WORLD TAX CARBON TAX

GENESIS 11:1-9 (THE FIRST NEW WORLD ORDER - ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT)
1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.
2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there.
3 And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter.
4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.
5 And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.
6 And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.
7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.
8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.
9 Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

LUKE 2:1
1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.

THE ENVIROMENTISTS AND GOVERNMENTS WILL USE THIS CARBON TAX AS A WORLD TAX TO FUND THE NEW WORLD ORDER OR ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. NOW WE KNOW WHY THE EU WORLD DICTATOR WILL COME FROM THE NEW AGE MOVEMENT OR ENVIROMENTAL MOVEMENT,THEY WORSHIP THE EARTH NOT GOD (JESUS).THIS IS A DANGEROUS AND DECEPTIVE MOVEMENT.

OTHER CARBON TAX READING
http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=121152

Replace Kyoto protocol with global carbon tax, says Yale economist ,The Kyoto protocol is reckless gamble that penalises participating countries, Copenhagen climate change congress told Guardian March 12, 2009 Byline: Oliver Tickell

The world should dump the inefficient and ineffective Kyoto protocol and replace it with a global carbon tax, leading economist William Nordhaus said yesterday.To bet the world's climate system on the Kyoto approach is a reckless gamble, he told the climate change congress in Copenhagen. Taxation is a proven instrument. Taxes may be unpopular, but they work. The Kyoto model is largely untested and the experience we have tells us it will not meet our objective -- to stablise the world climate system.

This week's meeting of more than 2,000 scientists and policy-makers is intended to lay the groundwork for a major UN summit in Copenhagen in December that hopes to negotiate a new climate treaty to succeed the Kyoto protocol.Nordhaus, professor of economics at Yale university, critricised the Kyoto system in trenchant terms. The developed countries that have emissions reductions targets account for only half of the world's carbon emissions. Our models show that a 50% non-participation results in a 250% increase in the cost to those who are participating, and this is a huge penalty we can no longer afford.He also attacked the Kyoto protocol's clean development mechanism (CDM), which allows industrialised countries that are not meeting their Kyoto targets to comply by 'buying in' carbon credits from projects in developing countries. The CDM produces highly opaque instruments which are the climate equivalent of mortgage-backed securities and structured credit derivatives, he said.He proposed that a carbon tax, levied on fossil fuels and transport, would be simple and effective. It would create a reliable carbon price which would create the incentive we need to shift towards a low-carbon economy. Initially a carbon tax would affect producers, but as the price signal was passed through the economy it would drive the transformation to low-carbon technologies and efficient use of energy at every level.Nordhaus insisted that his tax plan was achievable.Many countries are very scared of signing up to emissions reductions commitents under the Kyoto protocol because they don't know if they can achieve them and are concerned as to the consequences if they don't. My suggestion is that they should be allowed, as an alternative to emissions targets, to commit to imposing a carbon tax at a minimum level. As a small country I would find this carbon tax model very attractive.

Cambridge economist Professor Michael Grubb agreed that there is no doubt that governments will respond far better to climate change if they believe that there will be a substantial carbon tax in the future that everyone will have to pay. Jacqueline McGlade, director of the European Environment Agency, based in Copenhagen, also backed Nordhaus's plan.His idea is very sensible. We need to move the burden of taxation away from labour to resources -- and tax not just on carbon but other resources such as water to tackle the far wider environmental and resource problems we face.Dan Kammen, professor of economics at Berkeley, said the world needs more than a carbon tax to tackle climate change.. A uniform carbon tax may be very nice in theory, but we are not going to make climate policy on theory alone. Any carbon tax would need to be supplemented by policy, legislation, regulation and efficiency standards.For example, Kammen said, huge investment is needed to rebuild electricity grids to accommodate a higher proportion of renewables and a carbon price could not achieve that in the necessary time frame. How many of us would have a cellphone if we had to pay for 20 years of minutes upfront? We need financing to enable people to build clean energy into their homes on terms which makes it available to owners, landlords, renters and low-income groups.2009, Guardian

More about carbon tax - videos
http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&rlz=1T4ADBF_enCA303CA303&q=What%20is%20carbon%20tax&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#

Global warming:

Obama - Would implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to the level recommended by top scientists. Would make the United States a leader in the global effort to combat climate change by leading anew international global warming partnership. Would establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) to speed the introduction of low-carbon non-petroleum fuels. Would create a Technology Transfer program within the Department of Energy dedicated to exporting climate-friendly technologies to developing countries. Would offer incentives to maintain forests globally and manage them sustainably. Would develop domestic incentives that reward forest owners, farmers and ranchers when they plant trees, restore grasslands or undertake farming practices that capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

B.C.’s Revenue-neutral Carbon Tax JULY 1,08

On July 1, 2008, subject to approval by the legislature, British Columbia will begin to phase in a fully revenue-neutral carbon tax with built-in protection for lower income British Columbians.

