Climate Change Deadlocks...

[GRG55]

No surprise that positions on both sides of the debate are hardening, particularly under the present economic circumstances. The only question is why it took so long...

Climate Change Measure Should Be Set Aside, U.S. Senators Say

Aug. 14 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Senate should abandon efforts to pass legislation curbing greenhouse-gas emissions this year and concentrate on a narrower bill to require use of renewable energy, four Democratic lawmakers say...


Democratic Senators Demand Trade Protections in Climate Plan

Aug. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Ten U.S. Senate Democrats demanded today that that any climate legislation include trade protections to prevent U.S. manufacturers from being put at a competitive disadvantage...

...“We would find it extremely difficult to support a final measure that does not effectively deal with these important issues,” the senators said in a letter to President Barack Obama today...



Australian Senate Rejects Rudd’s Cap and Trade Emissions Plan

Aug. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Australia’s Senate rejected the government’s climate-change legislation, forcing Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to amend the bill or call an early election.

Senators voted 42 to 30 against the law, which included plans for a carbon trading system similar to one used in Europe...

...Five members from the Australian Greens party sought bigger cuts to emissions while the opposition coalition and independent Senator Nick Xenophon wanted to wait for further studies on the plan’s impact on the economy...

...The Australian legislation faced opposition from some companies that said the planned cuts were too deep and would have damped economic growth without making much difference to global warming. Advocates of tougher measures to combat climate change said the plan didn’t go far enough...

[GRG55]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

Democratic Senators Demand Trade Protections in Climate Plan

Meanwhile, in the la-la land of the United Nations...

Climate pact means new business, not trade war: U.S. envoy

Fri Aug 14, 2009 5:49am EDT

BONN, Germany (Reuters) - Trade wars after a planned U.N. climate deal are implausible, partly because of a surge of new business opportunities creating jobs in clean energy, the head of the U.S. delegation at U.N. climate talks said...

...He dismissed developing nations' worries that there could be trade wars. Many poor nations fear that rich nations will set up import barriers to protect domestic industries facing higher energy bills under a U.N. deal restricting fossil fuel use...

[thunderdownunder]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

No surprise that positions on both sides of the debate are hardening, particularly under the present economic circumstances. The only question is why it took so long...

Climate Change Measure Should Be Set Aside, U.S. Senators Say

Aug. 14 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. Senate should abandon efforts to pass legislation curbing greenhouse-gas emissions this year and concentrate on a narrower bill to require use of renewable energy, four Democratic lawmakers say...


Australian Senate Rejects Rudd’s Cap and Trade Emissions Plan

Aug. 13 (Bloomberg) -- Australia’s Senate rejected the government’s climate-change legislation, forcing Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to amend the bill or call an early election.

Senators voted 42 to 30 against the law, which included plans for a carbon trading system similar to one used in Europe...

...Five members from the Australian Greens party sought bigger cuts to emissions while the opposition coalition and independent Senator Nick Xenophon wanted to wait for further studies on the plan’s impact on the economy...

...The Australian legislation faced opposition from some companies that said the planned cuts were too deep and would have damped economic growth without making much difference to global warming. Advocates of tougher measures to combat climate change said the plan didn’t go far enough...

