Crown
Board: Porsche - 911 - 997
Language: English
Region: Worldwide
Close
CloseForum - Thread
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Ironic isn't it? The Germans now agree with the Americans that blind-following Kyoto is economy-wrecking. Besides... no one serious about scientific analysis can agree that forced decreases of human-produced C02 is going to make a difference. Ironic indeed.
Jan 31, 2007 9:54:27 AM
- easy_rider911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: London , United Kingdom
- Posts: 22190, Gallery
- Registered on: Nov 8, 2004
- Reply to: 911digital
Jan 31, 2007 10:10:54 AM
- Porsche-Jeck
- Rennteam Master
-
- Loc: Rheinland , Germany
- Posts: 4856, Gallery
- Registered on: Jun 27, 2005
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
Why isn't Angela Merkel speaking up?? This will kill German carmakers in one feel swoop. Wake up Angela!
Merkel said yesterday that she will fight against the EU plan "with a vengeance" (pretty harsh and non-diplomatic wording). She seems to prefer a rule which asks for a percentage in CO2 reduction (based on the actual emissions of each brand or type of car) rather than a fix g/km number for all cars.
Jan 31, 2007 10:30:02 AM
- Alex_997TT
- Rennteam Master
-
- Loc: Reading , United Kingdom
- Posts: 3320, Gallery
- Registered on: Nov 20, 2005
- Reply to: easy_rider911
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
easy_rider911 said:
I'm certainly no expert at chemistry but you're confusing CO2 (the carbon dioxide which plants consume giving off oxygen) with CO (the carbon monoxide which is a harmful pollutant).
I do have a degree in Chemistry way back when, although I have forgotten most of it these days...
Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is the greenhouse gas which is 'apparently' warming our planet and causing the ice caps to melt. Other greenhouse gases include, water vapor (H2O), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O - laughing gas, and for making you car go faster!), and ozone (O3) which are ALL naturally occurring.
Just refreshing my memory on google...Water vapor causes 36-70% of the greenhouse effect on the planet (not including clouds), C02 9-26%, CH4 4-9%, and O3 3-7%
Carbon Monoxide (CO) on the other hand is a small by product of burning fossil fuels when they burn incompletely, toxic to us but not the cause of any environmental catastrophe (as far as I know).
Particle pollution in the atmosphere is ironically having a negative affect on global warming, and is actually causing 'global dimming'. The particles reflect sunlight back out into space. Take away the particle pollution such as vapor trails from planes and it would be even hotter!
Frankly, I don't think anyone really knows what's going on. However, the car seems to be the latest scapegoat for pushing the blame away from the real polluters!
Jan 31, 2007 10:44:28 AM
- easy_rider911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: London , United Kingdom
- Posts: 22190, Gallery
- Registered on: Nov 8, 2004
- Reply to: Alex_997TT
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
oliver said:
but I think that if they don't change drastically they will one day become cars for idiots, I mean environnement unconscious people
So would you please NOT be one of these idiots and sell your track car and your 01' Boxster?
Thanks. 
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
it seems like every car on the road has 300hp nowadays. Granted, cars are getting heavier and heavier due to all the gadgets we want. As a p-car owner, I want to have fun and drive my car. But we can all be less wasteful and be conscious of the environment. I see all the time driver sits in their cars, trucks or buses with their engine running for a long period of time. I think this is really waste of gas and polluting the air.
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
colonel said:
it seems like every car on the road has 300hp nowadays. Granted, cars are getting heavier and heavier due to all the gadgets we want. As a p-car owner, I want to have fun and drive my car. But we can all be less wasteful and be conscious of the environment. I see all the time driver sits in their cars, trucks or buses with their engine running for a long period of time. I think this is really waste of gas and polluting the air.
People leave lights on in their appartments even when not at home or in different rooms, don't close doors or windows, etc. They waste much more this way than with many other practices. Heck, if everybody stopped eating beans, the average global temperature would probably drop by 4 degrees
.
Jan 31, 2007 3:50:52 PM
- BlackSparrow
- Pilot
-
- Loc: Bahamas , Bahamas
- Posts: 424, Gallery
- Registered on: Oct 28, 2006
- Reply to: Crash
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
The fact is that we need more science involved in this whole process. Everyone needs a math table that will explain how much in % of global warming certain gadgets/actions/... cause. Corporations have to understand that same thing. Governments have to understand the same thing and has to start giving tax incentives for corporations to become less pollutive. Then in a 10-year period governments should start increasing tax for the polluting corporations.
We need not have an abrupt change of laws. Whenever an abrupt change happens, someone always gets richer. We should work slow, but effective to first understand global warming and then only start making laws regarding it.
Of course big-time polluters sending toxic waste down rivers, etc should be punished right away.
Let us take another view though. Mercedes keeps making their cars bigger every year. The new C class is what E class looked like 5 yrs ago. The new E class is like what S class used to be 5 yrs ago. No matter how great the comfort is to be in one of these cars, there should be a feeling of social responsibility. We are running out of oil. Stop making machines to consume more and more of it.
We need not have an abrupt change of laws. Whenever an abrupt change happens, someone always gets richer. We should work slow, but effective to first understand global warming and then only start making laws regarding it.
Of course big-time polluters sending toxic waste down rivers, etc should be punished right away.
Let us take another view though. Mercedes keeps making their cars bigger every year. The new C class is what E class looked like 5 yrs ago. The new E class is like what S class used to be 5 yrs ago. No matter how great the comfort is to be in one of these cars, there should be a feeling of social responsibility. We are running out of oil. Stop making machines to consume more and more of it.
