Sunday, September 26, 2010

Looking at the November Ballot: Proposition 23 (Post #13)

Californians will be voting on nine propositions in November. The focus of this blog post is Proposition 23 which, if passed by a majority vote, would freeze the state's movement to curb greenhouse gasses until the state's unemployment rate reaches 5.5% (or lower) for a full year. Proponents of the proposition argue that jobs are more important than addressing the abstract concept of climate change. Opponents of this measure, which include both major party candidates for governor, say that desperate action needs to be taken to address our dire climate issues.

Ultimately, this proposition is a referendum on climate change. Do we need to take action to address climate change or is it a scientific scam to keep business from making a profit? What are the opportunity costs and trade-offs of doing nothing about climate change? Should these decisions be made by popular vote of citizens?

Please cite your sources where necessary and keep your comments within the bounds of civility and good taste. Be sure to cast your vote in favor or opposed to this measure.

173 comments:

  1. I would vote against prop 23 because our state needs to keep working for cleaner air and less pollution. If the unemployment rate have only been under 5.5% for three consecutive quarters since 1980, then it i don't think it will be likely it will become that low anytime soon even if the prop is passed. Sloan p.3

    ReplyDelete
  2. I believe that air pollution is a huge issue. I would be againt prop 23 because the state should still focus on air pollution and other things that are harming our environment. I dont believe that the people should be voting on this because to be honest alot of people dont care about the environment because they are uninformed and dont care about their impact on the environment. I believe that each state should vote on wether to pass the bill or not, people shouldnt have a say.

    Trista Dowdy
    sloan per.5

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think for now we need to focus on jobs to get us out of the recession beecause the climate thing has so many sides to it, not many people know what to believe. The climate problem can be solved in the future while alot of people are running out of time to find jobs so that their family can still live the way they do.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Proposition 23 is like a deceiving apple. I would like to eat it, but know it wont turn out well. I think this proposition is good and bad all at once. Good because it, in theory, would reduce unemployment. Bad because it, in actuality, would freeze resources we put towards green energy, which i agree with. I am pro environment myself because i love the outdoors and hunting, and i hate seeing the purplish haze that comes from we humans driving in our automobiles. Basically, i believe we should cut funding from other areas, such as state pension funds and health care and welfare for illegals, and put those resources towards reducing unemployment.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I am not supporting this bill at all. The process of making the air clean will create more jobs for American that just freezing it and letting more pollutants into the air. Waiting on a solution for unemployment when it is right in from of our face is just plain wrong. Why can we not just use this government money towards clean energy in turn providing jobs for the vast unemployment in america. This "Apple" that Mr. Reller has been telling us about is fine and will taste much better if the air was clean. So no on 23!

    ReplyDelete
  6. In this certain proposition, I would have to agree with the proponents. Jobs are more important at this point then the concept of climate change because our situation with the
    California economy. This is a great proposition for citizens of California to vote on because it affects us greatly with job issues.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I agree with propositon 23 i think it is a good idea to wait until the employment rate goes up. Sure the air and enviornment is important, but jobs are more important especially because of the lack of employment. It seems like climate change has been going on for awhile now so holding it off for a little while longer wont hurt.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Emily Staab Per 2 BauerSeptember 26, 2010 at 4:24 PM

    I think it is a good idea to vote for prop 23. But it is a hard decision: Continue killing the environment o continue to lose jobs. Either way, someone is going to be upset. With a proposition like this, there is no way you can please everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Yea i'm pretty sure this is one of those props that we're going to have people crying on either side. As far as my views, I agree that we need to be cutting funds from so many other areas. Cutting money from welfare and putting it towards creating jobs..HELOOOO...If you create jobs, you reduce people on welfare, in turn cutting the funds that you need for welfare in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Climate change is a big issue, and just because unemployment is high, it doesn't go away. This beast will keep growing. Allowing climate change research to continue could create jobs in the research and development sector. We need to take action against climate change. Why bother creating jobs when we're too unhealthy from our environment to do them and reap their benefits? The trade-offs aren't worth it. Citizens should be take choose between the two, as long as they're well-informed. Many people are convinced the planet is about to explode from heat, and many believe the warmer weather is a result of God hugging us closer. Neither are true, and the public needs to be informed to make the right decision, which I firmly believe is to stop greenhouse gas emissions and move towards a greener society.

    Emily Dirksen
    Bauer
    AP Gov

    ReplyDelete
  11. I think we do need to take action to address climate change because of global warming. Each year the weather is getting worse than before. This decisions should be made by a popular vote of citizens because everyone has a right to vote on this.
    Sloan Period 1

    ReplyDelete
  12. i with kyle on this, having the policy of clean air endorsed by the government would create jobs. the environment benefits as well. it's a win win situation if the bill is not passed.

    and shawn for the welfare cutting idea.
    "if i have to take a drug test to get a job, then you should have to take a drug test to get welfare"~random FaceBook group.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Emily Geiszler, Bauer, Period 4September 26, 2010 at 6:41 PM

    I am an opponent of the measure. I believe that climate change is a very big issue. If it is ignored while unemployment is above 5.5%, it could very well be ignored for several years. The issue will only progress and the damage will be done. We are already seeing major climate change issues in this state, even throughout the entire country. Last year, crops went bad due to frost. Even now, we are going to experience high temperatures in the coming week after we have seen low temperatures during the past few weeks. Something must be done now, not months from now.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Josh Agans, Bauer P.5September 26, 2010 at 7:15 PM

    I am for proposition 23. i think raising the employment rate is more important than the climate rate now. wouldn't you rather help our economy and get us out of this huge hole we are in? if we don't try to stop the unemployment rate from increasing then things are just going to get worse. we need this to stop as soon as possible. therefore, i agree with proposition 23.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I AM UNDECIDED WITH THIS BILL. I AM A "TREE HUGGER" AND I FEEL THAT IT IS OUR RESPONSIBILTY TO PROTECT NATURE AND PRESERVE IT. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT IF THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR NEW JOBS THEN IT SHOULD BE DONE. IF MONEY IS NEEDED THEN THAT IS IMPORTANT BUT WE CAN NOT MAKE NATURE COME BACK. MY FINAL THOUGHT IS THAT THE COUNTRY SHOULD VOTE FOR IT AS A WHOLE.
    DIANA REYES =]

    ReplyDelete
  16. I agree with proposition 23 because the employment rate is alot more importent now then it ever has been,so that makes it a lot more importent then the climate change and if we don't do what we can about the economy now,then it will jest get worseas we move on.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Brian Magina, Sloan P.3September 26, 2010 at 8:37 PM

    This would be a hard decision for anybody but in my opinion I believe that prop 21 is positive. Athough we are risking the climate and its' features I think we are in too big of a debt to not focus more on the job crisis we have. I would rather try and hurry up and get out of our job crisis before its too late.

