Essay by Eric Worrall
According to The Guardian, poor countries will demand a global carbon tax this week on airline travel, shipping fuel and fossil fuel extraction.
Vulnerable countries demand global tax to pay for climate-led loss and damage
Poor nations exhort UN to consider ‘climate-related and justice-based’ tax on big fossil fuel users and air travel
Fiona Harvey Environment correspondent
Mon 19 Sep 2022 15.00 AEST…
Some of the world’s most vulnerable countries have prepared a paper, seen by the Guardian, for discussion this week at the UN general assembly. It shows that poor countries are preparing to ask for a “climate-related and justice-based” global tax, as a way of funding payments for loss and damage suffered by the developing world.
The funds could be raised by a global carbon tax, a tax on airline travel, a levy on the heavily polluting and carbon-intensive bunker fuels used by ships, adding taxes to fossil fuel extraction, or a tax on financial transactions.
…
All options for funding loss and damage are likely to be difficult for rich nations to agree to at a time of soaring fossil fuel costs, rising food prices and a cost of living crisis around the world. Although rich countries agreed at the Cop26 UN climate summit in Glasgow last year that there should be a framework for loss and damage, there is no agreement on how it could be funded or who should contribute.
…
Walton Webson, Antigua and Barbuda’s ambassador to the UN and chair of the Alliance of Small Island States, said: “[We] deserve to live without the looming fear of debt and destruction. Our islands are bearing the heaviest burden of a crisis we did not cause, and the urgent establishment of a dedicated loss and damage response fund is key to sustainable recovery. We are experiencing climate impacts that become more and more extreme with each passing year.”
Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/19/vulnerable-countries-demand-global-tax-to-pay-for-climate-led-loss-and-damage
The new UN Climate Chief, Caribbean politician Simon Stiell, may have have his fingers in this pie, though as far as I know he hasn’t come out and openly declared any involvement.
Any tax like this would obviously be devastating for global shipping, food and fuel prices, as even The Guardian admits.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Simple solution. Nothing in to those countries using this scheme. Let their politicians deal with the chaos sure to follow. In most poor and underdeveloped countries its the politicians who have kept the citizens from enriching themselves.
If I am forced to pay such a tax – which is likely to be ripped off by many of the developing world’s own corrupt leaders – which is frequently a factor for the poorer countries, then I will immediately stop my donations. They are certainly larger that a tax like this which will also impact on prices for the very people it is supposed to help. Given that the democracies are also likely the only ones who will pay – and many “democratic: leaders seem to be busy destroying their own countries economies at the moment, there may not be anyone left to pay.
The odds of them getting the Developed World to get their citizens to agree to any sort of taxes whose revenues would be sent offshore are about as good as Canada’s reaching net zero carbon emissions by 2030. Citizens in general are thoroughly fed up with yet another tax, particularly when they hear of foreign aid money being regularly squandered or misappropriated. What happened to most of the $19 billion raised for Haiti after the 2010 earthquake? The real irony of such a proposal is that while these poor countries denounce the carbon emissions that are supposedly causing the “climate crisis”, they depend mainly on coal, oil and natural gas for their energy generation.
The UN will love this. They have been angling for a steady income stream separated from elected governments for decades.
The ignominy of UN officials having to beg climate denier Trump for funds. How is it possible that the great and dutiful doing all their good for the world are held to account by a scoundrel. They need their own source of funds. The idea of taxing the global population for the carbon they consume is brilliant. A tiny administrative tax of maybe 1% would ensure the UN can continue to do its great and noble work.
That ‘tiny admin tax’, unhappily, due to supply constraints, WuFlu, the need to attract sufficient talented (rapacious) staff, etc., will tend to grow inexorably.
Odd that!
Auto
Antigua and Barbuda want a “global carbon tax”? There current electricity is fossil fueled. They wish to tax their own electricity?
Is China still considered a poor, developing nation???
Yes, China has been poor and developing for 6000 years. Plus, it’s the only one with a space program and nuclear weapons.
What about India and Pakistan?
Parts of China are very rich. Other parts remain very poor.
Funny thing is, I thought that couldn’t happen under communism/socialism.
The cesspool of corruption that is the UN needs funding of its extravagant spending to come from somewhere.
This would only lead to further constrictions of FF production and result in increased energy costs, which would hurt poor countries even more.
The UN has been looking for a way to institute taxes on the various sovereign states.
Governments always seek ways to grow. It’s what they do.
Ah yes, the eternal mantra of the developing world ‘gimme money”.
“We DEMAND a global carbon tax!!!”
“No.”
The UN promotes and feeds the development of politicians, countries, peoples,… with beggar mentality.
time between “conspiracy theory” and fact keeps dropping
Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,
An opinion piece published by the World Economic Forum lauds how “billions” of people complied with “restrictions” imposed as a result of lockdown, suggesting they would do the same under the guise of reducing carbon emissions.
—————————–
Id bet this move via grunion, has full WEF backing if not creation behind it too
although I do remember saying that the poor would start demanding compensation for perceived damages some years ago
after all, a handy cashcow like this presents is hard to pass up on, took longer than I though though for majority to start up
We are the carbon they want to reduce.
The UN needs another fund? Nobody paid into the last fund.
If the Guardian admits it will be devastating for global energy prices, that is a certain indication they will champion its introduction. As the Guardian is the print version of the BBC we should not be at all surprised to hear how ‘equitable’ this carbon tax is and to hear how ‘beneficial’ it will be in redressing the imaginary Climate Change impact of poorly managed and poorly administered nations across the globe.
“Antigua and Barbuda’s ambassador to the UN and chair of the Alliance of Small Island States, said: “[We] deserve to live without the looming fear of debt and destruction.”
Selected groups should pay even though there is no damage, just fear caused by the climate catastrophe claims of the climate industrial complex and allied interests (one-world government, par ex)?
Quit the fear mongering. Climate has changed through history and through geologic time. Humans and animals have adapted especially after they understand that floodplains flood, coastal storm surges happen, droughts occur, rain falls, freshwater resources may be limited, forests burn, sea levels have been higher and lower and have been steadily rising for ages …
That’s right tax the one thing that this planet must have in order to have plant life. Things are not bad for the current levels. Crop yields are high.
Well, this certainly explains the reemergence of the grifters with the Clinton Global Initiative.
They’ll really be in deep yogurt if this would actually happen, then fuel prices go thru the roof even more. Then they won’t be able to function at all for lack of ability to buy the fuel they need. Lotsa luck putting up windmills and solar arrays on small islands.
The UN has no authority to levy taxes, in fact, the UN has no authority at all. Best advice, tell’em to FOFF.
Seen on a bus stop bench in LA in the 70’s:
“Get the US out of the UN, and the UN out of the US.”
What do they think poor countries will do with that money? reduce their emissions? On the contrary. For poor people, energy is still high cost. They will use that money to subsidize their fuel and gas so that people can burn more of it. No net gain on any of their supposed climate war.
Give me a shout when China signs up to this….