Down here it has been a Big Fight, The Conservative Government has control but even the liberal/ national party members are against it, for the same reasons as you guys. It will export jobs to India or China or anywhere that is cheaper. Apparently by 2015 they want farting cows taxed which will add $35/ beast, milk will rise as will all carbon based (read animal products) It's implication have not been thought through. For goodness sake Australia is 1.2% of the global greenhouse emissions. The Greens want us to increase the savings- what for - give me real evidence that this won't be just another grab for scarce money. It clearly puts those who adopt at a massive disadvantage to those who don't. Level playing fields are never level unless all are on the same (exactly) Field. My view its all In - or - sunk as this premature, preconceived Bastard of the Banking Industry should be. Drowned at birth before it does the inevitable damage it was designed to do.
The big thing in the parliament was the fact that it has been a one sided debate with any objections regarded as Uneducated, fiendish, backward thinking and regressionist. This from the side who has no compete answers for reasonable objections.
What I want to know is who is steamrolling this through World wide (like all of a sudden) - Who is behind this Bastard of economic lunacy, who is paying and how much is being spent. Whats the payoff for them. Who gave birth and who was its Father.
In my experience anything that gets rolled out so quickly with such urgent force is called "Deception by Mass hysteria" similar to the run up to Kristallnacht.But that started years before.....
To those who understand history this will give you a hint as how well planned things can be ---------- Balfour Declaration 1917 - deception to get the USA into a War it didn't need and the payoff we, the World, are still paying for 92 years later (and counting) Thanks to a Banking family who remain part of the "Quiet Group"
Note to Thunder - Pearls to pigs = such a waste

[tsetsefly]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

Democratic Senators Demand Trade Protections in Climate Plan

Aug. 6 (Bloomberg) -- Ten U.S. Senate Democrats demanded today that that any climate legislation include trade protections to prevent U.S. manufacturers from being put at a competitive disadvantage...

Trade protections have worked before, why not use them again :rolleyes:


It would be funny if 1 or 2 years from now we see another tariff war...

[Starving Steve]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

Trade protections have worked before, why not use them again :rolleyes:


It would be funny if 1 or 2 years from now we see another tariff war...

As a globalist, I do NOT want trade protectionism. I do want open borders and free trade because world trade benefits everyone on this planet.

About the only good thing that the Bush bunch from the South did was give us free trade, especially NAFTA.

[aaron]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

As a globalist, I do NOT want trade protectionism. I do want open borders and free trade because world trade benefits everyone on this planet.

About the only good thing that the Bush bunch from the South did was give us free trade, especially NAFTA.

In 20 years free trade has brought a couple hundred million Chinese out of poverty, but gutted the American middle class. Protectionism seems to work really well for those who employ it ( Asia ).

[tsetsefly]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

As a globalist, I do NOT want trade protectionism. I do want open borders and free trade because world trade benefits everyone on this planet.

About the only good thing that the Bush bunch from the South did was give us free trade, especially NAFTA.

NAFTA is hardly free trade, its once again government picking certain industries that will benefit from it...

[Starving Steve]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

In 20 years free trade has brought a couple hundred million Chinese out of poverty, but gutted the American middle class. Protectionism seems to work really well for those who employ it ( Asia ).

A richer China and India, Russia, and Brazil, Europe, and the Middle East, even a richer Vietnam, Malaysia, and Indonesia would mean that the products of North America will be consumed abroad. In other words, there would be markets for exports from North America. That would mean a higher standard of living for the middle class in the US and Canada and Mexico.

Where America went wrong was not NAFTA and not free trade. America went wrong with endless military spending, endless tax cuts, endless deficits, endless drug war, and endless wars on everything, everywhere---and even a not too subtle war against change. And America went wild spending, just for the sake of spending, thinking that consuming instead of manufacturing and exporting was the way to prosperity.

But America will export again; it is already becoming a very productive nation and even a nation of savers. So better days may be ahead after we go through this depression.

[GRG55]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

In 20 years free trade has brought a couple hundred million Chinese out of poverty, but gutted the American middle class. Protectionism seems to work really well for those who employ it ( Asia ).

How do you think that American middle class was created in the first place?

[Starving Steve]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

NAFTA is hardly free trade, its once again government picking certain industries that will benefit from it...

Before NAFTA, we had to pay ONE BEAVER BUCK FOR ONE LEAF OF LETTUCE in Victoria, BC. ( I remember, well. ) The grocery stores would package the large leaf of lettuce in a package stamped $1. That was in the dead of winter when there were no lettuce heads on Vancouver Island.