    ReplyDelete
  18. omar delgado, sloan per4September 26, 2010 at 8:40 PM

    id rather have more jobs than think about climate. besides if the climate starts to get even worse the government will still jump in to restore it wheither the people like it or not. but right now providing jobs is most important.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I don't think global warming is a big deal, I do not think having green house gas jobs will change the climate the dramatically. The opportunity cost of doing nothing about the climate is we could have glaciers melt and flood the Earth but we will have more jobs. I think we should have a popular vote on prop. 23.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Bryana Zamarripa Bauer p3September 26, 2010 at 8:44 PM

    I believe that if nothing is done for the climate then it could be bad for everyone but people do need the jobs otherwise unemployment will be as great as greenhouse gases.
    Bryana Zamarripa
    bauer p3

    ReplyDelete
  21. i am in favor of this bill. climate change is a regular planetary cycle that has been happening for thousands of years. i support the whole "going green" thing and respecting our beautiful earth, but i find it hard to believe that anything that we're doing is actually effecting our global climate. correcting me if i'm wrong. people need jobs!

    ReplyDelete
  22. This is actually my Proposition for the Election 2010 Project.
    If given the opportunity to vote, I would vote against it. I believe our environment is in dire need of protection from our Carbon Footprints. I believe if we do not rectify our ways in the near future, their may not be one, or so that may be, one that we would be able to adapt too.
    There are many costs to every decision, but for this one, I would say that we would be trading a cleaner environment for a Proposition that in actuality will cause the loss of more jobs, leading to an increase in the Unemployment unlike what is suggested in the Proposition. The current Act AB 32 clearly presents approximately 12,000 careers and over 500,000 jobs that are currently being held.
    In conclusion, I do not believe in passing this Proposition.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Alyssa Cuevas
    Sloan
    Period 4

    Global warming is not as big of a deal as unemployment, our government should worry about the citizens first ;)

    ReplyDelete
  24. I would vote against prop 23 because we need to keep clean air around us and less air pollution. If we clean the air we would have a better healthier population and if we dont do anything to help the air get cleaner we would have a bad health.
    Jonathan Ramos
    Mr. Bauer
    Per.2

    ReplyDelete
  25. Global Warming, oh how i love the concept that we humans can actually cause the world to become warmer. Is the world getting warmer? Could be. Could it be natural? Well that's an idea we have not considered. Does the Earth go through cycles of increasing and decreasing temperature? Does summer precede winter? Does winter precede summer?

    The Ice Caps are melting.
    http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1806-west-antarctic-ice-sheet-is-thickening.html
    Are they really? or is just nice to think they are.
    The truth is, some of them are growing and some of them are shrinking.

    Are we polluting our air, most likely.
    Is it the cause of global warming, the media loves to think so.
    Co2 levels are not the primary cause of rising temp. In scientific studies, it showed that the world was actually colder with higher Co2 levels.
    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/615626/posts

    Facts are easily misquoted, misused and who ever screams the loudest is right. Regrettably the media screams into our ears every day.

    So ask me again, do i think we need to make more jobs at the cost of not preventing an event that will occur regardless if we do any thing or not?

    yes
    Caleb Newman

    ReplyDelete
  26. I would deffinately not support prop 23, we need to look at the big picture here. Yes creating some jobs would be nice but what googd will that do when our planet is being poisned with greenhouse gasses. Our planet is in fact geting warmer our oceans are riseing. What good will jobs be when were under watter
    jake beilby

    ReplyDelete
  27. Maria Schmidt, Bauer, Per 5September 27, 2010 at 3:52 PM

    Proposition 23 is tricky because there are pros and cons to both sides. No matter the outcome, someone is going to be left unsatisfied. I guess I would say I am for this proposition. The unemployment rate is going up and it's a serious problem. Yes, the environment is important too, but focusing on raising the employment rate may be more important at this time. In the long-run, if people aren't employed, the future generations won't have a chance at success. In order for our economy to thrive, a raised employment rate is a must.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Dominique Jimenez Sloan 5th.September 27, 2010 at 4:03 PM

    I would vote no on this proposition. Mainly because we already have problems with pollution, and this will just increase this problem. The employment percent is NOT as important as the environment that we live in.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I don't think that the bill should get passed because people need their jobs to get food on the table. I dont think that many people care for the environment.
    tori mlligan
    Sloan per. 3

    ReplyDelete
  30. The debate on this issue comes down to the government's priorites: long term or short term. Saying yes to Proposition 23 would benefit our short term problem with unemployment. Saying no to Proposition 23 would benefit our long term problem with improving the environment and natural resources. I feel that taking away a focus on pollution would not help the unemployment rate very well. The clean air act of 2006 was followed with a variety of different companies and organizations to help improve the environment and prevent global warming. If you remove this act, thousands of workers for those companies will initially lose their jobs, worsening the unemployment rate. There seems to be a political and economic trend that governments tend to focus on what will help temporarily, not paying attention to how the future will benefit. This is present in the US government's borrowing of foreign money instead of raising taxes and it is present in this proposition. Ignoring the environmental issue will only make it worse for later years.

    Devin Smith, Mr. Bauer, P.1.

    ReplyDelete
  31. I’m against proposition 23. I believe we need to keep the air pollution free. Yes I do think that we need to have job opportunities for citizens but why pollute the air just to make more jobs. I do not believe it’s a fair thing to do.

    ReplyDelete
  32. I am for prop 23. The current state of our economy is very bad, lowering the unemployment rate should be everyone's main concern. Yes, air pollution is bad, but we need to see what is more important.
    Fran
    Bauer

    ReplyDelete
  33. i believe that we need to set aside the issues of the climate and what not to focus on our economy. there aren't enough jobs for people so that they can provide for their family. i think that should be the main focus of our society, and after it is all figured out then we can get back to the climate issues
    ~~brooke fletcher:)
    mr. bauer
    period 2

    ReplyDelete
  34. viridiana ramirez p.2 bauerSeptember 27, 2010 at 5:37 PM

    I agree with propositon 23 i think it is a good idea to wait until the employment rate goes up. usualy right now we need more jobs but also our environment is important but how we are in this economy employment is more needed. but in another way its hard to agree because w/out nature we would die. we need nature and we need employment to survive its a hard desicion. but i would go w/ the employment.

    ReplyDelete
  35. This is a kind of middle decision for me. I would and I wouldn't vote for this bill because of the people in the U.S.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I an undecided with prop 23 because i agree that the climate is very important and we need to take care of earth for the future generations to come but i also belive that the issue of the low employment rate is important too because we need jobs for people so they can provide for thier families.

    Clarisa Carrillo
    Per.4
    Sloan government

    ReplyDelete
  37. We need to obtain jobs for the U.S. people, and not worry about the environment at this time. Global warming is real, but not created by human. The going green stunt is just another political move like all the others. It is stupid to keep playing the global warming card in politics. It is like trying to blame humans for why water runs down hill. The earth warms and cools itself, that is just nature.

