chicken_lipsforme
Gold Member
Offline
Australian Politics
Posts: 7090
Townsville NQ
Gender: 
|
perceptions_now wrote on May 30 th, 2011 at 12:29am: Maqqa wrote on May 29 th, 2011 at 10:59pm: perceptions_now wrote on May 29 th, 2011 at 9:55pm: Maqqa wrote on May 29 th, 2011 at 9:17pm: perceptions_now wrote on May 29 th, 2011 at 9:07pm: So, what are the relative costs to humanity, of doing something or doing nothing? [/b] In other words, what are the costs, benefits & losses involved, in being correct &/or incorrect, if we move on my senario's, versus moving on the assumption that there is no problem? You are now calling 22,000,000 Australians representing the whole of "humanity"???
the other 6,800,000,000 humans on Earth would love to know they don't rate as humans No, it's you saying that! As I said earlier tonight & on many previous ocassions - perceptions_now wrote on May 29 th, 2011 at 8:37pm: As I have said previously, it is all in or it just won't work and I suspect that the short term self-interest of too many countries will probably win the day, until it's effectively, too late! What I said, was - So, what are the relative costs to humanity, of doing something or doing nothing? In other words, what are the costs, benefits & losses involved, in being correct &/or incorrect, if we move on my senario's, versus moving on the assumption that there is no problem? Let me give you a hint - If I am wrong and proper Global mitigation proceeds , then it may reduce Global GDP by say 5% and the Recession we had to have will be worse than it should have been. If you are wrong and proper Global mitigation DOES NOT proceed, then it is quite likely that those 7 Billion humans you care so much about (NOT), will quite likely die! I've made my choice! not IF you are wrong but it's a matter of YOU ARE wrong You are wrong because of your inability to give a YES/NO answer to the question of
Will an Australian Carbon Tax reduce global temperature? You truely are as useful as tits on a bull!
In the post immediately above your last post, was the following, from me -perceptions_now wrote on May 29 th, 2011 at 10:00pm: Apparently, you have not read my many posts, where I have disagreed with both a Carbon Tax and an ETS?
There are ways to do what needs to be done, but neither the Carbon Tax or an ETS, will achieve what is needed, in an appropriate way!
I have also previously stated on many ocassions that neither a Carbon Tax or an ETS in Australia, will achieve anything, other than raising tax revenue & making money for insiders. No, neither a Carbon Tax, nor an ETS will reduce Australian or Global Temperatures! Now we have dispensed with what won't work, we should look at what would work, which is legislated annual GHG reduction targets, backed by Tax Credits for achieving those targets & Tax Debits for not achieving the targets!
But even that won't work, if it only happens in Australia, it needs to be pretty much Global or at least 80% of the major Economies, whether they call themselves developed or developing countries and China, the USA & India would have to be included.
But, you already knew all of that, didn't you, because we've been on the same roundabout before and said the same things. And, you do that purely to try to not answer the real questions, which are - So, what are the relative costs to humanity, of doing something or doing nothing?
In other words, what are the costs, benefits & losses involved, in being correct &/or incorrect, if we move on my senario's, versus moving on the assumption that there is no problem? Wrecking a nations economy because of possible outcomes of a questionable theory doesn't pass the common sense test. The prophets of doom will need more than a good yarn for that considering that Australia could turn Amish tomorrow and it would make no difference.
|
Forum
Pages: 
