Beware of Entangling Alliances

The global push to enforce carbon emissions regulations concerns me. I believe we have an obligation to protect the planet from man-made pollution and emissions, but the debate is all wrong.

George Washington wisely stated "beware of entangling alliances." As a proponent of global cooperation, I think there is some merit to the discussions, but the solutions are not good for the world economy.

This story from the government EPW committee really focuses on what is going on:

A global tax on carbon dioxide emissions was urged to help save the Earth from catastrophic man-made global warming at the United Nations climate conference. A panel of UN participants on Thursday urged the adoption of a tax that would represent “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.”

“Finally someone will pay for these [climate related] costs,” Othmar Schwank, a global tax advocate, told Inhofe EPW Press Blog following the panel discussion titled “A Global CO2 Tax.” Schwank is a consultant with the Switzerland based Mauch Consulting firm

Schwank said at least “$10-$40 billion dollars per year” could be generated by the tax, and wealthy nations like the U.S. would bear the biggest burden based on the “polluters pay principle.”

The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to tax coal.”

The Global Warming issue is being waged in a debate to promote more government control over national economies. There is a term "enviro-socialism" that seems very fitting to what is happening today.

Another interesting article concerning the Bali Conference said:

Another point was that as this current economic system got us here in the first place, a climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources.

The free market approach to discussing the environmental situation is to target particular polluters and help them implement current technologies that will emit less pollution or carbon dioxide. To implement an arbitrary "carbon tax" is irresponsible. You cannot tax industrialized nations if the technology does not allow an alternative. This will destroy economies and prevent underdeveloped nations from participating in the global economy.

There needs to be a cost associated with emissions and pollution from industry and consumers. If there is no cost, then it is automatically cheaper to do nothing than to invest in new technologies. The idea of carbon credits is good in theory, but if that is based on some arbitrary government regulated program rather than true costs of environmental cleanup or market supply/demand, then the program will be very wasteful while consolidating power and money in bureaucracies.

The Bali Conference is the UN demanding to become the global government and using environmental issues to further it's agenda. The UN has proven to be anything but transparent and has shown little progress in helping third world nations enter the global economy. They may hand out a lot of aid, but they are showing very little accomplishment from the investments. This inefficient use of capital will continue to hurt the poor of the world and create an overly bulky organization which does not have the best interest of the world at heart.