[IceFire]

"The opposition parties teamed up Wednesday to pass a private member's bill that requires the government to meet international Kyoto targets — despite the Conservatives' attempt to kill the bill hours before the vote.

The bill, which was introduced 10 months ago by Liberal backbencher Pablo Rodriguez, gives the government 60 days to table a detailed plan outlining how Canada will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions."

Booyah!

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/02/14/kyoto-vote.html

[MP-Ryan]

What's this, another Canuckian?  Eh? =)

I'm a little miffed at this actually.  I agree we need to do something about fighting climate change, but I don't think self-handicapping and damaging our own economy through Kyoto is the way to do it.  Not to mention, opposition parties are expected to table legislation, yes... but tabling what amounts to a directive on how the government should be doing business?  That's... unorthodox.  I somehow don't think the Conservatives are going to listen, either.

And nobody wants an election.

[Kosh]

but I don't think self-handicapping and damaging our own economy through Kyoto is the way to do it.

Have any evidence that it does damage the economy?

[IceFire]

What's this, another Canuckian?  Eh? =)

I'm a little miffed at this actually.  I agree we need to do something about fighting climate change, but I don't think self-handicapping and damaging our own economy through Kyoto is the way to do it.  Not to mention, opposition parties are expected to table legislation, yes... but tabling what amounts to a directive on how the government should be doing business?  That's... unorthodox.  I somehow don't think the Conservatives are going to listen, either.

And nobody wants an election.

The only people who have ever said that Kyoto will damage the economy have been the Conservatives.  Everyone else feels that Kyoto will probably create net job gains as there will be need for skilled people to implement all the changes. All the retrofitting, upgrading, grants handed out, research projects, and so forth.  I'm not at all convinced that this will hurt the economy...this is the usual rhetoric from the right wing parties both here in Canada and south of the border.

Even if it does hurt the economy...are you suggesting we do the alternative and let this thing get away when we had the chance to stop it?

[MP-Ryan]

What's this, another Canuckian?  Eh? =)

I'm a little miffed at this actually.  I agree we need to do something about fighting climate change, but I don't think self-handicapping and damaging our own economy through Kyoto is the way to do it.  Not to mention, opposition parties are expected to table legislation, yes... but tabling what amounts to a directive on how the government should be doing business?  That's... unorthodox.  I somehow don't think the Conservatives are going to listen, either.

And nobody wants an election.

The only people who have ever said that Kyoto will damage the economy have been the Conservatives.  Everyone else feels that Kyoto will probably create net job gains as there will be need for skilled people to implement all the changes. All the retrofitting, upgrading, grants handed out, research projects, and so forth.  I'm not at all convinced that this will hurt the economy...this is the usual rhetoric from the right wing parties both here in Canada and south of the border.

Even if it does hurt the economy...are you suggesting we do the alternative and let this thing get away when we had the chance to stop it?

Where are we getting these skilled people, praytell?  We import engineers from all over the world but most of them end up driving taxes or cleaning public buildings because we don't accredit them here.  We're short of tradespeople already.  And I don't think shelling out cash in penalties because we can't meet the targets is a productive usage of funding.  It would make more sense to divert those funds internally to fund changes in industry.

I don't have a problem with addressing climate change - I have a problem when we're not setting our own standards and doing what works in Canada.

Furthermore, and on a more pragmatic note:  I'm a biologist.  I see the miracles of life daily.  I see how adaptive it is, how remarkably resilient.  Even IF we muck up this plant so badly that it can no longer support human life (which the nagtive impact of which would make a very interesting debate) life will indeed go on.  That's the great thing about evolution *crossthreads*.  Life goes on even if we as a species die out.  I fully believe that the human race will be the cause of its own destruction.  And I don't really think that's a bad thing, because there isn't much else left to decimate us as a species and force evolutionary change.

Earth will be here, covered in life, long after we're gone, no matter what we do to her.  Saying that "fixing" climate change is what's necessary for the planet's continued existence is foolish.  The Earth is constantly changing its climate.  We're nothing more than a minor blip on its developmental path.

EDIT:  And while I confess to voting Conservative, I'm not technically "a Conservative."  I'm mostly "NOT a Liberal"

[Kosh]

You didn't answer my question.

[aldo_14]

What's this, another Canuckian?  Eh? =)

I'm a little miffed at this actually.  I agree we need to do something about fighting climate change, but I don't think self-handicapping and damaging our own economy through Kyoto is the way to do it.  Not to mention, opposition parties are expected to table legislation, yes... but tabling what amounts to a directive on how the government should be doing business?  That's... unorthodox.  I somehow don't think the Conservatives are going to listen, either.

And nobody wants an election.

I think that sort of 'let someone else hurt themselves' attitude is exactly what's wrong with the world.  It's too easy an excuse to do ****-all, in any circumstance.  Baby in a burning building?  That guy's bigger and tougher than me, let him try and get it first.

[Rand al Thor]

I don't have a problem with addressing climate change - I have a problem when we're not setting our own standards and doing what works in Canada.

I don't understand the logic behind that. If that was actually the case and Canada was conscientious in regulating it's emissions then it's economy would definitely be damaged considering the vast majority of other nations wouldn't self regulate. You'd lose economic competitiveness and still suffer the effects of global warming, pollution etc.