Jan 31, 2007 5:05:42 PM
- Leawood911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Kansas, USA , United States
- Posts: 6920, Gallery
- Registered on: Aug 29, 2006
- Reply to: BlackSparrow
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
BlackSparrow said:
The fact is that we need more science involved in this whole process. Everyone needs a math table that will explain how much in % of global warming certain gadgets/actions/... cause. Corporations have to understand that same thing. Governments have to understand the same thing and has to start giving tax incentives for corporations to become less pollutive. Then in a 10-year period governments should start increasing tax for the polluting corporations.
We need not have an abrupt change of laws. Whenever an abrupt change happens, someone always gets richer. We should work slow, but effective to first understand global warming and then only start making laws regarding it.
Of course big-time polluters sending toxic waste down rivers, etc should be punished right away.
Let us take another view though. Mercedes keeps making their cars bigger every year. The new C class is what E class looked like 5 yrs ago. The new E class is like what S class used to be 5 yrs ago. No matter how great the comfort is to be in one of these cars, there should be a feeling of social responsibility. We are running out of oil. Stop making machines to consume more and more of it.
Math table - not even certain there is 'global warming' (much less caused by cars) at this point.
Levy higher taxes on poluters? First of all we have not established there is global warming and now you want to start taxing to punish? I suppose you also believe that 100% of those taxes will be used to prevent something that we do not know exists, which has a cause we can not find.
At least you later change your mind and decide we need to study 'global warming'.
Lastly, there have been many estimates regarding our oil supply and not all agree we are going to run out any time soon.
Chances are that long before we run out of oil some much better alternative will come along - and not as a result of taxes and wars, just plain economics and ingenuity.
It reminds me of how City planers in NY in 1910 were going how to deal with Horses (main transportation at the time) as the population was expanding rapidly. They made all kinds of plans on how to deal with 1000's of tons of manure and other care concerns of the millions of Horses they would have to deal with in 50 years time. If they had actually carried through with these plans and expenditures they would have looked very foolish 50 years later with no horses on the road.
Jan 31, 2007 6:57:40 PM
- The Groom
- Expert
-
- Loc: EU
- Posts: 1779, Gallery
- Registered on: Jan 23, 2005
- Reply to: Leawood911
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
Math table - not even certain there is 'global warming' (much less caused by cars) at this point.
I don't know what planet you are living on, but it sure does not seem to be mine. Uranus perhaps?
It is an undisputed FACT that the last few years are the warmest on record ever since we start keeping reliable records. It is an undisputed FACT that the concentration of greenhouse gases in the air is also at its highest. It is an undisputed FACT that greenhouse gases are a cause of global warming.
"Global warming" as a wheather phenomenom (i.e. the fact that it's getting warmer) is undisputedly real.
"Global warming" as an ecological theory (the link between human activity and the abovementioned wheather phenomenon) is, if not undisputedly real, at least highly probable (the role of possible external factors, e.g. higher solar activity, does not disprove it).
What remains debatable is "Global warming" as a political ideology. Can we curb global warming? If so, is it worth the investment? And last but not least, is global warming harmful at all?
As a European citizen, I selfishly answer NAY to the above three questions. Of course, a Bengladeshi or Maldivian citizen might beg to differ, but IMHO their countries are done for anyway.
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
Lastly, there have been many estimates regarding our oil supply and not all agree we are going to run out any time soon.
Chances are that long before we run out of oil some much better alternative will come along - and not as a result of taxes and wars, just plain economics and ingenuity.
IMHO the end of cheap energy is what we should be worried about, not global warming.
Unfortunately, I do not share your optimism. Demand does not automatically create supply. While there is a strong demand for a device that would let us pinpoint the exact position and speed of an atom, or for a perpetual motion engine, or a time machine, it's not going to happen. Ever. It's a physical impossibility.
Of course, a solution might be just around the corner. But what if there is not? I'm afraid the people would turn to the state as an insurer of last resort, as they did during the Great Depression, or, more recently, after Hurricane Katrina.
It is the duty of the state to plan ahead in case there is no solution. Consider it as an insurance policy. Did you insure your house against fire and tornadoes? If so, you should welcome a raise in energy taxes and increased spending into mass transit and alternative sources of energy. It's a small price to pay when Civilization is at stake.
Jan 31, 2007 7:14:39 PM
- Leawood911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Kansas, USA , United States
- Posts: 6920, Gallery
- Registered on: Aug 29, 2006
- Reply to: The Groom
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
The Groom said:
It is the duty of the state to plan ahead in case there is no solution. Consider it as an insurance policy. Did you insure your house against fire and tornadoes? If so, you should welcome a raise in energy taxes and increased spending into mass transit and alternative sources of energy. It's a small price to pay when Civilization is at stake.
Here is where we differ the most. I tend to view the state as a 10cent on the $ outfit. Asking them to solve this problem (and most) will delay a real solution and drive up the cost (in dollars and freedoms). Nothing solves problems as well as PROFIT and PRIVATE enterprise. The politicans would love for us to run to them to solve any problem we can dream up. It serves to increase their powers over us and waste resources on politics. Period. Start thinking about how these problems can be solved without the State. Ask yourself how many years of medcial research we have lost due to state involvement?
Just my thoughts.
To Recap -
Profit is not a dirty word and the State is a 10cent on the $ outfit.
Oh, and I do live on Earth _ as I recall - 10 years ago the same scientists were predicting the next Ice Age. I prefer the warmth myself
Perhaps Porsche will sell the 'Fast' models in the US and have to sell detuned models with small motors in the EU. That would be a switch.
