Author Topic: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "  (Read 19721 times)

expatartist

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1790
  • Location: The Big Lychee
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #200 on: October 03, 2019, 09:04:51 PM »

One easy way to take your foot off the accelerator is to stop buying shit.

The US is directly responsible for 15% of emissions . . . but that number would be an awful lot higher if we calculated in all the stuff that is manufactured purely for US demand.  Just because you outsourced labor to countries without environmental protections doesn't mean all the pollution caused by your demand disappears.  Canada is exactly the same way (as is the UK).

Yea, no kidding. And then there's the scrap we ship to China for recycling. It’s amazing that our number is a whopping 15% before all the outsourcing we do. This is another reason the continued finger pointing at China and India is so frustrating. They have many times more people than the U.S., *and* they’re manufacturing and recycling our crap.

Yep. As a Chinese businessman told me, "We are the world's messy kitchen. The west is the dinner table." I'm happy China and other countries are no longer taking the world's rubbish, it's important for a country to be confronted with all the waste they produce.


Linea_Norway

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5910
  • Location: Norway
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #202 on: October 03, 2019, 10:44:47 PM »
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/?fbclid=IwAR05Kr2gnD9B_2zFM2bt5vG9m6xr8723iovVxVFvIeJiTXXJpQRKB_MIjpM#yhiBukAYcJPDfIUC.01

I noticed that the Vanguard charitable endowment program is one of the sponsors.
Does that mean that most people of this site are indirectly sponsoring it?

It did indeed have to be such an organized thing, like what the smoking and the sugar industry did/are doing. And in the mean time, the planet becomes inrepairable...
« Last Edit: October 03, 2019, 10:47:25 PM by Linea_Norway »

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2389
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #203 on: October 03, 2019, 11:44:56 PM »
So my DW comes back from a last minute shopping trip to Walmart for her camping trip this weekend and says that there are a bunch of beautiful 'Christmas' pine trees in the parking lot marked 'free'.  I wish she had taken a picture, apparently these are beautiful, full trees of significant age (a tier a year, and probably 20 - 30 tiers).  We have no idea why they would be there, it is too early to have cut them for Christmas, but will hopefully be used for firewood or some reasonable purpose and not end up in a landfill.  Ugh.  It's moments like this, when you feel like you are doing OK and trying to be mindful and then some individual just takes a massive, indefensible, intentional crap on your paltry efforts.

Leisured

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 584
  • Age: 74
  • Location: South east Australia, in country
  • Retired, and loving it.
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #204 on: October 04, 2019, 02:15:54 AM »
I have seen talk of energy subsides for fossil fuels. Where are these subsidies/ I live in Australia, and oil exploration companies are normal commercial entities. They pay company tax if they make a profit, they pay royalties to the government on oil pumped. Motorists pay excise on every litre of petrol (gas) they buy. Where are the subsidies?

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4674
  • Location: Avalon
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #205 on: October 04, 2019, 03:43:20 AM »
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/?fbclid=IwAR05Kr2gnD9B_2zFM2bt5vG9m6xr8723iovVxVFvIeJiTXXJpQRKB_MIjpM#yhiBukAYcJPDfIUC.01

I noticed that the Vanguard charitable endowment program is one of the sponsors.
Does that mean that most people of this site are indirectly sponsoring it?

It did indeed have to be such an organized thing, like what the smoking and the sugar industry did/are doing. And in the mean time, the planet becomes inrepairable...
Apparently the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program has contributed $13.1m to climate change countermovement organisations.  Perhaps MMM could be encouraged to weigh in on this?  @arebelspy , can you put this to him?

Fresh Bread

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
  • Location: Australia
  • Insert dough/bread/crust joke
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #206 on: October 04, 2019, 03:58:20 AM »
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/?fbclid=IwAR05Kr2gnD9B_2zFM2bt5vG9m6xr8723iovVxVFvIeJiTXXJpQRKB_MIjpM#yhiBukAYcJPDfIUC.01

I noticed that the Vanguard charitable endowment program is one of the sponsors.
Does that mean that most people of this site are indirectly sponsoring it?

It did indeed have to be such an organized thing, like what the smoking and the sugar industry did/are doing. And in the mean time, the planet becomes inrepairable...
Apparently the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program has contributed $13.1m to climate change countermovement organisations.  Perhaps MMM could be encouraged to weigh in on this?  @arebelspy , can you put this to him?

Apologies if those in the US already knew this, but the Vanguard Endowment Fund is a vehicle for rich people's philanthropy. I think you guys have some sort of system set up re donor accounts...? Vanguard doesn't get to choose where people send their money. I guess people send money from there to all sorts of undesirable bodies.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4674
  • Location: Avalon
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #207 on: October 04, 2019, 04:42:34 AM »
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/?fbclid=IwAR05Kr2gnD9B_2zFM2bt5vG9m6xr8723iovVxVFvIeJiTXXJpQRKB_MIjpM#yhiBukAYcJPDfIUC.01

I noticed that the Vanguard charitable endowment program is one of the sponsors.
Does that mean that most people of this site are indirectly sponsoring it?

It did indeed have to be such an organized thing, like what the smoking and the sugar industry did/are doing. And in the mean time, the planet becomes inrepairable...
Apparently the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program has contributed $13.1m to climate change countermovement organisations.  Perhaps MMM could be encouraged to weigh in on this?  @arebelspy , can you put this to him?

Apologies if those in the US already knew this, but the Vanguard Endowment Fund is a vehicle for rich people's philanthropy. I think you guys have some sort of system set up re donor accounts...? Vanguard doesn't get to choose where people send their money. I guess people send money from there to all sorts of undesirable bodies.
But the money is funnelled through Vanguard, who are the people who send it on to the charity.  There is nothing to prevent Vanguard from having a policy that they will not send money to organisations that support climate change denial.  I'm guessing you wouldn't expect Vanguard to send money on to known racist organisations such as the KKK, would you?

Actually, there should be a rule that climate change denial organisations shouldn't have the tax advantages of charitable status, but US politics doesn't seem likely to go there at the moment.

partgypsy

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3469
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #208 on: October 04, 2019, 05:34:18 AM »
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/?fbclid=IwAR05Kr2gnD9B_2zFM2bt5vG9m6xr8723iovVxVFvIeJiTXXJpQRKB_MIjpM#yhiBukAYcJPDfIUC.01

I noticed that the Vanguard charitable endowment program is one of the sponsors.
Does that mean that most people of this site are indirectly sponsoring it?

It did indeed have to be such an organized thing, like what the smoking and the sugar industry did/are doing. And in the mean time, the planet becomes inrepairable...
Apparently the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program has contributed $13.1m to climate change countermovement organisations.  Perhaps MMM could be encouraged to weigh in on this?  @arebelspy , can you put this to him?

