Eco-fascist

[system]

I like Eris’s idea, but want to add another point to think about. Once the legislation is passed, it’s out of the Senator’s hands. It then becomes the wonderful bureaucracy’s job to implement what has been decided.

Personally, I think the key is not the congressmen, but the EPA bureaucrats. Some of them still care, but a lot are waiting until they get the federal pension. If we could make THEM accountable, it would go a long way.

“You don’t get something for nothing. You can’t have freedom for free.”
-Neil Peart, RUSH, “Something for Nothing”

[system]

That’s the wonderful thing about democracy. When it doesn’t work, we have no one to blame but ourselves. I’m always amazed when people complain about politicians like they were some form of natural catastrophe that no one had any control over. As far as I know, everyone on this board is a citizen of a country with a democratically elected President, Prime Minister, Congress, and/or Parliament.

[system]

Eris: I was thinking strictly of industrial production, excluding power plants, which have of course steadily increased output. That’s why the Kyoto agreements are so hard to attempt to reach.

[system]

Sunbear, I don’t know where the stats actually are on this, but I think industrial pollutants are still rising… do you know of a web page that’s tracking the Kyoto agreements?

[system]

Duh, I can use a search engine…

From the Text of the Kyoto Protocol, 1997, courtesy of CNN’s website:

The Parties included in Annex I shall, individually or jointly, ensure that their aggregate
anthropogenic carbon dioxide equivalent emissions of the greenhouse gases listed in Annex A
do not exceed their assigned amounts, calculated pursuant to their quantified emission
limitation and reduction commitments inscribed in Annex B and in accordance with the
provisions of this Article, with a view to reducing their overall emissions of such gases
by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012.

This seems to indicate that since 1990, levels have actually risen, if it’s going to take that long to get them below 1990 levels. Unfortunately CNN didn’t see fit to publish a stats page, just this sad little commentary:

The 10-ton gorilla at the Kyoto summit, of course, is the United States, the world’s largest energy consumer that alone produces nearly a quarter of the world’s emissions of carbon dioxide.

U.S. President Bill Clinton has committed his country to reducing levels of greenhouse emissions in the United States to 1990 levels by 2012. But U.S. officials are emphasizing that this can be done largely through widespread adoption of more energy-efficient technologies – and that major sacrifices by American consumers won’t be necessary.

Domestic critics are skeptical that this so-called “win-win” strategy is feasible, and they are warning American consumers about job losses and significant increases in the price of gasoline and electricity. Before the Kyoto treaty is even drafted, a multi-million dollar advertising campaign has been launched on American television to build opposition to it.

Clinton has called on developing countries to agree to limits as well. Indeed, the U.S. Congress has to approve the agreement, and congressional leaders have made it clear that they may reject it if the developing world is exempt. And without U.S. participation, any treaty would be something of a paper tiger.

You will note that there is no mention of skeptics on the OTHER side of the “win-win” issue who think, and probably rightly so, that measures that do NOT cost jobs or make consumers pay (GASP!) more for conveniences will actually do any real good at all. Pansy-ass measures like this will delay disaster, not prevent it.

Moreover, you will notice mention of an ad campaign against the Protocol. Oh, there’s a smart idea - the voice of the people, at work for you, making sure that you can drive your car for cheap, and who cares if you won’t be able to breathe the air outside of it.

I don’t know how this has panned out since 1997. If anyone has any info I’d appreciate it.

[system]

The CO2 emissions should be reduced as much as possible, but will people drive smaller cars?
On the other hand, the greater part of CO2 emissions are still natural, not man made.

[system]

The main problem with a dictator is, has
always been, and will always be corruption.
An elected head of government has to fight
for re-election or for the continued reign
of his party so he listens to the people.
Constitutional monarchs fear thier ministers,
the military, the church, the press… and
most of all, the impowered people. What does
a dictator fear? Nothing, if his army is
strong enough. If either Stalin, Mao, or
Hitler was in power now, I very much doubt
that they’d be actively doing a hell of a lot
to save the enviroment. The very argument made against democracies is that the people care about nothing but themselves. The problem with the argument is that no one has found a dictator that isn’t a person. When the enviroment is harmed, it’s usually the least affluent that are hurt the first and the most affluent that are hurt the least, while the rich are doing the most of the harming and the poor are doing the least. History teaches us that in a dictatorship, the dicatator is takes the place of the most affluent and the people take the place of the least. Nothing else changes.

[system]

Ick… I’m sorry 'bout the carriage returns. Please don’t send the Thought Police after me.