Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (179937)	11/4/2021 4:12:41 AM
From: Maurice Winn	2 Recommendations Recommended By 3bar Hoa Hao Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217758

Oddly, I agree in part with Greta Thunberg = blah blah blah... 37 years ago, thinking about CO2 as a potential problem, I told my boss in BP Oil New Zealand that if CO2 turned out to be a problem, the way to fix it would be a carbon tax, offset with equal or larger tax cuts on computers, income taxes, with increases in pensions so that old people could, if they chose, still buy petrol and not be out of pocket. Many would of course keep the loot, sell the car, walk or bike to the shops, get a bus or share a ride. Put big tariffs on imported things such as steel, cars, ships full of crude oil and other easily measured things. That would avoid transferring CO2 emissions elsewhere, punish bad countries, encourage local production and tax foreign countries rather than locals. A country is its borders and community of interest. He shushed me as he fid NOT want our products taxed. I said, well, that's the answer if CO2 is a problem. 37 years later, I still think there is a vast net gain from fossil fuels, limestone mining for cement, and the CO2 that has been put in the air. Sea level rise is zero compared with tsunami risks from earthquakes, volcanoes and bolides. Air temperature is so close to constant over 5000 years it doesn't matter about a tiny CO2 effect, if any. Plants have gone crazy on the extra CO2. Irrigation needs are much less. Deserts are greening. Crops booming on free CO2 and less water needed. The Glasgow jamboree is mad. A swarm of free-loading scientifically and economically illiterate self-dealing kleptocrats. More a religious festival than anything else. Shut up and give us your money is the main scientific finding. Religions like money, and lots of it. Mqurice

To: TobagoJack who wrote (179937)	11/4/2021 4:27:01 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 217758

Regarding "trade disputes", they seem silly. Each country should just charge taxes they want to where they want to, either at the border or internally. If China wants to charge their citizens a big fee for buying from New Zealand then that's a problem for China consumers. No need for NZ to do the same unless it makes sense. I would stop all government trade travel. If a business wants to buy or sell overseas, that's up to them and their customers/suppliers. No need for government kleptocrats to get involved. Mqurice

To: TobagoJack who wrote (179937)	11/4/2021 1:25:29 PM
From: sense	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217758

Tariffs are a legitimate tool for addressing trade imbalances... while, properly done, in a coordinated system designed for that... the taxing of imports and exports is a legitimate tool for structuring tax revenues in the least onerous way... Given taxes ARE a drag on all economic systems... the question of where best to apply that drag to minimize its impacts... is legitimate. But, "innovation" in taxes... is rarely about minimizing impacts... Knowing that its NOT about impact reduction, rather than intending more impact, gives us: "risks, including undermining world trade rules and triggering trade disputes"... but with that as the intent... in the realization of those risks as the goal. But, seeing a coordinated policy without any of the legitimate concerns as drivers... in a policy that is not ignoring the risks as much as intending they be realized... and given they know the what impact of the change in the re-imposition of sweeping tariffs will be from prior experience... “prolonged [the depression] and possibly deepened it around the world, not just in the United States but for other countries,”... Shows us that's the choice being made... to impose a realization of those risks in order to obviate risks to themselves... by imposing them on everyone else... holding the world hostage to their narrow self interest. The rest is hand waving to distract from that choice because "climate" !!! The scam allows them to knowingly impose global harms because "See what good people we are" ? All that leaves for those who "get it"... is parsing specific impacts and, particularly, the likely sequences in events and the timing issues in the rest... both in result of the implementation of that harmful intent as policy... and, likely to be more important: in the unintended consequences... as they continue creating policy that is based not on "agreed principles" under a rules based order, or on economic reality while seeking greater good, but on pairing desire for "control" with belief in their own propaganda...