Account Management


Sarkozy Pushes Carbon Tax On Trade
Crippling industry and holding back prosperity in the name of saving the planet helps bureaucrats line their pockets

Steve Watson
day, Jan 16, 2008

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has proposed the creation of a carbon import tax to be levied against those countries who buy from nations that do not conform to European imposed greenhouse gas emission limits.

"In this scheme, nations importing products from these polluter countries would be forced to pay a tariff on the goods or be obligated to purchase emission permits." reports the German press agency DPA.

Later this month Europe will propose new laws that will force EU industries to cut down carbon emissions, a move that will inevitably lead to a shift in production facilities to countries that do not have such laws.

To offset this Sarkozy, a staunch globalist who takes over the European Union's rotating six-month presidency in July, is proposing a carbon tax on relevant products from those countries.

Under such a scheme the standards of living within the industrialized world will diminish through the loss of industry and production while the developing world also fails to benefit as it has to cope with crippling taxes driving up the prices of its exports.

Trade lawyers have been divided over the legality of a carbon tax, with some saying it would run counter to international trade rules.

(Article continues below)

At the same time carbon emissions from human activity, which only account for a small percentage of overall climate change anyway when compared to natural factors such as volcano emissions and solar activity, are not reduced at all.

The only benefactors of a carbon tax will be the power hungry bureaucrats who are pushing it.

The European carbon tax proposal mirrors that of the UN, which has urged the adoption of “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations,” in other words a global carbon tax.

The bounty from this would amount to $40 billion dollars a year and will go straight into the coffers of a UN controlled "Multilateral Adaptation Fund".

As MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen warned last year, "Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life."

Lindzen is one of over 100 prominent scientists who signed a letter last month slamming the UN move as a futile bureaucratic scheme, pointing out the results of a recent study in the International Journal of Climatology which concludes that climate change over the past thirty years is largely a result of solar activity and that attempts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions are irrelevant.

In comparison, half that number - just 52 scientists - participated in the IPCC Summary for Policymakers meeting in April 2007, a report funded by the U.N. itself.

In the letter addressed to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, the scientists state, “Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity's real and pressing problems.”

"It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation."

"The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions. On top of which, because attempts to cut emissions will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it."

The letter goes into detail about several conclusions of the IPCC report that are completely contradicted by recent major scientific studies.

Read the full letter here.

in its entirety.
View more High quality trailers at www.endgamethemovie.com

Email This Page to:

INFOWARS.net          Copyright 2001-2008 Alex Jones          All rights reserved.