Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

Responsibility...

Recs

4

April 20, 2010 – Comments (13)

...is what "The Left" (the group that elected a Democratic Congress and President) is talking about today.

Mother Jones:

Is that, well—legal, you might ask? In international law, there's an established principle called transboundary harm, which means that if a Canadian factory belches toxic chemicals into a river, fouling a reservoir in Vermont, sooner or later the people at the Canadian factory will be hearing from some American lawyers. For the first time, Micronesia applied this tenet to climate change—arguing that its survival is jeopardized by any large power plant that doesn't curb its carbon footprint. "They're using a very creative approach to the international legal process," says Durwood Zaelke, president of the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development....

....Nevertheless, industries are bracing for a tide of climate lawsuits. The major insurer Swiss Re has warned that "climate change-related litigation could become a significant issue within the next couple of years." Pawa compares this nascent field to the epic court battles over tobacco and asbestos. "It's a process of learning by doing," said Pawa. "Just by bringing these cases over and over again, the judiciary [and] the public get used to the idea of liability." According to a forthcoming United Nations study, the world's 3,000 biggest public companies could be on the hook for $2.2 trillion—more than 30 percent of their profits—if they were made to pay for the fallout of their carbon emissions.

13 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On April 20, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Option1307 (29.69) wrote:

Interesting stuff here, although it is the start of a very tricky and slippery slope. Take a stroll with me down this thought excercise...

If the case can be made against large corporations/industries/etc. that they should be held responsible for their CO2 emissions, should we hold individuals responsible for their own emissions? i.e. should they be held accountable for miles driven/flown, plastic products bought, or meat consummed? If so, who determines what the fine/repercussion is?

Going even further into crazytown, if country A has a bad crop yield this year, is country B liable for this "damage" via GW? How would we ever determine what percent and what is a resonable compensation?

I don't expect you to have the answers, just thinking out loud here.

Report this comment
#2) On April 20, 2010 at 9:54 PM, fmahnke (90.19) wrote:

Hi,

Way too much of a reach here, Unlike tobacco and asbestos, it will be hard to prove damages, probably impossible.

I can barely stand to watch MSNBC these days,  I used to enjoy Chris Matthews sometimes, but all these folks are now more slanted than most of the Fox guys lately.  I am guessing  they see their majority slipping away.

Worst is the talk of the Tea Party being raccist or violent anti-goverment extremists. BHO plays right into the game, says he's amused' He doesn't realize that most of America is fed up with BIG GOV"T, BIG SPENDING and taking care of their voting blocks instead of the country at large. They don't want to seen tea partying with crazy sister Sahra, but they will show the  left how far they missed the mark come Nov,

Hope you are well

Report this comment
#3) On April 20, 2010 at 11:00 PM, MikeBobulinski (< 20) wrote:

Great...we are next going to be held accountable for the gases we put out on a personal level...the carbon dioxide that results from us breathing...and perhaps the methane equivalent we produce upon consumption of bad burritos.

Who knows where the liability cops will stop.... 

Report this comment
#4) On April 20, 2010 at 11:10 PM, devoish (98.44) wrote:

I am not sure why you are talking about the Tea party or MSNBC but I think the assessment of a large racist segment of the Tea Party is accurate. I also think the assessment of them being nuts to complain about high taxes to the President who just lowered the vast majority of Americans tax bills is also correct.

You have a fiscally Conservative President with Liberal social values. Congress's healthcare bill was paid for. The Republicans did not pay for anything they passed in six years with full control of both houses and the Presidency.

Option and the rest of Fmahnke's reply,

If the case can be made against large corporations/industries/etc. that they should be held responsible for their CO2 emissions, should we hold individuals responsible for their own emissions? i.e. should they be held accountable for miles driven/flown, plastic products bought, or meat consummed? If so, who determines what the fine/repercussion is?

 yes, through a carbon tax.