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Scientists and politicians are wonderful.
In the early 70's they claimed the earths population would face starvation and run out of oil in the 80's.
In the 80's they claimed the earth would enter another Ice Age around 2000.
Now they say we are entering a global warming catastrophe.
Of course that can be fixed if there is a "Envy Tax" on cars. Odd how they make no mention of the private jets and mega luxury homes of their super rich supporters.
The EU should just decree a "Envy Tax" and get it over with.
On global warming they seem to be pandering more to those that don't have than actually facing the "problem."
If The EU was actually serious about facing global warming they would return Europe to a pastoral agrarian economy with cities emptied and people back in villages growing crops in small fields.
Is Richard Branson ready to cease operations of Virgin to save the earth? Is Ikea ready to supply horses and carts
so people can get their furniture home? Are EU employees ready to walk to and from work, have offices without air conditioning, central heat and no copy machines? I dont think so.
Its developed into a political farce with undertones of class envy, but not envy of the super rich who give it public support and back the utterances of politicians who pander to envy sickness.
Will Buono trade his Maserati for a rickshaw and pay some taxes to support his governments efforts. Likely? No.
Sorry, but the effort looks laughable.
In the early 70's they claimed the earths population would face starvation and run out of oil in the 80's.
In the 80's they claimed the earth would enter another Ice Age around 2000.
Now they say we are entering a global warming catastrophe.
Of course that can be fixed if there is a "Envy Tax" on cars. Odd how they make no mention of the private jets and mega luxury homes of their super rich supporters.
The EU should just decree a "Envy Tax" and get it over with.
On global warming they seem to be pandering more to those that don't have than actually facing the "problem."
If The EU was actually serious about facing global warming they would return Europe to a pastoral agrarian economy with cities emptied and people back in villages growing crops in small fields.
Is Richard Branson ready to cease operations of Virgin to save the earth? Is Ikea ready to supply horses and carts
so people can get their furniture home? Are EU employees ready to walk to and from work, have offices without air conditioning, central heat and no copy machines? I dont think so.
Its developed into a political farce with undertones of class envy, but not envy of the super rich who give it public support and back the utterances of politicians who pander to envy sickness.
Will Buono trade his Maserati for a rickshaw and pay some taxes to support his governments efforts. Likely? No.
Sorry, but the effort looks laughable.
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
@JimFlat6:
Modern cars produce less greenhouse effect per mile than oxen. I'll stick to riding the subway... and my (soon to be delivered) Porsche of course.
However, I'm not pretending oil is getting more plentiful every minute. Which is why I understand why we are paying so much gas taxes in Europe and why we should be paying even more. I'm basically paying more tax so that someone else does the energy saving.
@Leawood911:
As an business owner myself, I'm aware that "profit is not a dirty word" (funny, I remember you repeating that sentence like a mantra whenever this issue pops up...
).
However, I do not have a blind faith in the market. For one thing, markets adjust quickly to fundamental changes in supply and demand. Unfortunately, the real world does not. It took 40 years to remodel American cities to take advantage of a world where energy was plentiful. It's going to take a good 20 years to remodel American cities back to a configuration suited to a world where energy gets painfully expensive.
Let me tell you that you won't want to be around the populace during those 20 years. If you don't want to be the first against the wall when the revolution comes, you'd better plan ahead and gradually defuse the situation.
Unfortunately, publicly-traded companies have a terrible record at long-term planning. If you doubt that, consider this: how many companies have been in the DJIA index since the beginning? Just one. All others are gone. They were the richest and mightiest companies on the planet. And yet, they faded into irrelevance - out of sheer ineptitude.
At the end of the day, the only entity to steer the ship out of rough waters is the state. It might be a $0.10 to the dollar outfit, but it's all we have. Ten cents is better than nothing.
By the way, if you're living on this planet, then you must live in an alternate timeline. 10 years ago Global Warming was all the rage already. The New Ice Age scare is sooo 35 years ago. I mean, even those poor Soviet astronauts that got stuck in a tin can for years when the Soviet Union collapsed knew about that.
That said, I'm looking forward to warmer winters as well. I'm just not looking forward to a world without easily available energy.
Modern cars produce less greenhouse effect per mile than oxen. I'll stick to riding the subway... and my (soon to be delivered) Porsche of course.
However, I'm not pretending oil is getting more plentiful every minute. Which is why I understand why we are paying so much gas taxes in Europe and why we should be paying even more. I'm basically paying more tax so that someone else does the energy saving.
@Leawood911:
As an business owner myself, I'm aware that "profit is not a dirty word" (funny, I remember you repeating that sentence like a mantra whenever this issue pops up...
).
However, I do not have a blind faith in the market. For one thing, markets adjust quickly to fundamental changes in supply and demand. Unfortunately, the real world does not. It took 40 years to remodel American cities to take advantage of a world where energy was plentiful. It's going to take a good 20 years to remodel American cities back to a configuration suited to a world where energy gets painfully expensive.
Let me tell you that you won't want to be around the populace during those 20 years. If you don't want to be the first against the wall when the revolution comes, you'd better plan ahead and gradually defuse the situation.
Unfortunately, publicly-traded companies have a terrible record at long-term planning. If you doubt that, consider this: how many companies have been in the DJIA index since the beginning? Just one. All others are gone. They were the richest and mightiest companies on the planet. And yet, they faded into irrelevance - out of sheer ineptitude.