Apologies if those in the US already knew this, but the Vanguard Endowment Fund is a vehicle for rich people's philanthropy. I think you guys have some sort of system set up re donor accounts...? Vanguard doesn't get to choose where people send their money. I guess people send money from there to all sorts of undesirable bodies.
But the money is funnelled through Vanguard, who are the people who send it on to the charity.  There is nothing to prevent Vanguard from having a policy that they will not send money to organisations that support climate change denial.  I'm guessing you wouldn't expect Vanguard to send money on to known racist organisations such as the KKK, would you?

Actually, there should be a rule that climate change denial organisations shouldn't have the tax advantages of charitable status, but US politics doesn't seem likely to go there at the moment.

I agree.

Fresh Bread

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
  • Location: Australia
  • Insert dough/bread/crust joke
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #209 on: October 04, 2019, 05:41:26 AM »
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/?fbclid=IwAR05Kr2gnD9B_2zFM2bt5vG9m6xr8723iovVxVFvIeJiTXXJpQRKB_MIjpM#yhiBukAYcJPDfIUC.01

I noticed that the Vanguard charitable endowment program is one of the sponsors.
Does that mean that most people of this site are indirectly sponsoring it?

It did indeed have to be such an organized thing, like what the smoking and the sugar industry did/are doing. And in the mean time, the planet becomes inrepairable...
Apparently the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program has contributed $13.1m to climate change countermovement organisations.  Perhaps MMM could be encouraged to weigh in on this?  @arebelspy , can you put this to him?

Apologies if those in the US already knew this, but the Vanguard Endowment Fund is a vehicle for rich people's philanthropy. I think you guys have some sort of system set up re donor accounts...? Vanguard doesn't get to choose where people send their money. I guess people send money from there to all sorts of undesirable bodies.
But the money is funnelled through Vanguard, who are the people who send it on to the charity.  There is nothing to prevent Vanguard from having a policy that they will not send money to organisations that support climate change denial.  I'm guessing you wouldn't expect Vanguard to send money on to known racist organisations such as the KKK, would you?

Actually, there should be a rule that climate change denial organisations shouldn't have the tax advantages of charitable status, but US politics doesn't seem likely to go there at the moment.

I agree.

I guess it would be seen as political in the US since it is still up for debate so they wouldn't go near it. (As it still seems to be here). Be interesting to know what the general policy is if they have one. Couldn't find it when I was googling earlier.

Papa bear

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1248
  • Location: Ohio
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #210 on: October 04, 2019, 06:11:11 AM »
I have seen talk of energy subsides for fossil fuels. Where are these subsidies/ I live in Australia, and oil exploration companies are normal commercial entities. They pay company tax if they make a profit, they pay royalties to the government on oil pumped. Motorists pay excise on every litre of petrol (gas) they buy. Where are the subsidies?

At least in the US, people used to say the DPAD deduction, which gave a small deduction for things manufactured domestically, was a subsidy for oil. But it was available to every company that made things in the US. (This is no longer a deduction).  Outside of that, I do not know of any subsidies directly for fossil fuels.

I’ve brought up this question before, but I have never seen an answer.  The transportation industry is subsidized with road and bridge construction, but that isn’t direct to fossil fuels.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kyle Schuant

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 846
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #211 on: October 04, 2019, 06:35:15 AM »
You need to discover google, Papa Bear.

https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-fossil-fuel-subsidies-a-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs#1

There are others but that's a start.

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1012
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #212 on: October 04, 2019, 08:30:20 PM »
You need to discover google, Papa Bear.

https://www.eesi.org/papers/view/fact-sheet-fossil-fuel-subsidies-a-closer-look-at-tax-breaks-and-societal-costs#1

There are others but that's a start.
It's probably important to note that the ~$5B/year in fossil fuel subsidies is on $300B/year in US domestic fossil fuel-based energy production. Subsidies exist but they are not significant in comparison to the size of the market.

Kyle Schuant

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 846
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #213 on: October 04, 2019, 11:15:19 PM »
If $5 billion isn't significant, please give me the first $5 billion of your wealth.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6520
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #214 on: October 05, 2019, 03:49:42 AM »
If $5 billion isn't significant, please give me the first $5 billion of your wealth.

Mmmhmm... If the recipient companies of that $5bn make $5bn in profit, do the executives deserve their bonuses? After all, they'd be break even without the subsidies....


lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1012
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #215 on: October 05, 2019, 08:00:26 AM »
If $5 billion isn't significant, please give me the first $5 billion of your wealth.

Mmmhmm... If the recipient companies of that $5bn make $5bn in profit, do the executives deserve their bonuses? After all, they'd be break even without the subsidies....
I'm of course not in favor of those subsidies and elsewhere pointed out I support a carbon tax--but to use an analogy, elephants aren't heavy because of a few oxpeckers perched on their backs. Here is what US oil producers make in net profits. It's not clear what operating profits are, but assuming a modest effective tax rate, it could be $30-35B.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14151
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #216 on: October 05, 2019, 08:32:02 AM »
So 1/7th to 1/8th of their net profit is government subsidy?

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1012
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #217 on: October 05, 2019, 08:50:04 AM »
Obviously yes, although their overall profits are much more sensitive to the price of oil than to a change in subsidy level. The subsidies result in more US production than would otherwise occur, which has complicated impacts on total greenhouse gas emissions. On the one hand, natural gas co-production at wells increases supply and hastens the decline of coal's share of electrical power production, while natural gas leakage from wells is of course a negative outcome. US energy-related CO2 emissions are down ~14% from its peak in 2007 (and CO2 per $ of real GDP is down ~26% from 2007).

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14151
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #218 on: October 05, 2019, 09:23:00 AM »
Simply pointing out that that's a rather heavy 'oxpecker' weighing in at 1/7th what the elephant does.  A substantial amount of the profitability of these companies comes from government subsidy, it doesn't make any kind of sense to dismiss this hand-out.

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1012
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #219 on: October 05, 2019, 09:50:44 AM »
$5B in subsidies on 4.5B barrels of annualized US oil production means that subsidies may depress the price of oil ~$1.10/barrel. Without subsidies, oil production would be marginally lower and prices marginally higher; subsidy elimination would tend to drive the most marginal and least profitable producers out of the market, so it's not clear that total industry profits would decline by very much. Compared to the back-of-envelope $1.10 subsidy impact, the market price of WTI oil has fluctuated over a range of $10 within the last 30 days.

Burning a barrel of oil produces 0.43 metric tons of CO2. This bill sets a starting carbon price at $15 per metric ton, which would be $6.45 per barrel, with subsequent increases of $4.30 per barrel per year. Those are the levels at which economic incentives will trigger large-scale changes in consumption patterns. That's what I was getting at with the $1 oxpecker; sorry if that wasn't clear.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1233
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #220 on: October 05, 2019, 11:38:15 AM »
Hmmmmmm - This is not a climate related comment.  If these guys didn't get the subsidies, I guess their costs would be higher.  It was said that it would drive the producers on the margins out.  I've read it is more expensive to produce oil in North America including the tar sands.  If subsidies were reduced, would it give a benefit to foreign producers and thus raise their sales in North America?

I don't think cutting subsidies would do a whole lot to cut usage.  At least not for quite a while until prices spike again.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1444
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #221 on: October 06, 2019, 10:14:30 AM »
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/?fbclid=IwAR05Kr2gnD9B_2zFM2bt5vG9m6xr8723iovVxVFvIeJiTXXJpQRKB_MIjpM#yhiBukAYcJPDfIUC.01

I noticed that the Vanguard charitable endowment program is one of the sponsors.
Does that mean that most people of this site are indirectly sponsoring it?

It did indeed have to be such an organized thing, like what the smoking and the sugar industry did/are doing. And in the mean time, the planet becomes inrepairable...
Apparently the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program has contributed $13.1m to climate change countermovement organisations.  Perhaps MMM could be encouraged to weigh in on this?  @arebelspy , can you put this to him?

Apologies if those in the US already knew this, but the Vanguard Endowment Fund is a vehicle for rich people's philanthropy. I think you guys have some sort of system set up re donor accounts...? Vanguard doesn't get to choose where people send their money. I guess people send money from there to all sorts of undesirable bodies.
But the money is funnelled through Vanguard, who are the people who send it on to the charity.  There is nothing to prevent Vanguard from having a policy that they will not send money to organisations that support climate change denial.  I'm guessing you wouldn't expect Vanguard to send money on to known racist organisations such as the KKK, would you?

Actually, there should be a rule that climate change denial organisations shouldn't have the tax advantages of charitable status, but US politics doesn't seem likely to go there at the moment.

I agree.

I guess it would be seen as political in the US since it is still up for debate so they wouldn't go near it. (As it still seems to be here). Be interesting to know what the general policy is if they have one. Couldn't find it when I was googling earlier.

is that a thing?   Anti-science groups (anti-vaxxers, climate deniers and so on) aren't eligible for charitable organization status?


Fresh Bread

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
  • Location: Australia
  • Insert dough/bread/crust joke
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #222 on: October 06, 2019, 02:07:42 PM »
The international rebellion starts today! I'm joining in as I feel like this is a last ditch effort to make necessary changes. Anyone else on the streets today*?

* Although my very first action is on a boat ;)

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14151
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #223 on: October 06, 2019, 02:43:39 PM »
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/meet-the-money-behind-the-climate-denial-movement-180948204/?fbclid=IwAR05Kr2gnD9B_2zFM2bt5vG9m6xr8723iovVxVFvIeJiTXXJpQRKB_MIjpM#yhiBukAYcJPDfIUC.01

I noticed that the Vanguard charitable endowment program is one of the sponsors.
Does that mean that most people of this site are indirectly sponsoring it?

It did indeed have to be such an organized thing, like what the smoking and the sugar industry did/are doing. And in the mean time, the planet becomes inrepairable...
Apparently the Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program has contributed $13.1m to climate change countermovement organisations.  Perhaps MMM could be encouraged to weigh in on this?  @arebelspy , can you put this to him?

Apologies if those in the US already knew this, but the Vanguard Endowment Fund is a vehicle for rich people's philanthropy. I think you guys have some sort of system set up re donor accounts...? Vanguard doesn't get to choose where people send their money. I guess people send money from there to all sorts of undesirable bodies.
But the money is funnelled through Vanguard, who are the people who send it on to the charity.  There is nothing to prevent Vanguard from having a policy that they will not send money to organisations that support climate change denial.  I'm guessing you wouldn't expect Vanguard to send money on to known racist organisations such as the KKK, would you?

Actually, there should be a rule that climate change denial organisations shouldn't have the tax advantages of charitable status, but US politics doesn't seem likely to go there at the moment.

I agree.

I guess it would be seen as political in the US since it is still up for debate so they wouldn't go near it. (As it still seems to be here). Be interesting to know what the general policy is if they have one. Couldn't find it when I was googling earlier.

is that a thing?   Anti-science groups (anti-vaxxers, climate deniers and so on) aren't eligible for charitable organization status?

No.  Would be tricky to implement too.  No churches would be eligible for charitable organization status . . . as they all demand belief absent (sometimes in spite of) proof.

Kyle Schuant

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 846
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #224 on: October 06, 2019, 02:50:50 PM »
The international rebellion starts today! I'm joining in as I feel like this is a last ditch effort to make necessary changes. Anyone else on the streets today*?
For reference, historically change is effected when a protest group shuts down traffic in a city centre, shutting down commerce and government for some months. See for example the various Colour Revolutions, or the ongoing struggles in Hong Kong.

Are you prepared to camp out in front of parliament for, say, three months?

Montecarlo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 311
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #225 on: October 06, 2019, 03:35:17 PM »
Aren’t a lot (not all) of what is reported as a subsidy really normal deductions for depreciation and other expenses, that all businesses can use if they have capital assets or commodity reserves?

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4674
  • Location: Avalon
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #226 on: October 06, 2019, 03:47:39 PM »

is that a thing?   Anti-science groups (anti-vaxxers, climate deniers and so on) aren't eligible for charitable organization status?

No.  Would be tricky to implement too.  No churches would be eligible for charitable organization status . . . as they all demand belief absent (sometimes in spite of) proof.
The idea is that charitable status has as it basis the idea that a charity is carrying out acts for the good of society as a whole - the relief of poverty, the provision of education, and so on, and that in return the charity is granted favourable legal and financial status by the state.

Climate change deniers are not acting for the good of society as a whole, and do not deserve charitable status.  That doesn't prevent them from existing, or from spreading their pernicious message, it just means that the state is not helping them to do it.  The KKK survives without state support, so can the climate change deniers.

Religion has been considered to be charitable in itself in English charity law since medieval times.  One might argue otherwise these days, of course.

Fresh Bread

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1933
  • Location: Australia
  • Insert dough/bread/crust joke
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #227 on: October 06, 2019, 03:53:51 PM »
The international rebellion starts today! I'm joining in as I feel like this is a last ditch effort to make necessary changes. Anyone else on the streets today*?
For reference, historically change is effected when a protest group shuts down traffic in a city centre, shutting down commerce and government for some months. See for example the various Colour Revolutions, or the ongoing struggles in Hong Kong.

Are you prepared to camp out in front of parliament for, say, three months?

You know full well we don't have the numbers in Australia. I could do that tho, yes, I'm almost retired. We are working off research that says we need 3.5% of the population to be active to effect change.

Ok I'm off to be active, have a great day!

Kyle Schuant

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 846
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #228 on: October 06, 2019, 09:05:31 PM »
You could actually shut down Flinders St station with about 1,000 people; 150,000 people pass through there each day. Another thousand at Melbourne Central and a few thousand in between blocking off Swanston, and that's the city closed off to over half its workers. At most 10,000 people in all. Or the same number of people could occupy Parliament. This is far fewer than 3.5% of the population of Melbourne.

The question is whether you could persuade them to stay there for three months. It's not just a weekend with 3.5% and done, it's 3.5% keeping it up day after day for months. Essentially it's the difference between trying to effect social change as a hobby and doing it as a profession. At the moment the closest we have to professional protestors in Australia is first and second year Arts students, but they tend to have a different cause every weekend, from Israel vs Palestine (protests with neither Israelis nor Arabs at them) one weekend, climate change another, veganism yet another, and so on; historically the left is quite diffuse.

Leisured

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 584
  • Age: 74
  • Location: South east Australia, in country
  • Retired, and loving it.
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #229 on: October 07, 2019, 03:26:12 AM »
Aren’t a lot (not all) of what is reported as a subsidy really normal deductions for depreciation and other expenses, that all businesses can use if they have capital assets or commodity reserves?

Yes, that was my point in Reply 204.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14151
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #230 on: October 07, 2019, 07:12:55 AM »

is that a thing?   Anti-science groups (anti-vaxxers, climate deniers and so on) aren't eligible for charitable organization status?

No.  Would be tricky to implement too.  No churches would be eligible for charitable organization status . . . as they all demand belief absent (sometimes in spite of) proof.
The idea is that charitable status has as it basis the idea that a charity is carrying out acts for the good of society as a whole - the relief of poverty, the provision of education, and so on, and that in return the charity is granted favourable legal and financial status by the state.

Climate change deniers are not acting for the good of society as a whole, and do not deserve charitable status.  That doesn't prevent them from existing, or from spreading their pernicious message, it just means that the state is not helping them to do it.  The KKK survives without state support, so can the climate change deniers.

Religion has been considered to be charitable in itself in English charity law since medieval times.  One might argue otherwise these days, of course.

Not to take this down a rabbit hole . . . but the whole concept of 'charity' as it applies to churches is pretty messed up.  The majority of the expenses that most churches have relate to the operation of their private club - the church itself.  As a matter of fact, churches can claim tax exempt status with zero charitable contributions whatsoever - they're not required to file taxes or prove any amount of charity to get this status.

I agree with you . . . climate change deniers are not acting for the good of society as a whole, and do not deserve charitable status.  But I'd argue that the many churches involved in preaching that homosexuality is a sin, that hide and protect pedophiles, that preach against contraception, attempt to enforce a blanket ban on abortion . . . these actions all actively damage society as a whole.  No state should be supporting this via tax exempt status.  We have given up the medieval practices of bloodletting and attempting to cure disease through balancing of humours.  We need to give up on the medieval belief that organized religion is beneficial to society.  As it stands right now, climate change deniers just need to say that they're a religion and their tax exempt status immediately becomes iron-clad and immutable.

scottish

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1444
  • Location: Ottawa
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #231 on: October 07, 2019, 03:45:53 PM »

is that a thing?   Anti-science groups (anti-vaxxers, climate deniers and so on) aren't eligible for charitable organization status?

No.  Would be tricky to implement too.  No churches would be eligible for charitable organization status . . . as they all demand belief absent (sometimes in spite of) proof.
The idea is that charitable status has as it basis the idea that a charity is carrying out acts for the good of society as a whole - the relief of poverty, the provision of education, and so on, and that in return the charity is granted favourable legal and financial status by the state.

Climate change deniers are not acting for the good of society as a whole, and do not deserve charitable status.  That doesn't prevent them from existing, or from spreading their pernicious message, it just means that the state is not helping them to do it.  The KKK survives without state support, so can the climate change deniers.

Religion has been considered to be charitable in itself in English charity law since medieval times.  One might argue otherwise these days, of course.

Not to take this down a rabbit hole . . . but the whole concept of 'charity' as it applies to churches is pretty messed up.  The majority of the expenses that most churches have relate to the operation of their private club - the church itself.  As a matter of fact, churches can claim tax exempt status with zero charitable contributions whatsoever - they're not required to file taxes or prove any amount of charity to get this status.

I agree with you . . . climate change deniers are not acting for the good of society as a whole, and do not deserve charitable status.  But I'd argue that the many churches involved in preaching that homosexuality is a sin, that hide and protect pedophiles, that preach against contraception, attempt to enforce a blanket ban on abortion . . . these actions all actively damage society as a whole.  No state should be supporting this via tax exempt status.  We have given up the medieval practices of bloodletting and attempting to cure disease through balancing of humours.  We need to give up on the medieval belief that organized religion is beneficial to society.  As it stands right now, climate change deniers just need to say that they're a religion and their tax exempt status immediately becomes iron-clad and immutable.

Yeah, the idea of revisiting the definition of a charitable organization is very appealing.   In Canada the definition is:

Quote
Registered charities
Registered charities are charitable organizations, public foundations, or private foundations that are created and resident in Canada. They must use their resources for charitable activities and have charitable purposes that fall into one or more of the following categories:

the relief of poverty
the advancement of education
the advancement of religion
other purposes that benefit the community

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-giving/giving-charity-information-donors/about-registered-charities/what-difference-between-a-registered-charity-a-non-profit-organization.html

I'm fine with #1,2 and 4, but not so sure about the advancement of religion.   

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4674
  • Location: Avalon
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #232 on: October 07, 2019, 04:28:34 PM »
Yeah, the idea of revisiting the definition of a charitable organization is very appealing.   In Canada the definition is:

Quote
Registered charities
Registered charities are charitable organizations, public foundations, or private foundations that are created and resident in Canada. They must use their resources for charitable activities and have charitable purposes that fall into one or more of the following categories:

the relief of poverty
the advancement of education
the advancement of religion
other purposes that benefit the community

https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/services/charities-giving/giving-charity-information-donors/about-registered-charities/what-difference-between-a-registered-charity-a-non-profit-organization.html

I'm fine with #1,2 and 4, but not so sure about the advancement of religion.
Those are the standard categories of charitable purposes in English/Commonwealth law. They come direct from the Statute of Elizabeth of 1601, so they are over 400 years old.

pecunia

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1233
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #233 on: October 07, 2019, 06:28:32 PM »
On the one side is that fact that churches may not be fully aligned with what some consider today's societal norms, but
on the other side throughout history they have often been the only force in many societies helping the poor, curing the sick and feeding the hungry.  In today's times of plenty these good practices are easily forgotten.

And, I'm not even religious.

lost_in_the_endless_aisle

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1012
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #234 on: October 07, 2019, 06:36:52 PM »
The international rebellion starts today! I'm joining in as I feel like this is a last ditch effort to make necessary changes. Anyone else on the streets today*?
For reference, historically change is effected when a protest group shuts down traffic in a city centre, shutting down commerce and government for some months. See for example the various Colour Revolutions, or the ongoing struggles in Hong Kong.

Are you prepared to camp out in front of parliament for, say, three months?

You know full well we don't have the numbers in Australia. I could do that tho, yes, I'm almost retired. We are working off research that says we need 3.5% of the population to be active to effect change.

Ok I'm off to be active, have a great day!
300K global "supporters" on Facebook but need almost 1M just in Aus by your logic (I'm assuming your specific cause is tied to the Extinction Rebellion, which does have an interesting set of ideas behind it). There is a bit more thought behind some of it than I initially expected, since protesting is generally >90% virtue-signalling (i.e. noise) and <10% signal (i.e. tangible, coherent objectives).

I'm speaking from a specific vantage-point here, of course, when I say that such protests would probably be better directed in favor of a carbon tax than an unrealistic goal of zero net carbon by 2025. I'm also puzzled by one article I skimmed how the yellow-vests offered some level of support in France to the XR when the YV movement cites energy taxation as one of its impetuses. For some clarification on the cognitive dissonance, I did find this.:

Vincent Picard describes himself as a “militant ecologist.”  But when protesters took to the streets to express their rage over a planned increase in France’s fuel tax, Mr. Picard joined their ranks.
He acknowledges that the tax might encourage the conservation considered critical for a healthy planet. But with the nearest train station 35 minutes away, he has to drive to work every day....

But it's hard to take much of this very seriously when the unifying underlying message is merely I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!.

EscapeVelocity2020

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2389
  • Age: 46
  • Location: Houston
    • EscapeVelocity2020
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #235 on: October 07, 2019, 11:52:47 PM »
I found this news-story to be mildly encouraging - https://www.pressreader.com/usa/houston-chronicle-sunday/20191006/282024739007626

Quote
On land, the wind boom already is well established. By next year, 9 percent of the country’s electricity is expected to come from wind power, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The wind industry already claims 114,000 jobs, more than twice the number of jobs remaining in U.S. coal mining.

But despite the steady gales of condemnation from the country’s wind-hater in chief, wind is booming most strongly in states that voted for Trump.  Then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry, now Trump’s energy secretary, pushed his state to one of the current top four wind power states, along with Oklahoma, Kansas and Iowa.

Linea_Norway

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5910
  • Location: Norway
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #236 on: October 08, 2019, 12:47:29 AM »
I found this news-story to be mildly encouraging - https://www.pressreader.com/usa/houston-chronicle-sunday/20191006/282024739007626

Quote
On land, the wind boom already is well established. By next year, 9 percent of the country’s electricity is expected to come from wind power, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The wind industry already claims 114,000 jobs, more than twice the number of jobs remaining in U.S. coal mining.

But despite the steady gales of condemnation from the country’s wind-hater in chief, wind is booming most strongly in states that voted for Trump.  Then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry, now Trump’s energy secretary, pushed his state to one of the current top four wind power states, along with Oklahoma, Kansas and Iowa.

And if we could only lower our total need for electricity in general, then the percentage clean energy could even bigger.

Like blockchain technology. Interesting technology, but it is one of the many new things using up large amounts of energy.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #237 on: October 08, 2019, 06:24:02 AM »

Vincent Picard describes himself as a “militant ecologist.”  But when protesters took to the streets to express their rage over a planned increase in France’s fuel tax, Mr. Picard joined their ranks.
He acknowledges that the tax might encourage the conservation considered critical for a healthy planet. But with the nearest train station 35 minutes away, he has to drive to work every day....


Ha ha! Hypocriticism for the win!!

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14151
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #238 on: October 08, 2019, 07:39:30 AM »

Vincent Picard describes himself as a “militant ecologist.”  But when protesters took to the streets to express their rage over a planned increase in France’s fuel tax, Mr. Picard joined their ranks.
He acknowledges that the tax might encourage the conservation considered critical for a healthy planet. But with the nearest train station 35 minutes away, he has to drive to work every day....


Ha ha! Hypocriticism for the win!!

You can call it hypocrisy I suppose.  To me, it kinda highlights the problem with attempting to solve a huge issue like climate change on a personal level.

Most governments have built transportation infrastructure with all of our money . . . but the majority of that infrastructure is automobile based.  It mentions in the article that he wants to take the train, but it doesn't go where he needs it to and it's not accessible without an automobile.  Give people cheap, fast, efficient ways to get around that aren't cars and they'll use 'em.  Make it so that it's incredibly difficult, dangerous, or painful to use other modes of transportation . . . and the majority of people will always choose the option that the government has made easiest for them.

You can't just tax gas and then not give people an alternative to drive.  The gas tax needs to be built into transit plans that will work together to reduce fuel consumption.  We need to stop throwing the huge amount of money that we do every year into building and repairing roads, and throw that giant surplus into transit programs.  We need leadership from our governments on climate issues to dig out of the hole that this poor planning has dug for us.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4480
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #239 on: October 08, 2019, 08:57:59 AM »

Vincent Picard describes himself as a “militant ecologist.”  But when protesters took to the streets to express their rage over a planned increase in France’s fuel tax, Mr. Picard joined their ranks.
He acknowledges that the tax might encourage the conservation considered critical for a healthy planet. But with the nearest train station 35 minutes away, he has to drive to work every day....


Ha ha! Hypocriticism for the win!!

You can call it hypocrisy I suppose.  To me, it kinda highlights the problem with attempting to solve a huge issue like climate change on a personal level.

Most governments have built transportation infrastructure with all of our money . . . but the majority of that infrastructure is automobile based.  It mentions in the article that he wants to take the train, but it doesn't go where he needs it to and it's not accessible without an automobile.  Give people cheap, fast, efficient ways to get around that aren't cars and they'll use 'em.  Make it so that it's incredibly difficult, dangerous, or painful to use other modes of transportation . . . and the majority of people will always choose the option that the government has made easiest for them.

You can't just tax gas and then not give people an alternative to drive.  The gas tax needs to be built into transit plans that will work together to reduce fuel consumption.  We need to stop throwing the huge amount of money that we do every year into building and repairing roads, and throw that giant surplus into transit programs.  We need leadership from our governments on climate issues to dig out of the hole that this poor planning has dug for us.

This. Crowing "hypocrisy" and then dismissing any climate activist who ever uses a fossil fuel is just lazy thinking. We need to deal with the infrastructure that got us here.

Davnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2031
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #240 on: October 08, 2019, 09:44:18 AM »

Vincent Picard describes himself as a “militant ecologist.”  But when protesters took to the streets to express their rage over a planned increase in France’s fuel tax, Mr. Picard joined their ranks.
He acknowledges that the tax might encourage the conservation considered critical for a healthy planet. But with the nearest train station 35 minutes away, he has to drive to work every day....


Ha ha! Hypocriticism for the win!!

You can call it hypocrisy I suppose.  To me, it kinda highlights the problem with attempting to solve a huge issue like climate change on a personal level.

Most governments have built transportation infrastructure with all of our money . . . but the majority of that infrastructure is automobile based.  It mentions in the article that he wants to take the train, but it doesn't go where he needs it to and it's not accessible without an automobile.  Give people cheap, fast, efficient ways to get around that aren't cars and they'll use 'em.  Make it so that it's incredibly difficult, dangerous, or painful to use other modes of transportation . . . and the majority of people will always choose the option that the government has made easiest for them.

You can't just tax gas and then not give people an alternative to drive.  The gas tax needs to be built into transit plans that will work together to reduce fuel consumption.  We need to stop throwing the huge amount of money that we do every year into building and repairing roads, and throw that giant surplus into transit programs.  We need leadership from our governments on climate issues to dig out of the hole that this poor planning has dug for us.

This. Crowing "hypocrisy" and then dismissing any climate activist who ever uses a fossil fuel is just lazy thinking. We need to deal with the infrastructure that got us here.

The criticism was not because he uses fossil fuel, it was because he joined a protest against a tax on fossil fuels.

Not taking a side, just saying.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2019, 09:55:50 AM by Dabnasty »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14151
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #241 on: October 08, 2019, 09:47:48 AM »

Vincent Picard describes himself as a “militant ecologist.”  But when protesters took to the streets to express their rage over a planned increase in France’s fuel tax, Mr. Picard joined their ranks.
He acknowledges that the tax might encourage the conservation considered critical for a healthy planet. But with the nearest train station 35 minutes away, he has to drive to work every day....


Ha ha! Hypocriticism for the win!!

You can call it hypocrisy I suppose.  To me, it kinda highlights the problem with attempting to solve a huge issue like climate change on a personal level.

Most governments have built transportation infrastructure with all of our money . . . but the majority of that infrastructure is automobile based.  It mentions in the article that he wants to take the train, but it doesn't go where he needs it to and it's not accessible without an automobile.  Give people cheap, fast, efficient ways to get around that aren't cars and they'll use 'em.  Make it so that it's incredibly difficult, dangerous, or painful to use other modes of transportation . . . and the majority of people will always choose the option that the government has made easiest for them.

You can't just tax gas and then not give people an alternative to drive.  The gas tax needs to be built into transit plans that will work together to reduce fuel consumption.  We need to stop throwing the huge amount of money that we do every year into building and repairing roads, and throw that giant surplus into transit programs.  We need leadership from our governments on climate issues to dig out of the hole that this poor planning has dug for us.

This. Crowing "hypocrisy" and then dismissing any climate activist who ever uses a fossil fuel is just lazy thinking. We need to deal with the infrastructure that got us here.

The criticism was not because he uses fossil fuel, it was because he joined a protest against a tax on fossil fuels.

Not taking a side, just saying.

Right.

But why did he join the protest?

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4480
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #242 on: October 08, 2019, 09:58:05 AM »

Vincent Picard describes himself as a “militant ecologist.”  But when protesters took to the streets to express their rage over a planned increase in France’s fuel tax, Mr. Picard joined their ranks.
He acknowledges that the tax might encourage the conservation considered critical for a healthy planet. But with the nearest train station 35 minutes away, he has to drive to work every day....


Ha ha! Hypocriticism for the win!!

You can call it hypocrisy I suppose.  To me, it kinda highlights the problem with attempting to solve a huge issue like climate change on a personal level.

Most governments have built transportation infrastructure with all of our money . . . but the majority of that infrastructure is automobile based.  It mentions in the article that he wants to take the train, but it doesn't go where he needs it to and it's not accessible without an automobile.  Give people cheap, fast, efficient ways to get around that aren't cars and they'll use 'em.  Make it so that it's incredibly difficult, dangerous, or painful to use other modes of transportation . . . and the majority of people will always choose the option that the government has made easiest for them.

You can't just tax gas and then not give people an alternative to drive.  The gas tax needs to be built into transit plans that will work together to reduce fuel consumption.  We need to stop throwing the huge amount of money that we do every year into building and repairing roads, and throw that giant surplus into transit programs.  We need leadership from our governments on climate issues to dig out of the hole that this poor planning has dug for us.

This. Crowing "hypocrisy" and then dismissing any climate activist who ever uses a fossil fuel is just lazy thinking. We need to deal with the infrastructure that got us here.

The criticism was not because he uses fossil fuel, it was because he joined a protest against a tax on fossil fuels.

Not taking a side, just saying.

Ah. Dammit, sorry, I misread that. I think maybe I've had too much coffee this morning. (And I have also been seeing a lot of "any climate activist who has ever flown in a plane or driven a car is a hypocrite!" posts lately, so I may be on a hair trigger, lol!)

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #243 on: October 08, 2019, 10:13:13 AM »

Vincent Picard describes himself as a “militant ecologist.”  But when protesters took to the streets to express their rage over a planned increase in France’s fuel tax, Mr. Picard joined their ranks.
He acknowledges that the tax might encourage the conservation considered critical for a healthy planet. But with the nearest train station 35 minutes away, he has to drive to work every day....


Ha ha! Hypocriticism for the win!!

You can call it hypocrisy I suppose.  To me, it kinda highlights the problem with attempting to solve a huge issue like climate change on a personal level.

Most governments have built transportation infrastructure with all of our money . . . but the majority of that infrastructure is automobile based.  It mentions in the article that he wants to take the train, but it doesn't go where he needs it to and it's not accessible without an automobile.  Give people cheap, fast, efficient ways to get around that aren't cars and they'll use 'em.  Make it so that it's incredibly difficult, dangerous, or painful to use other modes of transportation . . . and the majority of people will always choose the option that the government has made easiest for them.

You can't just tax gas and then not give people an alternative to drive.  The gas tax needs to be built into transit plans that will work together to reduce fuel consumption.  We need to stop throwing the huge amount of money that we do every year into building and repairing roads, and throw that giant surplus into transit programs.  We need leadership from our governments on climate issues to dig out of the hole that this poor planning has dug for us.

This. Crowing "hypocrisy" and then dismissing any climate activist who ever uses a fossil fuel is just lazy thinking. We need to deal with the infrastructure that got us here.