And besides, Kyoto IS Canada setting it's own standards. It's a treaty negotiated by all members that have signed on. Or at least initial members.

Of course it's not perfect. From Irelands point of view, when Kyoto came into being we were only just entering a massive economic boom phase and went from a fairly poor country to one of the richest per capita in Europe. Because of that we're way over the limits that were set for us regardless of the fact that we were essentially less developed than the average European country at the time.

It's harsh for some and flawed, but something needs to be done about the issue and it will take a lot of work and sacrifices.

BTW; you'd rather humans die out rather than try to become a more eco-friendly society?

[aldo_14]

No country can call on another country to do something - anything - without demonstrating willingness to do it itself.  Otherwise it's just being hypocritical.

[Thor]

sure earth will still be here, teaming with life...but it would be nice if the human race was still around.  Not fixing the environment = humanities suicide?  hmm interesting thought...

at any rate, anything that'll get those Connie bastards out of office is a great thing!

[TrashMan]

I agree we need to do something about fighting climate change, but I don't think self-handicapping and damaging our own economy through Kyoto is the way to do it.  Not to mention, opposition

Eh? Didn't that famous english economist present a report stating that investing in ecology actually benefits economy?
It's a win-win situation.
Even if it wasn't ecology all the way!

Now, if ecological damage was localized, I wouldn't be so opposed to it, but since YOUR garbage might end up killing ME and my future offspring that I have every right in the universe to be very much pi**sed about it...

[IceFire]

What's this, another Canuckian?  Eh? =)

I'm a little miffed at this actually.  I agree we need to do something about fighting climate change, but I don't think self-handicapping and damaging our own economy through Kyoto is the way to do it.  Not to mention, opposition parties are expected to table legislation, yes... but tabling what amounts to a directive on how the government should be doing business?  That's... unorthodox.  I somehow don't think the Conservatives are going to listen, either.

And nobody wants an election.

The only people who have ever said that Kyoto will damage the economy have been the Conservatives.  Everyone else feels that Kyoto will probably create net job gains as there will be need for skilled people to implement all the changes. All the retrofitting, upgrading, grants handed out, research projects, and so forth.  I'm not at all convinced that this will hurt the economy...this is the usual rhetoric from the right wing parties both here in Canada and south of the border.

Even if it does hurt the economy...are you suggesting we do the alternative and let this thing get away when we had the chance to stop it?

Where are we getting these skilled people, praytell?  We import engineers from all over the world but most of them end up driving taxes or cleaning public buildings because we don't accredit them here.  We're short of tradespeople already.  And I don't think shelling out cash in penalties because we can't meet the targets is a productive usage of funding.  It would make more sense to divert those funds internally to fund changes in industry.

I don't have a problem with addressing climate change - I have a problem when we're not setting our own standards and doing what works in Canada.

Furthermore, and on a more pragmatic note:  I'm a biologist.  I see the miracles of life daily.  I see how adaptive it is, how remarkably resilient.  Even IF we muck up this plant so badly that it can no longer support human life (which the nagtive impact of which would make a very interesting debate) life will indeed go on.  That's the great thing about evolution *crossthreads*.  Life goes on even if we as a species die out.  I fully believe that the human race will be the cause of its own destruction.  And I don't really think that's a bad thing, because there isn't much else left to decimate us as a species and force evolutionary change.

Earth will be here, covered in life, long after we're gone, no matter what we do to her.  Saying that "fixing" climate change is what's necessary for the planet's continued existence is foolish.  The Earth is constantly changing its climate.  We're nothing more than a minor blip on its developmental path.

EDIT:  And while I confess to voting Conservative, I'm not technically "a Conservative."  I'm mostly "NOT a Liberal"

Setting our own standards would be fine I think too...if someone actually bothered to set a realistic standard that didn't place the onus on the very end of the time period alloted.  We've been doing that since I was born.  Things like "by year X we'll have cut our emissions by Y amount" and then when we get close to year X we haven't done ANYTHING and the situation is worse and now it'll "hurt out economy" because we didn't do anything the rest of the time.  So the made in Canada approach that Harper keeps talking about was absolutely laughable and what the Liberals did in the 90s was twiddle their thumbs and so forth.  We're still allot further along than our southern neighbors but we still suck and I feel that Canada should be leading the way.

As for skilled people...we've got em.  We've got plenty of them.  Some of them go to the states because we don't have anything for them up here (or not the incentives).  And as you say we import them en mass and give them taxi jobs.  We can definitely change these situations if things are changed and money re-allocated.  And we've got some economic experts telling us that allot of this green technology will be a huge advantage because we'll be so much more efficient than the competition that we'll have the edge. 

So I feel very justified in saying that we could be much more friendly to the environment AND have the edge on the competition.  Just look at the car industry where the Japanese corporations years ago decided to try and work towards more ecologically friendly options and in the process they have cars with large numbers of recyclable components, better fuel economy on the average, and green technologies that some of the North American automakers had to copy or license.  So competitive advantage goes to the Japanese for going green.

Its not a perfect solution by any means.

I do absolutely agree with you on the pragmatism part.  The planet will probably survive us and life on this planet, given the chance, seems to absolutely thrive in almost any environment.  I'd rather have our cake and eat it too...humans more in tune with our planet and our planet still supporting us.

[Rictor]

Dude looks like Al Pacino in Carlito's Way.