At the end of the day, the only entity to steer the ship out of rough waters is the state. It might be a $0.10 to the dollar outfit, but it's all we have. Ten cents is better than nothing.
By the way, if you're living on this planet, then you must live in an alternate timeline. 10 years ago Global Warming was all the rage already. The New Ice Age scare is sooo 35 years ago. I mean, even those poor Soviet astronauts that got stuck in a tin can for years when the Soviet Union collapsed knew about that.
That said, I'm looking forward to warmer winters as well. I'm just not looking forward to a world without easily available energy.
Feb 1, 2007 1:20:08 AM
- Leawood911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Kansas, USA , United States
- Posts: 6920, Gallery
- Registered on: Aug 29, 2006
- Reply to: The Groom
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Groom - thanks for you reply. It has caused me to throw together a note or two. Please keep in mind that I am perhaps having too much fun and a beer as well.
1)I was not aware I used 'profit is not a dirty word' in other posts but I will take you up on the suggestion and make it my mantra.
2)I thought the markets were part of the real world. My mistake.
3)40 years to remodel cities? Our cities are very dynamic and will continue to be remodeled. I really doubt all the development we have seen is due to the need to adapt to cheap energy - but you do illustrate my next point that the price of energy (especially before taxes are added) is always going down over the long term.
4)The cost of a gallon of gas at the pump is actually much cheaper than it was 60 years ago if you take inflation and % of income into account. I suspect strongly that this trend will continue - that damn flexible market will make certain of this to the point of providing energy at a fraction of today's price in the next 20 years. Keep in mind that consumption will skyrocket during this time - and this is why the price of energy will go down - although it may no longer be oil - so what.
Certainly you can introduce enough taxes in the EU to ensure the cost outstrips inflation but that is not the market (real world) determining the price now is it? The politics of guilt & Envy make this possible so watch for it. The real test will be when gas is not longer used and there is no more polution at all. Do you really think that will be the end to the current GAS and Pollution taxes? Right - they will find a way to raise taxes to keep the problem at bay or to pay off the cost of all that help they provided.
5) The standard of living in this world has been improving since the dawn for friggin time. The pace in the last 50 years has been astounding. I do not see the next 20 years as slowing down much less turning around. Go ahead and dig yourself a hole and hide for 20 years just in case I am wrong and you are right.
6) Your argument against the Dow is that only one company name is the same and all the others are gone? What has been the average rate of return for market investments? What other 'market system' do you propose? One which is part of the 'real world'? When I look around and open my eyes really wide I see pretty much everything around me was created by private enterprise. What little the State has added it has done using the revenue private enterprise and the employees who are employed by private enterprise provide in taxes.
With my eyes wide open I see the state as a 'Cost Center' not a 'Profit Center' and certainly not a problem solver or inovator (got some examples).
7)It's low expectations, like yours, that breed the type of state government we now all suffer from - especially the EU. You agree the state returns 10 cents on the dollar and your best argument is 'It's all we have to steer this ship out of rough waters'.
GET OFF THE SHIP and back on shore - the real world will be just fine (for the next 1000 years at least.)
8)Sorry 35 years rather than 10 years. Keep in mind that there are still some that are predicting the Ice Age and many who disagree with the Computer models predicting Global Warming. The fact is nobody can tell you for certain.
I agree that there is some place for the State to see to the common good and to ensure our safety. I do not think they can solve scientific and economic problems.
IMHO the best thing the State can/should do is to offer some tax relief or collaborative help to companies willing to develop solutions to alternative energy needs and enviromental clean-up where required.
I hope my prediction of Porsche selling 'slower models' in the EU (and sending the 'fast' one to the US) will cause some folks to join the real world.
1)I was not aware I used 'profit is not a dirty word' in other posts but I will take you up on the suggestion and make it my mantra.
2)I thought the markets were part of the real world. My mistake.
3)40 years to remodel cities? Our cities are very dynamic and will continue to be remodeled. I really doubt all the development we have seen is due to the need to adapt to cheap energy - but you do illustrate my next point that the price of energy (especially before taxes are added) is always going down over the long term.
4)The cost of a gallon of gas at the pump is actually much cheaper than it was 60 years ago if you take inflation and % of income into account. I suspect strongly that this trend will continue - that damn flexible market will make certain of this to the point of providing energy at a fraction of today's price in the next 20 years. Keep in mind that consumption will skyrocket during this time - and this is why the price of energy will go down - although it may no longer be oil - so what.
Certainly you can introduce enough taxes in the EU to ensure the cost outstrips inflation but that is not the market (real world) determining the price now is it? The politics of guilt & Envy make this possible so watch for it. The real test will be when gas is not longer used and there is no more polution at all. Do you really think that will be the end to the current GAS and Pollution taxes? Right - they will find a way to raise taxes to keep the problem at bay or to pay off the cost of all that help they provided.
5) The standard of living in this world has been improving since the dawn for friggin time. The pace in the last 50 years has been astounding. I do not see the next 20 years as slowing down much less turning around. Go ahead and dig yourself a hole and hide for 20 years just in case I am wrong and you are right.
6) Your argument against the Dow is that only one company name is the same and all the others are gone? What has been the average rate of return for market investments? What other 'market system' do you propose? One which is part of the 'real world'? When I look around and open my eyes really wide I see pretty much everything around me was created by private enterprise. What little the State has added it has done using the revenue private enterprise and the employees who are employed by private enterprise provide in taxes.
With my eyes wide open I see the state as a 'Cost Center' not a 'Profit Center' and certainly not a problem solver or inovator (got some examples).
