You say progress, I say regression

I came across the article linked below over the weekend. I wanted to pass along, if anyone is interested. It discusses California’s supposed lead in setting tough environmental standards and the actual result of these initiatives. The article points out several brilliant examples of the law of unintended consequences resulting from governmental regulations.

What’s the real benefit of setting tough environmental standards, if no one can live up to them? Our society is blindly signing on 100% to the environmental agenda these days, but are we really going to be better off for it?

The article references the rolling brown-outs that have been affecting California for several years. Viewed another way, is that saying that California’s power infrastructure isn’t any better than Iraq’s? The third largest economy in the world, but they can’t keep the lights on during the summer? Is this progress? Instead of being bombed back to the early industrial age, are we going to be “greened” back to it?

I, for one, do not believe this is progress. And I also think this is a lesson as to what the future holds for our society as the greeners gain more and more control and clout. If you want to understand the effect of the “cap and trade” system that everyone is talking about now, do a little research on New Zealand and what they are going through right now.

I didn’t think that when the doom and gloom prophecies said the future was dark, that it was because we wouldn’t be able to afford electricity any longer.

http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_2_californias_environmentalism.html