US Politics Mega-thread - Page 834

WASHINGTON, Jan 30 (Reuters) - Forty industry groups launched a new partnership on Thursday to form a "unified strategy" to respond to forthcoming federal regulations targeting carbon emissions from the country's fleet of power plants and other carbon-intensive facilities.

Led by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for 21st Century Energy, the group will lobby local, state and national lawmakers and educate the public about what they believe will be the economic impact of future regulation.

NAM President and chief executive officer Jay Timmons and other members of the Partnership for a Better Energy Future said President Barack Obama's climate action plan, which will target domestic emissions through executive actions, such as power plant emission standards, aims to completely eliminate fossil fuels from the U.S. economy.

"To remain competitive in a global economy, manufacturers need an 'all-of-the-above' energy strategy to ensure they have access to affordable and reliable energy," Timmons said in a statement.

Obama touted what he said was a successful energy approach in his State of the Union address on Tuesday night, saying the strategy has enabled an expansion of natural gas and oil production while driving a decline in greenhouse gas emissions.

"The all-of-the-above energy strategy I announced a few years ago is working, and today, America is closer to energy independence than we've been in decades," he said.

The members of the partnership, as well as some environmental groups, have been wary of the administration's energy plans.

On February 01 2014 11:31 PassiveAce wrote:
why do i even subscribe to this thread.
everything here makes me depressed.
if it isnt stealthblue posting some really depressing news its a retarded argument between all of TL versus 1-2 american conservatives.

On February 01 2014 14:58 PassiveAce wrote:
what is an american argument?
i seriously dont know what you mean by that.

On February 01 2014 14:53 Danglars wrote:
If keystone goes through, that would be uplifting news. I don't know how long they're willing to wait before running the pipe out to the coast to be sold to international consumers.

On February 01 2014 15:29 Mindcrime wrote:


Eminent domain was written into the Constitution just for foreign oil companies, amirite?

On February 01 2014 15:14 Danglars wrote:
Retarded conservatives ... you did see that one right? The whisper on the breeze from all of TL.

This might be a little deep for a passing forum post, but notice the frequent returns to the American left/right debate vs a world-wide separation of political ideologies. This being the US politics megathread in a worldwide forum, maybe you might find the surface level explanation. But I'm explaining a joke and that's fruitless, you either see it or you don't.

On February 01 2014 11:31 PassiveAce wrote:
its a retarded argument between all of TL versus 1-2 american conservatives.
On February 01 2014 14:53 Danglars wrote:
"its a american argument between all of TL versus 1-2 retarded conservatives" works too

On February 01 2014 15:29 Mindcrime wrote:


Eminent domain was written into the Constitution just for foreign oil companies, amirite?

On February 01 2014 16:15 Danglars wrote:
Negotiating with foreign powers for the conduct of trade is one of the few proper roles of the federal government. The refineries are American business and that's the refining market. You say "foreign oil companies," so maybe you're holding to some ancient protectionist doctrine?

On February 01 2014 11:31 PassiveAce wrote:
why do i even subscribe to this thread.
everything here makes me depressed.
if it isnt stealthblue posting some really depressing news its a retarded argument between all of TL versus 1-2 american conservatives.

On February 01 2014 14:53 Danglars wrote:
strangely enough, swapping this for, "its a american argument between all of TL versus 1-2 retarded conservatives" works too. Just can't see the light and don't like the flavor of that new free government cheese they're advertising!

If keystone goes through, that would be uplifting news. I don't know how long they're willing to wait before running the pipe out to the coast to be sold to international consumers.

Walmart struggled at the end of last year. But according to the retailer's new estimations, it wasn’t because people didn’t want to buy. It was because they couldn’t.

The retail giant warned Friday that the effect of last year's national food stamp cuts on its bottom line will likely be deeper than the company previous estimated. As a result its comparable same-store sales -- an retail metric that measures how stores are doing year over year -- will likely be slightly down for the fourth quarter.

“The sales impact from the reduction in SNAP [the U.S. government Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] benefits that went into effect Nov. 1 is greater than we expected,” Walmart’s Chief Financial Officer Charles Holley said in a news release Friday. “And, second, eight named winter storms resulted in store closures that impacted traffic throughout the quarter.”

The GOP-led push to cut the food stamps benefits to the tune of $5 billion left 47 million Americans reeling during a time of nearly record-level food insecurity.

Because about 18 percent of all total food stamp dollars are spent at its stores, according to an October report from the Wall Street Journal, Walmart can serve as a way to gauge how Americans are coping.

Walmart executives were cautiously optimistic about the effects of the cut on Walmart's bottom line last year. "Everybody's benefit is going to get cut, price will become more important. And when price is more important, we're more relevant," Bill Simon, the retail giant’s U.S. CEO, said in October. He noted that Walmart’s market share actually decreased when the food stamp program initially expanded in 2009.

On February 02 2014 08:40 SnipedSoul wrote:
One business cutting wages to increase profit might work, but when they all do it they start running out of customers.

I wonder how bad it will get before they decide to change anything.

On February 02 2014 09:17 Vegetarian wrote:


Businesses do not set wages, they are determined by supply and demand within a given marketplace.

On February 02 2014 09:17 Vegetarian wrote:


Businesses do not set wages, they are determined by supply and demand within a given marketplace.

On February 02 2014 09:24 Roe wrote:


When I worked for the little garden shop around the corner, I'm pretty sure "the marketplace" didn't set my wage. Pretty sure my boss did.