Leave it to the Journal Times to capture the essence of the leftist/statist/socialist position on global warming. Read it for yourself if you like at: http://www.journaltimes.com/articles/2007/12/18/opinion/doc47673a8247192770324340.txt
The editorial is entitled Stop talking, start spending. The JT argues that "the whole country has missed some economic opportunity" as "US companies could right now be selling carbon dioxide-control equipment or advanced solar cells to the developing world instead of fighter jets-and could be making a lot more money." "Even if (global warming) skeptics are proven true," the nation will gain "new industries to employ the manufacturing workers whose livelihoods have fled overseas; and an economy that is overall more efficient and has more capital to invest because it's spending less to but energy."
A few thoughts. Is there something preventing US companies from "right now" selling environmental products overseas? Unless the product sales are discouraged by import tariffs or the lack of free trade generally, then no, nothing is preventing our "whole country" from this glorious "economic opportunity." More likely, the products in question are themselves economically inefficient, thus requiring a massive taxpayer subsidy to create this new "industry." The money required to "start spending" will be yours and it will be used to prop up an industry that would not exist without it. And the JT then argues that subsidizing an inefficient industry will somehow result in more capital and a more efficient economy. How so, I wonder? Capital, your capital, will be transferred from capital investments not requiring government subsidy to an industry that can't make it without government subsidy. This is called waste, not efficiency, and it will harm our economy. Someone, anyone at the JT should read an introductory economics textbook.