7)It's low expectations, like yours, that breed the type of state government we now all suffer from - especially the EU. You agree the state returns 10 cents on the dollar and your best argument is 'It's all we have to steer this ship out of rough waters'.
GET OFF THE SHIP and back on shore - the real world will be just fine (for the next 1000 years at least.)
8)Sorry 35 years rather than 10 years. Keep in mind that there are still some that are predicting the Ice Age and many who disagree with the Computer models predicting Global Warming. The fact is nobody can tell you for certain.
I agree that there is some place for the State to see to the common good and to ensure our safety. I do not think they can solve scientific and economic problems.
IMHO the best thing the State can/should do is to offer some tax relief or collaborative help to companies willing to develop solutions to alternative energy needs and enviromental clean-up where required.
I hope my prediction of Porsche selling 'slower models' in the EU (and sending the 'fast' one to the US) will cause some folks to join the real world.
Feb 1, 2007 2:12:36 AM
-
911digital
- Veteran
-
- Loc: Staffordshire , United Kingdom
- Posts: 833, Gallery
- Registered on: Dec 2, 2005
- Reply to: Alex_997TT
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
Alex (UK) said:
Frankly, I don't think anyone really knows what's going on. However, the car seems to be the latest scapegoat for pushing the blame away from the real polluters!
So true even the top scientists don't know all the facts,
The universe is so complex we will never fully understand it.
Funny thing is we have the green campaigners who think they know the earth and the universe better than anyone else, and because of this we are all paying the price in high costs of travel and living expenses!
And the only way to beat this is to get very wealthy....
And because i'm going to get my way i'll be on the wealthy bandwagon in the not so far future and move out of the disnormal country called the uk!
Feb 1, 2007 10:18:54 AM
- easy_rider911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: London , United Kingdom
- Posts: 22190, Gallery
- Registered on: Nov 8, 2004
- Reply to: 911digital
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Feb 1, 2007 11:07:42 AM
- The Groom
- Expert
-
- Loc: EU
- Posts: 1779, Gallery
- Registered on: Jan 23, 2005
- Reply to: Leawood911
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
3)40 years to remodel cities? Our cities are very dynamic and will continue to be remodeled. I really doubt all the development we have seen is due to the need to adapt to cheap energy
While it was not caused by cheap energy, it was made possible by cheap energy. Cheap energy and transportation made the whole "x miles = y lower sqf prices" equation appealing. However, if you take away cheap energy, the current structure of American cities is no longer viable. Unfortunately, while developing empty space is easy, remodeling a busy district populated by vocal citizens is another story (at least in a democracy).
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
I suspect strongly that this trend will continue - that damn flexible market will make certain of this to the point of providing energy at a fraction of today's price in the next 20 years. Keep in mind that consumption will skyrocket during this time - and this is why the price of energy will go down - although it may no longer be oil - so what.
Past performance is a poor predictor of future gains.
There is no physical or economic law that dictates stock prices have to go up or energy prices have to go down. It's only a matter of structural supply and demand.
You seem to assume that exponential demand will always drive the price down. That's wrong and you know it. Exponential demand only drives the price down if supply can be made exponential. If supply is somehow limited, exponential demand will always translate into exponential prices.
In the case of energy, while I agree that demand is likely to grow, I fear that demand growth will outstrip supply growth. Actually, I'm unsure there will be any supply growth at all.
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
Certainly you can introduce enough taxes in the EU to ensure the cost outstrips inflation but that is not the market (real world) determining the price now is it?
The market is not always right at a given time. If it were, Warren Buffet would have gone out of business long ago.
If you want to be more than a follower, you have to think ahead of the herd. A smart investor anticipates the market and makes a killing selling to not-so-smart investors later. Similarly, a smart state anticipates the market and makes the right decisions to ensure its competitivity when the forecast materializes.
Fiscal policy to steer it in the right direction. In our case, it implies raising taxes on energy now, and invest the proceeds into alternative energy research, mass transit, and nuclear power plants.
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
5) The standard of living in this world has been improving since the dawn for friggin time. The pace in the last 50 years has been astounding. I do not see the next 20 years as slowing down much less turning around.
Again, past performance is no predictor of future gains. There is nothing that dictates that the only way is up. Many factors are at play. IMHO the largest is the availability of cheap energy.
It was the conjunction of increased availability of cheap energy and increased "energy productivity" (actual production per BTU) that allowed the standard of living to increase. If you take the former away, then it all bets are off. Can we increase our "energy productivity" faster than the cost of energy increases? That is an open question.
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
6) Your argument against the Dow is that only one company name is the same and all the others are gone? What has been the average rate of return for market investments? What other 'market system' do you propose? One which is part of the 'real world'?
The market is the best way to set a price for a given supply and a given demand. However, don't mistake it for what it's not. Stock markets provide no magical guarantee of positive long-term returns. Moreover, as they currently work, they are inefficient as long-term predictors simply because "long-term" is not a priority of many players.
Once again, there is nothing that dictates that the Russell 5000 has to go up. It all depends on the structural balance of supply and demand, which itself depends on the demographic structure of the population and in particular the key 30-65 / 65+ (a proxy for net investors / net divestors) ratio.
If you had invested $1m in a diversified stock portfolio on 10/01/1929, your rate of return would have been negative until the early 1980s. Shockingly enough, this appears to be strongly correlated with a defavorable demographic structure between 1945 and 1980, followed by a structural change in the 30-65/65+ ratio. When a massive cohort (baby boomers) started arriving on the market, they drove prices up.