Now with NAFTA, we not only get huge heads of lettuce in Victoria, but we also get fresh blackberries, and even in the dead of winter. The blackberries get shipped in from Guadalaja, Jalisco. We also get rasberries and blueberries, either from Mexico or from the U.S. So prices for fresh produce have fallen, especially on Vancouver Island where local growers used to have a monopoly and used to dictate the price of produce.

I support free trade, NAFTA, open borders, multi-culturalism, and multi-lingualism 100%.

I noticed now in California, Spanish is spoken nearly everywhere. Signs are in Spanish and English. NAFTA products are in Spanish, English, and even French..... I like it.

The next thing, as soon as possible, is to junk the archaic and nationalistic American public school curriculum. Foreign languages should be taught from day-one in kindergarten, right through to high school graduation.

One more point in favour of free trade and globalism: Private and for-profit healthcare in the U.S. has made American companies uncompetitive in the past because U.S. companies had to pay healthcare insurance premiums for their employees. Products were over-priced to cover the albatross (sp?) of private health insurance premiums.

But now with national health insurance, the albatross (sp?) of paying for health insurance premiums of workers will be removed from American industry. This will LOWER the price of American products. America would be able to manufacture and compete. So Medicare for everyone, regardless of age or pre-existing condition, would be a win-win-win for everyone in the country.

[GRG55]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

Down here it has been a Big Fight, The Conservative Government has control but even the liberal/ national party members are against it, for the same reasons as you guys. It will export jobs to India or China or anywhere that is cheaper. Apparently by 2015 they want farting cows taxed which will add $35/ beast, milk will rise as will all carbon based (read animal products) It's implication have not been thought through. For goodness sake Australia is 1.2% of the global greenhouse emissions. The Greens want us to increase the savings- what for - give me real evidence that this won't be just another grab for scarce money. It clearly puts those who adopt at a massive disadvantage to those who don't. Level playing fields are never level unless all are on the same (exactly) Field. My view its all In - or - sunk as this premature, preconceived Bastard of the Banking Industry should be. Drowned at birth before it does the inevitable damage it was designed to do.
The big thing in the parliament was the fact that it has been a one sided debate with any objections regarded as Uneducated, fiendish, backward thinking and regressionist. This from the side who has no compete answers for reasonable objections.
What I want to know is who is steamrolling this through World wide (like all of a sudden) - Who is behind this Bastard of economic lunacy, who is paying and how much is being spent. Whats the payoff for them. Who gave birth and who was its Father.
In my experience anything that gets rolled out so quickly with such urgent force is called "Deception by Mass hysteria" similar to the run up to Kristallnacht.But that started years before.....
To those who understand history this will give you a hint as how well planned things can be ---------- Balfour Declaration 1917 - deception to get the USA into a War it didn't need and the payoff we, the World, are still paying for 92 years later (and counting) Thanks to a Banking family who remain part of the "Quiet Group"
Note to Thunder - Pearls to pigs = such a waste

Australia to split green energy from carbon laws

Sun Aug 16, 2009 5:16am EDT

SYDNEY (Reuters) - Australia's government said on Sunday it would split planned legislation to promote renewable energy from its controversial proposal for carbon trading, giving in to a key demand by the conservative opposition...

...The emissions trading scheme was voted down on Thursday in the upper house Senate where the conservative Liberal-National coalition hold the largest block of votes. They joined with Greens and independents to oppose the legislation...

...By contrast, the renewable energy legislation -- targeting a 20 percent renewable energy target -- has widespread support. The opposition has been calling for it to be treated separately...

