In an under regulated capitalist society like ours, the power of big money over shadows all sensibility. If the threat of global destruction isn't enough to get the Carbon Barons to stop their maddness, and our own government refuses to stop them, then in my opinion for their own salvation, countries like Denmark and Germany need to unite and do an intervention on out of control Fascist states like ours. The Kochs may as well be pushing nuke buttons....for a few billion, I'm convinced they would.

Paying for carbon credits? Let me see......who will make money on this?

Why is 'climate change' being shoved down the throats of other-----more poluting----countries?

How about we continue to find more efficient ways to harness wind/water and solar energy and show that we can maintain our standard of living with them.

I aslo think that you are missing a key to eliminating fossil fuels.....what would happen to the stock market? So much of the market today is tied in some way to oil. What would happen to our stocks and mutual funds if the oil sector came to an abrupt stop?

Well, after a five-month hiatus, I feel like jumping back into the online think tank here. So here's my 2-cents worth:

Environmentalism presents the perfect opportunity for Democrats and Republicans to come together. It's all in the messaging.

For Democrats, push the "save the world" side of conservation. And the "bring down the corporations" side of it too, if that helps motivate people.

For Republicans, just point out that the less you consume, the less you pay in taxes. I'm about two years away from getting my house "off the grid" with solar panels. And after that comes an electric car. Because I care about the environment? Maybe a little. Because I want to make a statement about taxes - that's the primary motivation.

I've also realized that most of the garbage my house produces, which I have to pay the city government to haul away, is food packaging. So I've started buying from the bulk bins at Whole Foods. (I've had to learn how to cook different things, but it's worth it.) My goal is to get my total weekly garbage down to a single bag, which I can then just throw away at work. So I can stop paying the city to haul away my garbage. Sticking it to the goverment is the goal. Helping the environment is a side effect. So is improved cooking skills. Bulk lentils are very versitile, I've learned.

Thom, please mention that people can call from other states this weekend, not just from in state. Progressive Change Campaign, MoveOn, Oregon's GMO labeling initiative 92 and Colorado's GMO labeling 105 initiative are all running calls from out of state.

Getting the Republicans to sign on to anything positive for the environment is a lost cause. However, your intention to go solar and get an EV is the key to a solution.

Change your home's energy to renewable by either installing solar (cheaper than grid power in many states), or by signing up for your utility's renewable energy program. If you drive a car, switch it to one that runs on electricity. Used LEAFs and Volts are selling for well under $15K and still run like brand new.

Doing both of these things reduces the pollution for which you are responsible by over 90%. It also eliminates your giving any money to the oil, coal and natural gas companies.

Do both of these things as soon as you can. Make it a high priority.

http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2012/08/a-glass-sphere-solar-energy-generator-capable-of-converting-sun-and-moonlight-into-usable-power/

Watch this great interview of Senator Bernie Sanders by Bill Moyers about a speech he gave in Richmond, CA about Chevron and its attempt to buy the city council so that it can have its way with the community. Great interview!

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/video-audio/moyers-and-company?utm_source=berniebuzz&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Question+here+prompt_url&utm_campaign=National+Bernie+Buzz+10-30

Chuck - I appreciate your arguments, and I think they would work well to motivate and persuade an educated populace. I wonder how long you would have to look at a list of the highest-rated TV shows before you came across something that can be considered "educated" in America. I think most Progressive arguments and movements in the modern era fail to take hold primarily because of an ill-educated, yet content, and selfish, and distracted populace. In other words, not enough people care. Enough people will never care. And, in this environment, Individualism (taking care of yourself) is the best option.

I'm generally surrounded by educated adults both at work and in my private life, and even in this Democrat stronghold of Chicago, complaining about taxes is a favorite topic among them. Even without my provoking it. They don't care enough to vote Republican. Sometimes I think they just like griping for the sake of griping about it.

Sadly, I can no longer listen to Thom's show. They moved it to the middle of the day here, when I am working. And I don't have the time or desire to listen to it online. It was nice when it was on when I was driving, which is about the only time I have to listen to anything anymore. But now we have Jeff Santos. I think he might only be on in Chicago, because every one of his callers is from here. I give him a chance every day, and every day I end up just listening to music instead.

But getting back to your point about society and sociopathy - I think the biggest issue that I, like many Conservatives, have with government isn't so much that it exists, but with what level of government the power lies. It's the State's Rights argument. Most social and fiscal issues should only go as high as the state level. The lower on the governmental rung the decisions are made, the better. The reason for this is simple: People feel like their voice is heard more in the smaller setting, and people tend to live around others who share their same values and economic interests.

Chi Matt RE #16-- I would like to reply in detail to what you say. However, I have a couple of responses I am trying to generate for the CA propositions followed by a couple of the other things. I hope you keep what you said in mind so when I refer to it a couple of weeks from now it will make sense.

For the non-controversial part of your message I have a statement. For only $60 a year you can subscribe to Thom's podcasts. It is the only way I listen to Thom. I just download his programs onto my mp3 player, and listen to Thom in my car and on my long walks on the beach.

Thanks for the welcome back! I've been reading from time to time. I quit responding because I realized I was sending out very negative vibes. I wrote a rather long response that was pretty harsh to the baby boomers. I read it before I posted it, deleted it, and walked away for awhile. No sense sending negativity out into the world.

At any rate, yes, I did once toy with the notion of leaving the US. Specifically, I wanted to go to New Zealand. When I took their online immigration questionairre, I found out that they didn't want me because I didn't have an advanced degree, or enough money to invest in their stock market. Now I have both, but I'm too old to go starting over like that.

Anyway, I was just meshing up some points to come to my conclusion:

1. Other counties have it better than us. Specifically Northern and Western European and Asian countries. (I hear this constantly in my field. American public schools always drag behind Sweden, Denmark, Japan, Singapore, etc...)

2. Those countries also have much stricter immigration laws than the US.

3. Those countries actually enforce their immigration laws. They don't want Americans there, or any other outsiders.

So, my conclusion, which sounds like a GOP talking point:

4. We, too, would be much better off with stricter immigration laws that we actually enforced. i.e. "blame the immigrants".

I actually agree on reducing the military. I'd take it a step further, and reduce the tax burden by a proportionate amount. I think, too, that the other smaller, more socialist countries are able to focus on their domestic issues because they more or less gave up on their militaries. They have token armies, but they know that if anything ever happened to them, the US would be there for them. Particularly those European countires who are in NATO. Do you think the Norwegians sleep easy at night because they know their army will keep Russia at bay should Russia decide to attack? Or, do they not even bother trying to field a formidable army, because they know we are on their side?

There was a 20/20 or Dateline special a few years ago where they interviewed a farmer in Alabama. They were asking him about why he uses immigrant labor. He said he still advertises for seasonal help in the local paper, but never gets any responses from the locals. He said you could offer $20 an hour, and no one would still want to do the work. He was faced with two options: immigrant labor, or watching his crop (I believe it was peaches) die on the trees.

Off of the fields, I agree that corporations exploit foreign labor. And the Democrats have made any mention of immigration laws into a racist thing. They are just as guilty in the immigration problem as the Republicans. They make people affraid to say anything about it, for fear of being labeled as "racist".

There is a third option is your "military is eating us alive" theory - do something, get eaten, or, profit from it. Either by joining the military, working indirectly for it, or buying stock in defense companies. I know people who fit into all three of those categories. I'm not saying it's moral. I'm just saying that you can both try to change the world, and still participate in the current system.

On a related note, and back to the point of Thom's blog, I downloaded this awesome App (I saw it on the Colbert Report) that tells you what political parties different companies support. You scan a barcode, and it will tell you how much that company gave to each political party. That way you can speak with your wallet, which will have the biggest effect. They should make similar Apps for pollution, where you can scan a barcode and see how much that company pollutes. Then it might also give you more environmentally friendly options.

I find the secularization of Halloween and St. Valentine's Day and St. Patrick's Day, all Catholic holidays, mildly annoying. At least with Christmas and Easter, most people know they are celebrating Christian holidays. But ask the average teenager who we're celebrating on St. Valentine's Day, and they won't know. I don't celebrate any of those three holidays really. Fortnuately, my wife doesn't mind.

Anyway...

"I really don't care how futile of a fight that is. The fight is all that is important to me. The only thing more important is the fact that I am fighting on the right side. Doesn't that mean anything to you?"

Suppose there were two people who both had Progressive ideals. One spent their life fighting the Military-Industrial Complex: protesting at G8 summits, supporting Progressive candidates, etc. The second person went to work for a defense contractor, and used the money he made there to raise his family, give to charity, support the economy, etc. I'd say both people are equally moral.

I'd also say the second guy is smarter, because if he didn't take that defense contractor job, someone else would have.

Perhaps had I been around in the 60s, I would think differently. To me and my generation, protests have always been these marginal freak shows, not actual movements that made any difference in the long run. During the G8 or IMF (One cancelled, but I forget which one) meetings in Chicago two years ago, there were just as many police as there were protestors. In fact, if their goal was to reduce the military-industrial complex, it backfired. It gave the city a reason to buy more military gear for the police. Perhaps if those people put their money and energy into something else, like organic food or solar panels, they'd get better results. But honestly, I feel like most of the protestors I see are there just to "be a part of something". The same reason people celebrate sports teams when they win the championship. Even if they aren't fans, people like being part of a crowd.

But I'm probably just a jaded, middle-aged guy.

Reply to #21: Marc, I agree with what you are saying. But you left out one important factor in our immigration problem: our ridiculous "trade" policies. NAFTA is to blame for the surge in Mexican immigration, because it was NAFTA that made it impossible for them to earn a living in their own country. I find that point conspicuously lacking in 99.9% of the comments & discussions about immigration.

People tend to not leave their country of origin unless they've got a damn good reason. Especially if they're poor. - AIW