ASIA - Time for Climate Justice

[michaelpousti]

that's really heartwarming... :)

[redblooming]

everyone can take pictures, some pose badly, other pose more beautiful than they really are . but know to really see when looking, really hear when listening is a very important learning

[redblooming]

don't you feel now, even in this version of performance, her voice is still too sweet?

A voice of performer can never lie

[TheDocBud]

Funny way to love your family, by urging world leaders to sign a treaty that will drastically slow the global economy and so condemn millions to endless poverty.

[sypin]

Funny way to completely miss the point!

Besides, no one knows whether the treaty is going to be binding or not.

[TheDocBud]

It's not missing the point at all. Jet Li urges us to love the global family by supporting the tck, tck, tck campaign and I suggest that to do so is not to love the family because it will slow global growth and condemn millions to poverty, i.e. I'm dealing directly with his point.

You imply, by your comment about the treaty possibly not being binding, that the global economy may not be affected. For me that would be great, but for all the AGW believers what would be the point of such a treaty?

[sypin]

I still fail to see how supporting the tck tck tck campaign will result in condemning millions to poverty, slower global growth, etc.

I don't follow pop-media rhetoric regularly, so I'm not familiar with the term "AGW believers"

But it's quite obvious a treaty that results in increased poverty, regardless of the environmental outcome of the treaty would not be climate justice. This is not "climate change" or PETA, tree hugging mentalities.

[TheDocBud]

The draft treaty sets out to drastically cut CO2 emissions (the tck tck tck campaign asks for much more). This is done either by reducing energy consumption or substituting much more expensive forms of energy. Either way, as energy is the driver of economic growth, this will slow down global economic growth, the one proven means of lifting people out of poverty. Furthermore, developed countries are being urged to source more food locally and cut back on imports from developing world farmers.

[sypin]

That is a nice theory. The problem is energy is not the only driver of economic growth... The fact that it will slow down global economic growth is complete hearsay... there are too many conflicting economic models to even address the issue. And countries would never cut back on imports willingly, improving efficiency is the real challenge. Who urges such things?

[TheDocBud]

For businesses energy is a cost. If you increase costs significantly the business may no longer be profitable or it passes on the costs downstream, increasing costs for other businesses. All businesses strive to cut costs through improved efficiency, it's prudent business practice. Treasury modeling in Australia says unemployment will rise and real wages will fall under its ETS, this will slow economic activity. Countries love exports, not imports. Try Friends of the Earth (haters of people).

[sypin]

Rises in unemployment and wages are subject to more variables and factors other than "cost of energy" - In terms of alternative energy, the oil embargo & energy crisis... caused a reorganization of energy policies in the 70's that saw solar, wind, etc. energy as actual potentials. 19% of Denmarks electricity is wind power, El Salvador, Kenya, the Philippines, Iceland, and Costa Rica all use over 15% of their electricity from geothermal sources,

Businesses and markets can adapt...

[TheDocBud]

'Rises in unemployment and wages are subject to more variables and factors other than "cost of energy".' Well, duh, except the treasury modeling was aimed solely at determining the effect of the ETS not other factors. Denmark has the highest domestic electricity cost and maintains fossil fuel power stations as back up. If you've got geothermal energy, fine, but we're talking very small energy markets. Why should businesses adapt to paying higher costs to solve a non-existent problem?

[sypin]

My, you are all over the place... are you using this treasury model aimed solely at the effects of the ETS as a template of the economic outcome for pursuing alternative energy? And since when is the problem non-existent?

It seems we don't even exist in the world if we cannot agree on the science...

And what does "AGW Believers" mean anyway?

[TheDocBud]

You're boring the pants off me now. You are the one who said 'Rises in unemployment and wages are subject to more variables and factors other than "cost of energy".' I merely pointed out that the sole purpose of the treasury modeling was to determine what the effect of the Labor government's ETS scheme would be on jobs, i.e. irrespective of any other factors. You obviously know nothing about science if you think scientists agree. If you really don't know what AGW believers means, google it.

[sypin]

Hey, i'm trying to understand your explanation for "slowing global growth and condemning millions to poverty" through your mere pointing to some Australian study on a treaty... Also, previous and current ETS are criminal at best, and haven't been supported by Climate Justice NGOs

And this isn't 1992! no international or national scientific body has issued an opposing statement on global warming ...

[TheDocBud]

It couldn't be simpler, the Australian government's treasury modeled its proposed ETS which will push up costs to business, direct (carbon permits) and indirect (energy costs) and found a reduction in jobs and real wages. Less disposable income = less spending = less growth. Climate NGOs? I didn't vote for them to interfere in my life. Try googling "ACS climate editor letters" and "APS climate open letter", these committees don't canvas their members before issuing political statements.

[Helmutiloveofficiel]

bonne chance au S'abonner

Se désabonner time4climatejustice

[baibucix]

:') Love this one

[graffitiskater111]

yeah, me too :)