Sunset Clause for the C-Tax?
Letter to the Editor
Watts Up With That?
30 July 2011
Australians must insist that the monstrous carbon dioxide tax legislation has a sunset clause which is triggered by global cooling.
This whole tax extravaganza is based on the foolish notion that man’s production of life-sustaining carbon dioxide controls global temperature and we need a C-Tax to stop it.
However no one has produced evidence that carbon dioxide exclusively controls the climate. What’s more, carbon dioxide production is rising strongly but world temperature has been stable for the last 13 years. Right now sea surface temperatures are falling sharply.
“Climate” is generally defined as an average of 30 years of weather. Therefore the C-Tax should be scrapped immediately the global temperature falls below the 30 year average temperature, indicating the start of global cooling.
As the sun has gone quiet, and Queensland has just had its coldest autumn for at least 60 years, this looks likely to happen soon.
Viv Forbes
Rosewood Qld Australia
Sunset Clause for the C-Tax?
Australians must insist that the monstrous carbon dioxide tax legislation has a sunset clause which is triggered by global cooling.
This whole tax extravaganza is based on the foolish notion that man’s production of life-sustaining carbon dioxide controls global temperature and we need a C-Tax to stop it.
However no one has produced evidence that carbon dioxide controls the climate. What’s more, carbon dioxide production is rising strongly but world temperature has been stable for the last 13 years. Right now sea surface temperatures are falling sharply.
“Climate” is generally defined as an average of 30 years of weather. Therefore the C-Tax should be scrapped immediately the global temperature falls below the 30 year average temperature, indicating the start of global cooling.
As the sun has gone quiet, and Queensland has just had its coldest autumn for at least 60 years, this looks likely to happen soon.
(150 words)
Viv Forbes
Rosewood Qld Australia
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Trouble is, Viv Forbes, they aren’t listening; not in Australia, not in Britan, not in Europe and not in California.They’ve got too much invested in AGW to let it go.
“Australians must insist that the monstrous carbon dioxide tax legislation has a sunset clause which is triggered by global cooling.”
To accept this is as accepting that humans are solely responsible for climate change – FAIL!
Never happen.
The operative word is TAX. Anything included with that word is window dressing. How many taxes (any government, anywhere) have ever been repealed? A very precious few.
A “carbon” tax is brilliant. If it’s warming then the tax is to limit CO2 to “save the planet.” If it starts cooling, then it’s needed to remove carbon particulates that are shading the earth and so again the pols can “save the planet.”
It’s like kissing babies at the campaign stops. What pol in their right mind wants to be seen as being against “saving the planet?” What pol worthy of her/his ambitions would ever eliminate a tax?
The best the proles can hope for is a meteor strike on their capitol while the government is in session or some crumbs of tax relief as the pols twiddle the tax dial back when the proles scream too loudly. (/rant)
Give it a go, Viv Forbes. There is nothing to lose and everything to gain. We’re pulling for ya’.
In 2007, Prof. Ross McKitrick proposed the T3 tax, as follows-
http://rossmckitrick.weebly.com/t3-taxstate-contingent-policy.html
“Recently I came up with a policy proposal that reconciles my doubts about the seriousness of the global warming problem with the worries of those who don’t sahre my doubts: calibrate a carbon tax to the average temperature of the region of the atmosphere predicted by climatologists to be most sensitive to CO2. I call it the ‘T3’ tax (for Temperatures in the Tropical Troposphere) and I think the proposal could, in principle, make everyone happy, except the most extreme alarmists or those whose stance on global warming is merely a pretext for some other agenda.”
The *problem* the CACA’s have with this solution is that it is tied to an observation, rather than a cultish belief. As Ross says in the last sentence above, the UNEP and enviro groups have another agenda in mind.
The Carbon Tax has a sunset clause. No CO2 emissions = No Carbon Tax.
100% renewable energy spells the end for the Carbon Tax.
Let’s get on with.
The faster we get to the goal of 100% renewable energy, the quicker we see the end of the carbon tax.
Colin, there’s no way you could be that ignorant.
Have you read nothing from climategate or harry_read_me?
The folks at WUWT have lots of info about climate and CO2. I recommend you enlighten yourself, at least some.
I doubt a carbon tax in US or Australia will reduce global CO2 or the temperature.
Colin says:
July 30, 2011 at 8:39 am
“The Carbon Tax has a sunset clause. No CO2 emissions = No Carbon Tax.
100% renewable energy spells the end for the Carbon Tax.
Let’s get on with.”
You try that out in Australia first.
Fine. When global temps return to pre-industrial revolution levels and glaciers and ice caps around the world return to previous levels, then we drop the carbon tax.
