Comments on: SMELLIE SNIFFS THE BREEZE: A crap deal for Maori

By: Buster Carbon

Buster Carbon — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 21:30:05 +0000

Angus now I am puzzled Australia didn’t go for the ETS.
We have the whole wannabe thing happening (& Key is trying to merge countries),so how come Oz don’t have to be seen by the World as Carbon Zoombies and we do?
Did you read the Copenhagen treaty.

Is it all part of the complex “fall behind further” B plan?
A wage increase due to ETS generated inflation?
Does it smell like realism to you.

Sorry about the request for a strap-on Angus… that was
impolite, not “ripping off investors then building a $30 million dollar mansion” impolite.

By: Hungry puppy

Hungry puppy — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 06:30:46 +0000

Angus here are a couple of reasons why I would be wary of the OECD “great” economic advise.
1)The OECD admitted the credit crisis had taken it by surprise.
2) “What we had not forecast was the extent of the spread of this financial risk”
Lets all be realistic about the ETS.

By: Buster Carbon

Buster Carbon — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 21:52:47 +0000

Strap a pair on the OECD should have be told( should have known) that this is not sustainable and the cost is an unfair burden on us following the ” credit crisis”. This harmed us and we have given more than enough in bailouts and subsidies to greatly benefit the increasing wealth of the crisis manufacturers(& It was no ordinary thing).

Each person will not equally shoulder the costs of Carbon trading.
Man made Climate Change has been found to be a Myth, so why isn’t the name changed to Myth trading?

I am suppose to be glad or proud that the world will recognize that the people of New Zealand created more debt and made financial contributions to promote and support (heavily funded) myths?

By: angus

angus — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 02:05:36 +0000

Take it as a guide, but also recognise what an act of global leadership an agreement at Copenhagen represents. The human race is being asked to do something painful, difficult and unwelcome on an unprecedented collective scale, in the face of legitimately brandished scientific uncertainty.

The world will recognise our contribution

The OECD is demanding a worldwide price for carbon. Each person (rich or poor) will equally shoulder the burden of climate change through a regressive tax, the level of which to be determined by traders in London or Frankfurt or Paris or NY. Agreement looks unlikely as the developing world is not supportative of paying for the OECDs wasteful excesses.

Obviously the nature of an ETS system greatly benefits the OECD, but rich world exploits poor world is not news – what is amazing is the thought that somehow the poor world is going to sign up.

By: Barry Munro

Barry Munro — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 01:48:24 +0000

And just who will take our carbon credit’s/debits money? No mention of how this CC/CD horse-trading will take place, or who will cream off the profits as commission. Not one dollar of NZer’s money will go towards solving the problems in our own country. Better that the money is spent solving problems not going into another internation bureaucratic sink-hole.

Rip-off? Oh, yeah! Cynical? Oh, yeah!

By: Consumerant

Consumerant — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 01:20:14 +0000

But Pattrick this( global warming shenanigan ) is not the public ideology needed at this time-not in any form .
Lets all dig for fossil fuel and runs around like headless chickens looking for Al gores “man bear pig”- develop a carbon fixated consciousness?
The emotional pleas to simpletons “its your fault, your responsibility you pay for all our mistakes”. “You want to play your part”.

And no I don’t believe the Maori Party got anything of value for their Mana sellout. (You are right 1 Billion is nothing in the scope of the ETS).
I am allowed to be saddened by the passing of the ETS bill and outraged by the lack of integrity of the scientists actively involved.
Both issues are failures of personal responsibility, a recipe for furthering and fostering a social culture of “blame game,PR deceit and self interest”.
Its too big to fail Myth?
Its not and it has.
No we have not adapted well to our environment we haven’t even tried.
To compensate for Corporate driven over consumption all we artfully sprinkling the words ‘sustainable’ on everything that isn’t. Nice sentiments & words replacing action- but we have a physical reality that requires more than just words.
So hurry up and say its broken so we can fix it, denial and change resistance is not appropriate.