the PRODOS blog

Have a hug. Read Atlas Shrugged.

Carbonocracy versus Capitalism

[photopress:green_baloney.jpg,full,pp_image]

Matthew Warren‘s article in The Australian, Capitalism clears the air, is full of enthusiasm about how big business, market forces, and carbon emission credits [i.e. anti-market forces] will tackle global warming more efficiently, effectively, and innovatively than any government could.

In fact carbon “trading” represents a deep undermining of the free market – which is the whole point of it of course. It’s an attempt to tame (i.e. destroy) the free market.

The threat of climate change has been around for more than a decade; however, clouded by complex and uncertain science, it is only in the past few years, even months, that the inherent risks to business have been sheeted home.

At an intellectual level there is the risk of an unacceptably warm planet by the end of the century. But even more pressing is the growing risk of a high price on carbon emissions and the impact that may have on their competitiveness, even survival. Self-interest is a powerful motivator for change.

Whodetermines this “high price on carbon emissions”? It’s not the interaction of buyers and sellers, producers and consumers. It’s government, led by technocrats.

The world’s biggest corporations are currently falling over themselves to get in on this.

What we are seeing is the rise of the new Carbonocracy.

Those who are learning to play the Carbon Game, and profit by it. The Carbonocracy will be a global community of gutless, subservient corporations.

Carbon emissions”trading” and carbon credits are completely incompatible with Capitalism, free markets, and freedom.

The Business Council of Australia (BCA) is leading the charge on Green Dhimmitude. They just can’t get enough of it!

  • Make the scheme long-term (at least 30 years) to increase greenhouse gas emissions reduction and investor certainty;
  • Set both annual and long-term emissions reduction targets;
  • Include a first phase which involves the establishment of information collection and measurement and verification mechanisms for businesses and the secondary market;
  • Include as many greenhouse gases as possible;
  • Maximise the number of sectors that are included in the scheme. If it is not possible to include a particular sector, introduce policies which ensure commensurate emissions reductions in that sector;
  • Allow maximum offsets (national and international) to meet abatement targets;
  • Establish a ‘Reserve Bank-like’ permit issue authority;
  • Issue free permits to compensate enterprises for the economic loss from the change in the ‘rules of the game’;
  • Offset the competitiveness impact of the scheme on ‘trade-exposed’ industries for as long as necessary, providing transitional arrangements through the permit issue process;
  • Cap the price of permits and consider other relevant ‘safety valve’ mechanisms;
  • Ensure the scheme facilitates an active secondary market to provide a rising but reasonably stable forward permit price curve; and
  • Ensure effective governance structures that enable confidence in the market.

And they love being Green so much, they want to share it with the world.

While Australia is developing a national response, the BCA believes Australia can and should, through its international relationships and networks, push for the development of a far-reaching global market response.

PS: I consider the notion of man-made global warming to be a load of rot. Just in case you were wondering.

Report This Post

7 Comments

  1. What a carbon credit really is.
    (1) The politician (mobster) comes knocking on the door. He wants to sell you protection from Carbon Dioxide (substitute anything).
    He says that he will burn your house down if you don’t give him money for not burning your house down. His argument is that when houses burn down it produces carbon dioxide and you will be saving the planet by giving him money. (2) If this does not make much sense to you. Congratulations. You win the thinking award. It doesn’t make any sense at all. He will just go to the next guy and burn his house down. No matter how many of his credits you buy you will have no control over his pollution.
    (3) Actually that is not quite true. A person who has more money is likely to spend some of it on goods that require energy to produce.
    (4) Carbon credits are good though. The politician (protection salesman)gets to look good, not go to jail, give perks to his buddies and family, get rich and keep his job. Sounds like a great scam. All the other scam artists will be jealous. This will boost the politicians ego. We won’t have to worry about his family or buddies welfare anymore.
    (5) The politician will cheer everybody up by getting on TV and acting all happy. We do like to see happy people, don’t we?

    Report This Comment

  2. Thanks for the picture from your link “a load of rot”.
    I have put my comment here. http://reasonrules.thinkertothinker.com/archives/276
    The picture is important in explaining my comment.
    Basically it is that the sun is the boss of climate but other factors are influencing it too. People a little bit, cars more, cows even more and so many other factors that I can’t name them all.
    As a worst case scenario the earths temperature can be raised 10 degrees by a lava flow the size of North America lasting thousands of years. I don’t think that we can produce that much energy much less waste it as heat. (Ref. The Permian Extinction)

    Report This Comment

  3. Hi Prodos

    Quite aside from the damage it will do to all of us, one of the things that upsets me is the ‘free-market’ gloss that cap-and-trade enthusiasts put on it. Their reason is this sort of scheme was proposed by Milton Friedman. But Friedman raised this kind of thing not as something that ought to be done, but as a less bad replacement for the direct regulation of pollution emissions.

    Report This Comment

  4. Greetings Walter,

    Thanks for the link.

    I’ll check your article when I get to the USA and get online again in a couple of days. We’re heading off in a few hours.

    Best Wishes.

    Report This Comment

  5. Stephen Dawson wrote:

    – – –
    … this sort of scheme was proposed by Milton Friedman
    – – –

    Interesting! I’ll look into this!

    PS: Nice to hear from you. 🙂

    Best Wishes.

    Report This Comment

Leave a Reply

© 2017 the PRODOS blog

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑

Report This Blog