Voit lisätä twiitteihisi sijainnin, esimerkiksi kaupungin tai tarkemman paikan, verkosta ja kolmannen osapuolen sovellusten kautta. Halutessasi voit poistaa twiittisi sijaintihistorian myöhemmin. Lue lisää
France’s U-turn over ¢3 fuel tax sent shivers through the COP24 climate summit: Highlights the difficulty of imposing *any* economic pain in the name of tackling climate change https://www.politico.eu/article/france-fuel-tax-retreat-dismays-cop24-climate-change-summit/ …pic.twitter.com/JNvd1cGGgy
Who knew? Voters care about climate, but only willing to pay a little Studies routinely show that voters only willing to pay $100-200/year to fix climate. Most policies that will have any real impact will cost much, much more (e.g. $177 in US, http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aa822a/meta …)
Maybe the French people are unhappy about many other things, but the increased tax was the final drop? That been said I agree with you. 
..and my point personally has always been that goverments should pour more money on risky basic research that will never get funded by profit-seeking entities but in time will produce ground-breaking research making stuff like ITER a real possibility.
That sort of money gets spent on more monitoring, producing data that takes more money spent on being manipulated to show just what the climate community wanted to in the first place but with more confidence. eg. NASA's Goddard Institute for Settled Science (GISS) case in point
Just taxing w/o increase in basic research will produce 0 results (other than pissing off population).
The reality of more and bigger government as the only solution for climate change. This won't work.
That's OK. Tax payer funded conferences can afford to pay extra Diesel taxes for their Diesel gennies, while probably still boasting they are 100% renewable
Free market principles, genuine belief in Liberty and Freedom for all. Honoring of inalienable rights for all. America was not an accident just like Man.
There must be a cost-benefit analysis to everything, and most climate activists downplay the costs while exaggerating the benefits. For example, the US could switch to entirely renewable electricity production tomorrow, and it would lower global CO2 emissions by <5%.
Surely throwing money at controlling the climate is a fool’s errand. It would make more sense and costs a lots less to sacrifice alarmists on top of a pyramid like structure. The climate gods would no doubt appreciate that all the more.pic.twitter.com/ycBbZy3G4z
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.