    -Michael Freeman

    ReplyDelete
  38. it is very hard to choose with this bill. the environment is important because it can change your health and everyone needs jobs so they can survive in this society. if we could keep the environment healthy and supply jobs that would be the key.

    Chris Long, P.3, Mr. Bauer

    ReplyDelete
  39. i am in favor of prop 23. i think because of the state our economy is we should be focusing on our unumployment. i think that is the bigger issue. on the other hand i think the enviornment is also an issue that needs to be addressed also. i think that they should cut spening on enviornment issues in half until we can start helping our economy and get some jobs going. I know my family and many others would benefit from this.
    Katey Santillan
    Bauer
    p1

    ReplyDelete
  40. I do think we should be able to make a decision on what to do with the climate change because yes it has not cooled down yet but also it would give people opportunities to try and figure out what to do about the situation.
    Aniscia Silva. Sloan. Per 5.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Danielle Bulmer -- Bauer -- 4September 27, 2010 at 7:33 PM

    I have to agree with everyone, prop 23 is a spitter because yes we need to focus on the environment and getting back into the safe zone, yet we also need to focus on getting jobs circulating out there so everyone can earn money and get the economy moving.

    ReplyDelete
  42. My opinion is that people concentrate on the wrong things and at the wrong time. The scientist are the people who are trying to find out how to change the weather and are doing experiments on it. It's people that want and are changing everything not mother nature.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Faye Roberson, Bauer, Period 5September 27, 2010 at 7:59 PM

    Well the unemployment rate is very low so maybe it would be a good idea to try and focus on that more than in other areas. I also dont think that its a good risk to stop thinking about the environment because thats why we are here in the first place. If it gets to bad then we will die and hiring more people and craeting more drivers on the road and craeting more polution will not be to good for this planet. We are already in alot of trouble with the environment as it is.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Chad Farris - Mr Sloan - Per 4September 27, 2010 at 8:06 PM

    We do not need to freeze our efforts to help with Global warming. This is a very big issue that will effect the environment for at least our lifetime if not more. Why don't we create more jobs in the environment field to help unemployment?

    ReplyDelete
  45. Steven Reichmuth, Bauer, period 2September 27, 2010 at 8:49 PM

    Finally this happens, instead of worrying about "climate change"(not called global warming anymore) the goverment is taking action to getting the state working again. These new environmental bills are costing companies money they could be using for jobs. While they're at it they need to get rid of the higher mpg requirements that continue to be placed on the auto industry...I don't want my mid-life crisis car to be a Toyota Prius.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I think we need to stay "green". No on prop 23, we have other places we can cut funding from. The earth is important enough to keep.
    sloan p2

    ReplyDelete
  47. I agree with prop 23 i think that jobs are a little bit more important than the climate right now.
    It is our responsibility to protect nature,but the jobs are needed more.Prop 23 should be done.

    tania hinojosa
    mr.sloan p5

    ReplyDelete
  48. I think the proposition shouldnt b passed. Its important to keep the air clean. There are different ways to fix the economy.
    Sloan P.3

    ReplyDelete
  49. It is best to focus on job opportunities until the state's unemployment rate reaches 5.5% (or lower) for a full year as of right now rather than to curb greenhouse gasses. I love the keeping the earth green and clean, but nature and climate is something that we cannot control. Job opportunities we can control. But, not keeping the earth clean and green may possibly lead to the sooner destruction of the earth. Looking at earth right now, it is despicable. With pollution, litter, and destruction of nature, we are not only killing earth, but ourselves because we need those natural resources that earth provides us. But without jobs, individuals are left homeless, starving, and suffering, as we see in today's economy. These votes should be made by the citizens because it is them who will be affected by the choice.

    Chrissy Vue
    Sloan
    Period 3

    ReplyDelete
  50. this prop. has many good points to it but it also has a few bad ones i do think that our main objective now is to find some jobs for the people that need them however we also need to take care of the enviornment as well now if the prop, said that we would put it on hold for a set amount of time then yes it would be good but who knows how long it would take for unemployment to get back down to 5.5%.

    ReplyDelete
  51. i believe that we need to focus on jobs more than our air. afterwards we get more jobs in motion we can put some more focus on the "clean air situation"

    Jesse Morales
    mr bauer
    per 3

    ReplyDelete
  52. Sarah Richter, Bauer, Period 5September 27, 2010 at 9:56 PM

    I'm not sure if im for or against proposition 23. There are good and bad in both choices. Our country does need more jobs to lower the unemployment rate, but we also need to prevent hurting our environment anymore. Many people have no jobs, and there havin a hard time living. Then again the environment can hurt our health in the end.

    ReplyDelete
  53. i agree with bradford and thin that we should cut fundings from other areas.
    i believe we need to help the enviorment if we are the ones destroying it

    ReplyDelete
  54. I think that we should focus more on the jobs than the climate because the we really have no control over it but the thing with jobs we can really make a difference in with and its the number one thing affecting society .

    Richard Manzo
    pr5. Mr. Sloan

    ReplyDelete
  55. The climate of our planet is an important issue that affects how we live and will become increasingly important in the future. However, ordering businesses to follow more regulations in the midst of an economic recession is like telling a starving person to grow more food. Aren't the greenhouse gas laws trying to help us live better lives? Isn't it a contradiction to keep people unemployed as businesses gasp for breath in order to help them later? "Hey, I know you don't have a job, but your grandchildren will breathe CLEAN AIR!" I support proposition 23.
    Caleb Boyd
    Mr. Sloan
    Per. 2

    ReplyDelete
  56. I am not in favor or against this poposition because they both have their bad and good qualities.People need jobs and helping to get the unemployment rate down should be one of the top priorities of the government. At the same time,the environment needs a lot of attention. Trying to bring the unemployment rate down to the desired goal can probably take more time than what it's expected to be and meanwhile the environment could slowly rot away..

    ReplyDelete
  57. We are barley doing anything to help the environment away, if we talk this away, the world will plummet even faster.

    -Victoria Turney
    Bauer 1st

    ReplyDelete
  58. well personally global warming is not the top of my list for things to worry about...yes things are changing, but i have more important things to deal with. Yes one day its going to effect us and we should presare for it, but our main problem are our lack of jobs, and money...not polar bears.
    rebecca miles
    bauer
    4th period

    ReplyDelete
  59. I think now is the time to worry more about jobs, it seems that in a time when it is so hard to get a job we should not making it any harder. But, thats not actually the case, its bad now, so why not open the wound before we fix it, so that when our economy is all healed up, our atmosphere will be too.

