Jump to content

Green Party gets mentioned in the NEWS!~


Recommended Posts

already done/happening... Developed countries outsource emissions - "Developed countries are "outsourcing" more than a third of their carbon emissions associated with products and services to other countries..... some countries in Western Europe have more than half of their total carbon dioxide emissions occurring elsewhere, especially in developing countries such as China".

Well if you don't say. A CBC article supports my viewpoint. Amazing.

What possible environmental benefit is there to outsourcing our pollution in the grand scheme of things?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so ironic...the green party's new ad denounces attack ads. attack ads tell me that politicians think we're stupid; i get it when the government or the opposition release them. but when the green party starts launching ads to tell us exactly how stupid we are, that's deeply troubling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think there's any point to having a green party anymore. Green parties arose when environmentalism was a fringe cause that most people never heard of and did not care about. Today, the many valid environmental issues have been completely eclipsed by just one: global warming, and that singular issue is now well within the political discourse of mainstream parties and is prevalent in the media and in the minds of people. We don't continue to need a special party just to continue to bring attention to it: they have already succeeded in their agenda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All you'd be doing is moving your manufacturers to China/India, where with the cost of labour they don't exactly need any other competitive advantages.
already done/happening... Developed countries outsource emissions - "Developed countries are "outsourcing" more than a third of their carbon emissions associated with products and services to other countries..... some countries in Western Europe have more than half of their total carbon dioxide emissions occurring elsewhere, especially in developing countries such as China".
What possible environmental benefit is there to outsourcing our pollution in the grand scheme of things?

err... out of sight, out of mind??? Of course, one of those "benefits" is to avail an easy pile-on for the "China/India bashers".

Carbon taxation is a dumb sell, not a hard sell. That's why it's not flying.

well, of course, the "sale" depends on the who and the how... I've posted reference to this study (Economists hail EU emissions trading success), in prior MLW threads... one of the first comprehensive reviews of Phase 1 of the EU ETS. Certainly, most of the vitriol against cap & trade stems from those who don't recognize (or factor) what's involved in the startup phase of any market based trading system... don't recognize (or factor) the purposeful design of some of what is being criticized about Phase 1 of the EU ETS... don't recognize (or factor) the corrective measures within subsequent Phases (some as designed, others as reacting to results of Phase 1). But... most importantly and most significantly don't recognize (or factor) the actual results of Phase 1 of the EU ETS. Specifically:

The widespread view that the EU's emissions trading scheme (ETS) has failed to deliver expected reductions in emissions "cannot be sustained on the basis of the evidence", according to a major new study of the first phase of the scheme which hails the cap-and-trade initiative as successful and a "path-breaking" policy experiment.

The study, which has been published in a book titled Pricing Carbon, was undertaken by a group of European and US economists from University College Dublin, the Mission Climate of the Caisse des Dépôts, the International Energy Agency, the University of Paris-Dauphine, the Őko-Institut in Berlin, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT).

It assesses the first phase of the EU ETS, which ran from 2005 to 2007 and was widely regarded as a failure due to an overallocation of emission allowances that resulted in a slump in the price of carbon.

However, the researchers estimated that despite the price of carbon falling to almost zero, the scheme still led to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of between two and five per cent against business-as-usual scenarios, resulting in carbon savings of 120 million to 300 million tonnes during the three-year period.

now, again... FWIW, I personally favour a "fee and dividend" approach over "cap & trade". However, per the above, per the referenced comprehensive and reputable study, the EU Emissions Trading System, through all the startup problems, over allocations, 'giveaways', etc., within it's Phase 1 deployment... still... resulted in reduced emissions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

now, again... FWIW, I personally favour a "fee and dividend" approach over "cap & trade". However, per the above, per the referenced comprehensive and reputable study, the EU Emissions Trading System, through all the startup problems, over allocations, 'giveaways', etc., within it's Phase 1 deployment... still... resulted in reduced emissions.

How much of the reduced emissions were a result of business shutting down and moving to Asia and record oil prices, not to mention the onset of the recession?