[bcassill]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

Cap and Trade and/or placing limits on CO2 emissions are only fair if everyone signs onto the same plan (i.e. China, Brazil, India, Russia in addition to the rest of the developed world). The problem is that places like China want nothing to do with this. So, we wind up with a situation like we have in manufacturing where companies offshore operations under the mantra that American/Canadian/whatever workers are too highly paid and are not competitive. This is a crock. Most lean manufacturing operations today are so lean that labor costs are a relatively small component in the cost of the finished product. What costs extra to make things here are compliance with environmental (think EPA) and safety (think OSHA) regulations in addition to health insurance costs. So, the "solution" for many of these companies is to move operations to countries that don't give a rats ass about any of these. Unfortunately, China is perhaps the best poster child for this situation. Environmental laws? Check out the yellow haze that blots out the mid-day sun over Beijing. Worker safety regulations? Not like anything in the West. How about healthcare? Oh yeah, the average Chinese worker doesn't have any except for what they can pay out of their own pocket. The average Chinese worker in a typical factory is perhaps one of the most exploited persons on the face of the planet. Want to import something into the United States? Not a problem. Want to do business in China? You have to "partner" with a local firm in order to gain entry.

This is why globalization, as it currently exists, is a farce. Until we have a level playing field for everyone in terms of regulations, intellectual capital protection, and environmental standards you'll never have a system that works. The academic economists that push this garbage are largely the same ones that missed the current economic crisis. Why anyone still listens to these clowns is beyond me. If, after all we've heard of greed and corruption in recent months, you still truly believe that everyone who comes to the table to discuss such matters as trade have nothing but the purest of altruistic intentions, I want whatever it is you are smoking because it must be pretty good.

Which brings us back to Cap and Trade. It won't work basically for the reasons outlined above. Polluters will simply move somewhere they can pump CO2 into the air with impunity. Those who can't will simply go out of business. And while you are riding your bicycle to work in the rain (since it will be too expensive to drive a car or take mass transit since both produce CO2), you will be able to silently thank your elected officials for turning your nation into a 19th century utopia.

Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of money to be made from Cap and Trade and "green" energy. Goldman Sachs and other investment banks are just salivating at the opportunity to participate in a one trillion dollar carbon credits market. And just think of all the new jobs that will be created on Wall Street for those out-of-work hedge fund managers, traders, and quant guys. No offense, but the local Mercedes dealership has been a little slow as of late. They could really use the business in these tough times.

I'm sorry, but I feel that there is a bit of a misconception going on here. Maybe you thought that "green" is all about recycling and saving the environment. I hate to burst your bubble, but it is nothing of the sorts. It is about the color of money and how to make more of it through back room deals and special access that folks like you and I will never have. When your usual sources of income from speculative investment activities have been blown sky high, it must be really nice to be able to legislate a new revenue stream out of thin air. Don't worry. It won't hurt much to start our new "green" economy: only a couple of grand a year for every man, woman, and child in America. Just happily think of it as just another "tax" in addition to universal health care and paying down that national debt. And if you are feeling particularly industrious, you can chip in a little extra to make up for the 1 in 5 Americans who are currently out of work.

I have just one question. Is there anyway to get off this crazy ride?:eek:

[Starving Steve]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

From what I can see on CCTV Channel 9 in China (Central China TV Ch. 9), the average worker in China lives pretty darn good compared to the average American or Canadian worker. The new apartment towers which have been built in Pejing, Shanghai, and Hong Kong are lovely, by any standard of measure. These cities don't have slums and ghettos for workers to live in, at least not any longer.

From what I can see on CCTV, the average worker in China earns a decent wage and gets all of the benefits that Americans have, and maybe a whole lot more.

The yuan is lower than the U.S. dollar and the beaver buck, but the yuan represents a share in a solvent country and growing country--- a country with exports and surpluses; not deficits, not state IOUs, not bail-outs, and not inside-deals in black markets by Goldman-Sachs.

So why should China adopt Cap and Trade? What is the benefit to China and the world? No-one knows exactly how much CO2 warms the Earth, so all of the climate models in the world by Hansen and NOAA and the UN are a joke..... And CO2 is needed by the Earth's plants to grow, so why Cap and Trade? The idea is absurd.

