Reg
location: back to the wilderness
listening to: static
registered: 1999.11.22
posts: 6470
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
"Government subsidies of gasoline, electricity and other energy sources
amount to about $1.9 trillion a year and should be ended or offset with taxes
used to battle climate change and pay for social programs, the International
Monetary Fund said Wednesday in a major foray into the global warming debate.
From top energy users such as the United States and China to the poorest of
the poor, the fund said countries should be more aggressive in developing
energy tax and pricing policies that reflect the true cost of fossil fuel
use, including such “externalities” as pollution and the steps needed to
mitigate the effects of a warming climate."
Pretty much what the IMF is saying is the cost of continuing to depend on
fossil fuels should include a tax that takes into consideration the damage to
the environment we have done and continue to do through our dependence on
them.
I assume they feel that drastically raising the cost of using fossil
fuels
will create a more dramatic and expedient move away from them. I would say
they are on the surface correct but I don't think this needs to be done
through taxes and I don't think you could count on the fact that those taxes
would go toward climate change initiatives and social programs. Not in the
United States where many on the right still believe climate change is a myth,
social programs are "a method of redistributing wealth" and the poor and
unfortunate should do us all a favor and "die to decrease the surplus
population."
I will say it is sort of sad that it took this long for the IMF to dip
their
globally warmed toes into the whole climate change issue.
Not to make this a right and left thing again but it must make the right
wingers want to puke when they read that the IMF believes that taxes should
go toward social programs and the climate change crisis.
What do you think of the IMF and their report, Ross, because that report
is
really not about subsidies but rather about the fact that they feel we have a
rather gigantic climate change crisis on our hands that will in the very near
future devastate many countries?
–--
'The only way to avoid getting crushed by absurdity, is to humbly include the absurd in our calculations.'
'The only way to avoid getting crushed by absurdity, is to humbly include the absurd in our calculations.'
Reg
(view)
"Government subsidies of gasoline, electricity and other energy sources
amount to about $1.9 trillion a year and should be ended or offset with taxes
used to battle climate change and pay for social programs, the International
Monetary Fund said Wednesday in a major foray into the global warming debate.
From top energy users such as the United States and China to the poorest of
the poor, the fund said countries should be more aggressive in developing
energy tax and pricing policies that reflect the true cost of fossil fuel
use, including such “externalities” as pollution and the steps needed to
mitigate the effects of a warming climate."
Pretty much what the IMF is saying is the cost of continuing to depend on
fossil fuels should include a tax that takes into consideration the damage to
the environment we have done and continue to do through our dependence on
them.
I assume they feel that drastically raising the cost of using fossil
fuels
will create a more dramatic and expedient move away from them. I would say
they are on the surface correct but I don't think this needs to be done
through taxes and I don't think you could count on the fact that those taxes
would go toward climate change initiatives and social programs. Not in the
United States where many on the right still believe climate change is a myth,
social programs are "a method of redistributing wealth" and the poor and
unfortunate should do us all a favor and "die to decrease the surplus
population."
I will say it is sort of sad that it took this long for the IMF to dip
their
globally warmed toes into the whole climate change issue.
Not to make this a right and left thing again but it must make the right
wingers want to puke when they read that the IMF believes that taxes should
go toward social programs and the climate change crisis.
What do you think of the IMF and their report, Ross, because that report
is
really not about subsidies but rather about the fact that they feel we have a
rather gigantic climate change crisis on our hands that will in the very near
future devastate many countries?
–--
'The only way to avoid getting crushed by absurdity, is to humbly include the absurd in our calculations.'
'The only way to avoid getting crushed by absurdity, is to humbly include the absurd in our calculations.'
posted 2013.03.29
posted on March 29th 2013
Reg
location: back to the wilderness
listening to: static
registered: 1999.11.22
posts: 6470
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
-
Sean Penn lost a friend – Marc on March 6th, 2013-
Re: Sean Penn lost a friend – edlorah on March 6th, 2013
Why? – EEE on March 6th, 2013-
Re: Why? – edlorah on March 6th, 2013-
Re: Why? – messybear on March 6th, 2013
Re: Why? – Dan on March 6th, 2013
Re: Why not music? – rosskolnikov on March 8th, 2013-
Re: Why not music? – Marc on March 9th, 2013
Re: Why? – messybear on March 6th, 2013
Re: Why? – Marc on March 7th, 2013-
Re: Why? – edlorah on March 7th, 2013
You are an ass.... – EEE on March 7th, 2013-
concerning educating Marc – mick on March 7th, 2013-
What pissed me off is the utter lack of respect.... – EEE on March 8th, 2013-
No I'm still here EEE – Marc on March 9th, 2013-
Re: No I'm still here EEE – edlorah on March 9th, 2013-
Re: No I'm still here EEE – Marc on March 9th, 2013-
Re: No I'm still here EEE – edlorah on March 9th, 2013-
He'll shrink and fade....as usuall – EEE on March 9th, 2013-
socialism – mick on March 10th, 2013-
Re: social isms – messybear on March 11th, 2013
Chavez and oil... – Reg on March 7th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – edlorah on March 7th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – rosskolnikov on March 8th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – Marc on March 9th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – rosskolnikov on March 9th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – randym on March 10th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – edlorah on March 10th, 2013
Re: Chavez and oil... – rosskolnikov on March 10th, 2013
Re: Chavez and oil... – edlorah on March 10th, 2013
Re: Chavez and oil... – Marc on March 10th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – edlorah on March 11th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – heathcliffe on March 11th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – messybear on March 11th, 2013
Re: Chavez and oil... – Herring405 on March 15th, 2013-
Re: Chavez and oil... – heathcliffe on March 16th, 2013
The Problem with Chavez's heating oil subsidy – rosskolnikov on March 8th, 2013-
I don't think problem is a word I would use... – Reg on March 8th, 2013-
Re: I don't think problem is a word I would use... – rosskolnikov on March 8th, 2013-
Sorry to go on and on . . . – rosskolnikov on March 8th, 2013-
Re: Sorry to go on and on . . . – Reg on March 9th, 2013-
Re: Sorry to go on and on . . . – rosskolnikov on March 9th, 2013-
Re: Sorry to go on and on . . . – Marc on March 23rd, 2013-
Re: Slurry on and on . . . – messybear on March 23rd, 2013
Re: Sorry to go on and on . . . – edlorah on March 23rd, 2013-
Re: deep down in the muck – rosskolnikov on March 27th, 2013-
Re: deep down in the muck – heathcliffe on March 27th, 2013-
Re: stuck – rosskolnikov on March 27th, 2013-
Re: stuck – heathcliffe on March 28th, 2013-
Re: stuck – rosskolnikov on March 28th, 2013
Moving back to how this thread started... – Reg on March 28th, 2013-
Re: Moving back to how this thread started... – rosskolnikov on March 28th, 2013-
Basically the IMF finally sat down and watched Al Gore's documentary... – Reg on March 29th, 2013-
Re: Basically the IMF finally sat down and watched Al Gore's documentary... – rosskolnikov on March 31st, 2013
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
