Yes, the last decade saw global cooling, not warming

[Index piker]

Quote from bigdavediode:

1)Increasing market efficiencies does not mean the same as "addressing market inefficiencies."

Good try, though.








2)The incentive to reduce emissions comes from the profit motive.



3)Trading increases costs? Well, that's not necessarily true or false.

1) bwhahaha I didn't ask you for more evidence that you rode the short bus to school but you nevertheless provided it anyway.:eek:

2) What profit motive? How does a cap n trade system introduce a profit motive into the system?

3) If you don't know trading is a negative sum game, as a trader you must be a MORON.

 

[Index piker]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Of course. 108 year old Nobel prize committee is wrong in its economics prize because you say so.

No, they have the right to choose whomever they wish but don't expect the non flvoraide drinkers to ignore the political angle.

I mean good lord look at the peace prize, jimmy carter,al gore, oh-bhama, yasser arafat.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from Index piker:

1) bwhahaha I didn't ask you for more evidence that you rode the short bus to school but you nevertheless provided it anyway.:eek:

You clever little muppet -- did you make that up on your own?

2) What profit motive? How does a cap n trade system introduce a profit motive into the system?

How does it not introduce a profit motive into the system?

If a company wants to emit extra nitrogen oxides, it needs to trade them.

A service or good or expense is provided and received on the basis of the profit motive.

3) If you don't know trading is a negative sum game, as a trader you must be a MORON.

How is your trading going, by the way?

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from Index piker:

Of course. 108 year old Nobel prize committee is wrong in its economics prize because you say so.

No, they have the right to choose whomever they wish but don't expect the non flvoraide drinkers to ignore the political angle.

I mean good lord look at the peace prize, jimmy carter,al gore, oh-bhama, yasser arafat.

The peace prize is actually not their economics prize.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from bigdavediode:

Well given a choice, I would rather trade.

How is that any different than the "self reliance of entrepreneurship"?

Well most of us on this forum are interested and support the notion of free market trading.

Including me but then I never said otherwise.

I understand you oppose trading and markets...

You apparently don't understand shit, or are you simply making a baseless projection?

Quote from bigdavediode:
No, it has zero credibility to you, because you don't agree with them.
They've given out their awards for 108 years (except for the Sveriges Riksbank Prize) and are the most prestigious awards one can receive in the fields....

Hence my comment about their "RECENT" lack of credibility. Have you heard about Hooked on Phonics dave?


And just because YOU agree with them, doesn't make them right.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from Lucrum:
Hence my comment about their "RECENT" lack of credibility. Have you heard about Hooked on Phonics dave?


And just because YOU agree with them, doesn't make them right. [/B]

That's correct -- it doesn't. They are likely to be right because they are the top experts in their fields. Their judges are the authorities in their disciplines.

Post your CV and we'll compare yours against theirs.

 

[Index piker]

Quote from bigdavediode:



1)How does it not introduce a profit motive into the system?

If a company wants to emit extra nitrogen oxides, it needs to trade them.

A service or good or expense is provided and received on the basis of the profit motive.



2)How is your trading going, by the way?

1) Good lord man where are your 2 brain cells?
If it costs nothing before to emit co2 previously and later it requires the purchase of a service or good (gas emission permit) that's a net cost and produces no wealth creation, and quite possibly reduces emissions by ZERO.

How do you fail to see this?

I'll ask again where is the profit motive you keep inventing?
I know I know it's the ol tooth fairy economics of dig a hole, fill up a hole full employment endless riches crap.



2) Frustrating but,You don't really want to go there.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from Index piker:

1) Good lord man where are your 2 brain cells?
If it costs nothing before to emit co2 previously and later it requires the purchase of a service or good (gas emission permit) that's a net cost and produces no wealth creation, and quite possibly reduces emissions by ZERO.

Whoa... you lost me at "produces no wealth creation." Why are you disregarding trading jobs, sequestration technologies, stack improvements, efficiency improvements in favor of only reductions in production?

How do you fail to see this?

I'll ask again where is the profit motive you keep inventing?
I know I know it's the ol tooth fairy economics of dig a hole, fill up a hole full employment endless riches crap.

2) Frustrating but,You don't really want to go there.

No, I'm happy to explore any of this. It all comes down to believing that technology is static versus dynamic. That the economy is static. That people don't create new things, that research doesn't occur, and that burning things is the only way to go about business.

 

[CaptainObvious]

"Former Vice President Al Gore told the conference that new data suggests a 75 percent chance the entire Arctic polar ice cap may disappear in the summertime as soon as five to seven years from now."

It's exactly this type hysteria that makes all climate science null and void. If their data shows this, we're on the verge of the end of our world as we know it. Absurd, as there would be other evidence to support this wild eyed claim and there is NONE. Sorry boys, you've been caught in a lie. Start over.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from CaptainObvious:

"Former Vice President Al Gore told the conference that new data suggests a 75 percent chance the entire Arctic polar ice cap may disappear in the summertime as soon as five to seven years from now."

It's exactly this type hysteria that makes all climate science null and void. If their data shows this, we're on the verge of the end of our world as we know it. Absurd, as there would be other evidence to support this wild eyed claim and there is NONE. Sorry boys, you've been caught in a lie. Start over.

Regarding the Northwest Passage:

"Lehnert said this year's number of marine transits is the most since the first recorded passage in 1903."

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/11/23/nw-passage-traffic.html