Reich says an economy can't recover if people only buy replacements. He's right.

Others here point out environmental costs of ever-increasing consumerism. You're right.

But, let's leave the context of the current structures of the economy.

Let's say your old fridge dies, and you buy a more energy-efficient fridge to replace it. That's a replacement of function to you, but in economic terms in may actually represent a higher-money transaction if that fridge costs more. But, environmentally, it may represent a decrease in your personal and the world's environmental "budget."

Now imagine the government gives you a quantified annual budget of environmental credits, and slaps an environmental cost on fridges denominated in those credits, based on their efficiency. By buying the smaller, energy efficient fridge you save some of your credits, and you sell your credits to Bob Reich or Bill Clinton or Paul Krugmanor or others who are rich and want huge, energy inefficient refrigerators.

Overall, the environment benefits because total credits are capped. You also get extra dollars, while irresponsible actors have to pay for their waste. But the trade for credits is yet another economic transaction, meaning the size of the economy again fractionally increases.

That's something what a new economy would look like. Old school environmentalists and economists are wrong that the economy can't grow within natural resource limits. The economy is not a "natural" being, it is a cultural artifact. Whether an economy can exist within limits all depends on how we structure the system. Almost all boomer economists belong to the school of environmental/economic nihilism and are arguing for a linear economy of resource depletion. There are other ways.

But why should they care? They'll be gone when the worst of the environmental problems are upon us.

Mr. Lind, this whole mess of an article needs a rewrite.

Yes, the cap and trade agreement needs to fail, for whatever reason. I suspect foes of the environment (including Obama) want it to fail.

The worse prospect is that the bill will pass and we'll be saddled with a cap and trade system that 1. enriches polluters and 2. fails to curb carbon. This ain't sausage, it's spam. It will discredit cap and trade.

I think people may need to form their own private cooperatives, corporations or non-profits to effect cap and trade principles.

It's obvious the Democrats and Obama understand the economic power of cap and trade, but they are cynically using this tool to increase their corporate and elite donations. I also expect Obama's post-Presidency payoffs will dwarf Bill Clinton's haul for this cynical sellout.

And we, and our children, will pay the true cost.

The Obamacrats combined policy package of stimulus, bailouts, and and cap and trade offers handouts to the wealthy and lectures to the poor. Like the Republicans during Katrina, the Obamacrats rescue efforts are concentrated on the wealthy and politically connected while the poor and usual scapegoats are blamed for problems caused by the elites themselves.

Obama was just in Michigan (Michigan!) telling the unemployed that they should go into debt by going back to school. Not exactly what he told the Wall Street bankers when they failed. He said: have some taxpayer cash.

Obama's pay-to-play Presidency doesn't have much time for anyone without cash, but it's obvious the inequitable distrubtion of the stimulus is particularly a burden on those groups already saddled with the lack of power that is a product of racism. Obama is completing Clinton's creation of a permanent jobless class that will always be underbid in the global economy.

An equitable dollar payout to every citizen would be the best shelter from the storm. Equitable annual distrubtion of cap and trade credits to citizens the best ongoing cushion from the economic and environmental storms to come.

Has anyone else noticed that Obama is lecturing us a lot on patience lately?

Now, when it came to rescuing the rich people on Wall Street, everything was rush-rush and spend-spend.

When it came to GETTING the stimulus money, it was rush-rush, but where's the spend-spend? It's not just the racial and class discrimination in the spending, Obama (Krugman, Biden, the whole gang) keep running around claiming the money can not be spent any faster. Wha?

Obama should just list every American in the "to" field on the IRS paypal account and hit "send" on his damn Blackberry.

It's time that the "lagging indicators" in America got the same sort of service Obama delivered to AIG.

I won't believe the wingnuts are authentic born again Christians until they produce rebirth certificates signed by Jesus H. Christ himself.

How hard can it be for an almighty God to whip up a little documentation for the Select?

Obama should have seen this fallout coming. Clinton would never be satisfied with his fake penitence for the enormous damage he did to the American economy and environment (and the enormous payoffs he received for his treason).

He's playing the same role as Dick Cheney is playing for the Republicans. A sort of black hole of corruption that sucks in all the light.

Obama should be worried.

How can a the profoundly corrupt Clinton, who "earned" $650,000 from Goldman Sachs for four speeches lasting a few hours at best, possess the shameless gall to preach that hardworking Americans should ask for only "half a loaf?"

Why does a guy who accepted well over a hundred million in such payoffs from international business for WTO, NAFTA, gutting the social safety net, gutting oversight of Wall Street, etc etc have the shameless audacity to tell Democrats anything at all?

Why do the Democrats keep rewarding this corrupt egotist with the lectern? Do the Democrats stand for ANYTHING anymore?

No wonder Obama is too chickenshit to take on Cheney.

He can't even face the evil in his own house.