First off, we will still need to check for part quality. Even here, you will have companies that cheat. In fact, it happens all too often.
However, we still need to bring back manufacturing, it nothing for security. But one good example is that we are close to using smart phones for our troops. It should be required that these phones be produced in America (with western parts). That would then give that company the chance to build others commercial use here as well. At this time, America is about the only great nation that does not practice this kind of approach.
Human activities increased normally, CO2 is spiking and temperatures are rising in proportion. A cap-n-trade is a tax on just the local nation, while a CO2 (and other pollutants) tax is on ALL nations that trade so as to NOT harm a single nation, but get all to participate
Which part of Per capita is worthless do you not understand. The reality is that it is not ppl that make the impact. It is economy that does. Per capita has as much usefulness as national energy use per squirrel.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_coa_con-energy-coal-consumption">
Now, as to coal, CHINA uses 30% more in 2008. Since that time, America's use has dropped, while China's has grown at the rate of 1-2 new coal plants EACH WEEK. At this time, they are approaching DOUBLE what America uses in coal. Worst, they run zero pollution controls and have some of the worlds dirtiest coal.
So, that leaves oil and gas.
Oil is used in transportation, but it is also used in chemical production, roads, etc.
In 2009, America used about double in oil of China. But again, our oil use has dropped, while China's rises at ~10% or more a year (economy has been growing 8-12% for some time and then you add the fact that China is becoming a very rich nation; slop factor into this). China is already approaching America's oil use.
Finally in the end, simply look at the energy usage. In 2008, China and USA used almost the same amonut of energy. However, China's growth in all fossil fuels have jumped tremendously. America is basically flat, with much of the growth coming by moving to AE, as well as moving Coal to Natural gas. OTH, more than 90% of China's growth is in fossil fuels.
BTW coward, Here is something for you to look at. This is the coal use by nations. It is already incorrect. China's usage is increasing, while America's is decreasing. Over the next 4-5 years, America's total amount of coal use is expected to drop about 10-30%. Keep in mind that America is already at 46% and dropping. China is over 70% for Coal and racing to 80-85% of their energy by 2016.
This will not kill anybody. In fact, it is the exact opposite. The reason is that the tax is applied SLOWLY and over time. Basically, it should grow at a % each year. In addition, the % that is applied to goods is based on the CO2 that the good/largest subcomponent come from.
Who it will hurt are the largest developed nations that trade with each who more importantly are the biggest emitters. That will mean China, most of EU, UK, USA, South Korea, Japan, Singapore and all of the OPEC nations. So, when the good comes to America, then it is taxed based on CO2 emissions from that nation. So, goods from say Haiti would have ZERO tax. OTH, our own local goods would be taxed much higher than would haiti. Of course, since the maximum tax rate starts low and grows over time, it gives nations time to adjust and change. In fact, when I ran these numbers, one of the things that stood out was that the more undeveloped the nation, the less CO2/sq km. It was the developed nations with smaller land that has relied soley on coal and gas that will have issues.
So, you made numerous accusations, with NOTHING to back your statements up. In fact, you do not even bother to show how a tax in America, on goods that are produced for consumption here or elsewhere, would increase the rate elsewhere? Taking this further, just looking through some of your statements, they looks similar to the other ACs that were posting here. Why not provide an alternative idea that will solve our CO2 and pollution issues, while helping these other nations? My guess is that you really have nothing innovative to say, and have no ability to back up your accusations.
wow. What a fool and an idiot you are. It is NOT ppl that do the bulk of emissions. China's water has NOT disappeared. They are pulling in more for economic reasons, not ppl. Hell, they have a slow population growth rate. The water disappearing is NOT for more ppl, but for economic reasons. In addition, they are being bitten by GW. Likewise, they have loads of water, but It is not usable. It is far too polluted.
India still has a moderate growth , but again, their water use has more to do with industry growth, not ppl.
The west is growing biofuels because other nations such as Venezuela, russia, and Iran are playing games with fuel.
Now, as to the water crisis, you sounds like you want us to do CO2/capita. What that does is reward nations that allow their population to grow beyond bounds. That is stupid and foolish. Instead, by tying emissions to land, then it forces these other nations to decide on population vs industry.
