Denmark Becomes First Country To Tax Farting Animals

How / what processes do you propose to reduce animal methane emmissions? Is there a soon to be announced fartalytic converter we can strap on them, or..? So, as always, we institute a per head surcharge tax ( or overfarting tax, if you will) on these animals and their owners in an attempt to lessen their supposed impact on climate change. Do you have a clue as to what % of greenhouse gases  are methane from livestock? It's somewhere between 3-4% of the total according to several sources ( I can provide those if you're interested..which in the end I doubt). You'd do more to limit greenhouse gases if you'd find a way to limit air travel to climate change conferences every year by politicians,activists, and bureaucrats.

Besides, I'm not keen on you limiting / restricting hamburger and ribeyes in order to fund a pipedream. I need my protein.

First of all...who said anything about "reduce"? The idea, in case it zoomed waaaaay over your head (and as your head is a Trumper head, that seems likely) is that when an industry/human activity produces a negative externality, that entity should rightfully pay for the costs imposed by that externality. It's no different than a factory spewing pollutants into the air. Those pollutants impose costs on the surrounding community, but the community, not the originator of the pollutants, pays those costs; thus the term, "externality." Another externality is noise (again, for instance, from a factory); yet another is traffic congestion caused by workers arriving and departing from a large facility.

Soooo...let's estimate the total cost worldwide of methane emissions at $400 billion (which actually seems low, but let's roll with it) due to the negative effects of climate change caused by greenhouse gas emissions. I hope that you're not one of those goobers who claims that climate change is a liberal hoax. So your 3-4% number, let's go high-side, is $16 billion. It would be equitable as well as socially just to charge farmers their share of those costs. The exact mechanism would vary from one government to another, of course, but the simplest method is a tax of some kind.

It's yet another of those "liberal ideas" that progessive societies embrace, and fiercely resisted by business-serving conservatives. Remember all the crying and moaning when manufacturers had to install pollution controls? Maybe you remember when the Cuyahoga River caught fire?

Disregarding externalities is like allowing your neighbor to toss his trash over his back fence into your yard.

Get it?

Says the party of losers that thinks it can change the weather through taxation while none of them know how much of the atmosphere comprises co2, much less methane.  All they do is take orders from their globalist owners, as they are bought and paid for grifters.

Thanks for the shout-out! I didn't read this when you posted it on Sunday, I'm not sure what you think I'm devoted to but this is not on my radar.

I do like how hard you try to be clever, Aaron. Unfortunately, the deep state has already developed this device, so your satire has run smack dab into reality. The good news for you is that they manufacture it using gold and fluoride. You should check it out!

There are those who innovate and there are those who insist nothing can be done, in this case, the innovators are attacking the "problem" at its source.

Feeding Cows Seaweed Cuts Methane Emissions | UC Davis

Strangely enough, my wife has, all of a sudden, added Japanese Nori to all my meals do you think she's telling me something?

Yeah, I'm aware of the seaweed approach..apparently some merit in it. Nobody will care , but in grad school there was a ton of research on a feed additive called Rumensin ( monensin sodium) which statistically improved feed efficiency while reducing methane production in cattle. That additive altered a volatile fatty acid ( specifically propionic acid) in the bovine gut during digestion and is still in wide use today. These types of feed additive approaches, as long as deemed safe through research, are fine with me in attempts to decrease methane. What irks me are these approaches and solutions that upend an entire industry that already function under low margins and also represent a corny 'way of life' for those involved. 

Your complaint is eerily reminiscent of that voiced by industries in the 70s and 80s when pollution controls were first created and enforced. OOOOOH, the costs will drive us out of business, the entire industry will be destroyed, and the earth will spiral into the sun!! Except...it didn't.

The trouble with getting industries to acknowledge their negative externalities is that in most cases, they've been polluting without consequence for decades, even centuries. And the AMURRICAN pro-business model has resisted making them pay for the damage they do. 

Requiring that an industry pay the true costs of its operations won't "upend" it. That talk is old, tired, and disingenuous.

Bah humbug right back atcha. Yeah, I get it..I get your approach.  No worries..we've already experienced a 25-35%( at minimum) jump in overall retail beef prices under your current  liberal / progressive administration and policies; that increase also involves a huge increase in borrowing / lending interest rates , with most sectors of the beef industry dependent on operating loans to conduct business. That "rich rancher" stuff you've heard all your life is bullshit, more times than not ( those that are rich surely didn't generate their wealth / revenues from the cattle/ beef market; the only real value is in the tax write-offs and organizing of game hunting at the ranch level).

So, what the hell, let's just put forth some ineffectual climate change policies and methods to encumber segments of the beef industry further, which will eventually drive live animal and product inventories down further and add another 50% to the retail price of beef. Let's penalize a low margin industry at an ever increasing rate by hiking their tax burden on a per animal basis. Then we can increase / add beef products to the list of things we have to secure from foreign sources. It's a cascading set of impractical events to keep you libs happy. Go ahead and protest outside McDonald's/ Burger King / Outback / Ruth's Criss / Texas Roadhouse ( scratch that one..sounds too dangerous for you). Hell, you can shave your head and stop eating meat, too. 

Practical/ affordable ( do you know what those words mean?) methane reduction from altering dietary feed additives in live animals ( the seaweed / Rumensin / lasalocid / many more ) is OK with me provided they're safe and fiscally efficient. Many such additives are already on the market and useful. Ongoing research to make further improvements ( methane reduction) through these approaches are hunky-dory, and I don't mind spending my tax dollars for research grants in this regard. Just don't attempt to upend and encumber an industry that's pretty close to home for me personally. It's like your defense of the teaching industry..sorta.  Get it? It doesn't matter to me if you don't..we'll just disagree..vehemently.

A side effect ( "externality"- wow , what a word!) of a progressive approach to methane reduction methods to mitigate climate change will most often be ineffectual / impractical/ unaffordable /and ultimately piss me off. But you can make your own decisions ..with my blessing.

A new legislative bill from Congress ( won't be enacted/ legislated until 2028 because the R's won't allow it for the next 4 years); the R's will screw up if we're honest , however, and piss off the electorate as all political parties do and lose their power in 2028 ( edumacated prognostication).

"The Excessive Bovine Flatulence Regulation and Reduction Act"

acronym = EBFRR

earmarks include :

Turtle tunnels in San Francisco, Cal $8 Billion

Parade balloons at the DNC - $22 million

Emu conception rates in the Alaskan frozen tundra study - $34 Billion

Pot bellied pig historical rejuvenation programs - $14 Billion

Taylor Swift Appreciation Day festival - $82 Million

Green Weenie Symposium - $144 Billion

Dallas Cowboys Name Change and City Relocation - $300 Billion

Total Cost to the taxpaying public ( a whopping 47% of the population, mind you ) = $16 Trillion ( or so..maybe)

Yes, dear, the recent increase in food prices is due solely to the machinations of the liberal deep state. Producers and retailers have no choice, shucky darn, but to obey orders and charge more.

As long as you believe that, all your other thought processes are GIGO.