Vive la France!
The French equivalent of the Supreme Court reveals the extent to which global warming alarmism was always intended as a justification for a sophisticated tax-farming rip-off of normal people by oligarchical elites:
….The tax, which would have started on Jan. 1, was set at 17 euros ($24.38) per ton of carbon-dioxide emissions, President Nicolas Sarkozy said in September. To make the tax more palatable, he partially or fully exempted power plants, public transport, airlines, farming and fishing, as well as 1,018 older cement, steel and glass factories.
In all, 93 percent of all industrial carbon emissions in France would have avoided paying the full tax, the constitutional court said in a decision published on its Web site. The tax would have fallen disproportionately on fuel for heating and cars, it said.
Emphasis mine.
Jesus, 93 %? Was anybody with connections paying the tax? Warmer, colder, who cares? Just so long as widows, hotel maids and slum dwellers are paying through the nose in carbon taxes while Total S.A. skates! That is to say, the burden is on the ignorant peasantry who did not go to Ecole Nationale d’Administration.
Or on our side of the pond, Harvard.
ADDENDUM:
Science Daily – No Rise of Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Fraction in Past 160 Years, New Research Finds
December 31st, 2009 at 11:59 am
" ignorant peasantry who did not go to Ecole Nationale d’Administration"
It’s a rather populist way of talking about it. Let’s just say that Mr Sarkozy is an intelligent politican who knows that the appearance of action is more important than reality. Taking on the business lobby would be far too costly for few benefits. Besides, if you want to finance the welfare state, you need money, playing the green card was a rather smart move.
December 31st, 2009 at 2:42 pm
"Let’s just say that Mr Sarkozy is an intelligent politican who knows that the appearance of action is more important than reality. Taking on the business lobby would be far too costly for few benefits. Besides, if you want to finance the welfare state, you need money, playing the green card was a rather smart move."
.
I see, ZI, that we are in agreement as to the substance at least. 🙂
.
Setting my populist snark aside, as I said, a sophisticated tax farming scheme.
December 31st, 2009 at 5:08 pm
In the U. S. vehicles are responsible for roughly 25% of carbon dioxide production. In France it is somewhat less. Arguendo, let’s say it’s 15%. . That means that, if the tax were set high enough that it completely eliminated vehicle carbon dioxide production, the greatest reduction that could be achieved by that method would be 15%..Of course, that’s unrealistic. Say you reduce the production of carbon dioxide by 30%. That would mean a reduction of appromixately 8%. Is that enough to achieve the stated objective? I think that somebody is kidding somebody.