Taxing something based on where the parts are from is NOT a tariff. NOT if you are looking at an issue from those spots. A tariff is a tax applied ONLY to imported items. Yet, in my case, I speak of nations AND STATES. That means that it is applied fairly.
Read it again. The tax is predicated on the CO2 from where parts come from. For the US, that means that we should should tax not just items/parts imported from other nations, but also based on our states. Why? Because a number of the states have already taken efforts to lower their emissions, while states like Wyoming has done nothing.
Basically, we want to reward those nations/states that have dropped their CO2/$GDP, and tax heavily those nations/states that have high CO2/$ GDP.
BTW, exports are about 20% of China's GDP. And America's share of that is around 15%. So that means that exports to America accounts for at most 3% of their emissions. AND NONE OF THAT takes into account the fact that China made the decisions to put in coal as well as not run their pollution control.
This goes back to you far lefties not using any logic in how you approach such an important issue. I really wish that you would learn to THINK.
look at what AC posted above.
Most of my information came from some friends that took real measurements there, without guards (nearly all scientists that go there have guards with them; discrete, but they are still there to make sure of what instruments they have). They were not allowed to publish.
BUT, as I said above, when OCO2 comes out, the world is in for a shock. Hopefully at that time, the far left will realize what idiots they are. Somehow, I doubt it.
And SO2 comes out of the air fairly easily (rain). Things like CO2 does not. And actually, 12-14% of SO2 being here from China is a great marker of how much other things are here.
And yes, 10-15% of their pollution (CO2, etc) IS FROM CHINA. I have friends that are doing air pollution work (they developed a number of the sensors) and have determined that more than 5% of the pollution in Colorado is from China.
In addition, these ppl have been to China and did actual measurements without the gov. interferring, BUT, were not allowed to report it to the world (only to them). What they found will be astounding to the world when OCO2 finally launches and starts making measurements. At that time, ppl will find out that China is already close to 50% of CO2 emissions (yes, it is going to rise that much).
BTW, it is NOT we the end buyers that are making these choices. It is the buyers at large retailers that are making these choices. Having dealt with Home Depot, I found out that the buyers are given nice business and/or first class seats to China and then put up in 5 star hotels, and then they get a nice vacation paid by the Chinese gov.
OTOH, here in America, IFF they go out (most stay in the office), it is coach, and then a motel 6.
Is it any wonder why those buyers are choosing Chinese?
Oh, I agree that we are buying their horrible junk. THat is why I work hard to NOT DO THAT.
BUT, the right way to solve this is to put a single level VAT (just between wholeseller and retailer; along with any delivery trucks ) in which goods are taxed based on where the parts are from.
BUT, it needs to be quantified and normalized logically. This idea of using values from a gov. combined with using per capita has to be one of the STUPIDEST idea going.
Instead, use the OCO2 to measure CO2 going IN and OUT of a nation. This solves the issue of how much CO2 is being generated, and does not worry about the source (that is for that nation to deal with).
Then as for normalization, it is far better to push
CO2 / $GDP. That is way off since it is based on data from 8-10 years ago, BUT, if you click on the GDP/emissions, you can see how efficient nations are.
Gads, What a total FUCKING IDIOT you are. The far right combined with you far left, are the real reason why we are not able to solve the CO2 problem. Look, China puts out over 33% of the emissions today AND RISING. And America is at 15% and dropping. Hell, China burns more than 50% of the world's coal.
BUT, that is not the real problem. The problem is that you far lefties scream that you want America to lower our emissions, while you give nations like China and South Africa a pass on building massive new coal plants. These are plants that will NOT come down for the next 50 years. And most of China's emissions are NOT from old plants. The old ones were small plants. China will be killing those and building new much bigger ones to replace them. And in addition, to replacing the current ones, you will note that China opens 1-2 new ones EACH WEEK. CHina has plans to continue that until 2018, and I am sure that they will not slow that down because of idiots like you that give them a pass.
Why does China do all this? So as to win a cold war against the west. They basically pollute heavily so that their electricity is cheaper. Hell, they have laws that say that western companies that employ chinese will pay a minimum, while their companies have laws that say that they pay a maximum (which is less than the western company).
And before you scream that America has done the largest pollution 'historically', let me point out that the bogus studies only look at emissions from 1904 onwards. Worse, they simply allow the other govs, such as china, to declare how much coal that they burned. Yet, the majority of coal that was burned was NOT in the last 100 years, but more than 1/2 of it was from BEFORE 1900, of which nearly all of that was in Europe through asia.
