Haliburton might just have a front-page competitor

Post Reply New Topic

http://publicintelligence.net/chicago-climate-exchange/
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... kAbYu5DtX8
http://www.pbs.org/nbr/blog/2008/03/usi ... ol_ca.html

If I'm understanding this right its not just Goldman Sachs, its also Fanny Mae, Franklin Rains, many members of both of the prior, many major players in Chicago - one could look at CCX in many possible ways, a few possibilities : 1) Man made global warming is either a big enough deal or can supposedly be altered enough by cap in trade that its worth the economy taking a hit and Obama, Goldman Sachs, et. al. are simply taking the initiative to set it all in motion before the bill is passed - they're corporate heroes to the environment, 2) Global warming is accelerated so fast right now that more drastic measures (chemical tinkering with the earth) need to be done, Cap In Trade will just destroy an economy to have a tiny effect - not worth it 3) A secular religious ideology is setting a new big agency up in the private sector as a ruse to change world economics, not for global warming but to ultimately remake global economic reality in a progressive direction.

Regardless of what take you have on em - I get the impression there'll be a lot more going around about this country for a while, and likely this'll be for Obama to explain as much as Haliburton was hung around the necks of Bush/Cheney.

Cleaning up the mess you make during any sort of industrial process shouldn't be considered an extra economic burden, it's something we should've been doing all along. Instead, we allowed these companies to profit from offering "lower" costs while not paying attention to the communal costs they were imposing on us. Unfortunately, on a larger scale we're basically stuck in a "tragedy of the commons" type game with developing countries such as China and India. Incurring a large communal cost, such as pollution, for even a small personal gain such as marginally lower costs, makes sense for any player. The problem is, when each player pursues the strategy in their own best interest, everyone loses bigtime from having to deal with everyone else's communal costs.