    Mr. Bauer
    Period 2
    9-28

    ReplyDelete
  60. breana spiro p4 sloan

    i believe prop 23 will only harm us yes jobs are important but there will be no jobs when the world is so deteriorated and gone we really need to concentrated on the world

    ReplyDelete
  61. Justin Tyler, Bauer, p.3September 28, 2010 at 3:38 PM

    I do agree that our climate is a big focus and we need to work on keeping the air clean but i belive jobs are more important. Jobs are important because without them people can not afford t live. It would take the unemployment rate a long time to reach 5.5% so i do not think that is a good plan.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Alexis Watson Bauer 3September 28, 2010 at 3:41 PM

    I personally think jobs and economic status is more important the clean air. We have lived in bad air for a long time and we can wait a little longer. With a better economy more money can go to environmental causes anyway, so let's get there first.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Cierra Gonsalves, Mr. Bauer, Period 2September 28, 2010 at 3:44 PM

    I believe that both protecting the earth and creating new jobs are equally important. The earth is our home and sooner or later it probably won't be as clean as it once was if we're irresponsible with our use of harmful chemicals, cars, and other emissions. However, the economy isn't doing too well and people need work to provide for themselves and their families.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I think that right now jobs are way more important than the enviroment. And i highly doubt that humans are the ones who are heating up the earth. Its just a cycle, eventually it will cool down again. Sloan per 1

    ReplyDelete
  65. Well, here's a question: Why doesn't the government just create more jobs by setting up more alternative energy sources? I mean, those wind turbines don't run themselves. And solar panels don't just magically appear on rooftops. Maybe they should just kill two birds with one stone and create jobs whilst helping the environment.

    Brian S.
    P. 4

    ReplyDelete
  66. Right now i think that it is important that americans get their jobs back to restore a good economy. I don't think that the world will begin to self destruct if we stop trying to eliminate greenhouse gases for a little while.

    ReplyDelete
  67. I am in favor for this Prop. With how the economy is, I would rather be working or trying to find a job to put a roof over the family. I think it's more important for people to still have a home and eat right now than worry about the climate.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Tyler Glenn, Per. 3 SloanSeptember 28, 2010 at 4:31 PM

    I am for Prop 23. People having jobs is more important than the climate. Im not saying that the climate is something we should disregard, but jobs are more important. With the unemployment rate as high as it is now jobs are necessary, we can worry about greenhouse gases later in time when more people have jobs and it is not an issue.

    ReplyDelete
  69. i am against this prop. everyone aove is talking about how with our economy jobs are more important. yes, many people are jobless, and that is making many homeless, but its better that the environment is still livable and safe. so the homeless can even survive.
    kimberlie hernandez
    sloan
    period 4

    ReplyDelete
  70. I believe that Prop 23 should not be passed because i personally believe that the environment is more important to keep the whole world alive and not just affect the people who are jobless. now i think that the gpvernment can put a little more focus on the unemployment rate, but not totally forget about the world we live on because its what keeps all of us alive. the environment and climate climate change is important for everyone.
    Blake Harrison
    Bauer
    Period 3

    ReplyDelete
  71. I am against proposition 23. I believe our planet is important and we should try to preserve our climate by reducing pollutants in the air. If the prop was to pass, people may keep their jobs, but wouldn't teh pollution hurt the entire state by hurting the air, water,and produce production.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Kayla O'Hara Sloan P.5September 28, 2010 at 5:02 PM

    i thnk that the government should worry about giving there citizens jobs instead of worring about the air. were breathing fine. we need jobs now. not perfect air.

    ReplyDelete
  73. I am for proposition 23. Personally, I don't think climate change is a big issue. Our country should be more focused on more practical things like recovering from the recession and get the economy booming once again.

    Kimberly Smith
    Bauer
    Period 1

    ReplyDelete
  74. Miriam Bejines P.5 Mr.SloanSeptember 28, 2010 at 5:03 PM

    I definetily opposed proposition 23 because our environment is more important than the economy because air pollution is a big problem in contaminating the whole earth and we need to fight against it.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Maria Perez
    Sloan
    Per:4
    I believe that the environment is much more important because if the air is polluted then we can even get sick from it. While jobs is important but not as important as keeping the world going. If the world is doing bad then everything while go wrong even jobs they can dissappear. That's why I am against proposition 23.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Luis Anguiano
    Mr. Bauer
    Period 2

    I think that prop 23 is important because we need to focus on jobs first so that we can feed our families but the environment is also important, why dont we just create job that will benefit the economy and the environment, like paying people to build solar panels or just plant trees.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Hannah Engebretsen/Bauer P2September 28, 2010 at 5:50 PM

    I agree with Devin's post. There are good reasons for/and against proposition 23. For example, if the proposition were to be a no, there would be a decrease in jobs and in the long run the unemployment rate would decrease. In yes for proposition 23, this would help our environment and do it in a faster and more productive way. This proposition would also help bring fresher and cleaner air. Proposition 23 also if voted yes, would have a more short term affect than a long term effect.

    ReplyDelete
  78. I believe that if nothing is done for the climate then it could be bad for everyone and people do need the jobs. We have lived in bad air for a long time and we can wait a little longer. With a better economy more money can go to environmental causes.
    Stephanie A
    Mr.Sloan
    Per.4

    ReplyDelete
  79. At the economic instability that California is experiencing at this moment, i believe that we should focus more on unemployment than "global warming". I choose to put global warming in quotations, because who are we to judge the sate our globe is going through? It is common for a planet to go through changes, and i believe that it is ignorant to wait until now to make a change. Why didnt we have this much emphasis on recylicing 50 years ago? We could've avoided gloabal warming altogether. Anyways, i would vote for this proposition to be passed, in order to keep the economic stability of California.

    Stephanie Romero
    Period 3
    Bauer

    ReplyDelete
  80. I think that the state should still focus on the greenhouse gases and whatnot. Even though the economy is garbage and alot of people are unemployed in our country, why should we stop doing our share to help fix the greenhouse gases just because some people dont have jobs? doesnt make sense to me. think about the bigger picture.
    -Matt nolen
    Sloan
    p.1

    ReplyDelete
  81. I think we need more jobs. People are loosing more jobs everyday. jobs are important now. Climate has changed. It wont be a big issue.

    Sania Bacha
    Bauer
    P. 3

    ReplyDelete
  82. Well as with any proposition this has two sharply contrasting sides. I suppose that the best option would be to curb greenhouse emissions still. Greenhouse gasses come from many different sources therefore many solutions exist. Each potential solution is a potential job opening in my opinion. You got to spend the money in research in order to open jobs.