There is no doubt that the far right is wrong, know that they are wrong, and simply want to move the problem over to others (similar to china).
BUT, you far lefties are just as wrong in that you are seeking to give China a pass without realizing that they are now the most destructive nation going and it will continue for the next 50 years.
Grow up and learn to fucking think.
As long as China insists on NOT using their pollution controls (they built them on new plants per the treaty with japan, but japan forgot to require china to turn them on; besides as we have seen with their money, they really do not care about treaties; only winning a cold war ), this pollution will continue.
And yes, the pollution really carries that far. 10-15% of the western America's pollution is from China.
This should not be directed at China but all nations and states.
Basically, America can solve this since we are the world's largest importer. But it needs to be done right.
First, we can not go with estimates. They are mostly in non-western nations. So use oco2 to measure the co2 flow in and out of nations. This way nations are not held responsible for others pollution.
Second, it needs to be normalized. Doing it per person is a joke. Instead, u want the tax to be based on co2 / $ of GDP. IOW, you want nations to grow, but u want the to do it efficiently.
Third, it is then applied as a VAT upon a whole seller selling to the retailer. Full tax is charged, unless the item is submitted to web app in which parts are described and where from. If u make to good in a nation like Sweden or costa Rica where emissions are low, then no tax.
Fourth, all delivery systems like FedEx that imported have to collect the tax. They can add some amount more to cover their costs.
huh.
So, kevin, per your statement, then why is Jamaica not spending 20 B/year on space? Is that due to choices that they make or because they do not have the manufacturing capability, nor the wealth to do so?
Really? OK, show me the link to the public record that shows our manned mars missions being built and that O killed it. Fuck, I will happily apologize to you if you can do that.
BUT, in return, if you can not do so, within 48 hours, I ask that you apologize. And yes, I will give you 48 hours to find something that you will NOT FIND. And Constellation was NOT a mars program. Its primary goal was the moon.
What a fool. You should get past your neo-con BS and actually learn a bit of the history. And as to physics, what the fuck does that have to do with the economics of space? Absolutely NOTHING. It is about economics and engineering.
Obama has been fighting tooth and nail against the GOP, and some dems to keep private space going. You neo-cons/tea* would have killed it if not for him. Simple as that. And that is DOCUMENTED fact.
O never told them to quit working on a manned mars mission because we NEVER HAD ONE. Total BS on your part. You obviously do not have a grasp of what is going on, or how NASA operates (and yes, I have a little bit; I worked on the MGS). The last time that NASA had any direct plans to go to Mars, was under Clinton. But again, you neo-cons killed it (to be fair, Clinton was opposed to, BUT, he did sign it and allow it).
OTOH, we had a good group for doing mars robotic missions. I know. I WORKED ON IT. Now, I am not wild about what O did, but basically, he gutted it in part to pay for private space. To be honest, I did not like it. However, I also understand that without having CHEAP access to space and mars, then all of our work is moot.
The Falcon Heavy combined with Red Dragon will allow NASA to put 2-4 orbiters AND red dragon on the planet IN ONE MISSION. One item that is desperately needed there, is a network constellation. With cheap launch and micro/mini sats, it would be possible for us to put say 100 sats around mars, of which most are simple comm sats, with processing capabilities.
And you are a friend of the space program in the same way that you neo-cons are a friend to the poor and middle class.
Actually, it is. Lets say that you have 40B today. That will fund NASA's current budget for 2 years. BUT, we spent less than 40B to build Mercury, Gemini, and Saturn, as well as go to the moon. In fact, we spent less than 60 Billion to do the above AND build 5 shuttles(enterprise was one of the 5).
What is the big difference? It is that we had loads more spending capabilities back then, then we do now.
The reason is that we had THE strongest economy, and could easily afford to spend 4% of our US federal budget on doing this. Now, we are fighting over less than.5% of our budget, and even then, we are still running a massive deficit.
So, the real issue is that to put man on the moon back in the 60's was hard because it meant LOADS of R*D. Now, it is not about capabilities, but about economics. That is why we will not get to the moon via the gov. We simply can not afford it. But, businesses like SpaceX and Bigelow CAN afford it. Both are funded by other items. SpaceX is being funded partially by the feds, but mostly by commercial launches. Bigelow is mostly funded by Motel 6.
NASA does not allocate the funds. In fact, they have tried hard to shift funds from different areas, to private space (for both COTS and now CCD).
CONgress allocates the money and then the president vetoes it or not.
