Thursday, October 13, 2005

More Port Pollution News

4 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

All credit to Assemblywoman Oropeza for calling attention to the air pollution crisis, but her idea of a bond issue to have the taxpayers pay to clean it up is a non-starter.

We pay for the pollution controls on our cars, and for the smog checks. This rich international industry can pay to clean up its own pollution.

To do otherwise is just a subsidy for imports and the exporting of our manufacturing base overseas.

10:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for this, it's a great public service.

10:35 AM  
Blogger Marshall Astor said...

It is a subsidy, but I'm always of the bent "If no one else is going to do it, do it yourself." I don't want us to be enablers for further industry environmental slackery, but I'd be willing to assume a tax burden to sort this situation out rather than wait for their arm to be twisted into action.

Isn't there a proposal to require some additional pollution controls at the industry's expense flating around now? I'm not sure what the situation on that is, but I know it's out there.

11:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rather than wait for their arm to be twisted, why not do some twisting? If we can put a bond measure on the ballot, why can't we put something on the ballot that requires these multinational corporations to clean up their act as a condition of operating in this state? Paying two billion dollars of taxpayer money to clean up a mess created by shippers is allowing them to externalize their costs directly to the government, with no middleman.

It's no different, in substance, from giving food stamps at public expense to Wal-Mart workers because Wal-Mart doesn't pay them enough to eat. Except that it's, you know, TWO BILLION DOLLARS.

3:10 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home