posted
Czech leader Klaus fights global warming 'religion'
By Jan Lopatka REUTERS
5:38 a.m. March 21, 2007
PRAGUE – Czech President Vaclav Klaus said on Wednesday that fighting global warming has turned into a a 'religion' that replaced the ideology of communism and threatens to clip basic freedoms. The president, a free-market champion, wrote to the U.S. Congress that adopting tough environmental policies to fight climate change would have destructive impact on national economies.
'Communism has been replaced by the threat of an ambitious environmentalism,' Klaus wrote in response to questions from the U.S. House of Representatives' Committee on Energy and Commerce. The U.S. House Subcommittee for Energy and Air Quality was due to hold a hearing on climate on Wednesday with former U.S. Vice-President Al Gore, who sees global warming as a key challenge, and Danish sceptic Bjorn Lomborg, who says governments should focus on fight disease and hunger instead.
Gore, who won an Oscar for 'best documentary' for his 'An Inconvenient Truth' movie on climate change, has led a global warming awareness drive in the United States, the world's largest source of gases believed to cause it.
Klaus, who does not hold many executive powers but is by far the most popular politician in the ex-communist Czech Republic, has taken a decisively opposite stance on the issue.
Klaus said poor nations would also be hurt by efforts to impose limits and standards on emissions of gases believed to cause global warming.
'They will not be able to absorb new technological standards required by the anti-greenhouse religion, their products will have difficulty accessing the developed markets, and as a result the gap between them and the developed world will widen,' he wrote.
'This ideology preaches earth and nature and under the slogans of their protection – similarly to the old Marxists – wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central, now global, planning of the whole world,' he added.
U.S. President George W. Bush opposes mandatory caps on heat-trapping gases. He pulled the United States out in 2001 of the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Klaus wrote that it was futile to fight against phenomena like higher solar activity or the change of ocean currents, and called for avoiding wasting taxpayers money on what he called doubtful projects.
'No government action can stop the world and nature from changing. Therefore, I disagree with plans such as the Kyoto Protocol or similar initiatives, which set arbitrary targets requiring enormous costs without realistic prospects for the success of these measures,' he said.
IP: Logged |
posted
"The president, a free-market champion, wrote to the U.S. Congress that adopting tough environmental policies to fight climate change would have destructive impact on national economies". _________________________________________________
This point is a good one and correct. If everyone else had the same standards for pollution as the United States our economy would grow in a hurry, instead of decline.
IP: Logged |
"Asked if natural warming cycles, as the earth has seen in the past, could be behind climate change, the director general of the Spanish National Meteorological Institute was adamant they were not.
"No, because the time scale is different. This phenomenon is happening much more quickly," Francisco Cadarso told Reuters on the sidelines of an international meteorological conference in Madrid.
He also dismissed as over simple other theories some scientists say undermine the idea humans are to blame, such as changes in solar activity, or the theory that carbon dioxide increases are lagging behind temperature rises."
I was not getting into the global warming part, there are plenty here to state both sides of that issue. It seems like the more the United States does to try and slow up pollution,( although many consider this part of global warming) the more manufacturing dies in our country. Hopefully some how we get some benefits in the economy and to all of our people for what we do, instead of just lost jobs.
IP: Logged |
posted
I see your point iwishihad. Stopping pollution is all and good but destroying a country's manufacturing industry in the process doesn't make much sense.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by urnso77: I see your point iwishihad. Stopping pollution is all and good but destroying a country's manufacturing industry in the process doesn't make much sense.
Sure it does.... The environment must be saved at all costs.
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by bdgee: It isn't polution restrictions that are sending our industry and money out of the country, it is corporate greed that wants to not pay taxes.
The suggestion that fighting polution is the cause of our economic woes is simple minded nonsense.
DEAD ON!...
tax breaks and hiring poor people willing to work for a quarter a day have driven many jobs out of the country...
why are so many Mexicans trying to come here AFTER we signed NAFTA? they don't want to work for a quarter a day either...
it is economic imbalance that is hurtful, not costs...
many of the same people that say we can't afford to be "green" said we CAN afford the Iraq war.... LOL...
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
You are not going to solve the problem in the US. We can try and do our part, but we kill so many businesses in the United States, while other countries end up polluting many times more than us, because they have no restrictions. You knock out a United States business and put one up in China that pollutes 100 times as much.( that's a guess) It is real hard to get people to worry about pollution in the US, when they have no job and have trouble feeding their families. The government has put more and more restrictions on manufacturing companies over the years,(adding more costs) i am not saying its bad, yet the government has done little to protect them from imports. There is one way to solve both, but that does not yet seem to be an option. What we saw several weeks ago on the stock exchange, if it were to continue for several months, we would see a quick change in the way we are doing things in the US. The bad part in that, is a lot of people have their IRA's tied to the stock market.
IP: Logged |
posted
It ain't all the woes, but it is one of them. I am not talking just about the big companies in the US, actually more the smaller ones, but that is what a lot of the US business is made up of.
IP: Logged |
posted
I say again, it ain't the polution restrictions.
There is another variable called taxes that has much more effect on U.S. industry than meeting polution testrictions. The anti-tax crowd has us not collecting taxes on imports, while paying duty to take out products to other countries.
Then there is the general overall tax dodge major corporations get by refusing to operate in the U.S. Lets adopt a name for that anti-American effort......Halliburtoning
IP: Logged |
So long as Halliburton is incorporated in Delaware, it will be subject to US tax laws, regardless of where it's corporate headquarters is based.
By the way, Halliburton is moving it's headquarters to Dubai to avoid paying their taxes, since they anticipate having to do most of their business in the Middle-East...
Why would they do most of their business over there you ask? Because liberal-enviro wackos like you won't let them drill here in the US.
Now, quit peddling half-truths or I will be forced to remove my ignore and smack you down again.
[ignore bdgee]
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
I was not getting into the global warming part, there are plenty here to state both sides of that issue. It seems like the more the United States does to try and slow up pollution,( although many consider this part of global warming) the more manufacturing dies in our country. Hopefully some how we get some benefits in the economy and to all of our people for what we do, instead of just lost jobs.
global warming and pollution are not the same actually unlike global warming pollution IS a serious problem!
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by NaturalResources: [/ignore bdgee]
So long as Halliburton is incorporated in Delaware, it will be subject to US tax laws, regardless of where it's corporate headquarters is based.
By the way, Halliburton is moving it's headquarters to Dubai to avoid paying their taxes, since they anticipate having to do most of their business in the Middle-East...
Why would they do most of their business over there you ask? Because liberal-enviro wackos like you won't let them drill here in the US.
Now, quit peddling half-truths or I will be forced to remove my ignore and smack you down again.
[ignore bdgee]
is this a good post?
-------------------- Nashoba Holba Chepulechi Adventures in microcapitalism...
IP: Logged |
posted
Depends on what you mean by a good post. If you expect a good post to offer information and truth rather than advocating blind obedience to the power that is, it is not a good post.
It is absurdly childish to worship corporations and corporation worship is the fundamental tenet of fascism.
Fascism also demands Party loyalty over loyalty to the nation, something we have seen way too much of in the last six years or so.
IP: Logged |
posted
Its as plain as the nose on a persons face we are warming and polluting like crazy not only us but the whole world mast more than us.
It is expensive for some one to operate in the green way that is safe for our enviormrnt.
That is the real reason business fights so hard to stop any restrictions.
Just moving over seas or to mexico will not solve the problem. Ross was right when he said you will see your jobs moving to mexico not only for cheap labor but for no pollution controls what ever.
Good luck world I hope we don't change after it is to late.
IP: Logged |
posted
Haven't we seen enough of corporations first yet?
We have just got done with a 7 year period where tax cuts and looting of public revenue has been rampant.
At the expense of health care,education,sanitation(mostly to poor neighborhoods),work related saftey,and with the 50% across the board cut in the regulatory department with food inspection we are have more and more bad products recalled .
Even Costa Rica ranks above us now as a better health provider to its people than we are.
IP: Logged |
posted
I see a new manufacturing base when I look at windmills. I see advancement of science when I hear about more efficient solar panels or fuel cells.
I'm confused.
We pout about America not being in the big leagues of the auto industry anymore. Two of the big three got there by embracing fuel economy. Why are we behind on this when we have seen the path to success unfold twice now in the last 15 years? Why do we continue to fight this?
If we bring new tech into the world America will be the base of that manufacturing until American businesses decide to outsource to cut costs.
If we don't you can bet another country will bring it and we will buy it from them without any production jobs or benefits in our country.
The science and innovation isn't to blame here.
