Will Going Green Kill Business?

"The U.S. is one example of a number of nations unsure about how to deal with climate change."

The uncertainty lies in just how much resistance the current administration will have with ramming this through congress and what is the best way to circumnavigate the opposition.

There is no question they (the administration) want to push this through into law. However, this is not about saving the planet as much as taking a bite out of capitalism in general.

"Are climate change initiatives and regulation giving management one more reason not to grow in the face of uncertain markets?"

I contend that it is going to be large factor. This legislation, as it is currently planed, will essentially tax every business in one form or another. If a company is not taxed directly by this legislation, they pay it from the supply chain. Additionally, it will require more resources within the company just to determine what they must do to comply.

These costs can be (and will be) ultimately paid for by the end user or customer. However, whichever nation is first to apply these "taxes" will be the first nation to play on an unleveled playing field. Essentially, it will be harder or impossible to be competitive with other nations that do not honor the cap and trade taxes.

The current recession is the wrong time to apply extra taxes and fees on businesses that are struggling. From a business perspective it is the right time to hunker down, strip all and every extraneous costs, and cut the workforce where possible. This is one of the leading reasons we are seeing an abnormally slow recovery. There is still the very real threat of double dip recession, which may become a self fulfilling prophecy as long as the specter of higher taxes and additional regulations hang over our heads.

"However, whichever nation is first to apply these "taxes" will be the first nation to play on an unleveled playing field. Essentially, it will be harder or impossible to be competitive with other nations that do not honor the cap and trade taxes".

And the proof is Germany and Denmark which embarked on greening their economies about 2 decades ago.

How quickly they have gone from first world countries to 4th world countries!

"The current recession is the wrong time to apply extra taxes and fees on businesses that are struggling. From a business perspective it is the right time to hunker down, strip all and every extraneous costs, and cut the workforce where possible". Taxes are internal to an economy. If the taxes reduce consumption of oil per item produced, and the tax money gets returned in r and d or in contracts to install more efficient machines, that keeps employment up and the country bleeds less money to Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Venezuela too. This is not a bad thing in my opinion. The current low level of fuel efficiency is basically a subsidy for those nations.

Brian

Denmark and Germany 4th world countries - you are of course joking I hope?

"Taxes are internal to an economy. If the taxes reduce consumption of oil per item produced, and the tax money gets returned in r and d or in contracts to install more efficient machines, that keeps employment up and the country bleeds less money to Saudi Arabia, Iraq and Venezuela too."

That statement is backwards. Taxes are an impediment to an economy. Only a fraction of the collected monies goes back into R&D. A large sum gets absorbed by the bureaucracy. Higher taxes also robs funds from businesses that could be used to hire workers.

I agree that it would be good to lower our dependance on foreign oil. The only thing that prevents that from happening is Congress. They will not allow tapping our own oil and natural gas resources. For that matter, when Congress approved drilling off shore last year, they quickly and quietly revoked that right after the elections.

It's about power, not economics, unfortunately.

Apparently it is a conundrum, for in the US it did get so that rivers were catching on fire, birds were dying, and people were dying due to pollution.

There are still places unfit to live.

How are things these days at Love Canal?

Environmental protections were put in place.

Industries moved to places where they weren't.

How about that Steel Industry?

Machiavelli said a long time ago, "Crush your enemies and Reward your friends."

Lincoln believed a strong nation ought to be economically self sufficient, neither depending on imports, or exports.

International competitors who do not play by the same rules when it is the "Commons", at stake, air, and water, ought to expect tariffs from those nations intent on doing what is right.

Those Multi Nationals that are intent on maintaining and advancing Wage Slavery, and misuse of the Commons, ought to be taxed, whereas those that operate cleanly, and fairly ought to have tax breaks, instead of being taxed for success.

Unfortunately we actually do need a basic World Government, as regards those things that we share in common. A war on Weapons of Mass Destruction is the ethical World War III.

"A struggle with the environment is not enough to make a nation." - Machiavelli also said that.

So then to get a World Government a World War sponsored by it is called for.

If we want to create a World Government powerful enough to cause Technocratically justifiable environmental regulatory institutions, aimed at least reducing a poisonous atmosphere for our working brothers and sisters.

I nominate a war on Weapons of Mass Destruction as an economic boost from skewed hard to follow logic.

Nice rant

I agree that the world is an unjust place, and that unbridled capitalism has caused massive environmental damage.

What you failed to mention is the other end of the spectrum. The damage done by dictatorships and communist states. I do not have the time at this moment to go into greater detail, but you may want to check out the environmental policies of China or an incident called Chernobyl in the then Soviet Union.

We humans have some very bad habits.

Trade: The world is now a global economy. The latest economic mess that we are in proves that. I do not like what is going on either. This is our reality.