A 3 year snapshot isn't exactly a reliable sample size.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

May is a total loser - do we really need another political type than needs the ego rush of office? Bad enough we have the other three people - why add this twit to the mix...she is a none entity...I don't like people who crave fame and status...they are usually lacking in every other area such as actually caring to be of service.....May like most will serve herself..she is an egotist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the last election she begged to get into the debates,well she did and she made a complete fool out of herself, she talks about these attack ads ,but yet during that debate ,she was nothing but a arrogant, rude, mouth peice, sure she does not like harper , but he is still the PM of canada and she treated him like dirt, even the other leaders had looks on thier faces that showed that they were to disgusted with her outburts and rudeness. I had lost all respect for her right there, and about her appearance ,have a little respect for yourself and the country you want to lead and clean yourself up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much of the reduced emissions were a result of business shutting down and moving to Asia and record oil prices, not to mention the onset of the recession?

A 3 year snapshot isn't exactly a reliable sample size.

you obviously missed the reference to "business as usual scenarios"... the 3 year reference is self-explanatory; i.e., it's the period of the study's analysis of the 3 year Phase 1 period. I've offered you reference to a comprehensive and reputable study that shows, in spite of all the difficulties associated with a market start-up, in spite of all the problems encountered within the initial phase (designed or not), that first phase of the EU ETS resulted in reduced emissions. It is surely your prerogative to attempt to counter that study with something other than your personal opinion...

.....However, the researchers estimated that despite the price of carbon falling to almost zero, the scheme still led to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions of between two and five per cent against business-as-usual scenarios, resulting in carbon savings of 120 million to 300 million tonnes during the three-year period.

now, again... FWIW, I personally favour a "fee and dividend" approach over "cap & trade". However, per the above, per the referenced comprehensive and reputable study, the EU Emissions Trading System, through all the startup problems, over allocations, 'giveaways', etc., within it's Phase 1 deployment... still... resulted in reduced emissions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in spite of all the difficulties associated with a market start-up, in spite of all the problems encountered within the initial phase (designed or not), that first phase of the EU ETS resulted in reduced emissions. It is surely your prerogative to attempt to counter that study with something other than your personal opinion...

I'm not really sure how remarkable it is that a carbon tax, or cap and trade or whatever you want to try reduces emissions. That's what they're designed to do. The question that I get back to is how many dirty polluting jobs were sent to China and how much does the system cost your economy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not really sure how remarkable it is that a carbon tax, or cap and trade or whatever you want to try reduces emissions. That's what they're designed to do.

well... that is the prevailing denier sentiment... a sentiment that states that, as applies in this case, cap & trade is a scam, that the only thing it accomplishes is to make a select few very rich. There is no acceptance in denierTown that cap & trade will reduce emissions. I was more than willing to, once again, showcase that recent released comprehensive and reputable study of Phase 1 of the EU ETS... showcase results that show a significant emissions reduction (per BAU scenarios), resulted during the Phase 1 period. Perhaps I misinterpreted what you meant when you stated the following... and as you can read, the EU ETS appears to be "flying" reasonably well, on some levels, during it's relatively early period(s).

Carbon taxation is a dumb sell, not a hard sell. That's why it's not flying.

The question that I get back to is how many dirty polluting jobs were sent to China and how much does the system cost your economy?

you will need to elaborate on your connection between outsourcing and cap & trade market systems. In any case, I certainly don't hesitate to highlight that very outsourcing aspect, per the previous linked study reference I have previously offered, several times now, across various MLW threads... the outsourcing of emissions by developed countries to China/India.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps I misinterpreted what you meant when you stated the following... and as you can read, the EU ETS appears to be "flying" reasonably well, on some levels, during it's relatively early period(s).

I'm not sure if you misinterpreted. I said carbon taxes, cap and trades or whatever you like to use makes your industry less competitive and simply outsources pollution. If all the world's major polluters would get on board with something I wouldn't have a single argument against it. I do, on the other hand, strongly protest extra costs on our manufacturers in the form of carbon taxes when the world's biggest polluters have no similar costs to deal with. Emission reductions in Canada wouldn't even be noticed in the world. It'd be like a fart in the wind.

you will need to elaborate on your connection between outsourcing and cap & trade market systems. In any case, I certainly don't hesitate to highlight that very outsourcing aspect, per the previous linked study reference I have previously offered, several times now, across various MLW threads... the outsourcing of emissions by developed countries to China/India.

