@parados,
Well, if you will be here when the Global Conference on climate takes place, your abysmal ignorance and lack of knowledge about Economics and Politics will be revealed.
You are so idiotic that you do not understand that decisions that will be made at that conference will be decisions which will be based on the economy of the countries at the conference and the politics of the individual nations.
Try finding some errors in this, Paradox---
quote:
MAY 12, 2009 Carbon Reality, Again
Australia's prime minister discovers how much an emissions trading policy will cost.Article
It's turning out that the biggest problem with carbon taxes is political reality. Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has just announced he will delay implementing his trademark cap-and-trade emissions trading proposal until at least 2011. Mr. Rudd's March proposal would have imposed total carbon permit costs (taxes) of 11.5 billion Australian dollars (US$8.5 billion) in the first two years, starting in 2010. This would have increased consumer prices by about 1.1% and shaved 0.1% off annual GDP growth until at least 2050, according to Australia's Treasury. Support has fallen among business groups and individuals who earlier professed enthusiasm for Aussie cap and trade. Green gains were negligible; Australia accounts for only 1.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
The reversal, or "backflip," has caused Mr. Rudd much embarrassment. He may still push ahead with legislation in some form, as he promised when running in the 2007 election. But it's becoming clear the proposal won't be a shoo-in despite all the votes Mr. Rudd won when he campaigned as an anti-carbon apostle.
This is yet another example of politicians elsewhere cashing in politically on the current anti-carbon enthusiasm, only to discover that support diminishes as the real-world costs become clear.
*******************************************************************
You obviously know NOTHING about Economics and Politics. Even Rudd, who was a fanatical backer of the Global Warming Theories of AL GORE, is backing off based on the reality of the ECONOMIC COST AND THE SUBSEQUENT POLITICAL DAMAGE THAT COST WOULD INCUR.
********************************************************************
Because you are a liar and an obfuscator, you never ever mention the fact that previous attempts to "control" the climate by the countries of the world were miserable failures. You never reference the failed Kyoto Treaty.
********************************************************************
Kyoto's failures haunt new U.N. talks - The work of fixing the treaty's flaws begins today in Indonesia.
By Alan Zarembo
December 03, 2007
In the Kyoto Protocol's accounting of greenhouse gases, the former Eastern bloc is a smashing success.
Ads by Google
GHG VerificationCombat climate change; verify Greenhouse Gas emissions
www.us.bureauveritas.com/bvcRussia: Down 29% in carbon dioxide emissions since 1990.
Romania: A 43% reduction.
Latvia: A resounding 60% drop.
Reductions such as those across Eastern Europe were the main reason the United Nations was recently able to report a 12% drop in emissions from the accord's industrialized countries over the 1990-2005 period.
It was an illusion.
The progress wasn't due to a global embrace of green power, but rather to the 1991 collapse of the Soviet Union, which shut down smoke-belching factories across the region.
"Their emissions dropped before Kyoto even existed," said Michael Gillenwater, a climate policy researcher at Princeton University.
Despite the 1997 Kyoto Protocol's status as the flagship of the fight against climate change, it has been a failure in the hard, expensive work of actually reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Its restrictions have been so gerrymandered that only 36 countries are required to limit their pollution. Just over a third of those -- members of the former Eastern bloc -- can pollute at will because their limits were set so far above their actual emissions.
China and India, whose fast-rising emissions easily cancel out any cuts elsewhere, are allowed to keep polluting.
The panel, laid out a framework for reducing emissions that could cost trillions of dollars over the next two decades.
*******************************************************************
By December, the Unemployment Rate in the USA will be over 10%, a Rate offered to the American People by the Messiah--OB.
Since you know nothing about Politics or Economics, you do not realize that the Congress will not pass any legislation which will threaten to raise the Unemployment Rate OR to weaken our economy and bring on inflation.
Are you really that stupid, Paradox?
