What is Digg?31 Comments
- sfhock, on 01/05/2009, -1/+8if the EPA starts taxing prolific biological producers of greenhouse gas, I'm in big freaking trouble...
- BeShirtHappy, on 01/05/2009, -3/+10I actually expected it to be true... glad it isn't.
- sockpuppets, on 01/06/2009, -0/+4I hope they don't discover my portal to the secret cow level.
- cobbwobbles, on 01/06/2009, -0/+3Milk is ***** poison anyway. Casin (the protein in dairy) is a known carcinogen.
- LacanX, on 01/06/2009, -0/+2or it may encourage some Americans to drink less milk and drink cheaper sugary drinks.
- da_bradler, on 01/06/2009, -1/+3Yeah! farmers should be able to get around pollution laws all they want. I mean what does the EPA expect? why should farmers be held responsible for the damage they do to air quality? Farmers have been trading the environment for cash for thousands of years why should our society have more advanced regulation now that air pollution is reaching a new epidemic?
Personally i feel a lot better knowing that factory farms can have tens of thousands of cows and not have to worry about the damage those cows do to the environment. Why should farmers be held responsible for the waste of their animals? they have been pumping ***** into our rivers for years why should we expect them to care about the air which they can't even see!
ignorant ***** - puddpunk, on 01/07/2009, -0/+2Well, lets put it this way:
First, lets agree that the tax should reflect the cost of doing a bad thing (emissions) to a good thing (the environment). This means, for instance, agriculture costs will reflect the true cost of it's impact to society, the economy and the environment.
By taxing emissions and thus increasing the price of the status quo, it will encourage emitters (i.e. farmers) to look at or invest in alternative methods and technologies that previously didn't make economic sense. Prices will probably go up for the things they produce (i.e. meat) but the idea is that the previous prices were unsustainable with regards to the resources they were using.
Molecule for molecule, Methane is a far more efficient "greenhouse gas" than CO2. By intervening in the market and sending a price signal that emissions are expensive and undesireable, we'll see innovations such as this:
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/ ...
and other such technologies that farmers had no reason to bother with before. - PopcornDave, on 01/06/2009, -0/+2If that's all it's going to take, what's your address? ;)
- cobbwobbles, on 01/06/2009, -1/+2I actually do want them in charge of our healthcare...the private industry seems to be really botching the job. I'd like to see something in the US akin to the NHS in Britain. Also, there are very mild taxes on air pollution at the moment, after 8 years of a Bush presidency which has degraded and destroyed the EPA's protections and incentives for companies not to pollute.
Did you know in Britain you can just walk into a hospital, give your name, and you'll get health services? You don't even need a driver's license...
If it were that easy to get treated in the US, people would probably address their health problems a lot sooner, like, as soon as they noticed them. It's a lot cheaper to treat most conditions early than it is to try and cure full blown diseases that have been neglected. - cobbwobbles, on 01/06/2009, -1/+2Actually, taxing cows might bring the waaaay overly subsidized meat industry into alignment with other food industries, like produce. Maybe a subsequent change in market prices would encourage some fat Americans to slather a little less butter on their toast, or have healthier alternatives for dinner. I'd be for it.
- Zalian, on 01/05/2009, -1/+2Is there a prize if I answer correctly?
- CYCLEORDIE, on 01/11/2009, -0/+1Diablo ftw
- CYCLEORDIE, on 01/11/2009, -0/+1Two man enter, one man leave!
- CYCLEORDIE, on 01/11/2009, -0/+1Cows and grazing regs have been taking their toll on american ecology for hundreds of years. I can trace partial blame on the cattle industry for massive pollution, invasive species of grass for feed which is partly responsible for massive forest fires (the other part being USFS fire supression program (yes forests NEED fires)).
Cows are the largest waste of resources in agriculture. 80 gallons of water for 1 pound of meat while people die of thirst. 40 pounds of grain for one pound of meat while people starve.
What's the solution? ideally to do away with this unsustainable farming practice. Since that won't happen the industry should be regulated. They already get massive subsidies; why not use those to install methane digestors? we could harness the energy of the cow's ass.
Also if the EPA would enforce the ***** laws that are already on the book there would be a lot less pollution.. - LacanX, on 01/06/2009, -0/+1I'd like to know it too so i can help ya jump popcorndave when he comes to kick you in the nuts.
- djAnakin, on 01/06/2009, -1/+2Most socailized medicine is horrible. My family is from Norway and they all say you have to wait weeks or months for health care, and even then it's ***** service.
- cobbwobbles, on 01/06/2009, -0/+1Mr Coldheart failed to even read the article before commenting.
- PopcornDave, on 01/06/2009, -0/+1Oh lighten up. Geez.
- dattaway, on 01/06/2009, -1/+1Tax the pork.
- LacanX, on 01/06/2009, -1/+1Well if you want to pay the price go ahead. My friend owns a dairy farm and he said they couldn't make money if they imposed the taxes they were planning. So if you want to pay for it directly with price increases then ok, but i'd rather just not care - as its not that big of a deal.
- djAnakin, on 01/06/2009, -2/+2Excellent idea. You know what.. let's just raise the price of everything till no one can afford to eat. Better yet, why not just come kick me in the nuts and i'll go move to Mexico.
- MrColdheart, on 01/06/2009, -1/+1If the EPA does that then the price of milk and beef would skyrocket.
- itstodd, on 01/06/2009, -2/+2If taxes actually reduced green house gasses we wouldnt have any green house gasses. Only the government can take a bad thing and find ways to make it worse. You want them in charge of your health too?
- FitteMas, on 01/06/2009, -1/+1Beefcake, Beeefcake!, BEEEFCAKE
- Ninh, on 01/05/2009, -3/+3Farming being the holy cow of american policy that's very unlikely. Sooner they'd sew all illegal aliens shut.
- Nauree, on 01/06/2009, -2/+2Oh, I thought they ment tax fat people...
- alanocu, on 01/05/2009, -4/+4If the Democrats can get away with taxing smelly cows and hogs, they will. Of course they will never win an election in the Midwest again.
- seobro, on 01/08/2009, -1/+1Make beans illegal, ass people who eat them produce - methane!
- jeches, on 01/06/2009, -1/+1Moooo...
- slidexd, on 01/06/2009, -2/+1Oh yeah, taxing cows because they give forth some kind of gas!
I wonder when they'll start taxing piquancy... That would be great, I would talk to many more people without clips on my nose - shig, on 01/06/2009, -3/+1Oh yeah, Big Farmer. Those are the fat cats running Washington. /s
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is