    Ryan Cabrera
    Mr. Bauer
    Economics per. 2

    ReplyDelete
  83. We should not be focusing so much on the climate changes. Jobs right now are way more important and the air has already been polluted for a while so I'm pretty sure we can deal with it for a little longer and focus on jobs for people that need them.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Cristian Garcia/Bauer p. 3September 28, 2010 at 6:45 PM

    we need to do what we can for the environment because it is 100 degree weather and its fall. if the environment keeps going on the way it is then are lives will change dramatically. I am against this proposition because employment will get better the environment will keep changing unless there is something done

    ReplyDelete
  85. the inviorment is demonstrating some drastic changes in which we and mostly the future generations willl be afected. prop 23 will marke and end to any effort put into the hope of helping the enviorment. yes, achiving a higher work rate is also important but why cant both efforts be focused on and not give one a prefrense because in the end they both will afect the future generation thats why the people should get a chanse to choose what they want.
    Alondra Munoz
    Sloan P5

    ReplyDelete
  86. I see absolutely no connection between greenhouse gases and California's unemployment rate. We should be focused on getting the job market back to a stable position. However, I guess we should appease everyone who feigns concern in the environment and "do something" about the ozone layer. I would vote no on Prop 23.
    Sloan
    p.2

    ReplyDelete
  87. Enrique Angulo
    Bauer
    Economics
    28 September 2010

    This would have to be a tough decision because most of the population wants a job but in the other hand we also need to worry about our air and also our surroundings, but what is most important for now is jobs, because we have been dealing with this polution for years now so might as well deal with it and keep jobs.

    ReplyDelete
  88. I believe that employment should be at the top of the government's list so that we can find our way out of the recession. Once we have a stronger economy we can focus on the environment, when we have the money to spend on new programs and services to protect it. Bauer/Sloan

    ReplyDelete
  89. karina ramos mr sloan period 1
    in my opinion propostion 23 could be good on one hand and bad on the other. i believe that if we go for propostion 23 it vould help us in our unemplyment rates but it will hurt our environment and in the other way around jobs are always in need. this is probably one proposition that will bee negociated alot.

    ReplyDelete
  90. I am againts prop 23 beacause our environment is very important. This is the place we live so if we do not take care of it now in the future it will be worse. Unjemployment right now is big, but this proposition takes a very high risk. we would pollute our environment more than it already is. people should have a popular vote on this issue. If our environment is not taken care of in the future living conditions could get bad.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Isabel De la Rosa
    Bauer
    p.2
    i believe the prop 23 should not be passed because the climate changes can affect us greatly in the future and it needs to get better now before it can get worse i also understand that the job problem should be adressed but i think the climate change should be focused on first because these changes can make the lack of jobs worse since it can affect crops which generates jobs such as field work, jobs in stores and jobs in factories using product from crops.climate changes can hurt us more if we dont fix it.

    ReplyDelete
  92. I say yes on Prop 23- the last thing our economy needs is more regulations and taxes keeping businesses and individuals from being productive.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Let me elaborate on my "yes" vote saying that I am all for bettering the environment, but that is something we can do at the individual level by recycling, carpooling, etc, rather than having government regulations weighing us down.

    ReplyDelete
  94. I would vote for prop. 23 because i feel that the unemployment rate are ridiculously high. People are losing jobs left and right and we should be focusing on fixing that problem. The environment can come after the employment problems have been taken care of.

    Chelsea Ray
    Mr.Sloan, p.1

    ReplyDelete
  95. Janeiry Balderas, Mr. Sloan, Period 4September 28, 2010 at 7:41 PM

    Even though in my opinion the environment is quite important the way that things are jobs are much needed. Prop 23 sounds real good and you could make jobs that revolve around helping the environment but i do not believe that the government would try to do this(they wouldn't carry it out so good). So taking in consideration that i would have to sadly say that i would vote against prop 23. Every choice that one makes does affect the way that our society lives but unfortunately some things must be put on hold and all we can do is wait.

    ReplyDelete
  96. i am for proposition 23. i believe that unemployment is way more important than the climate. i'd rather give people jobs to people in need of one rather than focusing on weater changes. people are dumb if they dont see how big of a hole we're in and how bad people need jobs to support themselves and their families.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Jordin Herrera, Bauer per.2September 28, 2010 at 8:00 PM

    I think that we as people living on this planet should do are part in keeping it clean. Whether or not global warming is real or not one thing is certain, pollution is not a good thing and we will be paying for not addressing this issue now in the future when health issues like asthma and cancer start draining the medical system. The economy may be bad but we must make some sacrifices now so that future generations get to enjoy a clean environment.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Lourdes Godinez
    Mr.Bauer
    Econ Period 2
    I would be against Proposition 23. The unemployment rate may take a while to get down to 5.5% and meanwhile we wait for it to decrease, our air can be getting worse. Especially if there are no actions going towards helping it get better. I think we really have no time to waste on improving the air pollution. Its too much of a risk to wait to help our environment.

    ReplyDelete
  99. I'm against prop 23. Our evironment is more important than unemployment, and should be considered with great caution. The climate change will affect all the citizens living here and therefor, people should be allowed to vote on it.

    Guadalupe Velasquez
    Sloan, Period 1

    ReplyDelete
  100. Man induced global warming is fundamentally a theory. It's like saying M-theory is the justification for our existence. Scientists simply don't know the cause of warming. Now to perceive climate change as a legitimate reason to decrease the presence of jobs in California is absurd. The statewide unemployment rate is 12.4% and our solution to supplying more jobs to Californians is to stop global warming?

    Our government should do everything in its power to preserve the natural environment of this state. Meanwhile, California needs to bring back industry and stimulate the economy. Why is this such an impossibility?

    Prominent skeptics of man induced global warming that the media doesn't want you to know about:
    -Richard S. Lindzen(Atmospheric Physicist, MIT)
    -Sallie Baliunas(Astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics)
    -Roy Spencer(Climatologist, NASA)
    -William Happer(Physicist, Princeton University)
    -Nicola Scafetta(Physicist, Duke University)
    (Sloan P.3/Bauer P.4)

    ReplyDelete
  101. I would vote against prop 23 because our state needs to keep working for cleaner air and less pollution; because it would take a while to get down to 5.5% unemployment rate.

    -Ivan Cardenas
    Mr. Sloan Per. 3

    ReplyDelete
  102. What garuntee do we have that this proposition would even work to help restore a struggling economy and reduce joblessness in our state? With potential servere consequences at hand, we need more than speculation to provide evidence for such an accusation. The choice between saving jobs and saving the environment is not easy for everyone. But what good is saving jobs if there's no enviorment to work in. So I am against prop 23.

    Sloan P/2

    ReplyDelete
  103. I would Vote yes on prop 23, because people getting jobs and getting California out of debt is more important then cleaning the environment. Getting unemployment under 5.5% shouldn't take too long if all out effort is in to getting people jobs.

    ReplyDelete
  104. Right now California is in a panic. Unemployment is high and this proposition would make the umemployment issue a higher priority. This is good but the problem is that in order to do this the issue of climate will be ignored. I don't see the point to this. The way things are going we might be decreasing the life span of the planet as we know it. I am constantly hearing things about how the ice is melting, salt water levels are increasing, the temperature of the earth is getting to hot, etc. If we are not part of the solution then we are part of the problem. We should be capapble of helping both the unemployment and the climate.

    ReplyDelete
  105. The unemployment rate and effective climate change are both important to our lives but which is most needed to be fixed? Unemployment effects families greatly and it would be a relief to see our moms, dads, uncles, aunts, etc. stress free and working again but what is it going to take to drop that 12.5% rate of unemployment. This has been an ongoing issue for years and yet it is still getting worse. Our health is the key to life and how can we be healthy if the air is filled with pollution? I think health matters most. I mean how could we even work if we don't have the strength?

