I think Al Gore has done a sterling job of getting around the place, keeping people focused on the notion that all is not well with our planet.The idea is simple. We are screwing the place up, big time. We are depleting resources at an alarming rate, we have little or no regard for the long-term sustainability and don't seem to have a plan.
There has been some trash talking about Gore's agenda, people commenting for example that he's just a lefty tree-hugging stooge and that kind of childish nonsense.
He seems to be serious about his message and has the track record to back it up.
However something is making me uncomfortable. Very uncomfortable in fact.
The recent Stern report commissioned by the UK Government painted a bleak picture of what awaits the planet. We're depleting fish stocks that marine life will be all but obliterated by 2048 if we keep going at this rate. And on it goes. One bleak projection after another.
One of the things that seems to be common across world governments is that we need to tax people more to support green policies to reverse the impending environmental disaster.
This is where I am not comfortable.
Is there any basis in evidence that suggests that increasing taxation of large car users results in any improvement in the environmental situation?
What about the fact that only people with money can pay taxes and penalties yet other countries with poorly developed infrastructures pump junk into the atmosphere?
Isn't there a western bias in the search for a solution, an asymetric apportioning of blame to those who can afford to pay?
I'm not saying this is wrong, per se. What I am saying is that there is a suggestion that this has not really been properly thought through.
There's a need for urgency to solve all problems. I'm just worried that we don't have full and impartial information about whether this problem really exists to the extent that it has previously been defined.
Am I alone in thinking that although we do need to slow down our consumption, it could be the case that "someone" could be distorting the real extent to which we need to change so that it can be channelled into so-called green taxation?
2 comments:
And really, where is that tax money going to go? I'm not certain I trust my government to spend my tax dollars appropriately. In fact, I think my government is full of greedy incompetent idiots. But that's just me.
I read a very interesting book called "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man" - in essence this book was about how the United States hires "consulting" firms to strong-arm smaller, less-developed countries into accepting huge loans from us. The loan contract stipulates that the loan money, to be used for "economic development" including drilling for oil and building power plants to supply electricity to the country, must be used to hire US companies. The smaller country never even sees the money, yet must pay it all back at exorbitant interest rates.
The trick is that these "economic hit men" justify these huge loans by projecting wild economic growth in the form of GNP. Interestingly, GNP growth is projected even when only a handful of people (say, poiticians, power plant owners, land owners) increase profits by a large margin, because it only takes into account the total amount of monet flowing into a place and not who the money goes to.
The best part is that because the loans are so big and carry such large interest rates the countries are inevitably unable to pay back the loans. Then, we take control of their oil/power plants or use them as military bases.
These countries now use more of their money to pay back those loans, and less goes towards social programs for the poor.
In effect, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
The beauty of it is that because these are private firms who are acting as consultants, the government can never be blamed for this. And it's all part of their plan. In fact, leaders have been taken out by the US government because they were not willing to go along with these plans. Of course, the government never admits that's why the leader was taken out - and sometimes a fortuitous plane crash takes care of things instead...
These loans, justified as increasing the GNP of a country and increasing the standard of living, in fact take away many of the resources available to the poor and make their situation even worse.
A specific example: Dick Cheney, of Halliburton, now the VP. Justifying huge loans to other countries (Saudi Arabia, for example), and then reaping the rewards when said countries hire Halliburton to build there.
I was so thoroughly disgusted by this book that I thought asbout moving to a deserted island.
It's a sad state of affairs that we aren't far-sighted enough to realize that we aren't poisoning the planet - we're poisoning ourselves. The planet will be here whether we are living on it or not. It's a matter of how we can keep ourselves from forcing our own species into extinction.
Well, now I'm all depressed! :-) Happy Tuesday!
it's sad how much mystery and intrigue their is in the world of business and money. Nothing is clear and nobody's motives are certain.
That's sad.
and now we, the west, are lecturing other countries on how to be more democratic, more free, more like us.
Sheesh. Maybe people would be better off without the "high quality help" offered by the west.
It just ends up costing too much, not least in financial terms.
Post a Comment