The carbon tax

Quote:
roll.png
th.gif


What's that supposed to mean?

Here in America a lot of people don't believe in global warming or that we are even capable as a race of harming our environment. Only God can do that according to some people. These people don't represent the majority bu any means but they do have the largest mouths about it. So they have created a myth concerning Al Gore and his movie and research. The myth is that the whole thing was created to put more money in the pockets of people that want to fight global warming through the collection of carbon taxes and building energy systems that don't destroy the environment. The people that are interested in destroying the environment in their pursuit of greater wealth have created a fantastic propaganda machine. They produce millions of gallons of kool aid and distribute it over the airwaves and the internet. People here call it drinking the Kool aid in reference to the late Jim Jones. In this case it has to do with the fact that if you believe that global warming is not happening you are drinking the kool aid and helping to destroy the Earth.

Try not to worry too much about it. The rest of the civilized world has figured it out. We're just a little slow over here.

Kristy. The carbon taxes and credits are as stated taxes on businesses and producers that produce carbons. Carbons of course are what is causing our environment to be warming at an alarming rate. It is the reason the average temperature of the ocean has gone up by 2 degrees and is causing all this crazy weather and melting the ice caps and glaciers around the world. So other civilized countries are charging for tonnage of carbon emitted into the air. The businesses are allowed to produce an acceptable amount of carbon emissions. If they produce less than they are allowed they can sell the unused credits to other companies that are exceeding their limit.It will encourage power companies to use better scrubbers on their coal plants and switch to the newest technology to avoid having to pay a carbon tax if they exceed their credits. Companies with fleet vehicles will have incentive to switch to vehicles powered by natural gas instead of diesel. Overall it would clean stuff up a lot and help lower our dependance on foreign oil. This of course would lower profits for many companies for a while until conversion cost are absorbed. Money or environment. Which is more important? When you're a 50-100 year old oil company executive the answer to that one is pretty clear. Just ask Rupert.
smile.png


You're right about Wikepedia. Bit of a joke isn't it?
 
I have no investment in Wikipedia but it does give as good of an idea on a subject as the bloviating on forums. Al Gore
bow.gif
Now there is a reliable source (politician, "hello") that is funny
lau.gif
lau.gif
lau.gif
 
Last edited:
Carbon tax is just smoke and mirrors it will no more reduce pollution or curb capitalism, it will line the recipients' pockets and give the greenies a new bureaucracy to play with as they decipher their big mistake.

There will really be no change of any significance in the carbon emissions themselves there is just too much money at stake in industry and too many people to provide energy for and as usual the ratepayer with bear the burden not the big oil or any other big business. Another case of dems screwing over themselves.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
If it ever comes down you will probably be right. It has the potential to make a difference but like everything else it will be full of compromises and loop holes and we will probably just end up paying more at the pump and on our electric bill. I could deal with that if it meant a reduction in carbon emissions. However, I'm sure big business will wrangle extra subsidies from the gov and get their requirements for the program minimized while still passing on any additional cost to us.

I don't think we'll ever see it. They need to figure out a better solution. Instead of carbon credits just heavy fines for exceeding limits.

The thinking people of the world should have used someone besides Al Gore to get the message out. Using a politician ensures that it will be accepted by one side while the other side will do everything in their power to debunk anything being said.
 
Quote:
Planting more trees is a great idea. No we can't live on Carbon Dioxide. That's why you die if you secure a plastic bag over your head. The concept about the carbon not hurting the environment because trees convert carbon to oxygen is always a good talking point to figure out if the person you are talking to has any tools in their tool box.
smile.png
 
We really have no way knowing that global warming exists or is man caused or if it can be undone really, the whole argument is a straw-man and the monetary gain that will be sure to follow, it is all about transferring wealth nothing more. If we don't start paying attention to more serious legitimate issues like China and its problems we may experience global thermal nuclear warming caused by man.

You are right we don't live on CO2 but we live on Oxygen that is made from CO2 they are inner connected and part of the system. Heating and cooling is a natural phenomenon in nature and we really have no data to back up any theory except maybe drilling in the earth for answers and they always find tropical vegetation globally north to south of the whole planet which says it was warmer... globally, I believe it was in Iceland they found it recently.

If anyone has not figured out that most controversial issues with out any hard facts to support them is usually about the acquisition of wealth for someone or power over another it is human nature.
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom