Totally theoretical, have you ever stopped to consider Patrick...

First 84 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
ausheds

19,577 Posts.

4947

14/09/19

22:25

Post #: 40424864
Share

Originally posted by mikaj ↑

1. It's an IMF working paper, which 'do not necessarily represent the views of the IMF'. It is clearly embraced by IMF managing director Lagarde. From the horses mouth: Madame Lagarde - 'If you look at our numbersfrom 2015, it is no less than about $5.2 trillion that are spent on fuel subsidies and the consequences thereof. And the Fiscal Affairs Department has actually identified, you know, how much would have been saved fiscally but also in terms of human life, if there had been the right price on carbon emission as of 2015. The numbers are quite staggering.' [1-2]
Plenty of references to her expressing this.

2. I clearly pointed to the direct cost (US$728 billion), and frankly, if you think the health and climate change costs caused by fossil fuel isn't indirectly subsidised then you're not seeing the bigger picture. Who pays for the health and climate issues? In the UK >40,000 die each year from air pollution, the healthcare for them and countless not dying IS, by extension, subsidies. In india, more than 1,000,000 died last year from air pollution etc etc

The point is (in addition to direct subsidies), use of fossil fuel causes health and environmental issues that our salary tax is paying for. By extension, WE are subsidising the true cost of fossil fuel usage. Can you see it? If no fossil fuel, no fossil fuel related issues = money that government can spend on other things..

Don't even get me started on the other huge global issues.. On this board we can/should only extend things to things that matter for LYC, and to me equates to rapid embracement of (B)EV and wind power.

1. https://www.imf.org/en/News/Article...lagarde-press-conference-2019-spring-meetings
2.

Expand

Totally theoretical, have you ever stopped to consider Patrick Moore, PhD Ecology, Greenpeace founder, may actually be right > zero emissions = zero humans?

Frankly I weight his opinion way, way in front of Madame Lagarde of questionable moral standing given corruption convictions, you should choose your champions other than those that can be bought.

Do you dispute his contention there has been no global warming past 18 years?

http://www.aei.org/publication/video-of-the-day-patrick-moore-the-sensible-environmentalist/

And I file most of the "climate science" I come across right beside Greenpeace denial of Moore:

http://joannenova.com.au/2019/03/greenpeace-lies-to-save-the-planet-erasing-patrick-moore-again/

LYC Price at posting: $2.56 Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
4 Upvote

0 Great analysis

Reply