Yes, I think I can rightfully crow hypocrisy* here. I'm not dismissing him because he used fossil fuels ever, I'm dismissing him because he is a self-proclaimed "militant ecologist" but yet seems more to me like a militant politician. You don't even need to be a militant ecologist to realize that, in order for the world to reduce carbon pollution, there must be some pain. Now, I'm not saying that improvements can't be made in the implementation of that law (including how the revenues are spent), but let's look at this from a different angle. If the U.S. Congress passed a law that jacked up the price of gasoline by less than 40˘ per gallon, I'd be ecstatic, because we're finally doing something, even if it may be painful for a lot of people (and of course the revenues should be structured to help minimize that pain). I wouldn't at all be surprised if people started rioting in the streets. However, if Al Gore (or any other self-branded "militant ecologist") joined the protesters because the implementation of a carbon tax wasn't perfectly executed, he should rightfully be mocked as a hypocrite.

(Also keep in mind that economic inequality in France is substantially lower than in the U.S.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_inequality#/media/File:Gini_Coefficient_World_CIA_Report.svg.)

Reminds me of the Whiskey Rebellion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion), and a contrasting politician's response to it.

*That was the word I was looking for! :)

ETA: Apologies for the lengthy reply when Dabnasty already gave us the courtesy of succinctness with a similar response.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2019, 10:14:46 AM by Boofinator »

Davnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2031
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #244 on: October 08, 2019, 10:14:30 AM »
The international rebellion starts today! I'm joining in as I feel like this is a last ditch effort to make necessary changes. Anyone else on the streets today*?
For reference, historically change is effected when a protest group shuts down traffic in a city centre, shutting down commerce and government for some months. See for example the various Colour Revolutions, or the ongoing struggles in Hong Kong.

Are you prepared to camp out in front of parliament for, say, three months?

You know full well we don't have the numbers in Australia. I could do that tho, yes, I'm almost retired. We are working off research that says we need 3.5% of the population to be active to effect change.

Ok I'm off to be active, have a great day!
300K global "supporters" on Facebook but need almost 1M just in Aus by your logic (I'm assuming your specific cause is tied to the Extinction Rebellion, which does have an interesting set of ideas behind it). There is a bit more thought behind some of it than I initially expected, since protesting is generally >90% virtue-signalling (i.e. noise) and <10% signal (i.e. tangible, coherent objectives).

I'm speaking from a specific vantage-point here, of course, when I say that such protests would probably be better directed in favor of a carbon tax than an unrealistic goal of zero net carbon by 2025. I'm also puzzled by one article I skimmed how the yellow-vests offered some level of support in France to the XR when the YV movement cites energy taxation as one of its impetuses. For some clarification on the cognitive dissonance, I did find this.:

Vincent Picard describes himself as a “militant ecologist.”  But when protesters took to the streets to express their rage over a planned increase in France’s fuel tax, Mr. Picard joined their ranks.
He acknowledges that the tax might encourage the conservation considered critical for a healthy planet. But with the nearest train station 35 minutes away, he has to drive to work every day....

But it's hard to take much of this very seriously when the unifying underlying message is merely I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!.

I think this is a relevant point from the article:

Quote
Of the 34 billion euros, or $39 billion, that the French government is expected to raise this year from the fuel tax, less than a fourth is earmarked for measures that could help people of modest means transition to less-polluting transportation, said Daniel M. Kammen, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley who specializes in energy policy.

I'd be interested to know where the rest of the money would have gone but it certainly sounds like they could have directed more of it towards alternative transportation. I don't know enough to say whether Mr. Picard's position is a reasonable one but even if 100% of revenue went toward alternative transportation, would that have stopped the protests?

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #245 on: October 08, 2019, 10:30:15 AM »
I'd be interested to know where the rest of the money would have gone but it certainly sounds like they could have directed more of it towards alternative transportation. I don't know enough to say whether Mr. Picard's position is a reasonable one but even if 100% of revenue went toward alternative transportation, would that have stopped the protests?

From what I've read, it is being used to reduce the budget deficit. This is an indirect return of the money to the people, in the form of reducing future taxes. (Of course, it might all be a shell game, similar to lottery revenues going to the schools but tax revenues to the schools decreasing by similar amounts.)

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #246 on: October 08, 2019, 10:58:47 AM »
Most governments have built transportation infrastructure with all of our money . . . but the majority of that infrastructure is automobile based.  It mentions in the article that he wants to take the train, but it doesn't go where he needs it to and it's not accessible without an automobile.  Give people cheap, fast, efficient ways to get around that aren't cars and they'll use 'em.  Make it so that it's incredibly difficult, dangerous, or painful to use other modes of transportation . . . and the majority of people will always choose the option that the government has made easiest for them.

You can't just tax gas and then not give people an alternative to drive.  The gas tax needs to be built into transit plans that will work together to reduce fuel consumption.  We need to stop throwing the huge amount of money that we do every year into building and repairing roads, and throw that giant surplus into transit programs.  We need leadership from our governments on climate issues to dig out of the hole that this poor planning has dug for us.

Would not taxing carbon accomplish the bolded for cars?

In my experience, there are often plenty of alternatives to the single occupant vehicle, at least in an urban environment (in my city, bike trails and buses and commuter trains galore). People choose not to use them typically because cars are more convenient, in the sense of 'hopping in to my luxurious moving couch and going where I want as quickly as I can go'. I sympathize. But you can't get around the fact that reducing the risks from global warming will have to cause pain and inconvenience.

For the rural dwellers, they are much more dependent on carbon, and I don't think there's any way around this. But most rural dwellers, such as our pastry chef who drives (presumably) into the city every day, don't need a train station in their hamlet, they need to move closer to the train station.
« Last Edit: October 08, 2019, 11:51:31 AM by Boofinator »

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11619
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #247 on: October 08, 2019, 11:42:33 AM »
Most governments have built transportation infrastructure with all of our money . . . but the majority of that infrastructure is automobile based.  It mentions in the article that he wants to take the train, but it doesn't go where he needs it to and it's not accessible without an automobile.  Give people cheap, fast, efficient ways to get around that aren't cars and they'll use 'em.  Make it so that it's incredibly difficult, dangerous, or painful to use other modes of transportation . . . and the majority of people will always choose the option that the government has made easiest for them.

You can't just tax gas and then not give people an alternative to drive.  The gas tax needs to be built into transit plans that will work together to reduce fuel consumption.  We need to stop throwing the huge amount of money that we do every year into building and repairing roads, and throw that giant surplus into transit programs.  We need leadership from our governments on climate issues to dig out of the hole that this poor planning has dug for us.

Would not taxing carbon accomplish the bolded for cars?