The purpose of the carbon tax is to encourage individuals and businesses to make more environmentally responsible choices, reducing their use of fossil fuels and related emissions. The tax has the advantage of providing an incentive without favouring one way to reduce emissions over another. Business and individuals can choose to avoid it by reducing usage, increasing efficiency, changing fuels, adopting new technology or any combination of these approaches.A higher price for higher-carbon choices also makes greener options more commercially viable, thereby encouraging businesses and entrepreneurs to develop innovative solutions that offer consumers and business affordable, lower or no-carbon emission alternatives.British Columbia’s carbon tax is based on the following principles:

Broad-based: The carbon tax will apply to virtually all fossil fuels, including gasoline, diesel, natural gas, coal, propane, and home heating fuel, making it among the broadest and most comprehensive in the world.

Phased in: The carbon tax will be phased in to give individuals, businesses, and industry time to adapt, innovate, and reduce the impact of the tax. The carbon tax starts at a rate based on $10 per tonne of associated carbon, or carbon-equivalent, emissions and will rise by $5 a year for the next four years — reaching $30 per tonne by 2012. This works out to 2.41 cents per litre for gasoline, rising gradually to 7.24 cents a litre by 2012. For diesel and home heating oil, it works out to 2.76 cents per litre, rising to 8.27 cents over the same five-year period.

Protection for lower-income households: To help offset the cost of the carbon tax, lower-income British Columbians will receive an annual Climate Action Credit of $100 per adult and $30 per child; the credit will be paid quarterly along with the federal Goods and Services Tax Credit.

Revenue-neutral: The carbon tax will be revenue neutral. Legislation will require a plan to be tabled in the legislature each year, showing how the revenue raised will be returned to taxpayers. All revenue generated by the carbon tax will be returned to individuals and businesses through reductions to other taxes. None of the carbon tax revenue will be used for expenditure programs.

Balanced Budget 2008 sets specific tax reductions for 2008 and 2009, with future rate cuts to be confirmed as the revenue-neutral plan is updated through the annual budget process. The carbon tax is forecast to generate an estimated $1,849 million over three years. This revenue will be returned through the following tax reductions:

The bottom two personal income tax rates will be reduced for all British Columbians resulting in a tax cut of 2 per cent in 2008 and 5 per cent in 2009 on the first $70,000 in earnings — with further reductions expected in 2010 ($784 million over three years); Effective July 1, 2008, the general corporate income tax rate will be reduced to 11 per cent from 12 per cent — with further reductions planned to 10 per cent by 2011 ($415 million over three years); Effective July 1, 2008, the small business tax rate will be reduced to 3.5 per cent from 4.5 per cent — with further reductions planned to 2.5 per cent by 2011 ($255 million over three years); and
Beginning July 1, 2008, the new Climate Action Credit will provide lower-income British Columbians a payment of $100 per adult and $30 per child per year — increasing by 5 per cent in 2009 and possibly more in future years ($395 million over three years). Integrated Approach: The carbon tax is one of several key building blocks to help government reduce B.C.’s greenhouse gas emissions by 33 per cent below 2007 levels by 2020. The carbon tax and complementary measures such as the cap and trade system will be integrated to avoid unfairness or double taxation.

B.C.’s Climate Action Dividend
Separate from and in addition to the tax reductions made possible by the revenue-neutral carbon tax, every British Columbia resident will receive a one-time, $100 Climate Action Dividend to encourage the transition to a greener lifestyle.

It is the government’s hope that British Columbians will apply the funds toward purchases that can help reduce their greenhouse gas emissions and, by doing so, also reduce the amount of carbon tax they would otherwise pay.For the Finance Minister’s speech and more details on Balanced Budget 2008, visit www.gov.bc.ca/bcbudget online.
Visit the Province’s website at www.gov.bc.ca for online information and services.

CARBON TAX
By Sally Deneen

They say two things certain in life are death and taxes. And in the fight to avoid lots of deaths from global warming, it's possible you'll soon be paying a tax — a carbon tax. Carbon, of course, is one of two ingredients in carbon dioxide, the most prolific of the greenhouse gases. CO2 is produced when oil, gas and coal are burned.

