About This Blog
At the UN Climate conference in Bali, a global tax on carbon emissions was recommended by a panel of participants. Advocates said the tax would be “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.” (Translation: Bend over, United States Of America). Basically, the richer countries would be paying for the poorer countries to prepare for the catastrophic specter of global warming. It's CO2 socialism. Advocates of the tax say failure to adopt it will bring about the end of all life on earth as we know it, and some even worse stuff too. And that's their conservative estimate.
“Finally someone will pay for these [climate related] costs,” Othmar Schwank, a global tax advocate, told Inhofe EPW Press Blog following the panel discussion titled “A Global CO2 Tax.” Schwank is a consultant with the Switzerland based Mauch Consulting firm
Schwank said at least “$10-$40 billion dollars per year” could be generated by the tax, and wealthy nations like the U.S. would bear the biggest burden based on the “polluters pay principle.”
The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to tax coal."
The UN was presented with a new report from the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment titled “Global Solidarity in Financing Adaptation.” The report stated there was an “urgent need” for a global tax in order for “damages [from climate change] to be kept from growing to truly catastrophic levels, especially in vulnerable countries of the developing world.”
Sounds to me like somebody hasn't done their homework here. There's a big difference between $10 billion and $40 billion. Expect the actual cost to be much, much, much higher if the UN ever convinces the US to go along with this step toward the end of our national sovereignty (to prevent it, elect a Republican in 2008). I wonder what the UN would do if america didn't pay it's global taxes ? Maybe they could put blue helmets on our soldiers and have us attack ourselves, or perhaps they would foreclose on Washington, D.C. It's a brave new world.
Not everyone favors the global carbon tax. There is a group of scientists who are strongly against it. These are the people Al Gore would call "deniers" (like Holocaust deniers) and "anti-scientific" (even though they ARE scientists). The Goreacle is not real flexible on this issue. He says the science of man-made global warming is settled (even though it isn't). Speaking of science, is Gore a scientist ? I think not, even if he did invent the internet.
...a team of over 100 prominent international scientists who warned the UN that attempting to control the Earth's climate was "ultimately futile."
The scientists wrote, “The IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions." The scientists, many of whom are current or former members of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), sent the December 13 letter to the UN Secretary-General.
Could there be more to all this than the stated reason of reducing carbon emissions and preparing for the post-apocalyptic globally warmed world ? It sounds to me like there is. Listen to the following quotes. These people sound more like socialists who want to run the world than folks concerned about climate change:
The environmental group Friends of the Earth, in attendance in Bali, also advocated the transfer of money from rich to poor nations on Wednesday.
“A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth.
In 2000, then French President Jacques Chirac said the UN’s Kyoto Protocol represented "the first component of an authentic global governance." Former EU Environment Minister Margot Wallstrom said, "Kyoto is about the economy, about leveling the playing field for big businesses worldwide." Canadian Prime Minster Stephen Harper once dismissed Kyoto as a “socialist scheme.”
MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen warned about these types of carbon regulations earlier this year. "Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life," Lindzen said in March 2007.
In addition, many critics have often charged that proposed tax and regulatory “solutions” were more important to the promoters of man-made climate fears than the accuracy of their science.
Former Colorado Senator Tim Wirth reportedly said in 1990, "We've got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing — in terms of economic policy and environmental policy."
I will close with a prayer of thanks.
Thank you, Lord, (and Florida and the Supreme Court too), for not letting Al Gore become president of the United States. Amen.