Obama's enviromental plan: paying for contaminate?

It is great to hear that finally the U.S. government cares about global warming. It is important to say that the U.S. “is the largest single emitter of carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels, a leading cause in global warming.” (Information taken from the website: http://www.workers.org/2007/world/global-warming-0118/). In other words, this country is one of the biggest responsible for global climate change. The most worrisome issue related to Global Warming is the fast rate of climate change that is not allowing species to adapt at the same pace. The U.S. is also suffering the consequences of climate change such as increasing the frequency and intensity of natural disasters like tornadoes, hurricanes, flooding and droughts among other disasters. Although the death toll and economic loss due to natural disasters is increasing, the U.S. government had not taken actions before. However, president Obama wants to effort to address global warming. Obama’s energy plan consists of reducing oil imports, creating green economy and limiting greenhouse emissions. Despite these goals seem to be necessaries for the economy and environment, it is questionable how Obama plans to accomplish them.

According to an article called Energy, published by the New York Times on February 26, President Obama says that reducing the greenhouse emission will produce 150 billion to support renewable energy project and to pay middle-class tax credit. Well, have you asked yourself how to obtain that money? The answer is selling to industries the right to emit greenhouse gases. In other words, I can understand that if people have money to pay, then they can contaminate the atmosphere. Is that morally right? Should we pollute our planet because we have money to pay for it? I think, there are better ways to make income and reducing the greenhouse gas emissions such as supporting alternative energy, improving public transportation, reducing the consume of fossil fuel energy, increasing taxes to big cars and educating people. However, I do agree that paying taxes to pollute or carbon trade is a good starting because it can lead to techniques such as carbon sequestration, that today many industries are applying in other countries like Norway. In conclusion, the motivation for taxing greenhouse emissions should not be seen as a source of money, instead it should be seen as mitigation for the global warming.

What should be the right position of the US about Israel crisis?

The article "Incursion Into Gaza," posted in the editorial of The New York Times on Jan 5, 2009, raises the attention about the challenges that the new US president will face with respect to the conflict in the Middle East. Israel fiercely attacked the militants of Hamas causing hundreds or even thousands of casualties and uncountable material damage on Gaza Strip; all publicly in front of the permissive attitude of the US. Why should Americans be concerned about this conflict? Well, according to “Text of U.S.-Israel agreement to end Gaza arms smuggling,” the U.S. will cooperate with the security, military and intelligence of Israel to control the terrorist in Gaza. Israel is the best allied of the US in the Middle East.
The United States have supported military Israel since it was established as state in 1948. Millions of Americans tax-dollars have been spent on the rockets that these days have destroyed houses, refuges, schools and innocents in Gaza. Obama's administration should aim for the regional peace and impose conditions to avoid that the aid will not be used to kill defenseless children and families. My position does not support Hamas terrorist attacks and does not neglect the fact that Hamas was the first who broke the cease fire agreement, but it criticizes that the U.S. backs up the disproportionate and violent response of Israel. Furthermore, in order to help solving this conflict they should dig into its roots. Perhaps, one of the causes is the strong religious type government of Israel. The state of Israel should treat equally its habitants regardless of their religious views or race. On this line of thoughts, I feel very fortunate to live in a country that respects all religious and political views. To summarize, I think Obama's administration should carefully watch the use of the US aid to Israel and advocate for the regional peace instead of fueling more this painful conflict.