Obama has kept the money flowing to CCD, while the GOP, along with some of the dems, have worked hard to gut private space. You will note that for the last 5 years, Obama has requested a great deal more for private space, the Senate has voted closer to the president, but always less, and finally, ever since the GOP took control of the house, they have gutted the budget for private space. They have pushed for less than 1/2 of what NASA and Obama have suggested. At the same time, these group has push for loads more money to the Russians, as well as massive spending on the constellation (though they gutted it under W), and then on SLS.
I am amazed when I see ppl screaming that we should dissolve the NSA. Yet, they do not realize that all of the techniques and tech would simply transfer to FBI, local police, etc. This is the kind of stuff that Americans should fear. Yet, we have idiots running around screaming about everything else, and most of the leaders on that, are the same ones that caused it.
I doubt that you are India, let alone Indian.
Now, with this said, the manipulation of Indian money vs the $ is where the real issues is. The Rupee should be at around 30 to $1. Right now, it is at 60 to $1. That is nothing but PURE manipulation.
And while India's Indians have become a lot more like what you said, it is also the fact that companies like IBM are ran by the worst, of the worst, that America has to offer.
That is NOT really what Obama is saying. He says that to the public. What he is counting on, is that private space will go to the moon and mars. He wants NASA to help them. In fact, once Bigelow builds his space station, the first long-term PAYING astronauts will be 1-2 NASA ppl for 1-2 years. And when Bigelow puts a station on the moon, no doubt, we will pay for 1-2 NASA ppl to be there CONSTANTLY.
Then you are NOT paying attention.
We are making progress in early 90's, when the neo-cons killed off NASA's efforts to go to Mars.
BUT, Clinton did the smart thing and push for a lot of tech transfer, esp. to Bigelow with transhab.
Now, for the last 8 years, we have had multiple competitions that are developing private space to make it happen.
Basically, NASA is transferring information AND helping to create numerous companies. THings are looking up.
What is needed now, is to stop the GOP's assault on private space.
Slashdot Mirror
Taxing something based on where the parts are from is NOT a tariff. NOT if you are looking at an issue from those spots. A tariff is a tax applied ONLY to imported items. Yet, in my case, I speak of nations AND STATES. That means that it is applied fairly.
Read it again. The tax is predicated on the CO2 from where parts come from. For the US, that means that we should should tax not just items/parts imported from other nations, but also based on our states. Why? Because a number of the states have already taken efforts to lower their emissions, while states like Wyoming has done nothing.
Basically, we want to reward those nations/states that have dropped their CO2/$GDP, and tax heavily those nations/states that have high CO2/$ GDP.
Yes, it is always better to take things out of context rather than leave them in such. It makes fools look so much brighter.
No, they are not. A tariff is a tax applied ONLY TO AN IMPORTED ITEM.
A tax applied to ALL ITEMS, is simply a tax and TOTALLY LEGAL PER ALL TREATIES.
Not even close. China does the majority of their own coal.
BTW, exports are about 20% of China's GDP. And America's share of that is around 15%. So that means that exports to America accounts for at most 3% of their emissions. AND NONE OF THAT takes into account the fact that China made the decisions to put in coal as well as not run their pollution control.
This goes back to you far lefties not using any logic in how you approach such an important issue. I really wish that you would learn to THINK.
Considering that the vast majority of this pollution comes from China, it shows that you are just a general idiot.
look at what AC posted above.
Most of my information came from some friends that took real measurements there, without guards (nearly all scientists that go there have guards with them; discrete, but they are still there to make sure of what instruments they have). They were not allowed to publish.
BUT, as I said above, when OCO2 comes out, the world is in for a shock. Hopefully at that time, the far left will realize what idiots they are. Somehow, I doubt it.
And SO2 comes out of the air fairly easily (rain). Things like CO2 does not. And actually, 12-14% of SO2 being here from China is a great marker of how much other things are here.
And yes, 10-15% of their pollution (CO2, etc) IS FROM CHINA. I have friends that are doing air pollution work (they developed a number of the sensors) and have determined that more than 5% of the pollution in Colorado is from China.
In addition, these ppl have been to China and did actual measurements without the gov. interferring, BUT, were not allowed to report it to the world (only to them). What they found will be astounding to the world when OCO2 finally launches and starts making measurements. At that time, ppl will find out that China is already close to 50% of CO2 emissions (yes, it is going to rise that much).
