|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Cow farts are a distraction, and the joke’s on us. The Danish tax on cow farts is a significant step toward the state ownership of the means of production. As the history of centrally managed economies shows, it’s not likely to end well.
Let’s not lose touch…Your Government and Big Tech are actively trying to censor the information reported by The Exposé to serve their own needs. Subscribe now to make sure you receive the latest uncensored news in your inbox…
Denmark Passes the World’s First ‘Fart Tax’ – But This is No Laughing Matter
By Paul Schwennesen as published by The Daily Economy on 13 December 2024
Denmark, according to The New York Times, is going ahead with its livestock “Burp Tax.” Though hotly contested, the Danish government has nevertheless finally settled on levying farmers 300 kroners (~US$43) per tonne for carbon dioxide emissions, ramping to US$106 per tonne by 2035. As is the case with many of these farm-targeted green interventions, the action is ludicrously ineffectual at addressing the trumped-up problem, while remarkably effective at further cementing state controls over economic production.
Part of the reason farms, and especially cows, are such fat targets for this kind of statist* intervention is that, politically speaking, they are the perfect scapegoat. It all seems so harmless, after all – so silly even – that serious-minded folk risk looking ridiculous if they object. Is it really so very draconian, goes the argument, to ask farmers to reduce their cow flatulence? The ever-so-reasonable request (enforceable by law, to be sure) glides under the radar in a scree of giggle-inducing copy that distracts readers to what is really afoot.
[*Note: Statism is the belief that economic controls and planning should be concentrated in the hands of a highly centralised government. According to Forbes, fascism and communism are two variants of statism.]
The Times plays its part in this façade, relishing the chance to print “poop, farts and burps” in the business section so that the regulation seems plucked from an impish children’s story rather than what it is: a deadly serious infringement on economic liberty.
Defenders of the scheme insist it is necessary to address the pressing issue of climate change. But even if we were to accept the lobby’s poorly understood climate science at face value, the claims would be dubious. Cows stand accused of emitting 5.6 metric tonnes in annual “CO2 equivalent” emissions. All this politically motivated tabulating and assessing completely ignores the other side of the ledger, the growing recognition that grazing livestock have a complex, largely offsetting (and quite probably net-positive) impact on overall carbon emissions. Nature, after all, doesn’t work in simple equations and we are woefully under-informed about the rich and inherently unmodelable world of stochastic ecology.
The New York Times, by way of perspective, accounts for 16,979 metric tonnes of its own, meaning that it, as a single company, has the footprint of ten Danish dairies. What would readers of “All the News That’s Fit to Print” have to say about an annual tax of $730,000 a year, ramping to $1.8 million, being added to the newspaper stand price? Advocates of a free press might well ask why the government was using state power to make the newspaper of record less competitive.
But in any case, climate science and cow farts aren’t really the issue here. The issue is essentially about control, and who gets to occupy the commanding heights of a centrally managed economy.
“A tax on pollution has the aim to change behaviour,” says Jeppe Bruss, the Danish “green transition” minister in an unguardedly candid moment. Government programmes to change behaviour are much easier to introduce slowly, and against somewhat laughable minority sectors like farming than against, say, the population at large. They do not seem eager, for instance, to levy additional burdens on average people’s heating and transport emissions, which combined dwarf the agricultural sector’s. The Times says that livestock emissions are “becoming” the largest share of Denmark’s share of climate pollution which is another way of saying that it isn’t the largest share.
If beef and milk production indeed posed such an existential climate risk, then why not simply tax the consumers of beef and milk who, after all, are the real source of the production signal? The answer, of course, is obvious: no politician wants to be pegged as the one who raised the price of butter for average Danish grandmothers. Politically, it is far easier to go after the farmers, knowing full well that any cost burdens on farm production will be passed along to consumers anyway – only then it will be the farmers’ fault, not the Government’s. It’s an old trick, a kind of regulatory-impact laundering scheme.
The success of the Danish strategy remains to be seen. If examples from the Netherlands and New Zealand are any indication, the plan may well backfire, with frustrated farmers taking to the streets and even grabbing back the reins of power. It is a useful warning: allowing the Government the power to surgically tax and thereby “change behaviour” of producers is the same as granting them economic planning privileges.
The Danish “Burp Tax” is a significant step toward the state ownership of the means of production, and as the history of centrally managed economies shows, it’s not likely to end well.
The Expose Urgently Needs Your Help…
Can you please help to keep the lights on with The Expose’s honest, reliable, powerful and truthful journalism?
Your Government & Big Tech organisations
try to silence & shut down The Expose.
So we need your help to ensure
we can continue to bring you the
facts the mainstream refuses to.
The government does not fund us
to publish lies and propaganda on their
behalf like the Mainstream Media.
Instead, we rely solely on your support. So
please support us in our efforts to bring
you honest, reliable, investigative journalism
today. It’s secure, quick and easy.
Please choose your preferred method below to show your support.
Categories: Breaking News, World News
My heart is fainting.
[…] Go to Source Follow altnews.org on Telegram […]
These people are not playing with a full deck. Do not comply with this nonsense. We have to get rid of these fools, they are costing the world a lot of grief and money. Just think what the world would be like if all the $ they waste of useless shit, they could put it into making this world a paradise. Get rid of them
Hi Cindy,
You are totally correct, your wishes are a bit harder to happen.
Only the public in the US still have guns, we had our right taken off us by Tony Blair, in a false flag.
Freemasons control the show.
Tony was a 33 degree, which means he worships Satan.
We can only hope for a better New Year.
The article makes a serious, fundamental error. It assumes the perpetrators of this evil scheme believe their own propaganda about man made global warming. They don’t! They’re simply using it as an excuse to do what they plan to do anyway, without any fictitious “climate emergency”. The underlying goal of this evil scheme is to take control over all of us, to reign as the dictators of humanity. This is happening in all Western countries and so is a globalist driven agenda. The likes of bill gates, the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, and all the rest of the so called “Three Hundred”, are now the targets of humanity’s rage at their pure evil.
Hi Ken Hughes,
What about this for plane farts.
Monkey Werx tracks them.
https://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=249536
lol no way to spin this lol
Anyone dumb enough to fall for a Cow Fart Tax deserves whatever they get.
Commenting on Bovaer, George Galloway said he doesn’t want low fart milk, he wants full fart milk.
[…] – Denmark’s “cow fart” tax is a statist intervention to change the public’s behaviour […]
That tax in Denmark only goes to show how strong is the corporate hold on the Danish governments short and curlies