You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Economy
U.S. should pay for carbon content of imported goods: Locke
2009-07-17
To address the serious threat of global warming, Americans should be required to "pay" for the carbon content of goods they consume from countries around the world, a top U.S. official said on Friday.

"It's important that those who consume the products being made all around the world to the benefit of America
What about the benefit to the countries making those products? What would they do for money if they weren't making stuff for us? Oh, that's right - they'd starve in charming, authentic squalor. Something you leftist loons approve of. For others. Especially others with non-white skin. *spit*
-- and it's our own consumption activity that's causing the emission of greenhouse gases, then quite frankly Americans need to pay for that," Commerce Secretary Gary Locke told the American Chamber of Commerce in Shanghai.

You think it's so important, you start, assh*le. Pony up yourself right now, as a "good example," for everything imported you've used in the last 10 years and LEAVE THE REST OF US THE HELL ALONE.

More buffoonery at the link. >:-(
Posted by:Barbara Skolaut

#8  As I said earlier, I gots my Galea and My Mirrorshades ready.
Posted by: Thing From Snowy Mountain   2009-07-17 20:29  

#7  The carbon label is new, but otherwise this looks like a rerun of the Great Depression (re tarrifs).

Throw in a flu pandemic and the signs the climate is abruptly cooling and the next few years should be interesting times.
Posted by: Phil_B   2009-07-17 19:42  

#6  So...a car with a Japanese label made in the US with 80 percent domestic parts will be cheaper than a Big Two assembled in Mexico/Canada with 30 percent US parts? /rhetorical question
Posted by: Procopius2k   2009-07-17 18:42  

#5  mport tarrif in other words?

Exactly! Because the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act worked SO well in the 1930's. By the end of the Obama administration, we're going to look back fondly at a mere 10% unemployment rate.
Posted by: DMFD   2009-07-17 18:12  

#4  CO2 - you call it pollution. I call it plant food.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia   2009-07-17 17:45  

#3  AzCat, that is what more people need to know. Most plants around today first appeared when CO2 levels were about 5x today's levels. In fact, CO2 depletion is seem as what will be the ultimate cause of extinction of life as we know it on Earth. CO2 continues to be converted to things like limestone, volcanism slows as the Earth cools, CO2 levels continue to drop, the plants die, the animals that eat the plants die.

This nonsense that carbon is somehow harmful is a suicidal meme. CO2 is probably the best fertilizer we could be producing.
Posted by: crosspatch   2009-07-17 15:22  

#2  I recently spoke with a professor of environmental engineering who informed me that the real crisis related to CO2 levels is that we're presently sitting at 10% of the Earth's long-term "normal" level and that such an alarmingly low level is endangering the survival of plant life on our planet. Thus, the logical cost imposition would be on those cutting CO2 emissions, not those raising them. Which of course means that countries providing us goods should be paying us for the privilege of doing so.

Hey, this lefty "thought" stuff is kind of fun!
Posted by: AzCat   2009-07-17 14:09  

#1  Import tarrif in other words?
Posted by: 3dc   2009-07-17 14:05  

00:00