Why should China waste more money on green tech? Unlike North American TV and unlike BBC, at least we get the truth on CCTV: windmill forests both on land and offshore still provide less than 1% of China's electric power needs. CCTV showed the central power accounting, and wind power was a joke.

Forests of windmills everywhere in China, and no power to speak of. Same thing with solar panels: no output to speak of. CCTV showed it.

Obviously, there is a profit racket of some kind going-on with green-tech and Cap and Trade. This is the real story behind to-day's environmental movement in North America and Europe. The greenies and governments and Wall Street are all in bed together, for profits.

[bcassill]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

From what I can see on CCTV Channel 9 in China (Central China TV Ch. 9), the average worker in China lives pretty darn good compared to the average American or Canadian worker. The new apartment towers which have been built in Pejing, Shanghai, and Hong Kong are lovely, by any standard of measure. These cities don't have slums and ghettos for workers to live in, at least not any longer.

From what I can see on CCTV, the average worker in China earns a decent wage and gets all of the benefits that Americans have, and maybe a whole lot more.

The yuan is lower than the U.S. dollar and the beaver buck, but the yuan represents a share in a solvent country and growing country--- a country with exports and surpluses; not deficits, not state IOUs, not bail-outs, and not inside-deals in black markets by Goldman-Sachs.

So why should China adopt Cap and Trade? What is the benefit to China and the world? No-one knows exactly how much CO2 warms the Earth, so all of the climate models in the world by Hansen and NOAA and the UN are a joke..... And CO2 is needed by the Earth's plants to grow, so why Cap and Trade? The idea is absurd.

Why should China waste more money on green tech? Unlike North American TV and unlike BBC, at least we get the truth on CCTV: windmill forests both on land and offshore still provide less than 1% of China's electric power needs. CCTV showed the central power accounting, and wind power was a joke.

Forests of windmills everywhere in China, and no power to speak of. Same thing with solar panels: no output to speak of. CCTV showed it.

Obviously, there is a profit racket of some kind going-on with green-tech and Cap and Trade. This is the real story behind to-day's environmental movement in North America and Europe. The greenies and governments and Wall Street are all in bed together, for profits.

May I ask if CCTV is a state run TV station? If it is, I'd take whatever you hear with a grain of salt (a large one at that). People talk of the corporate controlled media in America being bad, but I can only imagine how much the "news" (if you want to call anything coming off the television these days "news") is twisted around on an actual state run enterprise. You are likely correct in your assertion that we'll never get all of our power from "green" sources like wind and solar. However, don't fall for the mantra of "Everything is great and only getting better and better" BS you hear. China is blowing its own bubble and will likely crash along with the rest of the world. The export your way to prosperity model is broken because the American consumer isn't buying anymore. We've had a world with dramatic trade imbalances, a credit bubble of epic proportions, and the "reset" button has been pushed. Nothing is going back to the way it was. If China has been like much of the rest of the world, a small minority has made off with all the proceeds at the expense of the masses. And I can't imagine that the folks in the Chinese government who make economic policy are somehow smarter than anyone else. No, my friend, don't fall for the BS. Take whatever assets you have and play defensively. Anyone who starts talking to you about Green Shoots, V-shaped recovery, or anything about things just getting better and better, turn around and run. Don't walk. Run. And don't bother looking back.;)

[Verrocchio]

Re: Climate Change Deadlocks...

If China has been like much of the rest of the world, a small minority has made off with all the proceeds at the expense of the masses. And I can't imagine that the folks in the Chinese government who make economic policy are somehow smarter than anyone else. No, my friend, don't fall for the BS. Take whatever assets you have and play defensively. Anyone who starts talking to you about Green Shoots, V-shaped recovery, or anything about things just getting better and better, turn around and run. Don't walk. Run. And don't bother looking back.;)

Chinese with money like to create a "back door" for themselves for use when things get dicey. From the earliest days of China's opening to the West, individuals who were fortunate enough to go abroad often sought out ways to convert government wealth into private assets held overseas. As far as I know, this general practice persists today.