Airlines -- Biggest Carbon Sin
01-27-2013, 04:40 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,105
Airlines -- Biggest Carbon Sin
It has begun. No matter how good the outcome, this can not end well for the airline industry.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/su...ir-travel.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/su...ir-travel.html
01-27-2013, 04:53 PM
#2
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 40,044
I've been following this slow-mo train wreck for several years, it was a slimy euro attempt to unilaterally impose their greenie politics on international flight operations.
The EU used an underhanded technicality to attempt to dodge their obligation to develop this sort of regulation cooperatively through ICAO.
I'm pleasantly surprised to see the administration standing up so strongly to this BS.
The Russians did us one better...they threatened to outright BAN euro airlines from the polar over-flight routes.
The EU used an underhanded technicality to attempt to dodge their obligation to develop this sort of regulation cooperatively through ICAO.
I'm pleasantly surprised to see the administration standing up so strongly to this BS.
The Russians did us one better...they threatened to outright BAN euro airlines from the polar over-flight routes.
01-27-2013, 06:10 PM
#3
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
I've been following this slow-mo train wreck for several years, it was a slimy euro attempt to unilaterally impose their greenie politics on international flight operations.
The EU used an underhanded technicality to attempt to dodge their obligation to develop this sort of regulation cooperatively through ICAO.
I'm pleasantly surprised to see the administration standing up so strongly to this BS.
The Russians did us one better...they threatened to outright BAN euro airlines from the polar over-flight routes.
The EU used an underhanded technicality to attempt to dodge their obligation to develop this sort of regulation cooperatively through ICAO.
I'm pleasantly surprised to see the administration standing up so strongly to this BS.
The Russians did us one better...they threatened to outright BAN euro airlines from the polar over-flight routes.
Easy solution- have each country levy the same tax on each other in the same amount resulting in a net cost of zero. They can then claim victory with no need to pay anything to anyone. Winning all around.
The end effect on the climate would remain exactly the same. Winning.
The alternative is a full blown trade war, and I think we know who would last the longest.
01-27-2013, 07:28 PM
#4
Day puke
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Out.
Posts: 3,865
Sharp, and the Chinese threatened to hold EU aircraft hostage. Looks like the farce is over for now, but it will be tried again.
Easy solution- have each country levy the same tax on each other in the same amount resulting in a net cost of zero. They can then claim victory with no need to pay anything to anyone. Winning all around.
The end effect on the climate would remain exactly the same. Winning.
The alternative is a full blown trade war, and I think we know who would last the longest.
Easy solution- have each country levy the same tax on each other in the same amount resulting in a net cost of zero. They can then claim victory with no need to pay anything to anyone. Winning all around.
The end effect on the climate would remain exactly the same. Winning.
The alternative is a full blown trade war, and I think we know who would last the longest.
01-27-2013, 08:41 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2012
Position: Holding over Macho Grande
Posts: 602
It will be interesting to see if this thread gets closed for being too political, or if that is simply a matter of subjective opinion meted out on a completely arbitrary basis. I'm betting on the latter.
Apparently, PC comments are completely acceptable, but anything that isn't PC isn't. What a charming set of double-standards are work here in these forums.
Apparently, PC comments are completely acceptable, but anything that isn't PC isn't. What a charming set of double-standards are work here in these forums.
01-27-2013, 09:19 PM
#7
With The Resistance
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
It will be interesting to see if this thread gets closed for being too political, or if that is simply a matter of subjective opinion meted out on a completely arbitrary basis. I'm betting on the latter.
Apparently, PC comments are completely acceptable, but anything that isn't PC isn't. What a charming set of double-standards are work here in these forums.
Apparently, PC comments are completely acceptable, but anything that isn't PC isn't. What a charming set of double-standards are work here in these forums.
We get it, go over the rules again and try to play nice or it is going to be adios cowboy.
01-28-2013, 09:02 AM
#8
Libertarian Resistance
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 757 FO
Posts: 1,057
Inadvertent Honesty
Interesting that they use the term "sin" with respect to economic behavior of which they disapprove. I infer that we can, therefore, safely refer to carbon taxes as "alms" or "tithing". We can also safely refer to the activists that infest the EPA and the IPCC as "clerics".
WW
WW
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
