Opinion: April 26 buzz: Economy and environment in peril -- scare tactics or truth?

If the deficit doesn’t matter, why have any taxes at all? And if there is some point at which the deficit does start to matter, and become dangerous, when is that point if $1.6 trillion isn’t it?

You can’t argue with paranoia. The idea that there is some vast conspiracy among scientists and governments to perpetuate some sort of fraud about climate change is delusional on its face, but you can’t convince paranoids that their delusions are false. In fact, they typically interpret arguments against their delusions as further evidence of the ‘conspiracy.’ It can be kind of fun to read their articles and comments, though, in a sick sort of way. --Navydad Subtly perpetuating the myth that climate change might be a hoax is no help to anyone and it betrays any credibility when speaking about the issue. It doesn’t really matter what the general public ‘believes’. We’re not served to make policy based on what some uneducated Republicans believe. Columns like this do nothing to advance us as a country, and they hurt people’s ability to understand the issues. If Goldberg doesn’t know this, he’s either in denial or flat out stupid. If he does know it, and I think he does, he’s a cynic and he’s being purposefully destructive for the advancement of his own agenda...and that is pathetic. Then again, what else would we expect from that side? -- iamthearbiter I’m so tired of dismissive leftists stating that the science behind manmade global warming is irrefutable, settled, a consensus or undeniable. We can measure that temperature has risen but we can also show that historically our planet has cooled and warmed multiple times. What makes this time different and are you sure that man is the reason? That has not been explained to my satisfaction. I tend to believe that the giant atomic ball of fiery plasma that makes all life on our planet possible is to blame. And for those that ask what the harm is in acting as if it is our fault and encourage legislation that will change the energy on which our country runs and where we get it, the harm is to the economy. To the poor who are disproportionately affected by a rise in energy and food prices. To the jobs lost by shutting down drilling and not allowing even planned and previously funded development. To the freedoms of the American public which suffer every time our government takes away the legality or viability of a personal choice. To common sense, which begs the question; if oil is ‘the energy of the past’ why do all of the machines of today run on it? Please proceed with dismissing everything that I have stated with talking-points and name calling. --BigRez ‘Climate Change’ is a 21st century flavor of communism.A ruse to expand the state, erode national sovereignty and individual liberties by way of taxation and regulation. The market doesn’t buy it nor do most people, except those devoted to radical environmentalism or on the public dole like our scientific community which exists largely on taxpayer handouts. If climate change were indeed a man-made phenomena the investment community would be investing billions of dollars to be the first to found the environmental equivalent of Microsoft or Google. Instead, the only entity which funds ‘climate science’ is government since private enterprise refuses to invest in something that doesn’t exist. Unfortunately, while the political left fanaticizes about a grand global utopia of tiny electric vehicles, mass transit and contraception for all (because we don’t need any more people, unless they’re white, educated, liberals), many real issues are largely ignored. However, so long as people can drive or walk to Fresh Fields in Santa Monica with their dog, or maybe, gasp, a child, then who cares about the rest of humanity. So long as we bow down to the cult of global warming and drive our Prius, let’s not worry about solvable issues when the fantasy of global warming is much easier to handle. --yeedma