It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


UK Researchers: Tax Food to Reduce Climate Change

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 04:03 PM
a reply to: CranialSponge

Yeah, that would need a whole lot of help to go down.

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 04:12 PM
I'm confused. (I often am)

Where are all the pro-government leftists ho want to espouse this and preach to all of us on how higher taxes is just our duty to live on mother-earth?

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 04:17 PM
a reply to: CranialSponge


Wolf spiders creep me out. Especially when the female has all the little babies crawling around on her abdomen. Not to mention they can get fairly large......

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 05:21 PM
a reply to: mobiusmale

Are these Oxford Uni students vegetarian by any chance?

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:47 PM
I don't know where they get these crazy ideas from. So you have to pay taxes for damages to the environment? And because of what you eat, of all things! Everything has to be in the form of punishment after punishment.

Here's an idea: Instead of being taxed for what you do, why not get TAX BREAKS for things you don't do?

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 06:58 PM
just wait, they will use the climate change bogeyman to tax us for the air we breath and the CO2 that we exhale, just wait it`s coming.
Where I live they already tax us for taking a crap,$30 a year septic tank tax. I call it the poo poo tax.

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:50 PM
This is the most stupid thing I have ever heard, water, air and food are basic human needs for survival, they are within our human rights to have access to it and be affordable, taxing food will only increase hunger and death related problems from malnutrition.

The same human right issues that we in modern times have been fighting for decades.

Is not going to happen.

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:57 PM
a reply to: marg6043

You should all understand that there are so-called charities out there trying very hard to duplicate the anti-tobacco lobbists. Action on Sugar wants to sue the food companies for obesity in the population and gain a portion of the settlement to "help" the obese.

Same thing with Action on Salt etc etc

The recommendations of this "think tank" is to come up with reasons why a tax should be charged, not on why it shouldn't.

You all thought it was cool when they did it to smokers. Its your turn now.

Tired of Control Freaks

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 09:06 PM
By starving people? All necessities, food, housing and utilities need to be controlled and kept very low, while even those on assistance need to boosted to above the poverty level.


And anyone suggesting this should be fired immediately, and if they have a history of harming others, worse. I think they need to put on 3 months of public works and community service to the poor and needy.

If they want to help this world, release the clean energy such as cavitation and the star in a jar tech and stop promoting fossil fuel and scarcity.

Earth cleans up in no time, if of course it isn't too late and the methane isn't melting with those unusual warm temps in the North.

But then all those who promoted this fossil fuel nightmare and profited off of it, to harm people, freedoms and the world, should be treated like canaries in the mines and tied to the posts to see how safe the air is, in the town centers.

edit on 19-11-2016 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 09:10 PM
a reply to: mobiusmale

Disgusting research that is obviously pandering to the right wing tax the poor mandate.

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 09:23 PM
so this is why so many people and governments have been pushing the climate change hoax.
create a non existent problem
tax people to fix the non existent problem
keep the tax money because there is no problem that needs to be fixed.

it`s all so clear now.

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 10:10 PM
Even if climate change / warming is entirely real, and entirely man made, taxes do nothing to change that. All they do is fund greedy governments.

If there is a problem, wouldnt you offer an actual solution, not taxes? Like warming is a real threat and caused by co2 emmissions, lets build co2 scrubbers, or lets fund development of renewable energy production that will be more efficient than oil. Do we see anyone calling for that? No. They want taxes. And that should make everyone raise an eyebrow. Either they are fabricating/embellishing the problem, or they are just using a real problem to manipulate people to their own ends.

posted on Nov, 20 2016 @ 01:35 AM
a reply to: mobiusmale

if you want " carbon intensive food " to tax in the UK - try mange-tout imported by AIRFREIGHT from zambia in november - but hey - we has a wide selection in tesco

" seasonal vegatables " doesnt mean anything to kids any more

posted on Nov, 20 2016 @ 03:16 AM
a reply to: mobiusmale

Air travel should be taxed first.

Being well educated these people from the University of Oxford and the International Food Policy Research Institute in Washington will know the grounding of commercial flights due to the Icelandic volcano revealed the extent of debilitating stress caused by almost constant jet engine background noise. Mental health across Britain improved notably while the jets weren't flying.

I would welcome a tax on air travel that covers all the effects of air travel. Mental health, crop health, climate effects etc. In other words it would be impossibly expensive. That's the price we're paying in health.

Air travel is addictive. Addicts typically have difficulty conversing logically about their addiction. Therefore I would expect the frequent flyers in this group of intellectuals to be childishly unable to apply the same logic to their own lifestyles.

edit on 20 11 2016 by Kester because: (no reason given)

posted on Nov, 20 2016 @ 06:39 AM
More taxes won't solve anything, just put more money in the government cookie jar to be misused on other things. If beef production is so bad for the environment, then change the laws on beef production. Just because people are eating meats doesn't make them the problem for how it's produced. But like other big businesses, they pay to play and pass the cost on to the consumer, even fines for pollution are OK if it doesn't effect the bottom line. As long as the government gets it's cut, they don't care about what the pollution is actually doing to the planet or esp. the people living on it.

I'm not sure how it would be best to raise beef cattle, but I bet the free ranging herds are least damaging to the environment and least likely to make money for the government. IMO, that would be the reason why they are trying to destroy the free range family owned cattle ranches here in the States.

posted on Nov, 20 2016 @ 07:14 AM
a reply to: mobiusmale

This report was produced by a group of academics whose whole existence relies on wasting time, money and effort in researching often meaningless subjects.
Their circulation and consumption usually remain within the academic world and those pompous, anal and largely irrelevant scholars in their ivory towers.

Sometimes they leak into the public domain where they are generally used to sensationalise one viewpoint or another.

There's not even the slightest suggestion that any political party is giving these 'recommendations' anything more than even a cursory glance etc.

Smoke in mirrors.

posted on Nov, 20 2016 @ 07:46 AM
a reply to: Freeborn

Thing is that it does give you a glimpse into the mindset of the people who are teaching the kids who go into the university. That's a bit scary.

posted on Nov, 20 2016 @ 07:47 AM
a reply to: Kester

Absolutely correct, but they would rather blame the cattle for flatulence than the air travel industry for pouring out pollution into the atmosphere.

Notice how other academic's whom are working on solving problem's such as food and water shortage are ignored but the vested interests of those that want to control the human population and even cull it would embrace this kind of cock eye'd and crack pot research, if there was even any research done by this group of idiot's.

Taxing food would only effect the first world, how do you tax the majority of the world's population whom happen to be poor, or those that grow there own food.

Instead of proposing clean food distribution network's and more sustainable crop's, funding third world ecological initiative's and education program's to protect the third world's endangered natural habitat's and further research into green energy (especially relevant here in the UK were these lout's are based as we have an almost unending free energy source of tidal power which genuinely could provide all of our need's and produce a surplus for export to europe of clean energy) this group of obviously right wing biased crack pot's suggest starving the world - obviously in order to impose defacto population control on the poorest and that is what they are proposing after all, starving the world by making food too expensive for the poorest.

I should very much like to bump into the lead of this supposed team of crack pot's and wonder whom is providing these neo fascists with there burseries.

posted on Nov, 20 2016 @ 07:50 AM
a reply to: mobiusmale

I think we should just eat the Oxford students. We get a healthy serving of needed protein and simultaneously remove a bunch of morons from the planet. We like to call this a win-win-din-din in Masonic circles.

posted on Nov, 20 2016 @ 07:51 AM
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Hmmm long pig's.

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in