I ran some numbers. What I found is that only 3 large nations have that advantage: Russia, Canada, and Australia. Both Canada and Australia are hard at work at dropping their emissions. More importantly, both will have incentives to drop theirs to avoid ANY taxes. And Russia's IS increasing. In particular, messy oil/natural gas drilling and pumping dumps loads of CO2. I was amazed, but that much of the OPEC nations are actually high up there for emissions per sq km. My suspicion is that once we quit guessing about CO2 emissions and can actually measure Co2 in and out of a nation via OCO2, then we will see that Canada and Russia emission counts will rise WELL above other nations. In fact, I expect that USA and most of EU to remain where the numbers are. We will likely see China and a number of 3rd world nations rise in their emissions. The reason for China's rise is because they prohibit most information from getting out about it. Well, a simple scan over their nation by OCO2 will confirm it.
Interestingly, OCO2 will also give us other useful information.
It is NOT an import tax. I never said that. I said it is a tax applied to ALL GOODS. THat means local and imported. And it needs to be before going to retailers. Likewise, for items coming in from outside via the net, they need to buy a stamp for the right amount. If they do not have a stamp, then it does not come in. If we see a lot of cheating from business from certain nations, we just stop all shipments.
Now, you will note that I spoke of final assembly as well as primary subcomponent. I suspect that will work fine for smaller items. Large items like cars may need to look at % of content and where they are from.
The real issue is to get this stared and have nations realize that the tax will rise. That will give them a strong incentive to take actions to drop their emissions.
Much of the oil goes into plastic, drugs, etc. In addition, if we tax our own items, who will raise the taxes in other nations? China will not. They have cheated at everything that they do. 3rd world nations will have a strong incentive to cheat ALA China. So, by western nations, hopefully all nations, applying a tax to ALL goods (local and imported), it solves these issues. Basically, it does not allow nations to cheat.
Add in OCO2 and have it measure CO2 that flows INTO a nation, as well as out, and you now have the means to not worry about where the CO2 comes from, but allow the local gov/economy to solve it.
The approach that you speak of works in a communist nation, or one in which EVERYBODY accepts responsibility IFF you have a single issue AND a single problem. It fails miserably when your emissions are from multiple sources. By moving this to using capitalism and increasing the taxes on goods from nations that pollute heavily, then we can see multiple solutions for the multiple emissions.
Exactly. That is why America needs to put the tax on this. It forces every nation that we trade with to either lower their emissions or keep it low. Only a few nations will escape that due to low population/large land mass: canada, russia, and Australia. However, both Canada and Australia are working on dropping their emissions.
First off, doing per capita, USA is NOT leading. We are something like 10-12. However, per capitia makes zero sense. It is not even interesting or fair. It rewards nations that continue to grow their population. Instead, by doing it to a fixed item, such as land, it then makes the gov. have to deal with the issue of ppl (which is a SMALL issue) vs. the economic output (which is the major issue).
Doing an emissions per capita is a waste. The reason is that more than 1/2 of citizens live in 3rd world nations, and emit little. It is the economy that is the best measure. The reason is because most of CO2 emissions is tied to economic output. HOWEVER, economy, like ppl, is difficult to measure. Instead, land is a FIXED amount. By fixing it and saying that all nations have to get to the lower amounts, then they can deal with the issues of ppl vs. economy.
Ok. So, you do not believe an esteemed scientist like Dr. Hansen. Not a problem. The scientist and neo-cons that USED to lead the charge against the facts would be Dr. Muller and the Koch Brothers. They have since changed their minds So, if you are going to follow your fuhrers, then you should continue on this one as well. They have come out saying that GW is not just occurring, but also caused by man.
Actually, no. America makes less use of fossil fuel than many other nations. In particular, when it comes to emissions on a per sq km, it is actually in the lower half. In addition, it is one of the few nations in which it is dropping. OTH, China has moved to being in the top 10% for emissions on a per sq km basis, as well as the largest emitter!
Now, as to forcing all nations to participate, again, you are wrong. In particular, China, Russia, Brazil, India, etc. depend heavily on exports esp. to the west. Now Russia is in the bottom 10 in terms of emissions per sq km, while China is in top 10%, and moving quickly to top 1%. However, if China starts losing their exports to say USA due to a slowly increasing tax being applied to their goods due to their CO2 and pollution, you can bet that China will change their attitude. In fact, I dare say that if USA does this, then much of the west would join in. And that would include Japan and Germany. With the 3 of us, that is over 1/3 of China's exports. Think that China will change their attitude? I do. Russia is not the problem. While they are not a large polluter, emitter, in terms of per sq km, Russua, Canada, and Australia are at the bottom. IOW, do not focus on them, except to get them to keep their emissions down.
It is NOT people. It is the economy. If it was ppl then those areas with large amounts of ppl would have some of the highest emissions. That is not the case. It is the developed economies that emit the most.