You should do some research on the Great depression, and how two US senator's had a bill enacted on increasing tariffs. The result was catastrophic.

Machiavelli: This guy codified the rules on tyranny. You appear to be against it. Yet you quote him. Although there is an historic relevance, he belongs in the trash bin of history.

World Government: Great idea! Not going to happen in our life time.

Against weapons of mass destruction, yet advocating for war?

I am aware of the supposed influence of tariffs on the economics of the Great Depression.

I somewhat agree that at the time as they were, they were catastrophic. However there were many factors that contributed to the Depression of that era, and if you review my post you will see the mention of Lincoln's economic theory- which addresses the flaws in tariffs.

They will not work as long as you still buy at all. I have a similar view of "Sanctions".

Certainly I am all for further study.

Lately my concentration of study has been on WWI since the politics now are very similar. In particular we are in a period of Multi Polar Power Balance, as opposed to the Bi Polar Power Balance.

I am opposed to Weapons of Mass Destruction, and understand the realities of them, and would authorize covert and overt work of a deadly nature to free my brothers and sisters of this undue threat.

It is about the only just war, I am for.

No one can beat Machiavelli as a Political Scientist. He speaks the truth whether you like it or not, on the subject.

Edward Hallet Karr does provide insight into the real utility of Machiavelli in his essay: A Critique of Realism.

It is not correct that Machiavelli in some way caused tyranny, and his science is same as money. -"It's not how much money you have, but what you do with it."

As an anarchist I end up not being married to any particular form of government, and am only concerned with whether or not things are going in the right direction.

Dictatorships are not always dictatorships and democracies are not always republics.

The foundations for a World Government do already exist in great measure, and it does already exist up to a point.

Those foundations are Maritime Law, and International Law.

Interpol is an interesting institution.

What's that other country next to Haiti, and why are they doing better?

Life is confusing, isn't it?

I say it is not so important that you always make the right decision, but that you can make one.

I say that while I hate war, we need one worth the effort and sacrifice, and that is a war on Weapons of Mass Destruction.

This is due to the realities of our era, and undue threats to my class, the working class.

I do enjoy these conversations, as I am very into history, politics and current events in the world. It is like having my youngest son at home again.

As for WW1: I recommend that you look at the following. Sarajevo, the Von Schieffen plan, questionable alliances and various national aspirations and colonial desires. History just keeps on repeating it's self.

Covert operations are very dangerous affair. Especially if your the person doing it. If they go wrong it can cause major military and political issues. The ones that went wrong usually make it to the media. The ones that did go well are not heard of for decades.

A just war? That depends on which side of the line you are on. I know that the Fascist's needed to be defeated. Any government/dictator that abuses it's own people and or threatens others is a problem.

Just remember the Crusades were considered a just war at the time.

Machiavelli: I never stated that he caused tyranny. He just rote the "book" on it. Tyranny has been around since the dawn of man.

You have stated that you are an Anarchist. My I ask to what kind? As there are many forms of it. Such as Mutalisum, Individualist, Social, Capitalisms, etc.

As for me; depending on your location and political definitions, you can consider me as a right wing conservative, with a military back ground.

A Dictatorship is just that. I have have yet to find a perfect Democratic society. I will take my chances on Democracy as there is still a chance to change things, and you do not have tendency to disappear in the middle of the night.

Check out the STAZI, NKVD, GESTAPO, KGB, etc.

As for the bases for world government, you are correct. You did not mention the UN Law of the Sea Treaty.

The big problem is that not all of those who signed on all of the agreement's are abiding by them.

At this point and time, World Government is just a fantasy

Interpol: I have not done much research on them. My only experienced with them was when I was visiting my Uncle in Belgium many years ago and the came over the wall looking for the man that my Uncle had rented the house too while he was away. That was a moment.

The Dominican Republic has something resembling good governance. You can debate that if you wish based upon your ideological beliefs. They have also not deforested their land.

Life is confusing. I still have not figured it out yet.

History will be the judge of the right decision.

Note that there is a old Arab Proverb: "Be careful for what you wish for"

There are no real winners in war, only those that appear to lose less. If you really want to learn about what war's truly cost, talk to a veteran of any conflict and find out how haunted they may be. Or you sit down an talk to those who lost some one due to war.

War is stated to be result of failed diplomacy. That said; In order for diplomacy to occur, you need all sides to cooperate.

This is going to take some time

If you can you might want to visit or study some of the places to get a bigger prospective on the past and the cost of life it involves.

-Vimmey Ridge

-Normandy

-Cean

-Incon

-The Schelt campaign

-Bastone

-Pearl Harbour

-Manilla

-unfortunately the list does not end.

Grotius, wrote that you are more likely to go to war with people and nations you do business with, than those you don't. That was in 425 BC.

The success of the Cold War partly depended on separate economies.

