Has Canada rafitied the Kyoto Accord yet?

[Big Blue Machine]

Everyone is greedy at times. That's the fault of humans, we can all be corrupted by power. All power corrupts, but absolute power corrupts absolutely.

[August1991]

The suggestion that “socialism” or a collective response to environmental problems has been inadequate requires that such a response has occurred in the first place and has failed or alternatively that it has failed to even recognize the problem in the first place.

Collective ownership has occurred. IOW, we all own the environment (air, high seas) in the sense that anyone can use it. (This is one definition of socialism.) This method has failed.

Many things contain value and use value even if they are not privately owned. Most humans value sociality yet do not own friends.

I own myself and this means I can choose to associate with those who choose likewise. (Although telephone solicitors seem to think my time is collective property.)

Some people value spiritual or religious beliefs but do not own God.

If God exists, I'm sure He's a limitless collective good. There will be no queues to gain His attention.

Corporations that own the land they exploit do not necessarily treat it well.

Why wouldn't they? Do you not treat well the things you own?

There is more likelihood that corporate managers think in the long term than you or I do. Shareholders buy shares because of their resale value. And future buyers will think of resale value too. Corporate managers must think of future shareholders because current shareholders indirectly think of them now.

This is akin to purporting that science is woefully inadequate because the use of this epistemology has been unsuccessful at curing SARS or killing flesh eating bacteria.

Huh? The problem is well understood. Even the solution. Unfortunately, there are too many so-called Left Wing People, bad at mathematics who just don't get it.

When something is owned and can be traded, like a cow, then there will be no problem. When something is not owned, like a cod fish swimming in the ocean, then you have a big problem.

Our environment is like a cod fish.

If I try to dump garbage on your front lawn, you will stop me or sue me. But if I dump garbage into the air you breathe, well who owns the air you breathe? Who owns the water in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean?

Blaming corporations and greed and short-term thinking for environmental problems is really, really dumb. It's ignorant.

With that rant out of my system, let me add that a New Left Wing is desperately needed in this world. But first, the Old Left Wing must understand that socialism and communism and co-operativism and a "think globally, act locally" non-profit approach won't protect or help ordinary people - and they'll lead to the destruction of the environment.

[Cartman]

When something is owned and can be traded, like a cow, then there will be no problem. When something is not owned, like a cod fish swimming in the ocean, then you have a big problem.

By this logic, we should sell our national parks to corporations and individuals who will protect them because they own them.

[August1991]

By this logic, we should sell our national parks to corporations and individuals who will protect them because they own them.

Indeed, the federal government owns the national parks and controls who uses those parks. Imagine what would happen if the federal government didn't do that.

I'll avoid an ideological debate here about who (governments or private sector) would best protect (or use) this resource. (BTW, the most natural, fish filled rivers in Scotland are owned by private clubs that are indistinguishable from corporations.)

My first point is that environmental destruction is not caused by greed, corporations or short-term thinking. It's caused by an absence of ownership.

My second point is that I don't care who owns the environment as long as we find and designate clearly an owner or owners.

[Cartman]

Canadians seem to want an old left solution to environmental problems because the market has not responded to their wishes. Check out this Environics poll

http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/programs...cs-poll-eng.pdf

The results of this research reveal an unprecedented level of consensus among Canadians on

the importance of improving vehicle efficiency standards, and the acceptability of (if not necessity

in) achieving this objective through government regulations. More than nine in ten (94%) support

the concept of placing government requirements on automakers to improve average vehicle

efficiency standards by 25 percent by the year 2010, and almost all of these supporters (92%)

endorse this approach even if it will mean higher vehicle prices and less variety of models to choose

from.

Canadians seem to be saying they can do their part as consumers by paying a bit more

for a new vehicle or having slightly fewer models to choose from. While all of this might happen

without government intervention, previous research shows Canadians generally want and expect an

active government role in environmental protection. In this case they may see regulations as a way to give them confidence that fuel efficiency standards will in fact improve over the next few years.

[Big Blue Machine]

We should have a free vote on Kyoto.

[August1991]

We should have a free vote on Kyoto.

That's the equivalent of the bureaucrat's "we will evaluate this proposal" or the minister's "my staff is monitoring the situation".

When in doubt, mumble. When in trouble, delegate. When in charge, ponder.

----

Canadians seem to want an old left solution to environmental problems because the market has not responded to their wishes.

The market is not at fault here. Markets can only function if someone clearly owns something and then can trade it using a quotable price.

When you waste time in a traffic jam, would you say markets have not responded to your wishes? Or would you say that there are too many cars on the road?

I would say no one owns the road and so no one can sell it. There's no money price to be paid. That's an invitation to trouble. We pay the cost in wasted time.

We could do as they do in Athens and let cars with odd-number license plates drive on Tues, Wed etc. I suppose you would call that Old Left. I would call it dumb, ignorant and Soviet. We don't sell bread or milk that way. We shouldn't distribute road space that way either.

But what about "poor people" says the Old Left? They seem to be able to buy bread and milk, I say first. But then I say, Old Left, you're right. There is a serious problem of poor and rich in this world. But we must not mix this problem up with road space and the environment.

New Left thinking might be: Give money to poor people. Give them someone to have a decent conversation with so they may change somehow.

Cartman, I really like your posts. I hope you're not offended by my rants.

[caesar]

Opposition to Kyoto

The opposition to the Kyoto treaty in Canada comes mainly from Ralph Klein, the premier of Alberta. Alberta is Canada's oil-rich province. Klein said in one of his anti-Kyoto commercials that perhaps dinosaur farts helped end the last ice age. I don't know who Klein's scientific advisers on Kyoto are, but they appear to be unaware the dinosaurs died out millions of years ago and the last ice age ended a mere 10,000 years ago. I think we can safely presume that Klein has not been receiving expert scientific advice to justify his gut feelings about global warming.

Klein imagines that the Kyoto treaty will be costly to the oil interests in his province. He reasons, if we reduce emissions, we necessarily will necessarily consume less oil, therefore Alberta will sell less oil, therefore Alberta will make less money. Therefore, Kyoto must but stopped, the planet be damned.

Clean up the environment. It may not be possible as quickly as Kyoto wants but we certainly should work towards it. We put pressure on people smoking cigarettes; that's small potatoes compared to the industrial pollution that affects our health as well as the question of global warming

[playfullfellow]

I agree with you caesar on that we have to clean up the environment and that we have a long way to go yet. As for global warming, I still do not view it as viable science but then again, I may change my mind if more evidence is shown. I am more concerned about the shape of our rivers, lakes and general air. I wouldn't let my dog swim in the Fraser river, I am sure caesar knows how sad that river is.

Kyoto could be a good thing but the Liberals will try their best to screw up everything on this one too. As always, we get the feeling of east=good, west=bad from the Liberals. Look at the way the Liberals made the automobile manufacturing plants exemptions from kyoto but yet the oil industry looks like will have to bear the full brunt of kyoto. Last time I looked, we have no car manufacturing out here and there is not much oil exploration out there aside from NFLD. How many more exemptions are we going to see and how many will be in Liberal friendly east? As with so many things that are supposed to have a positive impact on our lives, I am sure the Liberals will screw this one up too.

[maplesyrup]

Russia's Putin preparing to ratify Kyoto Protocol: report

Finally Russia is getting its act together, at least on the global warming issue. Canada's position has been a comedy of errors and it is quite tragic what has happened here in our country. Canada could have been the trendsetter - another one of the reasons I miss Trudeau.

[ticker]

Russia is just being threaten by the EU to play ball or you are out on you own.