The problem is that EU wants to do the RIGHT thing, America does not want to get burned, and China wants to trash the west at any and all costs.
If America was smart, we would drop the cap-n-trade and put a tax on ALL GOODS based on where the final assembly and the primary sub component come from. In addition, it would be done as a percentage based on CO2 emissions per sq km. That way, it can be easily checked from the sky via sat. In addition, by doing it this way, it discourages nations from allowing high growth rates, as well as does not punish the vast majority of 3rd world nations.
Best of all, it tells EVERY NATION that they must partake. If they emit a load of CO2 per sq km, then they will have a tax put on their goods. If the lower it, and then later when succesful (see China), then they will have a larger tax put on them. This has a nice feedback to prevent successful nations from skipping the CO2 controls.
In addition, this same approach should be used for pollution controls. One nation in particular emits more than 1/2 of all mercury that man has ever emitted. That has to be stopped.
Unions account for a small amount of American production esp. in manufacturing. And we are perfectly able to compete iff the playing field is leveled. That means that nations like China have to increase their environmental standards. Likewise, they need to honor their word and quit subsidiziing, dumping, trade barriers, etc. but most of all, stop the money manipulation.
At this time, I would like to see us raise trade barriers against China slowly, or simply dump our money on theirs.
It is time for nations to put a tax on food based on the pollution from whence it comes. If they apply it to ALL foods (local and imported), then it is not considered a tariff, but a simple tax (ala sales tax). This approach rewards nations that drop their pollution, while punishing those such as China that live off the pollution. As long as this is applied to ALL food prior to hitting the retail store, then it is legal.
Good points. But you should blame the large box stores as well. They continue to push that nightmare. In fact, Walmart, target, K-ZMart are NOTORIOUS for 'buying' American goods and then simply not paying. They really want to deal with a relatively small number of Chinese manufacturers that are partially owned by Americans, who then steal American ideas.
Slashdot Mirror
First off, we will still need to check for part quality. Even here, you will have companies that cheat. In fact, it happens all too often.
However, we still need to bring back manufacturing, it nothing for security. But one good example is that we are close to using smart phones for our troops. It should be required that these phones be produced in America (with western parts). That would then give that company the chance to build others commercial use here as well. At this time, America is about the only great nation that does not practice this kind of approach.
Human activities increased normally, CO2 is spiking and temperatures are rising in proportion. A cap-n-trade is a tax on just the local nation, while a CO2 (and other pollutants) tax is on ALL nations that trade so as to NOT harm a single nation, but get all to participate
FTFY
Which part of Per capita is worthless do you not understand. The reality is that it is not ppl that make the impact. It is economy that does. Per capita has as much usefulness as national energy use per squirrel.
Actually, I think that you actually put 'Fucked that for you'. America uses more ENERGY than any other nation. We are also the worlds largest user of Nuclear energy. China just surpassed on intstalled capability, but china's production is very low relative to most other nations because they do not have good areas to place it in.. We are one of the largest of the hydro. We are the largest of geo-thermal electricity.
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/ene_coa_con-energy-coal-consumption"> Now, as to coal, CHINA uses 30% more in 2008. Since that time, America's use has dropped, while China's has grown at the rate of 1-2 new coal plants EACH WEEK. At this time, they are approaching DOUBLE what America uses in coal. Worst, they run zero pollution controls and have some of the worlds dirtiest coal.
So, that leaves oil and gas.
Oil is used in transportation, but it is also used in chemical production, roads, etc. In 2009, America used about double in oil of China. But again, our oil use has dropped, while China's rises at ~10% or more a year (economy has been growing 8-12% for some time and then you add the fact that China is becoming a very rich nation; slop factor into this). China is already approaching America's oil use.
Finally in the end, simply look at the energy usage. In 2008, China and USA used almost the same amonut of energy. However, China's growth in all fossil fuels have jumped tremendously. America is basically flat, with much of the growth coming by moving to AE, as well as moving Coal to Natural gas. OTH, more than 90% of China's growth is in fossil fuels.
BTW coward, Here is something for you to look at. This is the coal use by nations. It is already incorrect. China's usage is increasing, while America's is decreasing. Over the next 4-5 years, America's total amount of coal use is expected to drop about 10-30%. Keep in mind that America is already at 46% and dropping. China is over 70% for Coal and racing to 80-85% of their energy by 2016.
This will not kill anybody. In fact, it is the exact opposite. The reason is that the tax is applied SLOWLY and over time. Basically, it should grow at a % each year. In addition, the % that is applied to goods is based on the CO2 that the good/largest subcomponent come from.
