What's the point in any sort of environmental Plan right now?

[Moonbox]

Let's face it. Canada's economy (despite what is happening with oil in Alberta) is struggling right now. More jobs than we can really count have been shipped off to China and Mexico etc and have been replaced in large part by minimum wage (or close to it) service jobs and now our governments are currently proposing that we further handicap Canadian industry with carbon emissions 'taxes'.

As far as I'm concerned, the Green Shift is total balogna. When the Liberals first announced it, I thought it was a joke.

A country like China, with 1.2 billion people, and no environmental standards to speak of, is what we should be worried about, not Canada, a country whose population is about 1/40th the size of China's. Why should we penalize our manufacturers and have them move their operations overseas where they'd likely just end up polluting more? It's about as logical in my opinion as the doctors of hundreds of years ago bleeding their patients to cure them of illness. You're hurting Canada, and you're doing basically nothing to fix the underlying problem.

The BS about the west setting an example for countries like China should also be laughed at. They're not taking our example as far as intellectual property, fair wages, human rights and so on, and you i'll GUARANTEE they'll be laughing at our 'example' of environmentalism. Until the West is willing to stand up to China, India etc and make them play by the same rules we do, our environment is 100% most assuredly borked either way.

Dion's Green Shift is BAD for Canada. It WILL end up costing people money indirectly (I won't explain here unless asked to because there's another thread going on about that) and I can't even begin to understand how people could support it.

I don't think Stephen Harper's or Jack Layton's plans are any better for the record. I don't worry about them, however, because Layton's is irrelevant and because I highly doubt that the Conservatives are really looking to go ahead with their own plan anyways. The Conservatives are not making the environment a central point of their government. The Liberals, for whatever out-of-touch reason, are.

[Ontario Loyalist]

No environment=no people=no economy

You only look at the cost and not the benefit. Same thing people did when faming was mechinized and computers were introduced into the workplace.

[Moonbox]

No environment=no people=no economy

You only look at the cost and not the benefit. Same thing people did when faming was mechinized and computers were introduced into the workplace.

and yet again you've managed to completely ignore every point that was brought up and come up with another useless insight supported by an analogy that's completely inapt.

If you even read my post (which I doubt) I tried to explain that there was no benefit to the carbon tax plans that are being tabled right now. Congratulations on wasting ANOTHER post.

[Argus]

Let's face it. Canada's economy (despite what is happening with oil in Alberta) is struggling right now. More jobs than we can really count have been shipped off to China and Mexico etc and have been replaced in large part by minimum wage (or close to it) service jobs and now our governments are currently proposing that we further handicap Canadian industry with carbon emissions 'taxes'.

As far as I'm concerned, the Green Shift is total balogna. When the Liberals first announced it, I thought it was a joke.

A country like China, with 1.2 billion people, and no environmental standards to speak of, is what we should be worried about, not Canada, a country whose population is about 1/40th the size of China's. Why should we penalize our manufacturers and have them move their operations overseas where they'd likely just end up polluting more? It's about as logical in my opinion as the doctors of hundreds of years ago bleeding their patients to cure them of illness. You're hurting Canada, and you're doing basically nothing to fix the underlying problem.

Carbon emissions is a joke. The Chinese are bringing a new coal fired plant on-line every week. The Indians are not far behind. We could spend tens of billions over many years on reducing carbon emissions and whatever affect it might have had on the environment will be completely reversed by China's exploding economy within a week or two.

[White Doors]

No environment=no people=no economy

You only look at the cost and not the benefit. Same thing people did when faming was mechinized and computers were introduced into the workplace.

When was the last time you ventured outside of downtown Toronto?

This country is VAST. it is HUGE and hardly anyone lives here. Saying that there will be 'no environment' is simply an irrational, emotional argument with no basis in facts.

[Ontario Loyalist]

and yet again you've managed to completely ignore every point that was brought up and come up with another useless insight supported by an analogy that's completely inapt.

If you even read my post (which I doubt) I tried to explain that there was no benefit to the carbon tax plans that are being tabled right now. Congratulations on wasting ANOTHER post.

That's right, I didn't read it; your header made it clear that it would be a waste of time.

[Ontario Loyalist]

When was the last time you ventured outside of downtown Toronto?

This country is VAST. it is HUGE and hardly anyone lives here. Saying that there will be 'no environment' is simply an irrational, emotional argument with no basis in facts.

Irrational as in the kind of irrational it was to suggest that all of the ice in the arctic is melting?

[Moonbox]

That's right, I didn't read it; your header made it clear that it would be a waste of time.

and right there, along with most of your other posts, is pretty good evidence that you're just here to troll.

[Ontario Loyalist]

Carbon emissions is a joke. The Chinese are bringing a new coal fired plant on-line every week. The Indians are not far behind. We could spend tens of billions over many years on reducing carbon emissions and whatever affect it might have had on the environment will be completely reversed by China's exploding economy within a week or two.

So basically we shouldn't even bother and just keep on churning out the greenhouse gases until it doesn't matter, because we'll all be dead or dying? First of all, we should be concerned about what's happeneing locally; the health of Canadians can be improved by cleaning up the environment. Second, by cleaning up our act, we can serve as an example to other countries.

[Moonbox]

So basically we shouldn't even bother and just keep on churning out the greenhouse gases until it doesn't matter, because we'll all be dead or dying? First of all, we should be concerned about what's happeneing locally; the health of Canadians can be improved by cleaning up the environment. Second, by cleaning up our act, we can serve as an example to other countries.

Read the opening post dude. Seriously.

[Ontario Loyalist]

and right there, along with most of your other posts, is pretty good evidence that you're just here to troll.

Accusing someone of being a troll is trollish behaviour in its own right.

I don't even know who you are and don't recall having a discussion with you before, but I think that my history of posting substantive posts excludes me from the "troll" category.

The simple fact of the matter is your post as evinced by your header is something that I've come across umpteen score times and is no doubt just the same old falacious gobbledygook, so I provided a concise answer to your header.

Can you disprove the logic of my response? No, you can't. No environment means people can't exist and if people don't exist there is no economy.

[Ontario Loyalist]

Read the opening post dude. Seriously.

I got better things to do.

[eyeball]

I highly doubt that the Conservatives are really looking to go ahead with their own plan anyways.

Then why are they putting one forward? The friends and neighbours I know who are most likely to vote Conservative aren't overly concerned about the environment, especially with regards to climate change. Harper is apparently on record as saying AGW is a socialist plot. The Conservatives certainly aren't fooling anyone so why the facade?

If they can be this duplicitous about something they don't care about imagine how deceitful they might be about something really important to them, like their social issues.

[noahbody]

Can you disprove the logic of my response? No, you can't. No environment means people can't exist and if people don't exist there is no economy.

A high CO2 level does not equal no environment.

[Moonbox]

Accusing someone of being a troll is trollish behaviour in its own right.

No, it's not. I'm not calling you a troll for disagreeing or arguing. I'm calling you a troll because you didn't even read my post before you came up with a one-line balogna response that added NOTHING to the discussion.

I don't even know who you are and don't recall having a discussion with you before, but I think that my history of posting substantive posts excludes me from the "troll" category.

I think this thread dissproves that.

Can you disprove the logic of my response? No, you can't. No environment means people can't exist and if people don't exist there is no economy.

Actually, I can disprove the logic of your response such as it was presented. No environment = no people. Sure. There will, however, always be an environment, and thus no environment is not a possibility in the first place. See? Logic is fun!

Now provided you're willing to read any further than that, we can also go back to the meat of my opening post and say that Canada's carbon emissions have a negligible effect on the world environment and regardless of whether or not we meet Kyoto protocol reductions or any similar standards, we will still have an 'environment' .

[Moonbox]

Then why are they putting one forward? The friends and neighbours I know who are most likely to vote Conservative aren't overly concerned about the environment, especially with regards to climate change. Harper is apparently on record as saying AGW is a socialist plot. The Conservatives certainly aren't fooling anyone so why the facade?

If they can be this duplicitous about something they don't care about imagine how deceitful they might be about something really important to them, like their social issues.

Because if the Conservatives are going to bash Dion's plan they'd more than likely be expected to come up with an alternative plan. Saying, "We're not really worried about the environment," is less abrasive than coming up with an alternative plan that may or may not ever be implemented.

There may very well be the odd fringe voter out there who cringes at the thought of Dion leading the country, but who may also care at least a LITTLE about carbon emissions. Yes...it's politics!

[Ontario Loyalist]

Actually, I can disprove the logic of your response such as it was presented. No environment = no people. Sure. There will, however, always be an environment, and thus no environment is not a possibility in the first place. See? Logic is fun!

You've already demonstrated that there is no point in having a reasoned discussion with you on this subject, but I saw fit to provide a concise answer to your header. But okay, you're right, there may always be an environment, but that does not mean that it will be hospitable to man, which some would argue would be a good thing, and many others would not care because they are only concerned about the here-and-now.

[Ontario Loyalist]

A high CO2 level does not equal no environment.

That appears to not be the case in the arctic...

[DanInOttawa]

Dion's Green Shift is BAD for Canada. It WILL end up costing people money indirectly (I won't explain here unless asked to because there's another thread going on about that) and I can't even begin to understand how people could support it.

are.

I agree with you Moonbox. I see the Green Shift as just a really bad idea. It will shaft Canada and put us all in a bad position. No jobs=uneployment=crime=deadend.

[Ontario Loyalist]

I agree with you Moonbox. I see the Green Shift as just a really bad idea. It will shaft Canada and put us all in a bad position. No jobs=uneployment=crime=deadend.

Same thing was said about the introduction of computers.

Also making the economy more green will simply cause people to find jobs in the field. How are energy efficient cars built, anyway? etc. etc.

There should never be unemployment because there is more than enough work to do in this country.

[Chuck U. Farlie]

Just wanting to say that I also agree with you Moonbox.

By shifting our pollution someplace else in the world and crippling our economy at the same time does absolutely nothing to 'save the planet'.

Unless China, India, Brazil, Indonesia, etc, are on board in trying to protect the environment, then whatever we do means nothing.

We certainly did set an example for these developing countries - we showed them how to get stinking rich and rule the world and now they want a piece of the pie.

[DanInOttawa]

Same thing was said about the introduction of computers.

Also making the economy more green will simply cause people to find jobs in the field. How are energy efficient cars built, anyway? etc. etc.

There should never be unemployment because there is more than enough work to do in this country.

What energy efficient cars? Are these jobs already created? so people will be OK or should they go to the un-employment line first and then retrain, (funding?) then hope they get one of these jobs? or... should we first create these energy efficient cars and slowly people migrate to these "new jobs". Or do we just cut are loses, stop all jobs in Canada and then look to China, India to help us out and wait for them to clean up their polution problems.

[Alta4ever]

That appears to not be the case in the arctic...

This you might be interested in......

The Global Warming Activists are stunck in Sea Ice.

“We’re stuck”

I have slept poorly. The floating ice, while thin, is so prevalent that, throughout the night, it grinds noisily against the side of the boat in a slightly alarming fashion - imagine someone scraping their nails across an old-fashioned blackboard. Then, for once, I am not woken by Robbie bounding into my room. Instead the ship’s engine roars to life earlier than normal - at around 5.30 - and the MV ‘Havsel’ begins to judder ominously. I clamber out of bed and scramble up to the bridge - all the ship’s crew are there, and they look serious. I look outside and I can see why. The sea is almost entirely congested with ice floes - I would estimate 80% plus of the sea is covered by them. There is a real risk that we could get stuck up here. We have drifted in the night into a much icier area than where we stopped last night. I wake up the team, and everyone groggily makes their way to the bridge. There’s a mixed reaction in the team to the prospect of getting stuck up here.

http://polardefenseproject.org/blog/?p=153

[Chuck U. Farlie]

That appears to not be the case in the arctic...

I wonder... wouldn't a warming of the arctic be a good thing to help quell global warming?

I mean... sure some CO2 might be released, but at the same time there would be a longer growing season and more warmth for vegetation to thrive both on land and in the oceans, thereby taking carbon out of the system and creating more oxygen.

A while back I was reading a Farley Mowat book entitled West Viking: The Ancient Norse in Greenland and North America. In that book Mowat was talking about (I think) around 1000 AD when temperatures in North America were significantly higher than now? I wonder how they ever conquered climate change way back then? I wonder if the environment, in its tendency towards equilibrium, took care of itself and worked things out?

[White Doors]

That appears to not be the case in the arctic...

really? There's no environment in the Artic???

Wow! Shouldn't that be front page news??