Do we need to be preparing for Arctic cruising strategies because of Global Cooling

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Read very carefully



BTW - You last sentence is a perfect description of yourself.

Still doesn't answer the question of what happens to the " carbon tax" levied on petroleum products destined for polimers and not burning as fuel?

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Still doesn't answer the question of what happens to the " carbon tax" levied on petroleum products destined for polimers and not burning as fuel?

There are two options:

- In James Hansen's proposal a green dividend cheque is sent to all.

- In the BC system, which I prefer, all other taxes are lowered.

It is a carbon tax, not a carbon dioxide tax.

[Celestialsailor]

Originally Posted by GoingWalkabout

Thanks you for that unsolicited insult.

By the way...please help me to understand...
The OP's name is Going Walkabout (note space between Going and Walkabout) and no avatar. Your name is GoingWalkabout all one word with avatar. Yet you responded to my post as if you were the Op.
Just wondering if you are using two I.D's here.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Yes - you do.

Please provide an unembedded list of questions.

In meantime I will prepare a list for you.

Sorry if you have problems with attention span, and are insufficiently schooled up in basic economics. I can see how this combo would make it difficult for you to comprehend a simple analysis of how your own example of a carbon tax actually works/doesn't work.

Originally Posted by jackdale

Read very carefully

Quote:
A carbon tax is collected from fossil-fuel companies upon the first sale at the mine, wellhead or port of entry.

Got it the first time, thanks, which you posted a long time ago in the other thread, btw. You appear to be missing or avoiding Newhaul's point, namely that taxes collected by the fossil fuel co. at its source, are all then reimbursed to the same oil co. by the consumer. The question raised is whether the consumer is purchasing gas at the pump or is a consumer purchasing fossil fuels to produce resins for polymers. If the latter is not burning and therefore creating CO2 emissions, then what justifies the tax?

Maybe we have some facts wrong which need to be corrected, but let's not spend pages & pages getting you to acknowledge the simply-stated issue.

If reading carefully isn't your strong suit, then at least try and carefully read the underlined parts. Surely a guy of your education & accomplishment can overcome such relatively minor learning disabilities.

[jackdale]

OK - Exile and newhaul, or anyone else up to the task:

Please answer this question: What science academy anywhere on the planet disputes the conclusions of the IPCC?

If you need to quibble over what a science academy is, here is a definition of academy: "a society or institution of distinguished scholars, artists, or scientists, that aims to promote and maintain standards in its particular field."

I have repeatedly asked this; no one one appears up to the task.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

There are two options:

- In James Hansen's proposal a green dividend cheque is sent to all.

- In the BC system, which I prefer, all other taxes are lowered.

It is a carbon tax, not a carbon dioxide tax.

So according the Hansen's proposal every household gets the same amount ?
I like that idea , means I would make money on the deal due to my lower fuel usage compared to my neighbors that have and drive 3 older vehicles. I don't even own a car that is on the road.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Exile

Sorry if you have problems with attention span, and are insufficiently schooled up in basic economics. I can see how this combo would make it difficult for you to comprehend a simple analysis of how your own example of a carbon tax actually works/doesn't work.



Got it the first time, thanks, which you posted a long time ago in the other thread, btw. You appear to be missing or avoiding Newhaul's point, namely that taxes collected by the fossil fuel co. at its source, are all then reimbursed to the same oil co. by the consumer. The question raised is whether the consumer is purchasing gas at the pump or is a consumer purchasing fossil fuels to produce resins for polymers. If the latter is not burning and therefore creating CO2 emissions, then what justifies the tax?

Maybe we have some facts wrong which need to be corrected, but let's not spend pages & pages getting you to acknowledge the simply-stated issue.

If reading carefully isn't your strong suit, then at least try and carefully read the underlined parts. Surely a guy of your education & accomplishment can overcome such relatively minor learning disabilities.

All of other taxes are lowered in the BC system, which is the one I prefer.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

So according the Hansen's proposal every household gets the same amount ?
I like that idea , means I would make money on the deal due to my lower fuel usage compared to my neighbors that have and drive 3 older vehicles. I don't even own a car that is on the road.

That is correct. You would actually get rewarded for emitting less CO2.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by jackdale

ALL taxes collected results in lower taxes. It is revenue neutral. It cannot be more clear.

Wow, that's a new twist on the propaganda front! I think what our friend is trying to say here is that the so-called "carbon tax" levied in B.C. is offset by reductions in other, non-carbon related taxes, so the overall burden is lower. There, maybe that will help with the basic communications deficiencies.

Let's just say I'm rather "dubious" about this "selling point" to "win over" the populace. Anyone else??

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

That is correct. You would actually get rewarded for emitting less CO2.

Cool I really like Hansen's idea. Add to that the fact that here in the Puget sound we are paying about half of what you are for fuel . I wonder how much of the difference is the " carbon tax" verses just gouging customers in the name thereof.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Exile

Let's just say I'm rather "dubious" about this "selling point" to "win over" the populace. Anyone else??

So your dubiousness is unsubstantiated. No evidence, just gut feeling.

I have already posted assessments of the BC system. Do I need to do again?

BTW - a new assessment

B.C.’s carbon tax shift works | Financial Post

[Exile]

Originally Posted by newhaul

So according the Hansen's proposal every household gets the same amount ?
I like that idea , means I would make money on the deal due to my lower fuel usage compared to my neighbors that have and drive 3 older vehicles. I don't even own a car that is on the road.

Originally Posted by jackdale

That is correct. You would actually get rewarded for emitting less CO2.

But unfortunately, there is no incentive for large emitters to reduce their emissions since they will get "reimbursed" the same amount regardless. I doubt many people choose Newhaul's lifestyle because it will "lower their emissions" and make them eligible to receive less back from the govt. than they are paying when they replenish their propane. And I doubt many who have no choice but to use higher amounts of fossil fuels will believe this is nothing more than another misguided attempt at social engineering at their expense. And of course it won't matter to the affluent -- they will reduce or increase their consumption regardless.

Hansen should have stuck to his day job as a scientist. His late-in-life forays into political extremism (like getting arrested in front of the White House & coal mines) and economics don't seem to be his strong suit. Your own late-in-ilife foray into pseudo-science seems equally ineffectual.

[jackdale]

Meanwhile - back to the topic at hand.

It looks like a good year for a NWP or NSR passage. For this time of year, Arctic sea ice extent has not been lower during the satellite record period.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Meanwhile - back to the topic at hand.

It looks like a good year for a NWP or NSR passage. For this time of year, Arctic sea ice extent has not been lower during the satellite record period.

Two things I see of issue here
1). This line graph only shows to 2014
2). Wait for it
The sattalite has been having major issues so as to throw any of its current measurements into question.

[GoingWalkabout]

I think we should set up a new intetnat7body under the administration the United Nations. Tax all the industry based countries and energy users and use that money to redistribute wealth globally. Lenin would be so proud. So would all the other International Socialists from Marx, Trotsky and Mao.

As Lenin said, socialism is the pathetic that leads to communism. And another applicable quote. The path to he'll is made with good intentions.