No rudeness intended but I didn't understand this statement at all the way it was written. I can't figure out what you're saying here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so ironic...the green party's new ad denounces attack ads. attack ads tell me that politicians think we're stupid; i get it when the government or the opposition release them. but when the green party starts launching ads to tell us exactly how stupid we are, that's deeply troubling.

I guess they forget this little remark from the gracious may.

"a grievance worse than Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of the Nazis"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the last election she begged to get into the debates,well she did and she made a complete fool out of herself, she talks about these attack ads ,but yet during that debate ,she was nothing but a arrogant, rude, mouth peice, sure she does not like harper , but he is still the PM of canada and she treated him like dirt, even the other leaders had looks on thier faces that showed that they were to disgusted with her outburts and rudeness. I had lost all respect for her right there, and about her appearance ,have a little respect for yourself and the country you want to lead and clean yourself up.

I could care less if Elizabeth May wore a potato sack! The problem with you conservatives is on parade the way you fawn and lust over your favourite MILF - Sarah Palin. Do you want someone in politics who actually knows what they are talking about, or someone who can look good on camera reading her hand notes? And as for the debate...if May was rude, too bad; Harper was a total liar throughout the debate as we have seen with his actions in government since then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could care less if Elizabeth May wore a potato sack! The problem with you conservatives is on parade the way you fawn and lust over your favourite MILF - Sarah Palin.

The prevailing sentiment in Canada, even with us evil conservatives, is that Sarah Palin is an absolute moron and a snake.

As for Elizabeth May, she's a total slob. You don't have to be good looking to be in politics. Look at Hilary Clinton. Some pride in your appearance, however, is worth something. Elizabeth May looks like she's never done a minute of exercise in her life and that does, to an extent, tell us something about her character.

Is the irony of having a glutton crusading to save the trees and the animals lost on you???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The prevailing sentiment in Canada, even with us evil conservatives, is that Sarah Palin is an absolute moron and a snake.

As for Elizabeth May, she's a total slob. You don't have to be good looking to be in politics. Look at Hilary Clinton. Some pride in your appearance, however, is worth something. Elizabeth May looks like she's never done a minute of exercise in her life and that does, to an extent, tell us something about her character.

Is the irony of having a glutton crusading to save the trees and the animals lost on you???

There should be some sort of rule against posting crud like that without a current photograph of yourself attatched to it. Tell us, Moonbox, how saggy is your butt? How large your beer belly? Have you waxed your back this week?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There should be some sort of rule against posting crud like that without a current photograph of yourself attatched to it. Tell us, Moonbox, how saggy is your butt? How large your beer belly? Have you waxed your back this week?

I'm sorry if I've offended you. What is crud about it though?

As for my physical dimensions, let's just say I'm about 5000 Bigmacs behind May.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

..about the same behind chubby-cheeks Harper, or three times as many behind Mr. Kenny, then. Good to know.

Personally, I find it's the fat between the ears that's most telling, and those 3 you mention, have May beaten easily on that score (the poster you're replying to too)... ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There should be some sort of rule against posting crud like that without a current photograph of yourself attatched to it. Tell us, Moonbox, how saggy is your butt? How large your beer belly? Have you waxed your back this week?

I was away for awhile, and you seem to have stolen my thunder re: Moonbox's comment. I'm not going to pretend that I am not also swayed by a woman's appearance, but at some point, especially regarding serious issues, we men need to use the higher levels of our brains to do our decision-making, rather than the primal, impulse driven regions that surround the brain stem. And, needless to say, the same standard that Moonbox tries to apply here regarding Elizabeth May's imagined level of health and fitness is not applied to male politicians or media pundits....otherwise conservatives wouldn't be getting all of their talking points from fat bastards like Chris Christy, Rush Limbaugh, and Newt Gingrich.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me: when the Dixie Chicks made their remark about President Bush, Christopher Hitchens said "I don't care what those fat fucking slags have to say."

So, for a while, there were side-by-side photographs of Hitchens and the Dixie Chicks floating about online, complete with his remark as caption. You can imagine the comparative images. It was pitch-perfect.

Edited by bloodyminded
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,713
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...