babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » environmental justice   » Harpernomics and the environment

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Harpernomics and the environment
anchovy breather
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14223

posted 20 December 2007 07:28 PM      Profile for anchovy breather     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I was reading this:

quote:
Canadians will criticize the government for doing too much to tackle climate change once the economic impact is felt from reducing greenhouse gases, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said.

In a year-end interview with CBC's Peter Mansbridge, Harper spoke of the "challenge" of implementing the first phases of the mandatory emission reduction targets on industry because of the "very real costs" on the economy.

"There is a reason why previous governments have avoided at all levels setting mandatory emission targets." Harper said.

"As soon as you're dedicated to actually reducing emissions, that imposes costs on the economy. It imposes them in the short run."

While he said the costs will be manageable, they will provoke some reaction.

"And I'd ask your viewers to think of that whenever they have other people out there saying we should be doing more. Because once we start … these things start biting, the criticism we're going to be getting is that we're doing too much."


aside from the fact Harper has nothing to fear that people are going to think he has 'done too much' on the enviro file.

Unless, I started to wonder, if Harper is as politically cagey as we keep being told, if this might indicate his climate change plans and policies will intentionally make things very economically tough on average people in the short term, hoping that the optics of this would lead said average person to believe that 'their approach', doing the costless nothing and letting his oilsands backers do whatever the hell they want, was correct all along.

Perhaps said average voter would begin to lower the environment as a priority again once they engineer it to hit pocketbooks hard. Perhaps all in an attempt to appease his Big Energy cronies in the longterm.

Of course, I think people are going to start take economic hits eventually one way or another because of this little climate change thingy, and the above was just gratuitous and convoluted speculation, but figured I'd put it out there.


From: rotating, random | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca