Ted has spoken (actually Tweeted):
"In support of Paris, CA billionaires pledge to never again fly private, will only fly commercial. J/K--will quit symbolic councils instead."
So, he admits that the council was just symbolic. It is nice to have that clarification.
Lyin' Ted must be such a tortured soul, kissing the ass of his bully.
Al Franken,...."I probably like Ted Cruz more than most of my colleagues like Ted Cruz, and I hate Ted Cruz," Franken said on CNN's "New Day" Wednesday morning. "And I make an exception with him because he is a toxic coworker, and to get anything done in the Senate, you've got to be collegial. You're a small town of 100 people. Ted doesn't get anything done. His big accomplishment was shutting down the government."
Quotes from Ted Cruz: Consider the source, then disregard. ; )
@mark ... love it
You guys have to admit it is Hypocritical to go flying around on private jets with huge carbon footprints yet tell the rest of us how to live. "Do as I say not as I do"
Name a politician (or anybody, for that matter) who is making as big a difference as Elon. I don't even know if Elon flies on private jets. As for the rest of them, they are not on a mission to accelerate us to sustainable energy, so I agree with you.
The airline carbon footprint also needs to be reduced. However not everything can be done at once. It's hard enough to convince some on this forum that we even need to reduce our carbon footprint at all. As for the average Trump voter???
We should stop all the limousine crowd from flying private jets.
Would I rather have Elon wasting a lot of time walking to each location, or even taking a train?
Or would I rather have him waste as little time as possible to get to where he needs to go so he can focus on his businesses?
Hm. I vote to take the quickest travel method as possible. Now other CEOs of like Snapchat, that's a different story.
Or we could tax private jets an amount that corresponds to the external (environmental) costs of flying privately.
When they do fly, mitigation equal to the damage is paid for.
Maybe Elon is already voluntarily doing this carbon offset donation? The commercial company I work for offers this to all passengers.
Tropopause, a quick search will show you he owns a large business jet, and even upgraded just last year.
Dofpic, such logic wont work here.
IMO Elon will be remembered as a greater contributor to our society than Edison is thought of, I think very highly of him, but most here elevate him to godlike status and it is heresy to suggest he is anything other than perfect.
Bighorn, I didn't open the article BUT let us say that Trump is spending more on recreational travel than Obama. Now let us consider Trump is a self made billionaire who for decades has been accustomed to traveling where he wants when he wants on personal jets he owns so he is maintaining the lifestyle he is accustomed to. Obama on the other hand didn't develop a taste for expensive traveling to golf until he could do so on the taxpayer dime. He was only worth $1.3m in 2007 and worth more like $13m today so he was not capable of funding a luxurious lifestyle till he somehow made millions while being paid $400K a year.............
Trump should indeed take fewer recreational trips BUT I think it still is worth considering he is acting the way he did before taking office rather than using the office to live more extravagantly than he was accustomed.
Sorry to all of you who just spit coffee all over your device in a rage about how could I in one post dare say these things.
rwlawdude, business aviation is a bigger industry than most understand, attacking(monetarily) it hurts jobs. Let the rich spend freely on business aviation because it keeps the money flowing back into blue collar pockets, and business aviation is one industry where we export heavily rather than import.
@Should_I, your argument against taxing of carbon emissions from aviation is nonsequitur. Those wealthy enough to fly private aircraft will not change because of the tax. Thus, no impact on jobs.
The tax would be used to mitigate the negative effects of spewing greenhouse gases.
Ted Cruz has finally figured out how to make his tweets matter. They must be about Elon Musk.
Poor Ted! Nobody asks his opinion on anything, but this is a clear opportunity for him! Now that Elon's seat at the council is vacant Trump could well decide Ted is the best fit to fill it!
As for travel I have an even better proposal. Why don't we outright ban use of tax payers' money on participation in symbolic meetings? Travel, accommodation, food, calls. You can save tons on that staff and finally come up with balanced budget.
Also consider trains. Their carbon footprint is so much smaller than airlines!
Here is the trick. Individuals spend their own money. CEO's spend shareholders money.
Politicians spend other people's money. Why don't we make a simple comparison?
Let's list Elon Musk's significant achievement over the last 4 years. And then let's list Ted Cruz's over the same time frame.
And then make a judgement on carbon footprint allowances for each of them.
As for tax for emissions on aviation I am in support of it, provided it is part of a broader framework. We need both carbon tax and emissions taxes.
Don't you believe this not as much about way of living as it is about where to look for funds in support of the way of living?
You guys have to admit it is Hypocritical to go flying around on private jets with huge carbon footprints yet tell the rest of us how to live.
Nobody is telling us how to live. But it is our right to know how much it costs to live the way we want to live.
