National charge us and let their big pollutor mates off the hook
Householders face the biggest Kyoto burden
Taxpayers will be stuck with 84 per cent of the bill for meeting New Zealand's obligation under the Kyoto Protocol, while farmers and large industrial emitters get hefty subsidies, according to a report out today. The report on the Government's planned changes to the emissions trading scheme by the Sustainability Council's executive director Simon Terry and economist Geoff Bertram says farmers will be subsidised to the tune of $1.1 billion by the end of 2012, while large emitters get nearly $500 million.
Why must we the taxpayer pay for the big polluters? Why the hell can't the big polluters pay for THEIR pollution how the hell did we get to a situation where we are paying for National’s corporate big polluter chums? There is no incentive for the big polluter to cut back on their pollution, because we are fucking paying for them!
And why should we care? Because we are seeing the impact on global warming now…
Seas may rise even higher
Scientists are predicting seas will rise higher than the levels the Environment Ministry advises local councils to plan for. Delegates in Copenhagen for the United Nations climate change conference next month are to be told of the new predictions, which draw on new satellite images of Greenland and Antarctica. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has predicted a sea level rise of up to 59 centimetres by the end of the century. However, the director of the Antarctic Research Centre, Tim Naish, said the international community now believed sea levels could rise by 1.9 metres.
…while Kiwibloogh and Ian Wishart continue to pretend global warming isn’t happening because of man made pollution and Kiwibloogh continues to run propaganda lines for the climate denial circus, we must not allow the elites and those who generate the most pollution off the hook – you pollute, you pay.
Having us the taxpayer subsidize these buggers is unacceptable
posted by Bomber @ 8:09 am
10 comments
10 Comments:
To be fair, we will pay anyway, won't we bomber.
If Fonterra pays it's share of pollution, then milk is $6.00 a litre.
See, we pay always.
Just a thought, but if farmers were unsubsidised, would the extra costs they would have to pass on to consumers as a result of farming under the ETS be more or less than the subisdies passed onto consumers as the current policy stands?
Hmmmm saw a photo in the paper yesterday of a squad of V8's roaring around in circles, guzzling gas and promoting the message that waste is good...roll on the day when those polluters have to pay. Especially after I read a few months back that the Christchurch City Council admitted the noise from their race track in chch had caused so many problems that the Council had to buy out a bunch of properties around the track - to the tune of about $5m ... how about the motor racing industry PAYS for that one ?? Its THEIR noise pollution too.
This comment...
To be fair, we will pay anyway, won't we bomber.
If Fonterra pays it's share of pollution, then milk is $6.00 a litre.
See, we pay always.
...and this comment...
Just a thought, but if farmers were unsubsidised, would the extra costs they would have to pass on to consumers as a result of farming under the ETS be more or less than the subisdies passed onto consumers as the current policy stands?
...are the favourite counter attack talking points of the big polluters. It's the "hey kids, if we have to pay for our pollution, we'll make you pay that cost in the product" - it is a most bullshit line of attack.
1: I get to choose how much of your product I buy, which is preferable to having you take it straight out of my taxes.
2: Your product SHOULD have the full environmental impact built into the price so that it forces you to invest in research that can limit your environmental impact. Otherwise you buggers get away with it and NOTHING changes.
So let's have the power back in the hands of the individual. You leave my tax alone, increase the price of your dairy and I choose for myself thanks, knowing I'm not subsidizing your pollution and I'm forcing the industry to bring down their environmental impact. Consumers win, the planets and the Dairy industry is forced to clean up their act.
See, win, win, win.
Yeah, then the big companies will simply move their production to some other country. Yay. Ever thought of that scenario? What are you going to do to keep them in NZ Bomber? Whats your solution if you even have one beyond rhetoric.
are the favourite counter attack talking points of the big polluters. It's the "hey kids, if we have to pay for our pollution, we'll make you pay that cost in the product" - it is a most bullshit line of attack.
??
FFS, they are also Economic Practice 101.
Pointing out that the consumer ultimately pays, dosen't make me CEO of Fonterra???
As anon above says, Big Business pays the bills.
Until blogging replaces Dairy as an economic powerhouse, we are stuck with subsidies.
Yeah, then the big companies will simply move their production to some other country. Yay. Ever thought of that scenario? What are you going to do to keep them in NZ Bomber? Whats your solution if you even have one beyond rhetoric.
LMAO - pray tell brave anonymous poster where our farming industry would go to? What other country has the same landscape and is blessed with such growing conditions? Your scare tactics don't add up.
FFS, they are also Economic Practice 101.
It's Economics 101 to take my tax and subsidize big polluters? No it isn't.
Pointing out that the consumer ultimately pays, dosen't make me CEO of Fonterra???
No, you just sound like him.
As anon above says, Big Business pays the bills.
No they are not, they are not paying the bill of their pollution.
Until blogging replaces Dairy as an economic powerhouse, we are stuck with subsidies.
No, you ignore the entire point which was...
1: I get to choose how much of your product I buy, which is preferable to having you take it straight out of my taxes.
2: Your product SHOULD have the full environmental impact built into the price so that it forces you to invest in research that can limit your environmental impact. Otherwise you buggers get away with it and NOTHING changes.
So let's have the power back in the hands of the individual. You leave my tax alone, increase the price of your dairy and I choose for myself thanks, knowing I'm not subsidizing your pollution and I'm forcing the industry to bring down their environmental impact. Consumers win, the planets and the Dairy industry is forced to clean up their act.
See, win, win, win.
Oh and you right wingers are all about choice, why can't I make a choice about whether I purchase dairy with the pollution cost built into it rather than you take my taxes to subsidize your corporate chums within a framework that never makes them change their big pollution behaviour?
"LMAO - pray tell brave anonymous poster where our farming industry would go to? What other country has the same landscape and is blessed with such growing conditions? Your scare tactics don't add up."
Obviously it won't go anywhere. What will occur and happened in the 1980 will be that farmers will walk off their land given that many of them are highly leveraged. Their land will be brought out of large multi-national agri-business who will use economies of scale and genetically enhanced crops and livestock to increase profits to pay for ETS. As for 'scare tactics' this has already ocurred in the US where almost all farms in the midwest are corporate owned. Welcome to the future bomber.
But Anon, you said...
Yeah, then the big companies will simply move their production to some other country. Yay. Ever thought of that scenario? What are you going to do to keep them in NZ Bomber? Whats your solution if you even have one beyond rhetoric.
...when I pull you up on that you say...
Obviously it won't go anywhere.
...right, so that previous post was what then? Putting up a case study you knew wasn't true? As for your ag-corp future, Anon, it's already here and has been here for some time, the corporatization of argiculture can hardly be blamed on a new environmental focus.
Post a Comment
<< Home