BTW, it is NOT we the end buyers that are making these choices. It is the buyers at large retailers that are making these choices. Having dealt with Home Depot, I found out that the buyers are given nice business and/or first class seats to China and then put up in 5 star hotels, and then they get a nice vacation paid by the Chinese gov.
OTOH, here in America, IFF they go out (most stay in the office), it is coach, and then a motel 6.
Is it any wonder why those buyers are choosing Chinese?
Oh, I agree that we are buying their horrible junk. THat is why I work hard to NOT DO THAT.
BUT, the right way to solve this is to put a single level VAT (just between wholeseller and retailer; along with any delivery trucks ) in which goods are taxed based on where the parts are from.
BUT, it needs to be quantified and normalized logically. This idea of using values from a gov. combined with using per capita has to be one of the STUPIDEST idea going.
Instead, use the OCO2 to measure CO2 going IN and OUT of a nation. This solves the issue of how much CO2 is being generated, and does not worry about the source (that is for that nation to deal with).
Then as for normalization, it is far better to push CO2 / $GDP. That is way off since it is based on data from 8-10 years ago, BUT, if you click on the GDP/emissions, you can see how efficient nations are.
Yes, apparently, you kan reed, but you will not.
Gads, What a total FUCKING IDIOT you are. The far right combined with you far left, are the real reason why we are not able to solve the CO2 problem. Look, China puts out over 33% of the emissions today AND RISING. And America is at 15% and dropping. Hell, China burns more than 50% of the world's coal.
BUT, that is not the real problem. The problem is that you far lefties scream that you want America to lower our emissions, while you give nations like China and South Africa a pass on building massive new coal plants. These are plants that will NOT come down for the next 50 years. And most of China's emissions are NOT from old plants. The old ones were small plants. China will be killing those and building new much bigger ones to replace them. And in addition, to replacing the current ones, you will note that China opens 1-2 new ones EACH WEEK. CHina has plans to continue that until 2018, and I am sure that they will not slow that down because of idiots like you that give them a pass.
Why does China do all this? So as to win a cold war against the west. They basically pollute heavily so that their electricity is cheaper. Hell, they have laws that say that western companies that employ chinese will pay a minimum, while their companies have laws that say that they pay a maximum (which is less than the western company).
And before you scream that America has done the largest pollution 'historically', let me point out that the bogus studies only look at emissions from 1904 onwards. Worse, they simply allow the other govs, such as china, to declare how much coal that they burned. Yet, the majority of coal that was burned was NOT in the last 100 years, but more than 1/2 of it was from BEFORE 1900, of which nearly all of that was in Europe through asia.
There is no doubt that the far right is wrong, know that they are wrong, and simply want to move the problem over to others (similar to china).
BUT, you far lefties are just as wrong in that you are seeking to give China a pass without realizing that they are now the most destructive nation going and it will continue for the next 50 years.
Grow up and learn to fucking think.
As long as China insists on NOT using their pollution controls (they built them on new plants per the treaty with japan, but japan forgot to require china to turn them on; besides as we have seen with their money, they really do not care about treaties; only winning a cold war ), this pollution will continue.
And yes, the pollution really carries that far. 10-15% of the western America's pollution is from China.
This should not be directed at China but all nations and states.
Basically, America can solve this since we are the world's largest importer. But it needs to be done right.
First, we can not go with estimates. They are mostly in non-western nations. So use oco2 to measure the co2 flow in and out of nations. This way nations are not held responsible for others pollution.
Second, it needs to be normalized. Doing it per person is a joke. Instead, u want the tax to be based on co2 / $ of GDP. IOW, you want nations to grow, but u want the to do it efficiently.
Third, it is then applied as a VAT upon a whole seller selling to the retailer. Full tax is charged, unless the item is submitted to web app in which parts are described and where from. If u make to good in a nation like Sweden or costa Rica where emissions are low, then no tax.
Fourth, all delivery systems like FedEx that imported have to collect the tax. They can add some amount more to cover their costs.
huh.
So, kevin, per your statement, then why is Jamaica not spending 20 B/year on space? Is that due to choices that they make or because they do not have the manufacturing capability, nor the wealth to do so?
Really? OK, show me the link to the public record that shows our manned mars missions being built and that O killed it. Fuck, I will happily apologize to you if you can do that.
BUT, in return, if you can not do so, within 48 hours, I ask that you apologize. And yes, I will give you 48 hours to find something that you will NOT FIND. And Constellation was NOT a mars program. Its primary goal was the moon.