Hence my perfect resolution to the Cold War, would have been Statehood for Russia as this would have given them a tradition of Contract Law, necessary for Capitalism, plus recreated a bi polar power balance in relation to the rise of China.

Some things that are dangerous are more worthy of effort and risk than others.

Conflict is a constant, and WWI led to WWII.

Some people are born to be warriors and I'd rather have them fight for something worthwhile, than something stupid, since they will fight anyway.

Weapons of Mass Destruction have no more utility in this era.

Getting rid of them is a worthy fight.

Such a fight at this time would be better as Overt for the nations so armed to give them up, and ally to Covertly make sure no other nation or group get them.

While it is true that History repeats itself, it is not everyday the same play, with the same characters.

While I may learn some lessons of utility from events of WWI there are factors unique to now, and other lessons from times of peace, ideas and institutions forgotten to apply that could mean the difference between survival of the species, and extinction.

Nations and organizations must have one primary mission.

Individual freedom is the ideal of the US with all of its imperfections.

(I am particularly fond of US traditions of Free Speech, and Libel Law, since you cannot be sued for speaking the truth in the US.)

All who have weapons of mass destruction essentially threaten everybody. This is a fact of our time and era. The Crusades did have their unique imperatives that we may judge as either just, or unjust. However now is different.

I do come out of Godwin Anarchy and primarily support education and border defense. Conflicts do arise that challenge where I come out of when I recognize situations that do not conform to ideals.

Monarchs face similar conflicts when they inherit kingdoms that are backward and ignorant. Sometimes you just have to tell people what to do.

I was over there in the Fusion Thread where I learned that Fusion was not necessarily the problem, but control of it was.

In many respects, at its best, US as a Republic has had success as an experiment in controlled anarchy.

Certainly the success of the Cultural Art export of music, and movies, and games would support that thesis.

The chaos of the Wild West both disturbs and supports ideals.

The Schools must be safe.

The great Westerns do become terrible reminders that unfettered freedoms may allow for the barbaric take over.

How about that Ghenis Khan!

Now it is not the Hordes we are to worry about, but the cells and trusts.

Typically I get along with right wing conservative types with police or military backgrounds.

I was a Security Guard in Rochdale College in Toronto.

I have a friend who is ex-CIA, has been tortured by Cubans, doesn't sleep well, and is better at selling my art, than those of art galleries.

The issue of Green, or Not Green is significant as far as how it impacts businesses

I do not call my made up Model Country Transcendia a Country, Company, and Work of Art for no reason.

The floating value of the US dollar, just paper, is a triumph of conceptual art, as well as a great threat.

I am inclined to base my economy on the people through the use of Insurance Products, like the Whole Life Insurance Policy that gains equity.

In my ideal world the support for AIG, would have resulted in award of such policies at birth to citizens, and I proffer that such an event would really unleash the "invisible hand" idealized by Adam Smith.

As far as Green Business is concerned, it is worthy, and I would ally with nations that are Green, in ways possible, and hence reduce taxes and tariffs with nations playing by the same rules. If this is Anarchy, well it is my kind.

my friend i am neither right nor left wing supporter i am left Right man(EX Indian Navy)you have left out Mi3.Mi5 ,British special operations wing and ungentlemanly war fare of Churchill era! and seven sisters contribution to Post world war 2 era,

crm

I have far more concerns with government politicians and big business getting into 'green politics' over the environment than what the supposed climate change will bring about.

One common and well seen example is how many world governments have banded incandescent bulbs because they are energy inefficient and supposed to bad for the environment because they use more power than a CFL bulb. But yet its been well documented and proven that CFL's have far more harmful compounds in them than any incandescent bulb ever had.

CFL's are supposed to last 4 - 10 times longer than a standard incandescent bulb but yet real life has shown that most don't make it any where near the run time of a standard incandescent bulb let alone their advertised run times. But instead cost the customer far more than what they would have spent on purchasing an incandescent bulb and the added power it would have used in that same time period of operation. Just because an incandescent bulb uses more energy doesn't mean its creating more pollution. Much of our collective power comes from clean sources already.

Plus CFL's are supposed to be taken to recycling centers to be properly disposed of because these harmful and toxic compounds that are made of. I don't know anyone who actually does that. Like me they just cuss at the manufacturer and the pinhead politician who said that they where so much better and then toss them in the trash.

So how did they become the poster child of eco friendly actions and responsibility? Green politics and Eco tard laws thats how! Thinking your making things better is not the same as actualy making things better.

I am not against the use of CFL's but rather they are just a great and obvious example of how if people cluelessly follow what politicians say and recommend that things can get worse instead of better.

I and most educated people could easily give a dozen or more examples of how 'Green politics and big business practices' has implemented a changes that are intended for the better but instead ended up being far worse than had they done nothing at all.