Taxing something like business aviation just causes workarounds. They will just register elsewhere, meet elsewhere, refuel elsewhere something to dodge it.
I imagine Elon already has his eye on the next generation of Airbus e-Fan planes.
They will just register elsewhere, meet elsewhere, refuel elsewhere something to dodge it.
Register online, meet online it's all good, cut on useless meetings. That's all good. That's the main reason to introduce it in first place.
My US arms industry out exports any of your puny corporate jets.
Ted Cruz. A strong climate change denierhttps://youtu.be/ZCSnKNoyWtw
Does anyone actually take Ted Cruz seriously. I mean really.
Remember when his daughter dissed him during a promotional family video?
"You guys have to admit it is Hypocritical to go flying around on private jets with huge carbon footprints "
Or blasting rockets into space. Then again those missions are needed and he's doing it in a less wasteful way. He also did get hundreds of thousands of people out of fossil fuel cars or in line to replace them.
I have no idea how much time he spends in private jets, but people have seen him at supercharger stations.
Ted Cruz just reminds me of Kevin from the office.
Except Kevin is more intelligent.
Ted Cruz successfully argued the District of Columbia v. Heller case before the Supreme Court. What is this goofy crap I'm reading that Cruz is not smart?
Cruz is smart. Evil. But smart. Full lizard brain.
Lizards aren't smart.
Ted Cruz has been very successful academically. In real life, he's struggled a bit.
Ted has a future in the next remake of the Munsters.
They didn't teach consent when he was in school.
Ted Cruz did not argue anything about Heller vs. The District of Columbia before the Supreme Court. He only authored an Amicus Brief as solicitor general for the Attorney General of the state of Texas, Greg Abbot.
All the oral arguments were from:
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case on March 18, 2008. Both the transcript and the audio of the argument have been released. Each side was initially allotted 30 minutes to argue its case, with U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement allotted 15 minutes to present the federal government's views. During the argument, however, extra time was extended to the parties, and the argument ran 23 minutes over the allotted time.
Walter E. Dellinger of the law firm O'Melveny & Myers, also a professor at Duke University Law School and former Acting Solicitor General, argued the District's side before the Supreme Court. Dellinger was assisted by Thomas Goldstein of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, Robert Long of Covington & Burling and D.C. Solicitor General Todd Kim. The law firms assisting the District worked pro bono.
Alan Gura, of the D.C.-based law firm Gura & Possessky, was lead counsel for Heller, and argued on his behalf before the Supreme Court. Robert Levy, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, and Clark Neily, a senior attorney at the Institute for Justice, were his co-counsel.
Nowhere was Ted Cruz before the court arguing anything. A first year law student could write an amicus brief. Ted's still not looking too smart to me and others who can see right through him to his evil core.
Aren't you splitting hairs nex?
No he's not splitting hair, Magic.
I know things like facts and reading comprehension are anathema to your thermometer reading ways.
"Today, as a U.S. senator from Texas, Cruz is making a different kind of argument—one in the court of public opinion. On his Facebook page and in a statement released by his office, Cruz has declared his support for the families who own Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties in their First Amendment challenge of an Obamacare mandate."
Filing a friend of brief is not "arguing" before the court.
That is splitting hairs. Filing a brief is a form of argument is it not? I never said anything about a verbal argument.
Sorry, Mitch, but it's not splitting hairs when Ted wrote it for his boss, the attorney general. So, the amicus brief would have been argued by his boss, if anybody was to say that the brief is an argument to begin with.
Well, the important thing is that the 2nd Amendment prevailed. And Cruz was on the right side of that argument. He contributed.
Ironically we are going to need more guns to fight the Orwellian tyrant.
"Ironically we are going to need more guns to fight the Orwellian tyrant." I'm not to worried, I have seen the (protectors) of the left shoot. lol
Correctomundo bigd. They can't hit the broad side of a barn with a bass fiddle!
As long as we are doing childish jokes, here is one for you both:
Do you know why conservatives buy guns? It's coz they couldn't get a discount on penis extenders!
Tell Dana Loesch that Better Red Than Dead!
Guns are multipurpose tools Mitch, I'm sure she knows that already.
Guns are the great equalizer. It allows a 99 lb. weakling to have a chance against a 6'2" 230 lb. street thug. For some peculiar reason, liberals fight on the side of the street thug!
Caveman Mitch is not one I would call a Good Samaritin but is good at straw man arguments. I think these guys watch too many chuck norris movies.
ozone hole mike doesn't like a simple, straight-forward argument that liberals can't refute logically, so they resort to the knee-jerk "straw man."
Caveman Mitch Logic? LOL I said straw man first.