Colin @ur momisugly July 30, 2011 at 8:39 am
Set the goal. Develop the plan. Develop the “buy-in”. Find the funding. Go for it.
However, to accomplish anything of potential value, every nation on the globe must participate, so developing the “buy-in” may take some time, if the prior 16 COPs are any indication. Then, when you have the global “buy-in”, all you need to do is find the ~$150 trillion (US) which would have to be invested in new, zero carbon emissions facilities and equipment to achieve a global zero carbon society.
Also, don’t forget that they’ll be coming for your cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, etc. since the UN FAO says they are responsible for ~18% of global annual GHG emissions. And, I hope you won’t react poorly to legumes as a replacement for meat protein in your diet. Can’t have you producing uncontrolled methane emissions.
Finally, they will be around to discuss population control with you and your family. They estimate that ~1 billion global population is sustainable, though they haven’t said much yet about how we get there from here.
Who’s “they”? Why, the new global government. (Soon you’ll learn to love “Big Brother”. Oops, make that “Big Sibling”. How non-PC of me!)
I suspect this carbon tax may doom the ALP. Isn’t it opposed by something like 80% of the populace? If you can’t scare up a call for a new election you might be stuck until 2013 when the ALP will be voted into obscurity. After over two decades of intensive and expensive study there exists no empiric evidence that mankind’s emissions of CO2 will cause significant (and certainly not detrimental) global warming. These tax and cap & trade schemes are little more than examples of greedy governments pandering for tax revenue, crony capitalism and wealth redistribution. You tax, cap and trade all you want. The bottom line is it will not change the Earth’s climate tomorrow, 10 years from now, 50 years from now or even 100 years from now.
Ask them: What is the color of CO2?, believe me!…they will say it is black!
Mike wants a return to the Little Ice Age, but why stop there? If we try hard enough, we might be able to bring on a full Glaciation.
Or, just maybe, global temperatures have little or nothing to do with us.
“The faster we get to the goal of 100% renewable energy, the quicker we see the end of the carbon tax.”
Even better. End of all taxes, because a dead economy does not pay taxes.
I seem to recall that in the UK, income tax was introduced as a short term measure to pay for the Napoleonic wars. Now I know most Brits still dislike the French, but it’s safe to say we’re no longer at war with them. Strangely enough, income tax keeps plodding on.
Never mind the tax, it’s the politicians who need the sunset clause !
When they are all proved wrong on climate they are all barred from future public service !
In Canada, income tax was introduced in WWI to pay the costs of that war and was to have ended when the war did. Strangely, the war ended but income tax did not. I cannot remember the reason provincial sales taxes were added but the GST came in to take off the manufacturers sales tax so that products would be less expensive. Didn’t see that happen either. Now we have the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST), a combination of GST and provincial sales tax on everything you pay for, clothing, products, electricity, telephone, internet, heating fuel, gasoline, any prepared food product, etc. Bottom line is no government repeals taxes, they only increase them.
Colin @ur momisugly 8:39: I suggest we “go for it” after you’ve perfected that perpetual motion machine that you’re no doubt working on.
Mike says:
July 30, 2011 at 9:54 am Fine. When global temps return to pre-industrial revolution levels and glaciers and ice caps around the world return to previous levels, then we drop the carbon tax.
Mike. Who are ‘we’
Douglas
It’s impossible to see anyone in power wanting to give up a great source of income for their use. In this case, the facts don’t matter, as long as the tax money rolls in.
@ur momisugly Colin: YOU go 100% renewable, and see how long you last. You utter [snip].
It would not work, given that the custodians of the temperature data are arch-Warmists.
Eve Stevens, actually Harper reduced the GST in two steps from 7% to 6 to 5%.
I think there should be a sunset clause on all global warming legislation and have said this for years.
Colin:
At July 30, 2011 at 8:39 am you say;
“The faster we get to the goal of 100% renewable energy, the quicker we see the end of the carbon tax.”
100% renewable energy? Do you believe in faeries, too?
Richard
White collar carbon taxes is the ultimate wet dream of bankers. Forcefully selling us the air we breathe by using Government directives is the stuff that financial dreams are made off. It’s called “money for nothing” and there is bugger all we can do about it. This is the scam that we all know is a scam, but we still have to pay for.
We now pay for the air we breathe, or to be more exact the air we breathe out. Gillard is a complete and utter liar that betrayed the Australian people.
Lets tell everyone the truth and give them a choice:-
1. No change in current circumstances – uncertain temperature changes.
2. Renewable energy – energy bills unaffordable, no more air conditioning, uncertainty in supply, huge amounts of humanitarian aid diverted, uncertain temperature changes anyway.
Hmmm – sounds like a no brainer.