In my experience, there are often plenty of alternatives to the single occupant vehicle, at least in an urban environment (in my city, bike trails and buses and commuter trains galore). People choose not to use them typically because cars are more convenient, in the sense of 'hopping in to my luxurious moving couch and going where I want as quickly as I can go'. I sympathize. But you can't get around the fact that reducing the risks from global warming will have to cause pain and inconvenience.

For the rural dwellers, they are much more dependent on carbon, and I don't think there's any way around this. but most rural dwellers, such as our pastry chef who drives (presumably) into the city every day, don't need a train station in their hamlet, they need to move closer to the train station.

I guess it depends a lot on where you live. In my former area the right of way that used to be train tracks to take rural people in to Ottawa is now a walking path. So there used to be rural train service to Ottawa, but it is gone. The right of way is still there, something could be put into place.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14151
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #248 on: October 08, 2019, 12:08:55 PM »
Most governments have built transportation infrastructure with all of our money . . . but the majority of that infrastructure is automobile based.  It mentions in the article that he wants to take the train, but it doesn't go where he needs it to and it's not accessible without an automobile.  Give people cheap, fast, efficient ways to get around that aren't cars and they'll use 'em.  Make it so that it's incredibly difficult, dangerous, or painful to use other modes of transportation . . . and the majority of people will always choose the option that the government has made easiest for them.

You can't just tax gas and then not give people an alternative to drive.  The gas tax needs to be built into transit plans that will work together to reduce fuel consumption.  We need to stop throwing the huge amount of money that we do every year into building and repairing roads, and throw that giant surplus into transit programs.  We need leadership from our governments on climate issues to dig out of the hole that this poor planning has dug for us.

Would not taxing carbon accomplish the bolded for cars?

Yes.  But if there's no good alternative then what ends up happening is increased misery for the poor, a middle class who shrug and absorb the increased costs without changing their spending patterns, and an upper class who are just as happy to keep jetting around the world not giving a fuck.



In my experience, there are often plenty of alternatives to the single occupant vehicle, at least in an urban environment (in my city, bike trails and buses and commuter trains galore). People choose not to use them typically because cars are more convenient, in the sense of 'hopping in to my luxurious moving couch and going where I want as quickly as I can go'. I sympathize. But you can't get around the fact that reducing the risks from global warming will have to cause pain and inconvenience.

I live in an urban area.  To get from my house to work (11 miles one way) I've got the following options:

Drive my car - 25 to 60 minutes (Depending on traffic, snow, rain, construction).  Somehow, this is our gold standard.  I'd include carpooling and taking a taxi/uber in this same category.
Ride my bike - 40 minutes (I'm in good shape, and an experienced cyclist who is comfortable riding in busy city traffic and in pouring rain/snow.  Requires a shower at work.)
Take public transit - 120 to 180 minutes (Three bus transfers and a subway ride, or five bus transfers).
Walk - 210 minutes according to Google maps.


Alternatives do exist . . . but the only one that really seems competitive at all is cycling.  And cycling is only competitive because I'm in pretty good shape, and have showers at work.  Google maps estimates that cycling will take an hour and twenty minutes for the same route.  If you don't have showers at work, you may well lose your job by coming in to a customer facing job sweaty and stinky in the summer.  If you aren't comfortable cycling around heavy traffic, you will simply not be able to make the trip.  (There exists only about two hundred feet of bike lane in the 11 miles to my work.)

Don't get me wrong . . . I'd encourage folks to bike every time.  But there are very valid reasons why someone might not be able to do so.  If we built a sensible network of bike lanes, plowed the bike lanes in the winter (currently snow is plowed into bike lanes, forcing cyclists into the roadway), and educated drivers so that things aren't so dangerous for cyclists it would probably go a long way towards increasing the numbers of cyclists on the road.  We don't though - these solutions cost money, and nobody wants to spend money on cycling.  It's tied up maintaining our infrastructure of roads.

Public transit and walking are really not an option at all due to the time that you would lose each day.  Just in Canada, we spend fifteen and a half billion dollars a year on road work - more twice as much as every other type of transportation combined http://thecostofsprawl.com/report/the-costs-of-roads-and-highways.pdf.  Our public transit sucks because we aren't willing to spend the money to both build the transit that is necessary . . . and to pay to operate it.  This is a failure of the officials we have elected to government.



For the rural dwellers, they are much more dependent on carbon, and I don't think there's any way around this. but most rural dwellers, such as our pastry chef who drives (presumably) into the city every day, don't need a train station in their hamlet, they need to move closer to the train station.

My dad owns and operates a farm, in the middle of farm land.  The nearest town to him is about a twenty minute drive.  He is dependent upon an automobile as long as he keeps farming . . . because that is literally the only system that is in place there.  A train wouldn't help him or any of his neighbours get to and from the town to buy groceries.  Even a busing system would be difficult to implement, but I have some small hope that pooled autonomous car resources might be able to more efficiently move people around in this type of setting.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1116
Re: "The climate apocalypse is coming ... "
« Reply #249 on: October 08, 2019, 12:43:15 PM »
Sounds like your options blow. For comparison, my 20-mile one-way commute can be done in either 40-60 min by car, 1 hr 20 min by bike (plus 10 min shower at work), or 1 hr 10 min by bus (with a roughly 8 min bike ride from my house to the bus).

As for your dad (or any other rural dweller), I think we are on the same page, there's no getting around using a car for personal transportation for the foreseeable future. But the rural population that actually requires a rural environment to sustain their occupation should be no more than about 5-10% of the population. Their transportation costs do not have a big effect on overall carbon pollution, and if the market cannot sustain the increases in price of food due to a carbon tax, we could always increase farming subsidies to offset the higher costs.

Public transit and walking are really not an option at all due to the time that you would lose each day.  Just in Canada, we spend fifteen and a half billion dollars a year on road work - more twice as much as every other type of transportation combined http://thecostofsprawl.com/report/the-costs-of-roads-and-highways.pdf.  Our public transit sucks because we aren't willing to spend the money to both build the transit that is necessary . . . and to pay to operate it.  This is a failure of the officials we have elected to government.

My only quibble: How is this a failure of the elected officials? Did they promise to divert some of the road infrastructure budget toward making better bike lanes and bus routes? Is there an effective electoral voice pushing for these options?

In my opinion, the only solution is to make it prohibitively expensive to drive 10,000 miles per year (the miles I would drive in a year commuting by car, and I'm guessing not too far from the average annual commuting mileage in the U.S.). If we doubled the price of gas through taxation, and it caused people to live an average of only 10 miles from work instead of 20, then the net overall cost would be essentially zero while halving carbon emissions (and reducing wear and tear on roadways). Once driving becomes prohibitively expensive (so that alternative transport or moving closer to work is seen as being less costly than driving), only then will a sizeable amount of people begin demanding legitimate alternatives to driving.