More on Kyoto stuff-up

And as even Frog says, Labour kept trying to sell Kyoto as a money-maker.

However Frog goes off the deep end when it croaks “Humanity�s survival depends on our pulling together and mitigating the effects of climate change”.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

The argument that says “we are at a disatvantage if we comply, while others don’t” is interesting to me. I think the same can be said for things like buying free range eggs (which I do) at first I was resentful, only buying them on moral grounds and having to pay the extra cash for my choice. While others could go around buying the battery eggs and be at a fiscal advantage to me in this dog eat dog capitalist society. Now I still think that battery farming should be outlawed, but I enjoy the supperior flavour I get from the free range as well as the feeling that there are some happy chooks running round in a feild somewhere, and so i no longer resent the extra that I pay.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I got on the bus around lunchtime on the way to work today, and a lady and the bus driver were having a chat about changing weather patterns, possible global warming, and then one of them said – “Oh well, its our kids problem now”, and the other agreed. I smartly spoke up and stated – “If you don’t start now, no-one will!”

Kyoto is nice from an international perspective, but will it really have an impact on the individual? The only way we are actually going to start making changes here is by individuals and organisations taking responsibility – as highlighted by the conversation I had in the bus today. Kyoto may raise the cost of living, but will it actually make a noticeable change in outputs to the environment?

I find it particularly ironic that recently LandCorp was caught out for cutting down trees on its land and reverting to dairy farming. Hypocritical bloody government…

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I actually disagree with National’s policy, I just happen to believe in dealing with what they are saying rather than frogs version.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

What can little New Zealand do?

One of the main conservative arguments against New Zealand’s participation in the Kyoto Protocol is that “we池e a small country, so what we do will make no difference anyway.” When the issue of defence spending is raised, we observe an interesting …

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

I got so angry watching that on TV!!! National were making it seem like it was Kyoto that was the problem not the pollution, emissions etc.
We do need to keep to Kyoto, we will make a difference even if *some* people don’t think so. You would think that all those economists who studied neoclassical economics would realise that those models don’t exist in the real world. For example, the ENVIRONMENT MATTERS! This is why I’m studying economics. *frowns*
And anyway just because we might not make money from Kyoto, it will preserve our economy in other ways such as tourism, saving on later pollution clean-up costs, solar/wind power instead of fossil fuels would radically cut emissions and save money, our exports may grow due to advancement (or backup) of our pure image, healthcare, particularly related to respiratory conditions will improve with cleaner air, reduced skin cancer rates due to reduced ozone hole…
Yes we’re a little country but we have ideals and plenty of and certainly can be stubborn. We’ve been an example to others before (eg the nuclear issue) and this should be another arena for us to be world leaders again – if our politicians can summon the courage! “Be brave and mighty forces will come to your aid” (or something like that) Goethe
Politicians only seem to care about staying in office and sweet piss all about who they are supposed to be representing. We already know they don’t care about health & education because they can afford private, pulic transport because they get flash cars and/or drivers, and so on and so on but surely we all live in this environment? They aren’t exempt from that.
Climate change exists. Whether you believe the sensationalist advertising or not, the world is warming up. Between 1969 and 1980 there were about 5 floods in the Tauranga region. 1981 – today there have been 60something. I don’t know if that proves anything, and whose fault if anyone’s that we’re getting warmer but we all have to do something. It’s not that hard, it just takes someone to start

*sigh* back to my level 2 politics assignment…

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Sorry to disagree, sock, but as I said just a couple of days ago, in this very blog, its about doing the right thing. To see improving one’s pollution perspective as “penalisation” which makes perfect economic sense, but in the bigger picture its wrong. I’m already fairly cynical about the NZ “clean and green” image (OK, I think its utter bollux), and at least we can be seen to be trying to live up to that ideal.

It speaks shouts volumes aboout the integrity of the USA that they are not willing to stand up and be counted. China are at least trying to do some of the right things, but they are startuing from a bad position.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

Yes but by standing alongside the rest of the international community, it makes it easier for those countries to be persuaded to join Kyoto. By standing alongside the countries that refuse to ratify, we would make it less likely that they would change.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)

You are misrepresenting Nationals position. They are saying that major polluting countries such as India, China and the US are not part of Kyoto. That greenhouse gases emitted by China and India will continue to grow. It makes sense to ask if Kyoto will only penalise the willing and make no overall difference. Your accusation that the US will control NZ under National is simply petty. On the level of saying Cuba will control NZ under the Greens.

Like or Dislike: 0  0 (0)