Who it will hurt are the largest developed nations that trade with each who more importantly are the biggest emitters. That will mean China, most of EU, UK, USA, South Korea, Japan, Singapore and all of the OPEC nations. So, when the good comes to America, then it is taxed based on CO2 emissions from that nation. So, goods from say Haiti would have ZERO tax. OTH, our own local goods would be taxed much higher than would haiti. Of course, since the maximum tax rate starts low and grows over time, it gives nations time to adjust and change. In fact, when I ran these numbers, one of the things that stood out was that the more undeveloped the nation, the less CO2/sq km. It was the developed nations with smaller land that has relied soley on coal and gas that will have issues.
So, you made numerous accusations, with NOTHING to back your statements up. In fact, you do not even bother to show how a tax in America, on goods that are produced for consumption here or elsewhere, would increase the rate elsewhere? Taking this further, just looking through some of your statements, they looks similar to the other ACs that were posting here. Why not provide an alternative idea that will solve our CO2 and pollution issues, while helping these other nations? My guess is that you really have nothing innovative to say, and have no ability to back up your accusations.
wow. What a fool and an idiot you are. It is NOT ppl that do the bulk of emissions. China's water has NOT disappeared. They are pulling in more for economic reasons, not ppl. Hell, they have a slow population growth rate. The water disappearing is NOT for more ppl, but for economic reasons. In addition, they are being bitten by GW. Likewise, they have loads of water, but It is not usable. It is far too polluted.
India still has a moderate growth , but again, their water use has more to do with industry growth, not ppl.
The west is growing biofuels because other nations such as Venezuela, russia, and Iran are playing games with fuel.
Now, as to the water crisis, you sounds like you want us to do CO2/capita. What that does is reward nations that allow their population to grow beyond bounds. That is stupid and foolish. Instead, by tying emissions to land, then it forces these other nations to decide on population vs industry.
It is time that fools like you open your eyes.
I ran some numbers. What I found is that only 3 large nations have that advantage: Russia, Canada, and Australia. Both Canada and Australia are hard at work at dropping their emissions. More importantly, both will have incentives to drop theirs to avoid ANY taxes. And Russia's IS increasing. In particular, messy oil/natural gas drilling and pumping dumps loads of CO2. I was amazed, but that much of the OPEC nations are actually high up there for emissions per sq km. My suspicion is that once we quit guessing about CO2 emissions and can actually measure Co2 in and out of a nation via OCO2, then we will see that Canada and Russia emission counts will rise WELL above other nations. In fact, I expect that USA and most of EU to remain where the numbers are. We will likely see China and a number of 3rd world nations rise in their emissions. The reason for China's rise is because they prohibit most information from getting out about it. Well, a simple scan over their nation by OCO2 will confirm it.
Interestingly, OCO2 will also give us other useful information.
It is NOT an import tax. I never said that. I said it is a tax applied to ALL GOODS. THat means local and imported. And it needs to be before going to retailers. Likewise, for items coming in from outside via the net, they need to buy a stamp for the right amount. If they do not have a stamp, then it does not come in. If we see a lot of cheating from business from certain nations, we just stop all shipments.
Now, you will note that I spoke of final assembly as well as primary subcomponent. I suspect that will work fine for smaller items. Large items like cars may need to look at % of content and where they are from.
The real issue is to get this stared and have nations realize that the tax will rise. That will give them a strong incentive to take actions to drop their emissions.
Much of the oil goes into plastic, drugs, etc. In addition, if we tax our own items, who will raise the taxes in other nations? China will not. They have cheated at everything that they do. 3rd world nations will have a strong incentive to cheat ALA China. So, by western nations, hopefully all nations, applying a tax to ALL goods (local and imported), it solves these issues. Basically, it does not allow nations to cheat.
Add in OCO2 and have it measure CO2 that flows INTO a nation, as well as out, and you now have the means to not worry about where the CO2 comes from, but allow the local gov/economy to solve it.
The approach that you speak of works in a communist nation, or one in which EVERYBODY accepts responsibility IFF you have a single issue AND a single problem. It fails miserably when your emissions are from multiple sources. By moving this to using capitalism and increasing the taxes on goods from nations that pollute heavily, then we can see multiple solutions for the multiple emissions.
Exactly. That is why America needs to put the tax on this. It forces every nation that we trade with to either lower their emissions or keep it low. Only a few nations will escape that due to low population/large land mass: canada, russia, and Australia. However, both Canada and Australia are working on dropping their emissions.