    ReplyDelete
  106. richard may mr. sloan per 4September 28, 2010 at 8:44 PM

    i believe that the costs of stoping green house gasses will hurt the economy and lead us deeper into the recession. People need a higher level of education to do the work needed to live in a highly green society. Not many people can afford to go back to school because they can't make enough money to support their lifes and go to school. The trade off is putting ourselves into a deeper hole with green house gasses which will have a great affect on not just california but the whole world. So the question is should we worry about jobs and the economy or our future and the earth.

    ReplyDelete
  107. Danielle Smith, Sloan P1September 28, 2010 at 8:45 PM

    I'd have to say I am a proponent for this particular issue. I think global warming is a scam in itself, but I don't think it is a more important issue than the unemployment rate anyway. It is air versus society's poverty level; I think unemployment is much more important. Sure, we might have to hear more about global warming if we don't take care of it now, but people won't be hardly scraping by to support themselves without a job anymore if we make that a main focus for the time being. I think right now, government should take the vote for this issue because it is so widespread and controversial. It could cause some serious problems if it was left up to the people. The government knows people need jobs; and they should make that happen.

    ReplyDelete
  108. I believe the whole climate change thing is a way for people to make money. The earth goes through heating and cooling cycles which is totally normal. So in the end im for the proposition to win.

    ReplyDelete
  109. I do not support this bill. Further neglect to the environment will not be easily healed. We can't just put it off until tomorrow as we make it worse every day. It is important that unemployment rates go down, but high unemployment rates today won't effect us as severely in one hundred years as neglect of the environment will.

    Sasha Schotzko-Harris
    Bauer P.1

    ReplyDelete
  110. I would vote against Proposition 23 because I know that it is a way that buisnesses are trying to break the law. It is basically impossible to get an unemployment rate that is below 5.5%. That will take at least a decade to accoplish, and meanwhile we will be destroying the environment. We cannot afford to have this happen. We have already overlooked the environment long enough. For anyone who doesn't believe in global warming, step outside or turn on the news. There are strange weather patterns everwhere. Global Warming does not necessarily mean that it is only getting hotter. It means that our weather will be strange like it has been this year. This year we have been slightly cooler than usual, and then way hotter than usual, and this was all caused by a warm area in the ocean off the coast of California, that is usually cool. So now is not the time to do any thing bad to the environment, or else we will all be permenantly unemployed, because the Earth will be inhabitable.
    Bauer per. 1
    Sloan per. 3

    ReplyDelete
  111. Josh McNearney P.3 BauerSeptember 28, 2010 at 8:59 PM

    i have to agree with amber on this one. trying to get the unemployment down from 10% is going to take many years and putting a freeze on environmental safety is just ridiculous. and i also agree with sasha who basically said what i was gonna say if we put off environmental safety we will have to deal with the consequence sooner or later and if its later the consequences are going to be more severe.

    ReplyDelete
  112. I agree on this proposition because if we have high unemployment rates then why does pollution matter to us so much? I think first jobs should be raised for people so more people can survive and live a better life. Pollution is a big problem in todays society but if people dont hvae jobs where will they will?

    Jaskiran Kaur
    Mr. Bauer
    Period 2

    ReplyDelete
  113. I think putting people back to work is more important than getting rid of greenhouse gases. People are suffering because of lack of jobs. They are losing homes, cars, and many other possessions. Getting rid of greenhouse gases is very important but it is more of a longterm project. Finding jobs for people is more of a shortterm project.

    Jana Hackett
    Mr. Bauer
    Period 5

    ReplyDelete
  114. I think that before we take care of the environment, we should take care of the unemployment problems. People are struggling now ,so something about the unemployment needs to be done now. This decision should be made by the popular vote because it will directly affect the people of California.

    Omar Hoyos
    Bauer

    ReplyDelete
  115. Prop. 23 addresses a key problem in our state today which is unemployment. I believe we should do something with a majority vote to help the state's economy my passing this prop. because unemployment is a major issue that has to be dealt with as soon as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  116. i agree with prop 23, california is in dier need for jobs. our economy is terrible and our unemployment rate is extremely high, so we need to take steps towards bettering the lives of our citizens. the environment is important too, but it can wait. the earth isnt going to die anytime soon, so we need to worry about jobs before we worry about the environment.

    ReplyDelete
  117. This is a difficult decision, but I would say that neither should be neglected, as both helping the unemployment problem and the environment are necessary. Prop 23 should not be passed because it will take a long time to get the unemployment rate to 5.5%. This would hurt our environemt much more.

    ReplyDelete
  118. i think as long as the unemployment rate is adressed along with eco-friendly props, we should be good to go.
    veronica iniguez SLOAN p1

    ReplyDelete
  119. Alejandro Ibarra (Mr. Sloan, P.1)September 28, 2010 at 9:50 PM

    I agree with prop 23 becasue helping unempolyed people should be first since a government is meant to help its people overall. This is a good way of dealing with both things since it isnt proposing to stop research but postpone it untill unemployment rates drop.overall i believe that not much can be done about the climate problems, but we still shouldnt ignore it.

    ReplyDelete
  120. stephen goerzen
    jobs for the people in california are inportant, but so is the ecosystem. if we dont defend and aid nature from what we have done to it, then we could destroy it and ouselvs. i would rather be living than worry about the pepole who cant get jobs. in time they will find jobs, but if we ignore the enviornment, then soon we will have no reason to have jobs here because the planet will no longer be able to sustain life for a long period of time and we will either become instinct or have to leave to another planet if one can sustain life and the hiuman race

    ReplyDelete
  121. I believe that people should worry about jobs and business today and environment tomorrow. Bottom line business is way more important to the world today than something like climate changes.I also believe that taking action towards climate change is just a scientific scam to keep business from making a profit.

    ReplyDelete
  122. I think we need to focus on the unemployment in California. I also think we should not ignore protecting our environment. I am for the proposition because I think that right now the most important problem is the unemployment.
    Erica Ayala
    Mr. Bauer
    Per. 4

    ReplyDelete
  123. Propositon 23 sounds great. The unemployment rate needs to decrease. People need jobs to be able to support their families. And i think that is more important right now that a clean environment, although a clean environment is also very important.

    Melissa Quezada
    Mr. Bauer
    P.2

    ReplyDelete
  124. amanda eckroth
    per.1
    sloan
    i think of us caring about our enviroment is good. I think it should be up to us tho to vote on it.. the govenrment knows more then what us humans do..