I believe we need to be far more responsible in our collective actions however we first need to be collectively far more informed and educated before we do anything. Letting the village idiots run the show because they are bad at everything else is not a wise idea.

A good example for this is the baning of HFC refrigerants. The one that replaced R-22 is R-410a. No Ozone depletion, but a green house gas potential greater than methane.

Green policies must be integrated with trade policies....any country that goes green without demanding that its trade partners also go green will effectively destroy its 'non-environment' related industries. Why? We all understand that green policies do raise the cost of production, so any country that institutes green policies will raise the cost of its products and services, effectively pricing its industries out of the market place....not a good result unless your goal is mass unemployment. Conversely, operating without environmental laws will result in destroying the land, and water that the people require for the basics of life. China can manufacture things very cheaply, but some of its rivers run red, the air is filthy, and the pollution it releases into the rivers are poisoning the seas around it. Globally, as the world industrializes, the pollutions emitted may overwhelm the capacity of the earth to absorb them, potentially resulting in worldwide suffering. So, do we engage in unfettered free trade, realizing that if we will gain greater short term prosperity, but risk great tragedy in the future, or do have an integrated green policies and trade policies, which will result in more sustainable (and stable) long term prosperity? As all countries are sovereign, we do not have the right to force them to be green. However, if our industries must abide by green polices, it is only fair that any country that does not operate equivalent green policies should have a strong tarriff levied on its products, so that its industries do not enjoy an unfair (and ultimately destructive ) cost advantage, nor give incentive for our industries to locate in that country.

Should not cost a Nickel to go green.green movement has been created to Make more money at the cost of consumers ignorance for example Bangalore was known as air conditioned city till mid sixties .then came the greed we destroyed 80% of greenery in and around Bangalore and filled up 100s of water bodies which were collecting Rain water in the water bodies which were meeting water demand of surrounding villages and greenery with out spending any money ,to meet the high demand for Housing and commercial buildings like shoping malls and IT parks ,by disposable income group from IT business we destroyed the greenery and water bodies keeping city cool 365 days a year and To to day going green has become a buzz word. and air conditioning the homes,eating houses and shops are considerd and must have AC plants installed to be called green buildings with Green AC plants,I haven't meant any body who can tell me to make a green building how much Carbon,Carbon monoxide and other pollutants has to be generated which cant be handled and we take pride in getting certified as gold,Platinum rated buildings .To me it looks like equipment manufacturers, consultants and Builders including organisations like ASHRAE,IEEE are benefited.long live green movement.

crm

Interesting how many 'green' catalog sales are for electronic gizmos intended to 'purify' the air. Where is this electricity coming from? Coal mining and burning probably. Green seems to be only a color of money.

Going greener is to be backed up by low cost green energy / power solutions. That is, non heat based total power generation. Then comes the salvation for climatic issues.

Get the foundation done well and rest is easy.

The carbon credit cap and trade programs are being set up to create a new stock / commodities bubble. One that could be a bigger devastation than the current mortgage bubble we are trying to recover from at this time. It is not set up to make things "greener" unless you count the color of money going into Wall Streets pockets.

The carbon credit program in Europe is a mess. I have relatives there and if you mention it you can watch their blood pressure rise. Carbon credits/ off sets are a joke, as all y If you want to reduce carbon dioxide then reduce consumption.

Al Gore, David Suzuki are pure hypocrites. The first one has the largest electrical bill in the state that he lives in. His response is that he buys green power and carbon credits to offset the carbon foot print. The second one has three houses.

As for climate change: That is a constant. I once held a piece of redwood that was pulled out of a diamond mine above the Arctic circle.

Never heard about the continental drift?

Yes I have. Google: Tuzo Wilson

The isotope dating and the geology match. The area in question has not moved for several million years. Any movement had predated the forests that once were there.

Antarctic has been in the same place many Melina. Yet at one time there were dinosaur's living there. There was a very excellent article in "Scientific American" on that.

Climatic change can be slow or fast.

When the volcano Krakatau erupted in 1883, it caused a several year cooling period in the world. In Europe crops failed. Famine ensued.

You might want to check out why Greenland was called Greenland

I do not question the the climate is changing.

I do question, based upon history, to what level we are involved. I know that we are part of the problem.

"Greenland" was a real estate marketing scam. Why is Iceland called Iceland?

We are not adapted to the levels of CO2 that were in the air in the time of dinosaurs. It might have been high enough to kill us. And the sun sends more radiation out now than it did then. So if we had that much CO2, it might be even hotter than when they were around. No mammal was over 30 kg weight back then. Mammals are simply not able for those conditions.

Where was this carbon credit and trading carbon credit born& when will answer all ask Ever greedy ,ever cheating the world grate shopkeepers of the world who are down the funnel and trying to play the old game under their sleeve will Tell you

crm

If you will please edit that and make it more grammatical, maybe others can understand better--and react better.