However, when they start retiring, they will become net divestors. Boomer net divestors will outnumber new "Generation Y" net investors in the next 20 years unless the Chinese bail us out. That's about when you should start running for the hills. The stock market is just another pyramid scheme, really.
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
I agree that there is some place for the State to see to the common good and to ensure our safety. I do not think they can solve scientific and economic problems.
I believe you're vastly underestimating the contribution of the government to science and the economy.
I suppose the Manhattan project and the Marshall plan did not exist. How about the computer you wrote this on, which might have been powered by a nuclear power plant and delivered to you using the Federal Interstate system?
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
IMHO the best thing the State can/should do is to offer some tax relief or collaborative help to companies willing to develop solutions to alternative energy needs and enviromental clean-up where required.
You have to finance your tax cuts somehow. If you're providing tax relief to "green" companies, you have to raise the taxes of "not-so-green" companies. How is that any different from higher fuel/energy taxes?
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
Porsche selling 'slower models' in the EU (and sending the 'fast' one to the US)
The current profit margins in Europe shows that most Porsche customers are willing to buy them at any price. As long as we're only talking about increased taxes (as opposed to an outright ban), this is not going to happen.
It's about as likely as me writing short posts on political threads.
Feb 1, 2007 1:31:43 PM
- Leawood911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Kansas, USA , United States
- Posts: 6920, Gallery
- Registered on: Aug 29, 2006
- Reply to: The Groom
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Groom -
I found you a mantra - 'past performance is no predictor of future gains'
We just see things differently. I hope I am right and somehow I also believe that my viewpoint is more likely to be of use in solving the problem. Just my opinion.
I think you are too limiting when you keep the energy discussion aligned with Oil and the resulting pollution. That exponential increase in energy demand will bring about new technologies we have yet to even imagine. Like the horse riders 100 years ago could not have imagined our Porsches blazing along at 200mph. Energy will be cheap and it will not pollute.
I totally disagree that the tax incentive needs to be off-set by a tax increase. If it is a useful technology you are aiding with your tax incentive then the resulting industry advancements will result in a stronger economy which will increase tax receipts. Perhaps you would like to review the result of the recent American tax cut on the growth of the economy and the increase in revenue. It's been done time and time again.
Your thinking is exactly backwards yet it sounds so logical that it appeals to many. Those with millions to protect end up leaving the EU - hello Andorra. Anytime you think you will need to raise taxes as a result of such a tax incentive you have basically admitted that you expect your 'tax investment' to be a net failure.
Stop giving the 10 cent on the $ outfit any more money!
And yeah they build a good road. That's an excellent example of a great investment that really helped the economy and brought in lots of resulting revenue. I have noticed that the US commissions private companies to build the roads and they are built FAST. State road projects in Austria (where I grew up) took years to complete. That was in the 70's, maybe it's changed now.
Take care Groom - hope we are amusing the other members.
I found you a mantra - 'past performance is no predictor of future gains'
We just see things differently. I hope I am right and somehow I also believe that my viewpoint is more likely to be of use in solving the problem. Just my opinion.
I think you are too limiting when you keep the energy discussion aligned with Oil and the resulting pollution. That exponential increase in energy demand will bring about new technologies we have yet to even imagine. Like the horse riders 100 years ago could not have imagined our Porsches blazing along at 200mph. Energy will be cheap and it will not pollute.
I totally disagree that the tax incentive needs to be off-set by a tax increase. If it is a useful technology you are aiding with your tax incentive then the resulting industry advancements will result in a stronger economy which will increase tax receipts. Perhaps you would like to review the result of the recent American tax cut on the growth of the economy and the increase in revenue. It's been done time and time again.
Your thinking is exactly backwards yet it sounds so logical that it appeals to many. Those with millions to protect end up leaving the EU - hello Andorra. Anytime you think you will need to raise taxes as a result of such a tax incentive you have basically admitted that you expect your 'tax investment' to be a net failure.
Stop giving the 10 cent on the $ outfit any more money!
And yeah they build a good road. That's an excellent example of a great investment that really helped the economy and brought in lots of resulting revenue. I have noticed that the US commissions private companies to build the roads and they are built FAST. State road projects in Austria (where I grew up) took years to complete. That was in the 70's, maybe it's changed now.
Take care Groom - hope we are amusing the other members.
Feb 1, 2007 6:37:54 PM
- ADias
- Rennteam Pro
-
- Loc: Southwest USA , United States
- Posts: 2495, Gallery
- Registered on: Apr 9, 2004
- Reply to: Leawood911
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
Leawood911 said:Take care Groom - hope we are amusing the other members.
You certainly are. This the classical Milton Friedman / John Keynes argument. Milton was right. The EU is making the state the big daddy and burying itself in taxes to pay for that. I go to Europe once a year, and everywhere I go I see the gap between the US and the EU bigger all the time (make sure you understand that means the EU's standard of living and economy vibrance is lower than the US and going lower). And I do not rejoice with that, quite the contrary. I would prefer everyone's economies to improve - that is better for all.
Feb 1, 2007 6:49:18 PM
- The Groom
- Expert
-
- Loc: EU
- Posts: 1779, Gallery
- Registered on: Jan 23, 2005
- Reply to: Leawood911
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
I found you a mantra - 'past performance is no predictor of future gains'
Touché!
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
We just see things differently. I hope I am right and somehow I also believe that my viewpoint is more likely to be of use in solving the problem. Just my opinion.
Energy will be cheap and it will not pollute.
I sure hope you're right, but I'm not holding my breath.
