Mideast Assembly Thread

[HappyWarrior]

I'm not an assemblyman yet, but I'm thinking about proposing a bill when I get elected, cutting the burning of fossil fuels in the Mideast by 20%.
What do you think?

It would need to be a bit more specific than that.

[California8429]

I'm not an assemblyman yet, but I'm thinking about proposing a bill when I get elected, cutting the burning of fossil fuels in the Mideast by 20%.
What do you think?

what would be the timeframe? Not possible in less then 20 years, and even 30 years is very much pushing it. We can't just expect to wake up and power tens and tens of millions in the Mideast without fossil fuels.

Before this is considered there needs to be break throughs in R&D on multiple levels and areas of alternative energy. Which is what the Assembly has been recently pushing (see my Algae bill).

[Purple State]

At long last: https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=101096.msg2482734#msg2482734

A couple of clarifications could affect the numbers I have there.

I notice, Mr. GM, your analysis left out any effect (i.e. deficits) from these tax cuts and credits. While I understand that properly applied tax cuts can sometime create more revenue in the long run through increased economic production than lost through reduced taxes collected, but frequently there's still an overall revenue loss as the laws of diminishing returns kick in.

Like Happy Warrior, I'm sceptical these tax breaks won't result in an overall loss of revenue--possibly drastically. That isn't to say this plan is necessarily unwarranted even if it increases the deficit, as temporarily running a deficit may be warranted in an effort to "prim the pump" for the region's lagging economy.

The economic effects of Clauses 7, 10, & 11 aren't measured either. This is important as, even IF such measures are necessary in the long term, they would undoubtedly negatively effect hob growth.

My projections take all of that into account. The "cost" accounts for reduced expenditures (e.g. cutting farm subsidies) and lost revenue (e.g. tax credits). Those projections have the stated impact on the deficit, thus it will increase the deficit by $3 billion for each of the next two years and $10 billion over 10 years.

Does it include the cost saved with the drop in unemployment and welfare recipents?

It includes everything except for what it specifically states is not included. Obviously the number of more clauses that are more difficult to calculate made the process slightly less accurate, but you can take those numbers as the answer to all your questions.

[hawkeye59]

I'm not an assemblyman yet, but I'm thinking about proposing a bill when I get elected, cutting the burning of fossil fuels in the Mideast by 20%.
What do you think?

what would be the timeframe? Not possible in less then 20 years, and even 30 years is very much pushing it. We can't just expect to wake up and power tens and tens of millions in the Mideast without fossil fuels.

Before this is considered there needs to be break throughs in R&D on multiple levels and areas of alternative energy. Which is what the Assembly has been recently pushing (see my Algae bill).

Maybe 40 years.

[hawkeye59]

How about 20% reduction in the emission of fossil fuels?

[California8429]

How about 20% reduction in the emission of fossil fuels?

why are you asking again?

[HappyWarrior]

I personally would like to get rid of the lowering of the corporate tax as well as the cuts to the capital gains taxes.  These cuts are not workable in the current economy from what I've seen.

[California8429]

I personally would like to get rid of the lowering of the corporate tax as well as the cuts to the capital gains taxes.  These cuts are not workable in the current economy from what I've seen.

the GM said that the job creation coming of this bill was from the tax cuts. We aren't going to ever control unemployment and bring it down to reasonable numbers without welcoming business.

[RIP Robert H Bork]

I'm not an assemblyman yet, but I'm thinking about proposing a bill when I get elected, cutting the burning of fossil fuels in the Mideast by 20%.
What do you think?

How are we to do it?

First, as A-Bob said, we don't know what timeframe you have in mind, and I have to second him in everything else he said also. Of course, I can't ask a lot of other questions without actually reading through the bill that you intend to propose.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Voting is now open on the following bill.  This will be a 48 hour vote:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

AYE

[big bad fab]

AYE

[HappyWarrior]

AYE

[California8429]

AYE

[hawkeye59]

A 20% percent reduction in the emission of fossil fuels in the next 30 years.

[big bad fab]

A 20% percent reduction in the emission of fossil fuels in the next 30 years.

Is it your way of campaigning ?

I'm not sure shouting things repeatedly from the lobbies of this Assembly is the most efficient way to get elected...

Order, please

[California8429]

A 20% percent reduction in the emission of fossil fuels in the next 30 years.

Is it your way of campaigning ?

I'm not sure shouting things repeatedly from the lobbies of this Assembly is the most efficient way to get elected...

Order, please

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

For GI JANE, I'm happy with everything but clause 7:

7.   Eliminate all subsides to farms that are deemed inactive and are paid to not produce or grow crops, livestock, etc.

We can't just eliminate subsidies immediately.  I think we have to phase them out, otherwise we're going to see our farmers take a huge hit, and I don't know if the economy could handle that right now.

[President Mitt]

A 20% percent reduction in the emission of fossil fuels in the next 30 years.

You are not an Assemblyman. Do leave. No interrupting allowed here.

Oh Damn! Now I'm interrupting Assembly business! (Notices assembly looking at him pissed, walks away in hypocritical shame)

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

**Pulls out shotgun from the Speaker's podium, lifts in the air and fires at the ceiling.**

Quiet in the galleries!

**Smiles and returns shotgun to podium.**

[California8429]

Thankyou Mr. Speaker,

BBF, would pulling subsidies for inactive farms over 3-4 years be good? Any longer then that and we are very much still funding some farms to not be farmers. Also subsidies will not be cut when those farmers are in R&D stages.

[HappyWarrior]

Thankyou Mr. Speaker,

BBF, would pulling subsidies for inactive farms over 3-4 years be good? Any longer then that and we are very much still funding some farms to not be farmers. Also subsidies will not be cut when those farmers are in R&D stages.

What R&D?

[California8429]

Thankyou Mr. Speaker,

BBF, would pulling subsidies for inactive farms over 3-4 years be good? Any longer then that and we are very much still funding some farms to not be farmers. Also subsidies will not be cut when those farmers are in R&D stages.

What R&D?

Any testing of products or use of the farm for R&D, like algae

[HappyWarrior]

Thankyou Mr. Speaker,

BBF, would pulling subsidies for inactive farms over 3-4 years be good? Any longer then that and we are very much still funding some farms to not be farmers. Also subsidies will not be cut when those farmers are in R&D stages.

What R&D?

Any testing of products or use of the farm for R&D, like algae

I mean how are farmers involved in R&D?

[California8429]

Thankyou Mr. Speaker,

BBF, would pulling subsidies for inactive farms over 3-4 years be good? Any longer then that and we are very much still funding some farms to not be farmers. Also subsidies will not be cut when those farmers are in R&D stages.

What R&D?

Any testing of products or use of the farm for R&D, like algae

I mean how are farmers involved in R&D?

by using their farms for the research, however that means they are active. I was just clearing that up for any possible confusing that if a farm was involved in R&D over a regular year if that counted. Though I'm not sure many farmers at all would be affected at all. But in the algae bill we gave incentives to R&D