OT: Cap and Tax. Maybe One of the Largest Tax Increases in a Long While?

[patientrenter]

[quote=air_ogi]Yes, how dare I discriminate based on scientific credentials. Maybe we should ask Rush Limbaugh for his opinion.

China produces 1/3 of CO2 per capita US. India produces 1/10 of CO2 per capita as US.

EU introduced cap and trade in 2005 and had reduction in unemployment by 21% (from 8.9% to 7%) by 2008. I am not claiming that it was due to cap and trade, but your claim that cap and trade is economy destroyer is not grounded in fact. [/quote]

air_ogi, let’s suppose a country with a population of 100 people is confronted with two alternatives:

1. Produce 10 times as much pollution per capita as the USA, or

2. Produce 1/10 as much pollution per capita as the USA

Does it matter much for the world at large what that country does?

Of course not. It is interesting to note the per capita numbers, but what really matters is the total amount of pollution.

[air_ogi]

If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[air_ogi]

If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[air_ogi]

If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[air_ogi]

If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[air_ogi]

If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[patientrenter]

[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[/quote]

It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.

[patientrenter]

[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[/quote]

It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.

[patientrenter]

[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[/quote]

It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.

[patientrenter]

[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[/quote]

It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.

[patientrenter]

[quote=air_ogi]If China and India decide that it is OK to grow CO2 emissions to per capita levels as current US levels or higher, I agree that it is completely moot what we do.

But with significantly higher levels of emissions per capita, we don’t have moral ground to criticize either India or China.

India and China are developing nations with significant energy consumption growth. There is nothing that will change that. There are two ways CO2 emissions can be resolved. Over next 50 years, either we work together and US lowers CO2 emissions to their levels, or developing world increases CO2 emissions to our levels.

[/quote]

It’s not a question of who can lecture who about morals. It’s a question of what the biggest sources of the problem are, and how to reduce them. If we don’t tackle all the biggest sources, then there’s not much point in tackling one.

[Zeitgeist]

As usual Arraya brings facts to the discussion. Not only is it a job killer, crap and tax is a progressive tax on the poor. If this is just about money, make it a flat tax and spare me the BS about saving the planet. One big war, one big volcano, etc. and it’s all over except the crying. Check out the fossil records to see the impact of a nuclear winter on a very successful species. Maybe it is our destiny to kill humans off for the good of the planet. It might make room for a superior replacement. Give me a break air (_ogi). Is that a pun?

[Zeitgeist]

As usual Arraya brings facts to the discussion. Not only is it a job killer, crap and tax is a progressive tax on the poor. If this is just about money, make it a flat tax and spare me the BS about saving the planet. One big war, one big volcano, etc. and it’s all over except the crying. Check out the fossil records to see the impact of a nuclear winter on a very successful species. Maybe it is our destiny to kill humans off for the good of the planet. It might make room for a superior replacement. Give me a break air (_ogi). Is that a pun?

[Zeitgeist]

As usual Arraya brings facts to the discussion. Not only is it a job killer, crap and tax is a progressive tax on the poor. If this is just about money, make it a flat tax and spare me the BS about saving the planet. One big war, one big volcano, etc. and it’s all over except the crying. Check out the fossil records to see the impact of a nuclear winter on a very successful species. Maybe it is our destiny to kill humans off for the good of the planet. It might make room for a superior replacement. Give me a break air (_ogi). Is that a pun?

[Zeitgeist]

As usual Arraya brings facts to the discussion. Not only is it a job killer, crap and tax is a progressive tax on the poor. If this is just about money, make it a flat tax and spare me the BS about saving the planet. One big war, one big volcano, etc. and it’s all over except the crying. Check out the fossil records to see the impact of a nuclear winter on a very successful species. Maybe it is our destiny to kill humans off for the good of the planet. It might make room for a superior replacement. Give me a break air (_ogi). Is that a pun?

[Author]

Posts