I LIVE in Colorado. What is your point?
First off, doing per capita, USA is NOT leading. We are something like 10-12. However, per capitia makes zero sense. It is not even interesting or fair. It rewards nations that continue to grow their population. Instead, by doing it to a fixed item, such as land, it then makes the gov. have to deal with the issue of ppl (which is a SMALL issue) vs. the economic output (which is the major issue).
Doing an emissions per capita is a waste. The reason is that more than 1/2 of citizens live in 3rd world nations, and emit little. It is the economy that is the best measure. The reason is because most of CO2 emissions is tied to economic output. HOWEVER, economy, like ppl, is difficult to measure. Instead, land is a FIXED amount. By fixing it and saying that all nations have to get to the lower amounts, then they can deal with the issues of ppl vs. economy.
Ok. So, you do not believe an esteemed scientist like Dr. Hansen. Not a problem. The scientist and neo-cons that USED to lead the charge against the facts would be Dr. Muller and the Koch Brothers. They have since changed their minds So, if you are going to follow your fuhrers, then you should continue on this one as well. They have come out saying that GW is not just occurring, but also caused by man.
Actually, no. America makes less use of fossil fuel than many other nations. In particular, when it comes to emissions on a per sq km, it is actually in the lower half. In addition, it is one of the few nations in which it is dropping. OTH, China has moved to being in the top 10% for emissions on a per sq km basis, as well as the largest emitter!
Now, as to forcing all nations to participate, again, you are wrong. In particular, China, Russia, Brazil, India, etc. depend heavily on exports esp. to the west. Now Russia is in the bottom 10 in terms of emissions per sq km, while China is in top 10%, and moving quickly to top 1%. However, if China starts losing their exports to say USA due to a slowly increasing tax being applied to their goods due to their CO2 and pollution, you can bet that China will change their attitude. In fact, I dare say that if USA does this, then much of the west would join in. And that would include Japan and Germany. With the 3 of us, that is over 1/3 of China's exports. Think that China will change their attitude? I do. Russia is not the problem. While they are not a large polluter, emitter, in terms of per sq km, Russua, Canada, and Australia are at the bottom. IOW, do not focus on them, except to get them to keep their emissions down.
China's situation is far worse than what they admit to.
It is NOT people. It is the economy. If it was ppl then those areas with large amounts of ppl would have some of the highest emissions. That is not the case. It is the developed economies that emit the most.
The problem is that EU wants to do the RIGHT thing, America does not want to get burned, and China wants to trash the west at any and all costs.
If America was smart, we would drop the cap-n-trade and put a tax on ALL GOODS based on where the final assembly and the primary sub component come from. In addition, it would be done as a percentage based on CO2 emissions per sq km. That way, it can be easily checked from the sky via sat. In addition, by doing it this way, it discourages nations from allowing high growth rates, as well as does not punish the vast majority of 3rd world nations.
Best of all, it tells EVERY NATION that they must partake. If they emit a load of CO2 per sq km, then they will have a tax put on their goods. If the lower it, and then later when succesful (see China), then they will have a larger tax put on them. This has a nice feedback to prevent successful nations from skipping the CO2 controls.
In addition, this same approach should be used for pollution controls. One nation in particular emits more than 1/2 of all mercury that man has ever emitted. That has to be stopped.
we ask all of them, when they will put America first instead of their pocket book? And that needs to be asked of all of them, including O.
Unions account for a small amount of American production esp. in manufacturing. And we are perfectly able to compete iff the playing field is leveled. That means that nations like China have to increase their environmental standards. Likewise, they need to honor their word and quit subsidiziing, dumping, trade barriers, etc. but most of all, stop the money manipulation.
At this time, I would like to see us raise trade barriers against China slowly, or simply dump our money on theirs.
It is time for nations to put a tax on food based on the pollution from whence it comes. If they apply it to ALL foods (local and imported), then it is not considered a tariff, but a simple tax (ala sales tax). This approach rewards nations that drop their pollution, while punishing those such as China that live off the pollution. As long as this is applied to ALL food prior to hitting the retail store, then it is legal.
Good points. But you should blame the large box stores as well. They continue to push that nightmare. In fact, Walmart, target, K-ZMart are NOTORIOUS for 'buying' American goods and then simply not paying. They really want to deal with a relatively small number of Chinese manufacturers that are partially owned by Americans, who then steal American ideas.
Based on your comment, I think that many already assume that your parents fed you the thermometers. Hopefully, not used.