Going even further into crazytown, if country A has a bad crop yield this year, is country B liable for this "damage" via GW? How would we ever determine what percent and what is a resonable compensation?

A much tougher question. Probably compensation will be food and water, not pain and suffering. Carbon emissions could be used to determine percentages - bad for the USA and China and Europe - but the work on who is emitting what has already been done.

Way too much of a reach here, Unlike tobacco and asbestos, it will be hard to prove damages, probably impossible.

Not too much, just still a long way off, but the lawsuits are coming.

Report this comment
#5) On April 20, 2010 at 11:10 PM, ChrisGraley (29.73) wrote:

Cow flatulence is a huge contributer to CO2. Sue the cows! 

Report this comment
#6) On April 20, 2010 at 11:13 PM, devoish (98.44) wrote:

Mike,

In fact this good be a boon for good burritos at the expense of low quality burritos. A win for everyone in the room.

I'm more hopeful the liability cops will get started.

Report this comment
#7) On April 20, 2010 at 11:15 PM, devoish (98.44) wrote:

Chris,

Sue the cows? Grind them up into chop meat!

Report this comment
#8) On April 20, 2010 at 11:42 PM, ChrisGraley (29.73) wrote:

Oh devoish, the animal rights activists wouldn't let you do that! Politely ask them to hold it in, and if that doesn't work then sue the hell out of them. It's the liberal way!

 

Did you seriously just call Obama a fiscal conservative?

That stimulus bill that was supposed to create all the jobs with tea-pot museums and arrow subsidies and golf courses named after senators was the first bill that he signed and it wasted more money than any bill in history. This was the guy promising change. The change was that you get robbed much faster than you used to.

I really don't blame Obama, other than the fact that sometime between the election and being sworn in, he allowed himself to become Pelosi's bitch. 

Report this comment
#9) On April 21, 2010 at 12:08 AM, Judochop172 (24.47) wrote:

So can the UK and France sue Iceland for its volcano disrupting their atmosphere? It's a good thing Icelands broke.

Report this comment
#10) On April 21, 2010 at 12:24 AM, NOTvuffett (< 20) wrote:

damn you iceland, you gave us volcanos, delayed air travel and
björk, lol.

Report this comment
#11) On April 21, 2010 at 5:30 AM, fmahnke (90.19) wrote:

Devo,

You seem too smart for some of those comments.  Must be too much Obama Kool Aid,

The idea that health care is paid for is laughable I could start with the basic trick of 10 yrs of taxes vs. 6yrs of benefits. The CBO admits that they really have no good idea of how it plays out after the first 10 yrs and the Long term care costs applied to health care "reform: cost clearly creates anew,  long term unfunded mandate.  Finally, the cost of medicare funding passed to the states will clearly be passed to the citizens after the subsidy dies,  At best the idea that this is paid for is irresponsible, at worst it is deceptive and disastorous to our economic health.

A fiscal conservative ?  wow,  Paul Ryan is a fiscal conservative, I'd love to see a top dem debate him over the real cost of healthcare, It will never happen as they know its all BS.

BHO cut taxes in his stimulis bill,  Its a good thing that the Left can't figure out that someone is going to have to pay for that eventually, but luckily the Tea party people get it. When I supported Obama, I laughed at the far right voices who claimed he was trying to destroy our ecomomy. Today, I wonder,

Here link for you you

http://msncaps.fool.com/Blogs/ViewPost.aspx?bpid=379380&t=01000860093551905860

They probably do have some racist tea party folks (just like every other group) and do have some crazys, But the fact that they are mostly white is no surprise if 95% african americans voted for BHO,  The 95% number could also be viewed as racist but I won't judge because I know how it feels,  I'm white and support the tea parties after voting for BHO, so I guess the left and a couple of ex-presidents think I've recently become a racist,  Anyone who knows me would strongly disagree,

I mentioned MSNBC, because it represents most of my exposre to the Left and I think their rhetoric over the Tea Party is where the real irresponsibly exists.  I thought BHO could unite this country, how is that working out ??