And I am very confused by the Czech Prez Klaus and his letter. Granted if America were to invade poor countries and force them to only use expensive equipment it would hurt their economy. But we aren't going to do that, even if we push Kyoto with the UN it is voluntary adoption. Wind energy is already price competitive with other energy sources. Another 10% or so efficiency addition to solar panels and they will be better than current energy methods (and that's with them catching and translating less than half the solar energy that goes through them into a usable form!)
I agree with both Klaus and Professor what's his butt in England that more attention needs to be paid to the poverty stricken countries of the world but I don't understand why this is an one or the other situation.
Could just as easily say we should not spend billions of dollars on oil every year so that we can get clean drinking water in Sudan. Huh?
This line of thinking is fragmented IMO
-------------------- No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.
IP: Logged |
posted
The big three auto producers were beat at there own game so far so the best thing they could have done while they had the money was to make the best non polluting car that they could have that ran on different fuel sources what ever that may be to late now they will always be behind the japanease playing copy cat and catch up now.
IP: Logged |
Toyota has gained a huge market share in just the last couple years by truly embracing innovation. And I'm not talking about "Heated AND Cooled" car seats.
Amenities are good, but only those with the money to pay for them will buy them.
You want to get the average guy to buy your car you have to have something fundamentally different to offer.
Honda has economy and durability.
Toyota has Hybrid, efficiency, and a frame that appeals to young buyers.
Ford could still do the same as Toyota if they could find a new vein of thinking. In fact, they could make the "struggling automaker with a fresh idea" image go a LONG way in this country. But they gotta get off the bigger is better bandwagon and start fresh.
-------------------- No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.
IP: Logged |
posted
[QUOTE]Originally posted by The Bigfoot: [QB] I see a new manufacturing base when I look at windmills. I see advancement of science when I hear about more efficient solar panels or fuel cells.
I like the windmill idea but where we gonna set up enough of them to make a difference?
Solar panels have been looked at for quite some time, I wish some real money would be invested in that technology. After all once the sun disappears were all in for some difficult times might as well use it while we can.
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!!
IP: Logged |
posted
So what you are saying to me is that ford who has the best frames in the business on car or truck should follow the japan
I say this did not happen in the last 2 or 3 years this happened over the last 20 years
they slowly beat chrysler and ford now it looks like the mighty gm may fall from number 1.
I don't think you must have heard me when I posted that was the way through inovation and new product the big three could have stayed on top now they are trying to play catchup with toyo,and honda.
Did you ever think of ford who has spent the last thirty years out sourcing and of toyota who has spent the last thirty investing more in this country why they have been moving at the speed 0f light puting in double digit gains from year to year.
Not only were the big three ignorant of there market and were terrible at marketing for the long term they could have half there fleet not even using gasoline by now. Instead what did they all do they decided to sell money not cars and that has come to an end for now
IP: Logged |
posted
BF says: Did you ever think of ford who has spent the last thirty years out sourcing and of toyota who has spent the last thirty investing more in this country why they have been moving at the speed 0f light puting in double digit gains from year to year.
glassman points out:
Toyota Incentive Package Zips Through Mississippi Legislature
March 2, 2007 06:32 PM Mississippi lawmakers on Friday quickly approved a multimillion dollar incentive package to secure a deal that will bring a Toyota plant to northeast Mississippi.
As the Senate took the final votes, Gov. Haley Barbour stood in a nearly empty Capitol hallway and made a brief cell phone call to Dennis Cuneo, a retired Toyota vice president who led the site-selection process that sent the plant to Mississippi over competing sites in Arkansas and Tennessee.
over 300 million for Toyota, and in '02? Nissan ALSO got over 300 millio0n from MS to open a plant in Jackson...
why are Ford and GM not taking advantage of these incentives?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
Mississippi is non union. The American auto makers are hamstrung by huge labor union agreements. For GM or Ford to build plants and staff them with non-union workers would cause quite a stur.
-------------------- Let's Go METS!!!
IP: Logged |
That's an old wives tale concocted by huge copporations to succker in fools.
In the days that the "big three" were becoming the "big three, they had very strong unions and succeded quite well.
Corporations leave the U.S. to hide profits from U. S. taxes, not to hide from unions. Many of the places where they run are strongly unionized, but they keep going there.
IP: Logged |
posted 22-03-2007 12:41 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- BF says: Did you ever think of ford who has spent the last thirty years out sourcing and of toyota who has spent the last thirty investing more in this country why they have been moving at the speed 0f light puting in double digit gains from year to year.
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