    ReplyDelete
  125. Well I think we can agree that it's a slightly easier task to create a few jobs than it is to create a few new Earths. Do I believe we need to address the issues concerning the astronomical rate which we are devouring resources and pollution? Most certainly I do, however, I must say that global warming is simply a theory and one that I highly must disagree with. So yeah maybe we should create more jobs concerning environmental cleaning or pollution control.
    Marklin Nixon
    Mr. Sloan
    Gov Period 1

    ReplyDelete
  126. I would vote yes in a heartbeat. Jobs are way more important than this fake global warming scam. It is just being used to put money into the pockets of people like Al Gore and people have bit into it hook line and sinker.

    ReplyDelete
  127. I do not agree with proposition 23. If action towards cleaner air is not taken as soon as possible it never will be. A problem such as air pollution must be solved little by little not all at once. Pollution leads to climate change and perhaps even worse situations. What is the point of having a job if our environment is to dangerous to work in. Jobs will be created.
    Gabriella Cello
    p.3
    Sloan

    ReplyDelete
  128. I think that we should focus more on the environment more because i think that we do have a chance on making it better all we need to do is work together because the environment is our home and our kids upcoming home and the job problems can wait.

    ricardo villalpando
    mr sloan pr5

    ReplyDelete
  129. i think that unemployment should be the main priority at this time. The environment needs to be set on the backburner to jobs in order for this country to get back on track. So to vote on this prop, i believe that people would be smart to vote yes.

    ReplyDelete
  130. Sergio Maldonado, Sloan p.3/Bauer p.4September 28, 2010 at 10:18 PM

    People need jobs to survive now, while global warming might affect us more in the future. The environment is important, but people should be the ones that try to help the environment by recycling and being "green", not the government by applying regulations on companies. When many people get used to being "green", actually know why this helps the environment, and have enough money to buy the new "eco-friendly" houses and products, thats when the government should be setting standards or regulations.

    ReplyDelete
  131. I believe working on jobs for our people should come first. The way our economy is right now we need to focus on the most important points, like creating jobs. When it comes to the global warming issue I believe it is not real. Yes, there are things we do at this time and age that may cause harm but i dont believe it is an issue that needs to be looked at that hard. I dont believe in global warming and it is just a way for media to create problems and gain goalabal peoples attention.
    Spencer Pellandni
    sloan
    p.1

    ReplyDelete
  132. I believe that people should worry about jobs and business now and the environment later. Business is more important to the world today than the climate changes. We need to focus on getting people jobs because that is our bigger problem now.
    Ricardo Rivera
    Bauer P.5

    ReplyDelete
  133. A yes vote on Proposition 23 would temporarily suspend this costly California's Global Warming Solutions Act until California's unemployment rate drops to 5.5 percent or less for 4 consecutive quarters. It is estimated the Solutions Act will increase energy costs by billions of dollars, which will ensure additional loss of jobs, higher utility and electricity costs for all, and according to Sierra Research up to $3.7 billion in higher gasoline and diesel prices. Now is not a good time to enforce these regulations that will take away even more jobs.
    kayla smith
    sloan per 2

    ReplyDelete
  134. Mallory lemIeux Mr sloan pd.4September 28, 2010 at 10:35 PM

    I BELIEVE that the high unemployment rate in this country should be our first priority over anything else. yes although global warming dosent effect us now, it will later and we can deal with that issue when it becomes serious.

    ReplyDelete
  135. i think that the enviroment is really important and we should do what we can so help our planet. it can also help our health by getting rid of all the pollution in the air. in the other hand our economy is down we also need to help it get better.
    erika oropeza
    mr.sloan
    p.4

    ReplyDelete
  136. I agree our air quality sucks I can't go out for a run around here without wheezing, but then again clean air isn't going to put bread on the table is it? Air quality and the environment should be put away for now until we improve our economy and get more jobs.

    ReplyDelete
  137. Margarita Flores per.5 Mr.BauerSeptember 28, 2010 at 11:10 PM

    Ultimately, this proposition is a referendum on climate change. We need to take action to address climate change or is it a scientific scam to keep business from making a profit. The opportunity costs and trade-offs of doing nothing about climate change are environment needs to be set on the back burner to jobs in order for this country to get back on track. These decisions be made by popular vote of citizens.

    ReplyDelete
  138. lets not fuss about this so called "global warming" we should focus on things such as the economy , now thats a great topic

    Jordan Elzie per 2 sloan

    ReplyDelete
  139. Ashley Parker, Bauer P2September 28, 2010 at 11:54 PM

    I think that this should be passed because of global warming. I don't think this is a scam mostly because they are trying to help our planet to become a better healthy environment to live on. I understand we are in the recession, but the earth has needed help with gobal warming for awhile now, and i think its tim now to start giving back to the earth. If we don't do anything about this than what could happen would be the obvious, worse pollution, and more kids getting asthma, etc. By helping the earth to be a better place helps everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  140. i really dont know where to stand on this particular subject. it is true that our neglect on the earth has lead to climate issues and it is true that our economy is in dire need of help but whatever decision they make i will be fine with.

    ReplyDelete
  141. I believe that we should put the greenhouse effect on pause and help people who are unemployed get a job. Our economy is horrible and welfare is super high. We need to help our people first right now and then look into the future.

    ReplyDelete
  142. i disagree. we don't need to take action to dress climate change because i believe that the Earth is on its normal cycle and that humans have not been around along enough to see it so we are freaking out.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Ryan thinks that the ballot means well but its not such a smart ballot. If the government wanted to please both they could MAKE jobs that work to clean the greenouse gasses.They can make jobs to find new ways to make greener items or also make it so that there can be both. Just because the government wants to be lazy and do one or the other there is a way they can do both.

    ReplyDelete
  144. Shane Santos, Period 5, BauerSeptember 29, 2010 at 7:10 AM

    I feel that our job situation is more important than a so called climate change. Our economic crisis is real and standing in front of our faces but this global warming issue seems to float around cause no one really knows the truth. We should take care of the matter that we can control and make sure our job rate goes up. Even if this climate change stuff is going on i dont think its true. Im pretty sure it didnt stop raining this year until may ;)

    ReplyDelete
  145. I think we should focus on the unemployment rate first. Earth can still survive until 2012 so we still have time to fix the unemployment rate and save the world.

    ReplyDelete
  146. I would say no on this prop for the recession and enemployment are much more important than pollution and climate change. why cant more jobs be created that deal with reducing polution? A win win situation.

    ReplyDelete
  147. If the weather change gets to be so horrible, maybe then someone will decided to make more jobs for those people who know they can find a solution to this problem. But the thing is how bad does it have to get for the people making the propisitions pass for our vote see that we shouldnt have to wait to fix a problem we all created. No on the prop. -Jojo M. Mr. Sloan P.5

    ReplyDelete
  148. I believe that we should vote against prop 23 because we need to keep trying to find new ways to reduce our impact on the earth. Another reason is that if we do stop developing new ways to stop pollution, there will be more people unemployed because everyone who works in that department will lose their jobs. This is not a good solution for trying to solve unemployment rates and we should look to find a better one.

