The backer's claims of job loss are FAKES -- Vote NO on 23....

Today's post: Wednesday, 10-13-2010

We need an 80% reduction in fossil fuel use by 2050 to avoid the worst global warming effects. And, practically speaking, we need to also double our electricity generation and double the useful work done per unit of electricity & other energy sources as well during that same time to have a decent economy.

At some point, the oil that we’ve been using to power much of our economy will begin to run low enough that our world economy will shrink due to lack of supply or excessive costs or both. Kuwaiti scientists recently predicted peak oil in 2014 – just 4 years from now.

And, once the demand for oil picks up again with the apparent economic recovery or supply begins to plateau or drop, the prices will again go back up. That will cause more hard times economically unless we have enough alternative sources of energy to turn to.

Today’s post:

The backer's claims of job loss are FAKES -- Vote NO on 23

I’ve already posted that the jobs California would LOSE if the current Proposition 23 were to pass ARE real while the jobs the backers of 23 said we would lose if it is not are not at all likely to be real.

Shortly after I got home last week after my last post, I found out the backers of proposition 23 completely FAKED the lost jobs. They have been lying on purpose and have been quite conscious of it.

Last Wednesday, 10-6-2010, the San Francisco Chronicle ran a story showing that the actual researchers who did the study the proposition backers have been quoting said four things:

1. If proposition 23 fails and AB 32 goes into effect, more new clean tech jobs will be created to go with those already created once AB 32 was passed. If Proposition 23 is passed, many of those jobs will either be lost or NOT be created. They noted that, “….jobs in the clean energy sector have grown by 5 percent during the recession while overall employment has fallen."

2. The increases in energy efficiency and supply from AB 32 will IMPROVE the California economy. But that’s ONLY if 23 fails and we can implement AB 32.

3. Businesses that are impacted will have some increased costs initially; but historically such changes mandated by changes in technology tend to increase jobs –NOT make them disappear. These industries will actually have to hire people to make the now necessary changes.

4. Passing Proposition 23 would decrease jobs and harm the California economy. It’s actually the enemy of having more jobs and losing fewer jobs – NOT the reverse.

In short, the people who actually did the study that looked at the issue were quoted as saying the reverse by the backers of Proposition 23.

Proposition 23 IS the enemy of jobs in California. The backers of Proposition 23 lied on purpose. Their credibility was based on this study. But the people who did the study actually found the reverse of what the backers of Proposition 23 said. Their argument was FAKED to scare people who have been concerned about jobs.

The good news is that many of these less educated people who now favor 23 based on those scare tactics tend to not always vote.

So please join me in voting NO on 23. And, be SURE to vote!

My wife and I did that by voting last weekend by absentee ballot.


Also, despite the fact that I think some of what Meg Whitman says is sound, the fact that she knows so little about today’s economy and what it needs that she would suspend AB 32 while the economy is bad means to me she is so ignorant that she is not qualified to be Governor of California. I voted against her for that reason.

Carly Fiorina talks a good game but actually came out in FAVOR of Proposition 23. Some of her backers are coal companies that promote the idea that global warming isn’t real.

The fact that she knows so little about today’s economy and what it needs that she would help suspend AB 32 means to me she is so ignorant that she is not qualified to be a United States Senator representing the state where I live. I voted against her for that reason.

Since the energy economy is to me the most important issue today, I suggest you join me in those two votes also.