please point to specifically where in the document your stated "comment" exists? I'd like to read up more on how the UN believes that climate change is a hoax.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

I don't think is going to ask anyone how much money they made while on Earth,
but I suspect he will be asking if we were a good steward of it.

Something I learned in Sunday School from Sister Belnap and Boy Scouts from Bro. Mower --

ALWAYS leave a place better than you found it.

Tooele, UT

Re: "The only down side to the carbon tax is that it will _slowly_ begin to shift our economy away from the worst polluting sources of energy . . . ."

Hmmmmm. That's the only down side, huh?

How about the tripling or quadrupling of costs of basic necessities of life for millions of young American families? They're just on their own, huh? Or maybe the "green" movement just wants to starve them out of the equation?

Suggesting that America owes the world a symbolic heaving of untold billions into the gaping may of feckless environmentalism, to NO real effect, is EXACTLY that action of "plug[ging] your fingers in your ears, clos[ing] your eyes and whistl[ing] loudly" you speak of above.

Sheesh, indeed. And, you still don't answer the question.

Holladay, UT


The degree to which additional carbon dioxide influences the climate of the planet is often referred to as climate sensitivity to CO2. The understanding of the world's climate scientists of the physics of this sensitivity is expressed in their computer generated climate models. These are the models which predict the future temperature and climate of the earth if CO2 emissions continue at various rates.

These models are fundamentally flawed and invalid. They are over predicting the amount of temperature increase as a function of increasing CO2 in the earth's atmosphere. As each month passes the divergence between the temperatures predicted by the models and the actual measured temperature increases. Until this problem is solved and the models are corrected, it is unwise to spend a single penny on reducing mankind's carbon footprint.

Stalwart Sentinel
San Jose, CA

procuradorfiscal - I'd like to learn more about we feckless environmentalists. Your assertive statement that a carbon tax would triple or quadruple the "costs of basic necessities of life for millions of young American families" is based off which study?


We did not create this planet how can we save it?

We do not need to save the planet; the planet will do just fine. If, however, we want it to continue to support human life, we need to make that a priority.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments