Angus-Reid Poll on Economy vs. Environment
What do the results of this poll mean?
It means we have work to do on getting the truth out, that's what it means. The concept of the original Kyoto timelines costing thousands of jobs is not a hard one to grasp. I was thinking about it as I walked to work this morning... basically, here's my own personal speech/talking points...
"If this plan we're presenting had been brought forward ten years ago, we would not be in the position we are now. This is Canada's first truely comprehensive plan to curb emmission increases, and begin the process of reducing them. The Liberals did nothing for a decade... that's a fact. Now Canada has been left with this mess, and we're fixing it. But running the economy into the ground is not a viable option... and the only way to keep out Kyoto commitments is to do just that.
Destroying the Canadian economy is not an option this Government will consider... for all their years of inaction, it's the Liberal Party who should face unemployment, NOT the people of Canada."
It means we have work to do on getting the truth out, that's what it means. The concept of the original Kyoto timelines costing thousands of jobs is not a hard one to grasp. I was thinking about it as I walked to work this morning... basically, here's my own personal speech/talking points...
"If this plan we're presenting had been brought forward ten years ago, we would not be in the position we are now. This is Canada's first truely comprehensive plan to curb emmission increases, and begin the process of reducing them. The Liberals did nothing for a decade... that's a fact. Now Canada has been left with this mess, and we're fixing it. But running the economy into the ground is not a viable option... and the only way to keep out Kyoto commitments is to do just that.
Destroying the Canadian economy is not an option this Government will consider... for all their years of inaction, it's the Liberal Party who should face unemployment, NOT the people of Canada."
posted by Christian Conservative @ 11:58 a.m.
9 Comments:
At Thu May 03, 02:08:00 p.m. EDT,
Jeff said…
intensity levels actually decreased under the liberal govt. the problem is, intensity based reductions don't reduce total emissions which is kind of the point, no?
canada's newish government is nearly 16 months old. dion was environment minister for 18 months.
what will be harper's schtick when it is revealed that ghg emissions rose more under his watch than under dion's?
At Thu May 03, 03:03:00 p.m. EDT,
John M Reynolds said…
"what will be harper's schtick when it is revealed that ghg emissions rose more under his watch than under dion's?" I would guess that his schtick would be that though emissions rose more under his watch, the global temp did not. In fact, the global temp has not gone above 1998's level with the possible exception of 2005. That may have exceeded 1998's temp by a few hundredths of a degree. Nothing to worry about.
At Thu May 03, 03:40:00 p.m. EDT,
Livingsword said…
While laws to help improve the quality of life for people thru an improved environment (whatever that may look like) may be helpful, and while ideas are an engine for change, any true progression towards making things better must be fuelled thru the heart.
How about touching people’s lives in that manner? Do we not want to be conservative in the damage (however measured) we do to the creation that displays the qualities, power, and nature, of the Creator?
At Thu May 03, 06:41:00 p.m. EDT,
Swift said…
Sterns report used an economic model that says he ideal savings rate is 97.5%. Just a small distortion of reality.
At Thu May 03, 09:34:00 p.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
Jeff no one cares because there is causal relationship between CO2 and global temperature. What is the Greenies schtick going to be when AGW mania is finally accepted as fraud? Know why the enviro nuts like the libs and not the cons? The libs gave the eviro nuts money.
At Fri May 04, 08:57:00 a.m. EDT,
Dirk said…
"Economy vs. Environment"
Can you say false dichotomy? This kind of thinking, and the 'you're wrong, we're right' attitude displayed in the comment "It means we have work to do on getting the truth out" is ridiculous.
Many European countries with northern climates, remote communities, etc., are doing rather well in reducing their GHG emissions. Why? They've got governments that imposed GHG limits. Are their economies tanking? Nope.
Let me know when the CPC stops treating this like a partisan issue and treats the climate change file seriously. I've had enough of myopic "reports" and cries of "years of Liberal inaction".
At Sun May 06, 03:45:00 a.m. EDT,
zolton said…
Some Canadian companies have implemented Kyoto pollution targets on their own and have started to produces dividends for their initial investment.
The federal Conservatives will never have a leg to stand on on the environment. Seems to me that a good portion of the conservative base do not even recognize the environment as a legitimate notion.
It is sad to see individuals beinging mouthpiece to a system, rather then rational individuals, I guess thats the power of greed.
Competition is the philosophical virtue of capitalism. Individuals at the tops of the metaphysical world have to look at the value of an individual and the environment as a recourse to exploit to compete. The competition turns into a ruthless paradox where individuals who value their current life are not conscientious enough to realize that full extant of their actions, really do not represent a positive expression of life.
Were all guilty.
We do things, but really do not know ourselves.
If conservative government solved the Canada's environmental problems I could almost legitimize their treatment of human life as cattle.
At Tue May 08, 09:30:00 a.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
"If the conservative government solved Canada's environmental problems I could almost legitimize their treatment of human life as cattle"
So the Conservatives treat Human life as cattle eh? Maybe you should look into what kind of effects implementing Kyoto would have on the developing world. Or the fact that enviro-wackos are trying to restrict African nations from developing, basically sacrificing African lives to their god, the environment.
"Competition is the philosophical virtue of capitalism. Individuals at the tops of the metaphysical world have to look at the value of an individual and the environment as a recourse to exploit to compete."
This doesn't even make sense, please make sure you understand words before you use them next time.
Free markets are not perfect (they are close) but they have been proven to be better than the alternative, and in the long run they always correct themselves for the betterment of their consumers. Socialism always creates an elite class that rules over the people, and gov't controlled industry is always less effecient, less effective, and less innovative. So you may not think Capitalism is always fair, but it gets the job done. Do try and wake up from your socialist dreamworld.
At Tue May 08, 09:56:00 a.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
"Many European countries with northern climates, remote communities, etc., are doing rather well in reducing their GHG emissions. Why? They've got governments that imposed GHG limits. Are their economies tanking? Nope."
Well many European countries didn't really have great economies to begin with. Most European countries have unemployement rates that are habitually in the double digits.
As for lowering their GHG emissions, France gets over 78% of its electricity from nuclear energy . In Canada we're not allowed to use nuclear energy to reduce our GHG's. Everytime someone suggests it their howled down. Germany lowered it GHG's easily by simply adding East Germany into the equation. East Germany became part of Germany proper in 1990. In order for Germany to get its GHG's back down to 1990 levels, all it had to do was shut down or clean up all of the ineffecient East German coal plants.
The better question to ask about Canada reducing its GHG's is "who care?" We produce 4% of anthropogenic GHG's. AGHG's only account for about 4% of the total GHG's released into the atmosphere each year. This mean that if Canadians were to go back to rubbing sticks together to keep warm we would only reduce the total GHG emitted each year by 0.16 of a percent. But we're not even talking about that, all we're talking about is reducing our AGHG's down to 1990 levels. So our contribution becomes even less significant.
Post a Comment
<< Home