France Wants to Tax Us

Here’s a classic example of why the Global Warming thing is a scam. Bureaucrats want to use it to tax us using an international tax. Kyoto signatories have to pay fines if they don’t measure up (no country has), but since we didn’t sign it we’re exempt. So what then?

President Jacques Chirac has demanded that the United States sign both the Kyoto climate protocol and a future agreement that will take effect when the Kyoto accord runs out in 2012.

He said that he welcomed last week’s State of the Union address in which President Bush described climate change as a “serious challenge” and acknowledged that a growing number of American politicians now favor emissions cuts.

But he warned that if the United States did not sign the agreements, a carbon tax across Europe on imports from nations that have not signed the Kyoto treaty could be imposed to try to force compliance. The European Union is the largest export market for American goods.

“A carbon tax is inevitable,” Mr. Chirac said. “If it is European, and I believe it will be European, then it will all the same have a certain influence because it means that all the countries that do not accept the minimum obligations will be obliged to pay.”

I guarantee, the Euros will try to find a way to try to milk us one way or another using this scam. But will they have the balls to do it with China, who is becoming a much bigger polluter than the US? We’ll see.

1. James, the president (Clinton) *has* signed the treaty.  But the Senate refused to ratify it (by a vote of 95-0)

   Chirac is apparently unfamiliar with the way our government works, which isn’t really surprising.

   Joe

   Posted by  on  02/01  at  11:03 AM

2. France has such a progressive federal energy policy that they barely pollute yet their electricity is still cheap. For France and Japan, the Kyoto Treaty is a cake walk.

   They are just leveraging their strenghts.

   Hopefully, someone in our government will note their success and finally create a national energy plan for the U.S. Sometimes a free market is not the best solution.  99% of the time it is, but their are exceptions.

   Anyways, France is going to an extreme so that they may profit more from future negotiations.  They have set themselves up to be in a great place when it comes to this stuff and they are leveraging it.  It is like when the NRA demands that bazookas be legalized when all they really want is to keep pistols in peoples homes.

   France has clean energy, now they are looking to get some money out of it.

   -Testify!

   Posted by  on  02/01  at  12:12 PM

3. France has clean energy because they have a lot of nuclear power plants. If the environmentalists didn’t stop nuclear power plant construction in the 70s we would have clean energy also.

   Posted by James Hudnall  on  02/01  at  12:37 PM

4. You’ve got it, Hud.  The anti-nuke lobby here in the U.S. derailed our nuclear industry in the 70s and 80s. Of course, it sort of shot itself in the foot: most plants built in the 60s and 70s were flawed and didn’t pass their own specs guidelines reviews, so the NRC couldn’t approve them going online (American capatalism as its worst: cutting corners on things where corners should never be cut).  Additionally, the grassroots anti-nuke protestors convinced regulators to forbid the power companies to charge for the costs of building the plants until the plants went online; resulting in lots of consumers developing an anti-nuke attitude when their power bills jumped as new plants went into operation.  In France, as soon as they started building a nuclear plant, they also started passing the costs on to the consumer, so when the plants went online, everyone’s power bills went down; which produced a pro-nuclear power attitude.  One of the few things in modern times that France did right.

   Posted by  on  02/01  at  01:25 PM

5. That is true. But only a small part. 

   A major reason we don’t have much nuke energy is that we have no national standards for nuclear plants. In France, the government builds them all the same and with their own money.  That means they can build a 1000MW plant for about 3-4oo million bucks. Each one is easier, and easier to build.  Not to mention the government rates for loans to itself are fantastic. 

   On the other hand, in the US, we had/ have, no national standards.  Therefore, almost every plant built was unique.  This made building a lot more difficult delaying operation for anywhere from 1 to 3 years.  3 years on a high interest loan of 400 million dollars with no way to recoup the cash, turns the plant into a billion dollar project. I have heard stories where plants ended up costing 6 times the projected costs simply due to delays and harsh loans. In fact, almost every CEO who decided that it was a good idea to build a nuke plant in the 70’s, lost their job.

   Then once three mile island occurred.  Folks in the energy industry were scarred to even mention nuke.

   I am sure the environmentalist didn’t help.  In fact, they probably caused some delays of their own. But to blame them as the sole cause is not correct. They are just a lot of pomp (publicity) and no circumstance (money).

   Posted by  on  02/01  at  01:34 PM

6. Well said John.  You beat me to my post.

   Posted by  on  02/01  at  01:36 PM

7. The US does a lot of things stupidly, no doubt about it. Lack of standards is one of them. Which is why we have such crappy cell phone service. All the companies have their own standard so none of them work well. In Europe they have one standard and cell phones work everywhere, from subways to elevator shafts.

   For Nuclear Power, you’d think they’d get a clue and do what the French do. They have lead the way in nuclear power on a lot of fronts. We use their glass bead nuclear waste processing.

   But the environmentalists do get more blame in my mind, because they inflamed the media, whereas the energy business would have swept it under the rug. And 3 Mile Island was really a minor incident, despite what the media turned it into.

   Posted by  on  02/01  at  01:41 PM

8. Interesting.  That is a good analogy. I didn’t know Europe had telecommunications standards too.

   Admittedly, I was barely born when TMI took place.  But I can’t imaigne it being swept under given the nature of the cold war and Chernobyl.

   Posted by  on  02/01  at  02:45 PM

9. I was a teenager when it happened and I remember the media hysteria. It really was no big deal in reality. It was controlled. No significant radiation was released and no effects were found on the area of any significance. But the press made it sound like Chernobyl when it happened.

   Since three mile island, our reactor safety rules increased almost exponentially. But I think they should do what the French do and have a standard reactor design (unless a better design comes along).

   Posted by  on  02/01  at  04:36 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages

<< Back to main