    Zach Mietz

    ReplyDelete
  149. Even though I'm all for trying to help out the people and get our economy going again, I believe we should vote no on this proposition as there has got to be some other way to get this money. If we were to vote yes, our short term problem of unemployment would be solved but our long term problem of depleting our o-zone layer, etc. would suffer greatly. This suffering would most likely be a greater opportunity cost than if the people were to suffer still in their unemployment crisis.

    --Sloan
    AP Econ, Period 3

    ReplyDelete
  150. I think that this proposition is a good thing. i believe that climate change and "global warming" type issues are the last thing our country needs to focus on. we need to focus on the people of our country and help them get jobs before we focus on abstract concepts that are a natural occurence in the earth's atmosphere.
    hayley swearingen
    sloan per 4

    ReplyDelete
  151. bauer 4th
    I Belive that we should vote no on prop 23 becuse we need to fix this cituation now and stop putting it off.All this prop does is cut more jobs and pospone cleaning the enviorment intill a further date. we need to take respncibility and fix this issue imidently.

    jacob farrar

    ReplyDelete
  152. I Believe that we should vote against prop 23 because our state needs to keep working for cleaner air and less pollution yes many people are jobless, but its better that the environment is still livable and safe.

    ReplyDelete
  153. I think that we should not take away the money from that movement. There are CLEAR signs of global warming that maybe not necessarily lead to "the end of the world" but it could have some major effects on the world. I believe we should be worried and do something about it. Sure unemployment is also important, but why not raise taxes instead? I know everyone hates taxes but there are no other ways. Let's face it, we're in debt. Our deficit is like a trillion dollars! Best way to lower it is to raise taxes. We always use the fiscal policy for borrowing, not taxing, which we need to do. You shouldn't complain about taxes, they're going to happen. It's apart of our government. We made a big mistake of borrowing money for the war and other things so we need to deal with the punishment of paying it off. Maybe this recession and high unemployment rate will be a lesson for future presidents, senators, and congressmen to NOT BORROW SO MUCH MONEY.

    P.S. Sorry this post was late...I thought yesterday was Monday hahaha, My bad. :)

    ReplyDelete
  154. I think that the unemployment rate is more of a problem than the climate. The climate problems is important but jobs for Americans is more important. I agree with the bill to focus on jobs right now.

    Sloan p.2

    ReplyDelete
  155. I would definitely oppose prop 23. Even though jobs are very important now in this staggering economy, greenhouse gasses are becoming more and more hazardous. Besides, there are many ways greenhouse emissions could help create new jobs.
    Conner Woods Bauer

    ReplyDelete
  156. Nathalie Trevino; A. Bauer period1September 29, 2010 at 8:51 PM

    We need to look at the big picture, global warming is a serious threat to our planet. Without earth, there is no human existence, duh. What good are jobs going to be if we're all dead? And why isn't it possible to create jobs for fighting global warming?

    ReplyDelete
  157. I would oppose prop 23 because too many people have already lost their jobs due to the economy. The climate will effect the long run, but what about right now? What about our economy right now? Thats what people need to keep in mind is how will we survive to deal with global warming.

    ReplyDelete
  158. I would be against prop 23 mainly because it would simply take too much focus out of the environment. It would make sense to maybe take a little of that budget to help improve unemployment but not this way. The environment is messed up as it is and the last thing it needs is states pulling such props as this and destroying it as quickly as possible. We should do something to help unemployment, but prop 23 is not the answer.

    Michael Robles
    Bauer, period 3

    ReplyDelete
  159. Christina Luna
    A.Bauer
    p.1

    I strongly believe that our government should take the unemployment rate more into mind. Even though the environment and pollution and all is extremely vital unemployment is a major issue in society and we should take care of unemployment first and provide more jobs.

    ReplyDelete
  160. i feel that unemployment is more important and should be more seriouse than global worming.
    amanda hommond
    mr.slaon per 1

    ReplyDelete
  161. Unemployment fluctuates and always will its natural for it to fall and rise through time and to ignore a serious problem like global warming just to correct something that could have been avoided is plain nonsense. I believe really theres nothing we can do we take a step in one direction and somehow we always end up stepping back.
    Francisco Gonzalez
    Mr. Bauer P 2

    ReplyDelete
  162. I think that we are in dire need of protecting our climate. Polar bears are drowning, its becoming much too hot in the arctic areas as well as over the continents. Climates are drastically changing and it's because of our toxic fumes.
    Samantha White
    Sloan per. 5

    ReplyDelete
  163. Lucero Cardiel. Mr. Bauer 3rd periodOctober 6, 2010 at 8:54 PM

    The environment is very important but feeding our families exceeds that importance. As Americans, we can find little ways to help the environment. For example, in Germany, you go to the grocery store and they don't hand you plastic bags. This would cut down huge amounts of plastic and wastes. I think we the people can make the change and don't have to depend on the government.

    ReplyDelete
  164. Global warming is a myth just like big foot so we need to stop worrying about fake things and get our head straight
    jordan elzie per 2 sloan

    ReplyDelete
  165. I think that climate change is just a scam to get money. I don't think that the change in climate is preventable so we should just let it happen and not waste money on vain efforts to stop it. Instead we should use that money to give people jobs, which are more important. Jobs allow people to survive in this world for as long as their life goes. The decision should be made by the majority of the people,because this country does belong to the people and we should be able to choose which is more beneficial to us.

    Melody Morphis
    Mr. Sloan
    per. 1

    ReplyDelete
  166. Pollution is a major problem in the world and so is unemployment, but which is more important? I would not vote yes for this proposition. Lawmakers should come up with a plan to combine cleaning the enviorment and providing jobs.

    ReplyDelete
  167. i would vote no on preposition 23 because we need to start making a change and stop polluting as much as possible.

    ReplyDelete
  168. id vote yes. i think it should make jobs for cleaning n unpolluting this world. to make it a better place from gasses

    ReplyDelete
  169. Vicente Chavez
    Sloan per 5th
    Global warming and the air pollution is a big problem in the world because not only are we killing our planet but we are also killing everything that lives in it including ourselves. All this is a big problem because pollution ccause global warming and bad air wich is bad for our health. I think that there should be restrictions for gases and factiries to use because this is damaging eeryones lives and we should try our best to keep our planet healthy and not destroy it

    ReplyDelete
  170. While i believe that both of these issues are major...unemployment rates are reall bad right now..thats a little more important than the environemt so thats the first thing we should focus on...

    Danielle Barros
    Sloan p.4

    ReplyDelete
  171. I think that citizens should vote to pass this. To me there is really no reason for this prop because greenhouse gases will always be in the air and nobody is going to put an end to it.Things may have a possibility of changing though

    ReplyDelete
  172. enrique salazar sloanper5December 15, 2010 at 3:41 PM

    i believe that this bill should not pass because there is no really good reason for this prop. there will always be greenhouse gases in the air

    ReplyDelete

All comments will be reviewed before they are published. Make sure to leave your name to receive credit.