If you really think this is about climate change or global warming, you would be wrong. What is going on is Marxism, pure and simple. It isn't about anthropogenic climate change. The world has been on a cooling trend the past few years. If it was really man caused, the temperature would not be taking a dive. Since Carbon has increased, reason says it should be hotter, not cooler.
This is about economics and how to turn the world into a Socialist state. Freedom and liberty mean way different things in Socialist think.
Rich people's lives tend to give off more greenhouse gases because they drive more fossil-fueled vehicles, travel frequently by air and live in big houses that take more fuel to heat and cool.
By focusing on rich people everywhere, rather than rich countries and poor ones, the system of setting carbon-cutting targets based on the number of wealthy individuals in various countries would ease developing countries into any new climate change framework, Chakravarty said by telephone.
"As countries develop -- India, China, Brazil and others -- over time, they'll have more and more of these (wealthy) individuals and they'll have a higher share of carbon reductions to do in the future," he said.
These obligations, based on the increasing number of rich people in various countries, would kick in as each developing country hit a certain overall level of carbon emissions. This level would be set fairly high, so that economic development would not be hampered in the poorest countries, no matter how many rich people live there.
Is this a limousine-and-yacht tax on the rich? Not necessarily, Chakravarty said, but he did not rule it out: "We are not by any means proposing that. If some country finds a way of doing that, it's great."
Essentially, you will find it difficult or impossible to become wealthy or to improve your circumstance.
What makes me laugh is anyone thinking that China or India will sign on to this deal once they become "developed". They may pay it lip service, but why would they agree if they can eventually control commerce?
This is about stifling economic freedom. It's about taking from the rich and trickling down a few bucks to the poor. It's about us becoming a third world nation.
VW
His premis is mostly wrong. Poorer people have a tendance to have old LESS clean and less efficient forms of transport. Whether it is an old car an old morotcycle or an old bus they use for transport. And there are about 80 TIMES as many of them as the rich. So his focus for efficiency and clean running should be on the poor NOT the rich.
Posted by: WMD_Maker | Tuesday, July 07, 2009 at 07:13