“As Lord Keynes saw it, capitalism has suicidal tendencies and the task of economists is to avoid letting those tendencies materialize.
Wouldn’t it be better to say that capitalism, like any other economic system or human institution, has its own historical life and then has to die to allow for human progress? Just as cannibalism, feudalism, slavery, and the peculiar “state communism” of the old Soviet Union and Maoist China disappeared into history, capitalism will have to disappear to allow for a system more in agreement with the present stage of human civilization.
That stage has led us to form a global society in which national states and governments have become historical relics, increasingly unable to cope with worldwide problems that require worldwide solutions.”
Here’s the good Dr Tapia Granados :
“José Tapia is a researcher presently at the Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. He studied medicine in Spain and public health and economics in the United States. His field of research is the relation between macroeconomic changes and changes in population health.”
In other words, “not climate science, not meteorology, not weather.”
The other guy, Edward Ionides, is Associate professor of Statistics – so at least, he’s qualified to look at data,
Every business getting taxed passes the tax along to the general population in higher prices, which the general population can pay, because the tax is being “returned to them” by their benevolent government….
…thereby negating any CO2 regulating effect of the tax….
….does any proponent of this actually believe that it would be “returned to the population?”
I doubt that even graduates of Ivy League liberal arts programs are ignorant and stupid enough to believe in efficient “return of taxes to the general population,” so I am wondering about the real agenda of anyone who claims they buy into it.
In any case, this is a remarkably stupid argument. If the general electorate buys it, they deserve whatever they get.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 7, 2012 @ 12:13 pm
“returned to the population?”
Ummm…. They forgot to mention the government skim off the top and the carbon credit broker fees.
Besides which, if “we” continue to make it warmer, I’m sure the banana farmers in the Dakotas will appreciate the climate change.
Comment by dick, not quite dead white guy — May 7, 2012 @ 12:19 pm
Carbon Tax — take 2:
Ah, but what if there’s another reason for global warming?
The dreaded cloud of methane surrounding all animal life. Dinosaurs then, cattle today…. or…. People!
Wonder what the biomass and methane output of just China’s population is today, compared to a few wandering dinosaurs then?
Maybe we need a methane tax on China (bet they’d welcome that!)…. and India…. and Indonesia…. and damn near everywhere.
For that matter, CO2 is a natural product of respiration in all animal life. So, while the dinosaurs were farting at one end, they were respirating at the other. Methane and CO2? [blanching in horror here!] Those dinosaurs were massive global warming machines.
It wasn’t the meteor that got them, it was global warming. Er…. wait, didn’t dinosaurs prosper & proliferate with a warmer planet, just like human populations have done during every prior warming age in human history? Okay, well maybe global warming didn’t get them, any more than it would us.
But still, that gets me back to China’s massive dinosaurian human population. Farting at one end and respirating at the other. They definitely need to be taxed…. and then the tax money can be redistributed to the general population — which can buy more goods from China.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 7, 2012 @ 12:25 pm
The libtards don’t really care about the science.
They just want a Lords&Serfs society with THEM as the Lords.
An idealized 1750-1850′s society (that never really existed) has always been their goal.
Just because their version of Socialist Camelot starts looking like Pol Pot’s with everyone singing their praises while digging in the dirt and dying by the age of 35 is just a coincidence…..
“I suspect the cause of all this is an initial small lie, to cover intellectual mistakes, snowballing into a desire not to lose face, exacerbated by greater lies and compounded by group think.“
Well, there’s human nature at work, which in the first grade is reprimanded, but not so much in global politics and big money matters.
Incidentally, I have decided that the real cause of Climate gate is that the charlatans involved were rendered intellectually (and morally) deficient by inhaling too much CO2 (and methane), hence demonstrating further the need to curb these “manmade” emissions.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 7, 2012 @ 2:17 pm
Glowball wormers “believe” in glowball worming. That’s not science.
1. Postulate a theory.
2. Prove that theory with tests
3. Release the data for independent corroboration.
The b’leevers have trouble with number three because they have bent the data so badly, it never replicates.
I didn’t need heat in my house today. Must be global warming.
Comment by Alan outback bacon czar — May 7, 2012 @ 3:42 pm
You know what’s fun? Fun is having some new-hire with a brand-new flannel shirt, that’s never been washed, and then taking out your Bic Lighter™ and applying it to their arm in a semi-dark room. Bars are great for this.
It doesn’t hurt them, but the rapid prarie-grass-fire-effect is unbeatable. Besides, you’re always there to douse them with a beer if things get out of hand… like when their hair catches on fire, and stuff.
Taught to me by a Canadian logger. Okay, ‘former’ Canadian logger.
I didn’t need heat in my house today. Must be global warming.
Or because you can no longer afford the ever increasing energy bill. Thanks, Obama, and all your eco-tard friends.
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 7, 2012 @ 5:04 pm
Got me. Fixed it.
“It’s main uses are to justify …” was originally “It’s used to justify …” so I claim the editorial-oversight excuse.
(What? Another one? Where?)
Re: “Take a pill, Doug. … Expect lots of wailing and foot-stomping.”
Me stomping on ‘em critters as they skitter out from unner ‘em rocks is a pill, and a danged good one. Even more fun to smash ‘em with a shovel.
Re: “As Saint Albert said “Were my theory incorrect, a single voice would be sufficient to destroy it.”
Yeah, kind’a explains his refusal to debate, dunnit?
Ironic (10) Thanks for watchin’ my six. (11) Me, too.
The other side of the “it never replicates” coin is truly bizarre.
Using one of their models, no matter what data you input, you’d come up with the same output. It’s like they knew the answer ahead of time and made sure they got it. Who’d'a thunk?
In a four-star logging camp, that’s called flambé.
(What? Well, my great-granny was a cook in a Canadian logging camp, so I must know something about it, eh? What? No, don’t think she was a injun. [goes over to mirror to check cheekbones])
Comment by DougM (jackassophobe) — May 7, 2012 @ 5:05 pm
Besides, you’re always there to douse them with a beer if things get out of hand…
Just make sure it’s not tequila, mate.
(or vodka either)
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 7, 2012 @ 5:06 pm
Your six: any time four for you.
Your great-granny: maybe she was 1/32 injun. By the way, if I recall correctly (and I may not) Hitler’s regime drew the line at 1/16. As in 1/16 Jewish you got exterminated, but 1/32 you didn’t. If 1/32 wasn’t enough even for a fanatical fruitcake like Hitler to decide you were something, how can it possibly be enough to make you an indian law faculty member?
Comment by Ironic in Denver — May 7, 2012 @ 6:16 pm
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — May 7, 2012 @ 8:03 pm
The difference between people who believe in the usefulness of capitalism and people who believe in the usefulness of Kensyian/Prog/redistributive economic system: the capitalists say ‘play – don’t play. your choice’ while the Prog types spend all their resources forcing everyone to go along with ‘em.
Comment by Claire: pink pig barbarian, etc — May 7, 2012 @ 8:19 pm