Report this comment
#12) On April 21, 2010 at 11:49 PM, devoish (98.44) wrote:

Yes, a Fiscal Conservative. Most of the stimulus was a tax break that apparently was not enough for the Tea party. They should be in favor of that. Most of the spending was decided by the States. States decisions, not Pelosi's projects even if some of it was spent in Ca.  Just because you cannot understand the value of all of the projects doesn't mean crap. I don't like all of them, but I would cut defense spending, not a SF Bay cleanup that saves the habitat of "Pelosi's rat". Because to me, keeping stuff alive has become far more important than killing people.

If you don't like what MSNBC says about the Tea Party, stop acting like petulant children, don't bring guns to a healthcare debate, don't stand up and shout down the speakers at a healthcare debate, don't compare Obama to someone who massacred the Jews, and you won't have to worry about adults thinking you are ignorant children trying to appeal to the most ignorant hateful Americans in the country.

You have embarrassed yourselves  as a group of whiney selfish crybabys on National television courtesy of Fox. You have ruined the Republican brand, the Conservative brand and now in record time, the Libertarian brand.

You do not speak for me, I speak for myself and you can pretend your "small gov't" is different than Reagans or Bush's bugt you all you have is the same failed policys. "Cut the taxes" "don't regulate" "cut the taxes" "don't regulate" "cut the taxes" "don't regulate". Go home already with this failure.

Your man in the Whitehouse made his own law by not enforcing it. We call that an environmental disaster, or a fiscal disaster, or a housing disaster,  Reagans Republicans - "cut the taxes" "don't regulate"  Bush's Conservatives - "cut the taxes" " don't regulate" Your Libertarians - "cut the taxes" don't regulate".

All one and the same. Go home with this failure. Elect people who think they should be doing something to help, not goofing off. Elect people who think they should be responsible, not people who want to abdicate responsibility to "free markets".

Get serious. That which we call a Rose, by any other name would smell as sweet.

That which we call small gov't by any name, still fails to do the job it was elected to do.

Yes. Obama is a fiscal Conservative.

Report this comment
#13) On April 22, 2010 at 6:57 AM, devoish (98.44) wrote:

fmahnke,

I stayed up late enough to watch the Daily Show last night, had a laugh at my own expense and then had a laugh at yours. But this guy is a Tea Party speaker, not some idiot in a crowd, he is an idiot standing up to represent you and being cheered. And what get's the cheers? A discussion of the healthcare needs of Americans - no. A discussion of American air power superiotrity and the value or cost of such - no. A discussion of "indicator species" such as Pelosi's rat - no.

Your spokesperson is concerned that homosexuality causes a heterosexual elected representative to allow Mexican immigration.

I'll take you as seriously as I take Chris Rock, because at least if Chris spoke those words I would be rolling on the floor laughing.

Seriously, is your spokesperson familiar with a group of Homosexual haters so large that revealing a 'completely fantasized, imagined for supporting immigration reform'  homosexuality would swing an election? Does your spokesperson expect that group to be at Tea Party rallys? And who do you fear the most? Immigrants, immigration law reform, or homosexuals? Why do you hate all these people? Have they threatened your right to shoot cans off a fence with an AK47?

Oh, one other question. Did your Tea Party spokesperson against immigration reform actually find out what the "reform" was? The last "small gov't group" - I know not you guys, they were some other "small gov't" guys - voted to build a fence across a desert because it is a well known fact that Mexican immgrants cannot swim, steer boats, fly airplanes, climb fences, or hide in trunks.

Or was this just a rally around catchy slogans?

I have complete confidence you are ready to lead a round of name calling. But not the United States of America.

The Daily Show With Jon StewartMon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Friendly Fire - Gaywatch Edition
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full EpisodesPolitical HumorTea Party

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners


Advertisement