Many environmental groups want Congress to mandate greater efficiency standards for cars and lower emission limits for industry. There's another way, say advocates of a carbon tax. They point out that a tax on all the processes that produce CO2, based on the amount of carbon spewed into the atmosphere, could produce those very results, elegantly and using the forces of the marketplace. No need for government command and control, they say — just use a little weight from government's hand on the scales that fuel our economy.So, what would that mean? Run the numbers any way you want — there are literally infinite variations you could conjure — but think about $5-a-gallon gas. Consider $500-a-month power bills if you stick with your current electric-baseboard heating. It sounds rough, financially, on the little guy. But advocates say that if gas were $5 a gallon, for instance, we'd see many fewer SUVs on the road. We'd see much more innovation in how to produce that winter heat on a way-slimmed-down energy budget – more weatherstripping, better insulation and so forth. The basic principle is that the economic pain of a carbon tax would spur all kinds of innovation to conserve fuel. And who does the most flying, driving and other use of fuel now? The rich, of course. There are ways to structure a carbon tax so that, overall, it is not regressive.

Or the changes could be much simpler. If it were a sure thing that we'd be paying a carbon tax for decades to come, it's likely that utilities would stop building so many coal-fired, carbon-intensive power plants and building a lot more to burn natural gas, which has half the CO2 coal does.For this to really work and to help ameliorate the global warming already under way, the carbon tax would have to be administered worldwide, some argue. That's never been done. The European Union has toyed with the idea of a carbon tax in the EU alone, though. It remains to be seen whether that could be politically palatable and, if so, how it might affect Europe's economic fortunes.Here in the United States, a vociferous defender of the auto industry, U.S. Rep. John Dingell, proposed a carbon (and fuel) tax with real bite: $10 per ton of carbon content, plus an additional 10 cents a gallon for gasoline and jet fuel. That would rise each year for five years to $50 a ton of carbon and 50 cents a gallon for gas and jet fuel. That works out to 63 cents a gallon for gas and 90 cents 100 kilowatt-hours, on average across the country, according to the Carbon Tax Center.

Carbon Trading: The World's Next Biggest Market
http://www.greenchipstocks.com/aqx_p/8088?gclid=CPy2vOSlvpgCFQMQswod_1Kjbg

Europe to Ask Wealthy Nations to Adopt Carbon Trading System
By JAMES KANTER Published: January 23, 2009

BRUSSELS — The European Commission was preparing an appeal on Friday to wealthy countries — and to the United States in particular — to adopt carbon trading as one of the main mechanisms for curbing greenhouse gas emissions.The Europeans are drafting their proposal as the United States enters a period of intense debate over the wisdom of adopting such market-based systems following the inauguration of President Obama.Mr. Obama endorsed a similar system to cap and trade carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, during his election campaign. That system sets a limit on emissions, and those who exceed it must buy or trade permits to meet it.The main alternative to a cap-and-trade system is a tax on emissions. Many analysts say that would be a more straightforward way of limiting planet-warming gases from industry.

So far, Europe has created the largest single market for trading permits to emit carbon dioxide, while Australia and some groups of American states have begun their own initiatives. But the European system has also come under fire for doing too little to stop pollution and for creating vast windfall profits for some industries, like coal-burning utilities.European officials have acknowledged that the European Union’s emissions trading system has had a rocky start. But they say it has become more effective following a pilot phase, which ran from 2005 to 2007. European Union governments approved further measures late last year aimed at reducing the scope for lobbying by governments and industry that diluted the effectiveness of the system during the pilot phase.The commission’s proposals could still change before they are officially presented Wednesday by Stavros Dimas, the European Union environment commissioner. They are meant to lay out Europe’s stance as nations prepare for international talks in December in Copenhagen to negotiate a successor agreement to the Kyoto climate treaty.A centerpiece of the commission’s proposals is strategic bilateral partnerships with the United States to create a trans-Atlantic carbon market,according to the proposals, seen on Friday by The New York Times.The proposals also seek to encourage the participation of developing nations by helping them finance ways to adapt to climate change and cut emissions.

In the past, efforts at reaching global, coordinated action on climate change have been undermined in large part because the United States insisted on binding emissions limits for countries like India and China. Those countries resisted mandatory rules, saying they had the right to industrialize and improve their citizens’ standards of living.Some of the businesses that regard emissions regulation favorably because it could promote new investment opportunities welcomed the latest proposals. Adam Nathan, a spokesman for the Carbon Markets and Investors Association, a trade group, praised the central role for the carbon market set out by the commission. But he warned that support from the United States and others would be critical.Cooperation with the Obama administration must focus on leveraging comparable action from the United States and supporting developing countries in their efforts, he said.