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
Perhaps you would like to review the result of the recent American tax cut on the growth of the economy and the increase in revenue. It's been done time and time again.
It's not the Laffer curve, it's good old Keynesian deficit spending. The "growth" and "increase in revenue" you mention are only the result of the depreciation of the dollar.
You seem to consider President Bush's tax cuts as though they were a success, but they are a miserable failure. Devaluating the wealth of each American citizen by a third as a result of reckless budget policies is NOT what I call a success. You and I will be paying for them dearly in the next 30 years.
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
Anytime you think you will need to raise taxes as a result of such a tax incentive you have basically admitted that you expect your 'tax investment' to be a net failure.
Viewing tax cuts as investments is tantamount to deficit spending - which has been proven time and time again not to work in the long run. Incentives should not be viewed as a "tax investment", but rather as a redistribution scheme designed to educate individuals and corporations.
Since customers generally do not give a damn about the environment, the market will price the "green" product or process and the "not-so-green" competitor at exactly the same TCO at any given time (think of how hybrid cars cost exactly as much more as they make you save on fuel over 75,000 miles).
The goal of this redistribution program is to make the "green" approach more profitable to manufacturers so that more of them choose it.
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
I have noticed that the US commissions private companies to build the roads and they are built FAST. State road projects in Austria (where I grew up) took years to complete. That was in the 70's, maybe it's changed now.
Laziness and inefficiency do not have to be the lot of state companies. It's a risk with all large entities, regardless of owner. At the end of the day, everything depends on the quality of people that the government attracts.
It's a sad fact that the most talented people do not choose to work in a state company or office in the US. I mean, even your president was a mediocre student and a failed businessman.
Maybe you should start by offering them competitive compensation packages and by putting some emphasis on the concept of public duty instead of denigrating public officials all the time?
There are some countries where a career in public administration is the most prestigious and the best paying choice for a graduate. I'm shocked, SHOCKED, to find that states services work much better there than in the US!
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
Take care Groom - hope we are amusing the other members.
I never turn down a good flame war for the amusement the public.
(mods might want to move the thread to the Off-Topic board though
)
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Groom, you are talking out of your league.
Tell us how Bush's profits from investing in and the sale of both the Texas Rangers baseball team and Cresecent Real Estate Equities could be described as the efforts of a "failed businessman."
You can't. Is your imagination in overtime?
His 1998 Tax return shows he paid taxes on roughly 15 million dollars of earnings/income etc..
Was 1998 that good of a year for you?
Tell us how Bush's profits from investing in and the sale of both the Texas Rangers baseball team and Cresecent Real Estate Equities could be described as the efforts of a "failed businessman."
You can't. Is your imagination in overtime?
His 1998 Tax return shows he paid taxes on roughly 15 million dollars of earnings/income etc..
Was 1998 that good of a year for you?
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
I did not make $15m in 1998, but I did graduate from high school, so yes, it was a year to remember.
I freely admit I pushed it a bit just for the sake of public amusement. He did well at the Texas Rangers. You've got to admit his earlier track record was hardly stellar, though.
I freely admit I pushed it a bit just for the sake of public amusement. He did well at the Texas Rangers. You've got to admit his earlier track record was hardly stellar, though.
Feb 2, 2007 1:11:21 AM
- Leawood911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Kansas, USA , United States
- Posts: 6920, Gallery
- Registered on: Aug 29, 2006
- Reply to: The Groom
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
ADias said:
You certainly are. This the classical Milton Friedman / John Keynes argument. Milton was right.
I also agree Mr Friedman was right on the deficit issue. Oddly enough, the most Keynesian presidents in recent history were Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. Noone else has mastered the treacherous art of deficit spending as they did.
Unfortunately, the party isn't over until the last Treasury Bill has been paid off.
Quote:
ADias said:
The EU is making the state the big daddy and burying itself in taxes to pay for that. I go to Europe once a year, and everywhere I go I see the gap between the US and the EU bigger all the time (make sure you understand that means the EU's standard of living and economy vibrance is lower than the US and going lower).
I agree on the vibrance part, but not the standard of living part. Every time I go back to the US, I feel like I'm going to a Thirld World country. Everything feels so cheap because of the exchange rate.
Don't underestimate the importance of the dollar crash. In dollar terms, the average yearly growth rate in Western Europe must be in the 13% range. We're "growing" even faster than China collecting our unemployment checks.
Of course, it does not mean that Europe is doing gangbusters, it just means purchasing power of the dollar has gone way down the tubes.
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
The Groom said:Quote:
ADias said:
The EU is making the state the big daddy and burying itself in taxes to pay for that. I go to Europe once a year, and everywhere I go I see the gap between the US and the EU bigger all the time (make sure you understand that means the EU's standard of living and economy vibrance is lower than the US and going lower).
I agree on the vibrance part, but not the standard of living part. Every time I go back to the US, I feel like I'm going to a Thirld World country. Everything feels so cheap because of the exchange rate.
My feeling is mutual. Every time I go to Europe I notice the gap in quality of living wider - advantage USA.
Quote:
Don't underestimate the importance of the dollar crash. In dollar terms, the average yearly growth rate in Western Europe must be in the 13% range. We're "growing" even faster than China collecting our unemployment checks.
Of course, it does not mean that Europe is doing gangbusters, it just means purchasing power of the dollar has gone way down the tubes.
I also think that a long term low dollar policy is bad. I think though that the euro is currently artificially overvalued. Time will correct all this.
Feb 2, 2007 12:47:53 PM
- Leawood911
- Rennteam VIP
-
- Loc: Kansas, USA , United States
- Posts: 6920, Gallery
- Registered on: Aug 29, 2006
- Reply to: ADias
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
The weak dollar helps our exports and brings lots of tourists. What I find amusing is that we still pay 30-40% less for a Porsche than a German. Thanks Porsche! If that's 3rd world then I'm there.
By the way, I don't see my standard of living slipping nor anyone else's who is working. I agree that the standard of living for the unemployed in Europe is better! (How is that working for you? US = tourist destination, EU = retirement destination for teenagers.)
I think you confuse standard of living with cost of living and state sponsorship.
Why the great fear of deficit spending in the US (which is being reduced, by the way)?
I think the EU likes to point this out as some big US failure as a way to keep raising taxes on its citizens. They hate that tax cuts raised revenue here! At the same time they raise taxes, watch revenue drop, people with the BIG money to tax leave shore and they are not even challenging why. Instead the EU asks how much more should we tax (to reduce our deficit)?
As soon as the US deficit spending is down (or the hypocrisy is eliminated by recognizing EU deficit spending) the $ will go up. I agree the drop in the $ is not accounted for currently except perhaps for the Chinese not indexing by the $ any more. By the way - as a percent of GDP the EU deficit is much greater (about 2X) than the US. Watch out for a Tax increase!
When I hear of the Grooms energy fears I recall the dependence on Whale Oil we used to have. I'm certain there were folks spreading fear about running out of Whales. I get satisfaction knowing that someday the Middle East will be stuck with a bunch of 'Whales'. I bet the Middle East is planning for what to do when that 'next' energy source comes along.
Later, from the 3rd world US.
Mod- Note the mention of Porsche!
By the way, I don't see my standard of living slipping nor anyone else's who is working. I agree that the standard of living for the unemployed in Europe is better! (How is that working for you? US = tourist destination, EU = retirement destination for teenagers.)
I think you confuse standard of living with cost of living and state sponsorship.
Why the great fear of deficit spending in the US (which is being reduced, by the way)?
I think the EU likes to point this out as some big US failure as a way to keep raising taxes on its citizens. They hate that tax cuts raised revenue here! At the same time they raise taxes, watch revenue drop, people with the BIG money to tax leave shore and they are not even challenging why. Instead the EU asks how much more should we tax (to reduce our deficit)?
As soon as the US deficit spending is down (or the hypocrisy is eliminated by recognizing EU deficit spending) the $ will go up. I agree the drop in the $ is not accounted for currently except perhaps for the Chinese not indexing by the $ any more. By the way - as a percent of GDP the EU deficit is much greater (about 2X) than the US. Watch out for a Tax increase!
When I hear of the Grooms energy fears I recall the dependence on Whale Oil we used to have. I'm certain there were folks spreading fear about running out of Whales. I get satisfaction knowing that someday the Middle East will be stuck with a bunch of 'Whales'. I bet the Middle East is planning for what to do when that 'next' energy source comes along.
Later, from the 3rd world US.
Mod- Note the mention of Porsche!
Feb 2, 2007 2:26:51 PM
- Ronnie
- Co-Pilot
-
- Loc: good old England (sometimes Hong Kong)
- Posts: 206, Gallery
- Registered on: Apr 13, 2005
- Reply to: SoCal Alan
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
SoCal Alan said:Quote:
JimFlat6 said:
The U.N. report says almost a fifth of global warming emissions come from livestock.
So whats next? Catalytic converters for cows?
We have to become vegetarians!
By the way, do you have a breakdown of where the other 80% comes from?
USA
Feb 3, 2007 3:24:50 AM
- ADias
- Rennteam Pro
-
- Loc: Southwest USA , United States
- Posts: 2495, Gallery
- Registered on: Apr 9, 2004
- Reply to: Leawood911
Re: FT - Porsche warns of emissions war
Quote:
Leawood911 said:
The weak dollar helps our exports and brings lots of tourists. What I find amusing is that we still pay 30-40% less for a Porsche than a German. Thanks Porsche! If that's 3rd world then I'm there.
By the way, I don't see my standard of living slipping nor anyone else's who is working. I agree that the standard of living for the unemployed in Europe is better! (How is that working for you? US = tourist destination, EU = retirement destination for teenagers.)
I think you confuse standard of living with cost of living and state sponsorship.
Why the great fear of deficit spending in the US (which is being reduced, by the way)?
I think the EU likes to point this out as some big US failure as a way to keep raising taxes on its citizens. They hate that tax cuts raised revenue here! At the same time they raise taxes, watch revenue drop, people with the BIG money to tax leave shore and they are not even challenging why. Instead the EU asks how much more should we tax (to reduce our deficit)?
As soon as the US deficit spending is down (or the hypocrisy is eliminated by recognizing EU deficit spending) the $ will go up. I agree the drop in the $ is not accounted for currently except perhaps for the Chinese not indexing by the $ any more. By the way - as a percent of GDP the EU deficit is much greater (about 2X) than the US. Watch out for a Tax increase!
When I hear of the Grooms energy fears I recall the dependence on Whale Oil we used to have. I'm certain there were folks spreading fear about running out of Whales. I get satisfaction knowing that someday the Middle East will be stuck with a bunch of 'Whales'. I bet the Middle East is planning for what to do when that 'next' energy source comes along.
Later, from the 3rd world US.
Mod- Note the mention of Porsche!
Leawood911 I presume you are arguing Groom's arguments... as I clearly agree with you.
Forum
About Rennteam | Help | Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Support | Contact | Imprint | Archive
Powered by
Community
and