What a fool. You should get past your neo-con BS and actually learn a bit of the history. And as to physics, what the fuck does that have to do with the economics of space? Absolutely NOTHING. It is about economics and engineering.
Obama has been fighting tooth and nail against the GOP, and some dems to keep private space going. You neo-cons/tea* would have killed it if not for him. Simple as that. And that is DOCUMENTED fact.
O never told them to quit working on a manned mars mission because we NEVER HAD ONE. Total BS on your part. You obviously do not have a grasp of what is going on, or how NASA operates (and yes, I have a little bit; I worked on the MGS). The last time that NASA had any direct plans to go to Mars, was under Clinton. But again, you neo-cons killed it (to be fair, Clinton was opposed to, BUT, he did sign it and allow it).
OTOH, we had a good group for doing mars robotic missions. I know. I WORKED ON IT. Now, I am not wild about what O did, but basically, he gutted it in part to pay for private space. To be honest, I did not like it. However, I also understand that without having CHEAP access to space and mars, then all of our work is moot.
The Falcon Heavy combined with Red Dragon will allow NASA to put 2-4 orbiters AND red dragon on the planet IN ONE MISSION. One item that is desperately needed there, is a network constellation. With cheap launch and micro/mini sats, it would be possible for us to put say 100 sats around mars, of which most are simple comm sats, with processing capabilities.
And you are a friend of the space program in the same way that you neo-cons are a friend to the poor and middle class.
Actually, it is. Lets say that you have 40B today. That will fund NASA's current budget for 2 years. BUT, we spent less than 40B to build Mercury, Gemini, and Saturn, as well as go to the moon. In fact, we spent less than 60 Billion to do the above AND build 5 shuttles(enterprise was one of the 5). .5% of our budget, and even then, we are still running a massive deficit.
What is the big difference? It is that we had loads more spending capabilities back then, then we do now.
The reason is that we had THE strongest economy, and could easily afford to spend 4% of our US federal budget on doing this. Now, we are fighting over less than
So, the real issue is that to put man on the moon back in the 60's was hard because it meant LOADS of R*D. Now, it is not about capabilities, but about economics. That is why we will not get to the moon via the gov. We simply can not afford it. But, businesses like SpaceX and Bigelow CAN afford it. Both are funded by other items. SpaceX is being funded partially by the feds, but mostly by commercial launches. Bigelow is mostly funded by Motel 6.
NASA does not allocate the funds. In fact, they have tried hard to shift funds from different areas, to private space (for both COTS and now CCD).
CONgress allocates the money and then the president vetoes it or not.
Obama has kept the money flowing to CCD, while the GOP, along with some of the dems, have worked hard to gut private space. You will note that for the last 5 years, Obama has requested a great deal more for private space, the Senate has voted closer to the president, but always less, and finally, ever since the GOP took control of the house, they have gutted the budget for private space. They have pushed for less than 1/2 of what NASA and Obama have suggested. At the same time, these group has push for loads more money to the Russians, as well as massive spending on the constellation (though they gutted it under W), and then on SLS.
I am amazed when I see ppl screaming that we should dissolve the NSA. Yet, they do not realize that all of the techniques and tech would simply transfer to FBI, local police, etc. This is the kind of stuff that Americans should fear. Yet, we have idiots running around screaming about everything else, and most of the leaders on that, are the same ones that caused it.
I doubt that you are India, let alone Indian.
Now, with this said, the manipulation of Indian money vs the $ is where the real issues is. The Rupee should be at around 30 to $1. Right now, it is at 60 to $1. That is nothing but PURE manipulation.
And while India's Indians have become a lot more like what you said, it is also the fact that companies like IBM are ran by the worst, of the worst, that America has to offer.
That is NOT really what Obama is saying. He says that to the public. What he is counting on, is that private space will go to the moon and mars. He wants NASA to help them. In fact, once Bigelow builds his space station, the first long-term PAYING astronauts will be 1-2 NASA ppl for 1-2 years. And when Bigelow puts a station on the moon, no doubt, we will pay for 1-2 NASA ppl to be there CONSTANTLY.
Then you are NOT paying attention.
We are making progress in early 90's, when the neo-cons killed off NASA's efforts to go to Mars.
BUT, Clinton did the smart thing and push for a lot of tech transfer, esp. to Bigelow with transhab.
Now, for the last 8 years, we have had multiple competitions that are developing private space to make it happen.
Basically, NASA is transferring information AND helping to create numerous companies. THings are looking up.
What is needed now, is to stop the GOP's assault on private space.