Jump to content

Recommended Posts

vinceayre Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am just saying that the same scientists that

> have been telling us the we are all going to die

> unless we pay more tax, which is effectively the

> outcome of the climate change lobbyists, are now

> telling us that it has not got hotter in 15 years

> and that the global warming we are experiencing

> now may well have happened without our help

> before, which is what the sceptics have said all

> along.

>

> You have been conned but you cant accept it

> because it would make you look foolish.



head. brick wall.

Vince, this is crazy talk ;-)


Science has told us that Earth undergoes regular climate cycles. There's nothing new in that chappie - no epiphany, no revelation for the skeptics. You're not denying that, right?


A modicum of insight tells us that climate change, whether natural or man-made, is extremely bad news for a crowded planet with scarce resources and tribal mentalities. You're not denying that, right?


A vast consensus of quality science also tells us that human activity is currently ushering in the next climate change sequence, and doing it so fast that it represents a significant self-inflicted tragedy.


Attention seekers, nutjobs, conspiracy theorists and those working in the oil industry can be expected to challenge these findings for purely selfish reasons.


Frankly vinceayre, your assertion on tax is silly. With all the good reasons to be disappointed about climate change you have to go and make one up.


Climate change reduction involves moving away from consumption of hydrocarbon energy sources. This means raises of less than 5% in leccy bills to fund renewable sources, and more use of public transport. It recommends reducing senseless waste and over consumption. The impact on tax will be negligible.


Some commentators reckon it might have the impact of a reduction in GDP by as much as 1% - a figure which will have negligible impact on anyone's actual life. For comparison, the credit crunch created by the city boys created a shrink in GDP of at least 6%, and we're not bothered enough about that to legislate to prevent it happening again.


Amongst the positive by-products is a nicer place to live in, and less global instability.


With that in mind I correct my earlier statement. The witless, attention seekers, nutjobs, conspiracy theorists and those working in the oil industry can be expected to challenge these findings for purely selfish reasons.


Don't ally yourself with that gang Vince. It delivers you zero benefit.

Science has told us that Earth undergoes regular climate cycles. There's nothing new in that chappie - no epiphany, no revelation for the skeptics. You're not denying that, right?


No denial on that.


A vast consensus of quality science also tells us that human activity is currently ushering in the next climate change sequence, and doing it so fast that it represents a significant self-inflicted tragedy.

A large proportion of this science is based on data that we are not allowed to see, that leads me to question its validity.


Frankly vinceayre, your assertion on tax is silly. With all the good reasons to be disappointed about climate change you have to go and make one up. Climate change reduction involves moving away from consumption of hydrocarbon energy sources. This means raises of less than 5% in leccy bills to fund renewable sources, and more use of public transport. It recommends reducing senseless waste and over consumption. The impact on tax will be negligible.


Last year my energy bill was ?30,000 plus, i paid over ?1200.00 in climate change levy, a tax imposed on me by the government quite a few years ago. I estimate i have paid over ?5,000 in this tax since its inception. That may be nothing to you but to me its a lot of money.

I am a baker and waste is one of our cardinal sins so I am all for saving energy and time and materials.


Some commentators reckon it might have the impact of a reduction in GDP by as much as 1% - a figure which will have negligible impact on anyone's actual life. For comparison, the credit crunch created by the city boys created a shrink in GDP of at least 6%, and we're not bothered enough about that to legislate to prevent it happening again.


Agreed, but the boom they created in housing and capital wealth has made me and I suspect a lot of you reading this considerably richer. If you purchased a property in the mid nineties when Blair came to power it is now probably at least doubled in value even with the effect of the past three years taken into consideration. So yes their greed created this recession but it also created a huge wealth surge for the country as a whole.


I don't ally myself to anyone and change my mind on things quite often if i am wrong, I have yet to be convinced on this subject though.

Ah, the climate change levy for business.


Just wanted to highlight that, as it doesn't apply to domestic users - so we don't want any myths circulating.


It needs to be put in context. I'm guessing your overall business turnover may be 200k or more, including rates, salaries and baking ingredients etc.


If that were the case, that would make the levy 0.5% of your overall turnover - or a penny on a loaf.


I'd argue that a penny on a loaf is a small price to pay for climate stability, a green environment and political resolution. It would even lower your taxes by making cuts in the defence budgets needed to wage wars thousands of miles away to protect oil supplies which generate your electricity.

vinceayre Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Last year my energy bill was ?30,000 plus, i paid

> over ?1200.00 in climate change levy, a tax

> imposed on me by the government quite a few years

> ago. I estimate i have paid over ?5,000 in this

> tax since its inception. That may be nothing to

> you but to me its a lot of money.

> I am a baker and waste is one of our cardinal sins

> so I am all for saving energy and time and

> materials.

>


I have some sympathy with you on this point but it doesn't follow that because climate change has been used to justify some arguably arbitraty and unfair taxes then climate change isn't happening.


Whether these taxes are fair or will make any difference to energy consumption is a whole different debate - but there are vested interests who use the 'it's just an excuse to make you pay more tax' arguments to sell their own agenda (conspiracy theorists, free marketeers, Jeremy Clarkson etc)

Ah, the climate change levy for business.


Just wanted to highlight that, as it doesn't apply to domestic users - so we don't want any myths circulating.


You say that like it doesn't effect people just business, business's are people especially small business's like mine. Every pound that we are taxed more is a pound less we can reinvest in the company. This government has continuously raised business taxes thinking wrongly that it does not effect people directly, they are so wrong in this belief.

I don't think for one minute that the government raises taxes because they think it doesn't affect people. After all, they micromanage VAT because they believe it controls the economy.


Either way, as Timster says, hating tax doesn't alter the reality of climate change.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • was the price not displayed on the menu?
    • It has come to this author’s attention that the world of 4+ admissions — that most enigmatic of educational rites — continues to bewilder even the most composed of parents. Fear not. For in a former life, I was not merely a humble observer, but a seasoned educator of over twenty years, and Head of Pre-Prep for a distinguished dozen. Now, with quill exchanged for touchscreen, I have taken to that most modern of salons — Instagram — to dispense guidance, answer frequently whispered questions, and illuminate the shadowy corners of school selection with clarity and calm. Each post bears my signature twist: a blend of insight, levity, and the occasional raised eyebrow. Should you find yourself adrift in the sea of admissions, I suggest you peruse my latest dispatch. It may well be the lifeline you seek. The Delicate Dilemma of the Summer-born 4+ Scholars Yours in solidarity and scholastic savvy, Lord Pencilton  🎩✏️
    • Perhaps Gooseygreeny was not familiar with the wildlife before Gala was imposed on the park, since when its value to wildlife has deteriorated. The Park had never been disturbed before, as the council had respected it as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, so only the Common was licensed by them as a site for events. The first time Gala held their event, there was a tree with woodpeckers nesting in it right in the middle of the main field they used and thrushes, blackbirds and great tits nesting within the shrubs and trees immediately surrounding the field. The woodpeckers were thriving on ants from the anthills in the grass. To those of us who used to enjoy watching the wildlife, it was very obviously a Site of Importance for a variety of birds. Despite being accessed by the public and their dogs, it had been relatively undisturbed,  which was one of the main reasons why it was so special and why I have been opposed to the Gala festival being held during the bird nesting season.
    • So dangerous!    Can you be more specific about the road this was in and when you report it?  Maybe there’s some CCTV footage available
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...