Whomever wrote the headline failed to read the article
Climate change could wipe $2.3 trillion off global stocks
Policies designed to combat climate change could permanently slash the value of companies around the world by up to $2.3 trillion.
That’s according to a new report from Principles for Responsible Investment that examines how “inevitable” policies such as banning internal combustion engines will affect stock prices.
The analysis concludes that up to $2.3 trillion, or 4.5%, could be wiped off the value of companies listed on a global stock index from MSCI. The report was prepared by Vivid Economics and Energy Transition Advisers.
Most of that would come from the energy sector and the auto sector. It might not seem like a lot in the overall scheme of international economics, but, that would trickle around the economy, harming people’s retirement funds, and causing an increase in consumer pricing.
But there are also opportunities for investors. Companies that adapt to changing policies would see their combined share prices increase by hundreds of billions of dollars, according to the UN-backed group.
In other words, companies should dupe investors and consumers by making claims that they are Doing Something about ‘climate change’ in feel good campaigns all while they ship products made in China all around the world via fossil fueled vehicles, planes, and boats. Meanwhile, Warmists in Europe are coming after shipping
European shipping emissions undermining international climate targets
Greenhouse gas emissions from shipping equal the carbon footprint of a quarter of passenger cars in Europe and stand in the way of countries reducing emissions and limiting runaway global heating, analysis reveals.
Despite the scale of shipping emissions from both container and cruise ships, they are not part of emissions reduction targets made by countries as part of the Paris agreement on climate change.
In France, Germany, UK, Spain, Sweden and Finland shipping emissions in 2018 were larger than the emissions from all the passenger cars registered in 10 or more of the largest cities in each country, according to the report published on Monday from Transport and Environment, a Brussels-based NGO. (snip)
“To make shipping do its fair share, Europe must bring shipping into its carbon market and mandate CO2 standards for all ships calling at its ports.â€
So, what do they want to do? Obviously, banning shipping will mean a massive loss of products for Europe. It appears that they want to slap big fees on the shippers, which will just be passed down to the consumers. Good luck with this.
An interesting facet of the current deficits is the preponderance of the evidence that the Fed has returned to its quantitative easing programing of 2008. In essence, they are infusing banks with overnight funding to solve a liquidity crunch the banks have gotten themselves into.
This drives up the deficit by 100’s of billions of dollars for 2019 the first year that Trump’s full tax cuts have gone into effect.
The budget projection for 2020 revenue is exactly 3.68 trillion dollars.
In 1999 under Clinton, the Revenues was 1.98 trillion. So in twenty years, our economy has doubled in revenue despite a historic recession, which slowed progress considerably.
Again it must be taken into account and the FED doesn’t like to compare today to 2008 but their new version of Quantitative Easing is putting a huge dent in deficits as they restock the banks. The theory is that China has bought up over 4 trillion dollars worth of USA assets and at any time could pull the plug and sell these assets creating a financial crisis. The Fed has moved to preempt any effect this would create by filling the bank’s coffers to overflowing to offset any attempt by China to destabilize the USA.
Please keep this in mind when tossing around deficits as ammunition for either side political advantage.
Teach is always alarmed at BIG numbers
The total value in stocks worldwide is about 75 trillion
2 trillion is only 3% drop
Meh
But, since it will never happen, why raise a sweat?
Our esteemed host wrote:
The total wealth of the entire world is $241 trillion, so you’re talking about 1% of the value of the earth!
Our host wrote:
This could be interesting. Let’s say that President Trump is re-elected, which means five more years of the US not falling for the cockamamie warmunist policies, but everybody else does. Everybody else imposes ridiculous taxes on fossil fuels, which greatly increases shipping costs.
This means that our exports, when shipped on US carriers, are less expensive, because they won’t be paying the higher prices for fuel, but our imports, being shipped from abroad, will be more expensive, due to higher fuel costs in foreign countries. This will make US produced goods more competitive domestically, as the lower overseas labor costs will be more offset by higher shipping. More American jobs!
American shipping ??
Apparently you fo not know that American flagged ships are almost non existent
Apparently you fo not know that American flagged ships are almost non existent
Apparently you have never heard of the Jones Act and what it means to American flagged ships.
Ignorance can be cured, john.
The Jones Act applies only to ships from US port to US port, e.g., Puerto Rico to Miami.
As usual, genius doesn’t look any farther than he has to. Many ships owned by the US are flying what’s known as a flag of convenience for various commercial reasons, so the Jones Act is perfectly applicable.
40% of the world’s merchant tonnage is flagged in Panama, Liberia & Marshall Islands, hotshot.
The price of fuel is not related to the flag the vessel flies, but the port the vessel refuels in. A ship that trades in Europe will have to refuel in Europe no matter what flag it flies and pay the prices (unless it has enough range to get to North Africa for fuel and pay the extra price for traveling there).
I suspect there will be opportunities for large companies to have private fuel sources that never pay the tax. Maybe even floating gas stations just outside the EU boundaries.
Dana: This means that our exports, when shipped on US carriers, are less expensive …
Excellent description of a tragedy of the commons. Those who pollute, such as industries dumping toxic chemicals into rivers, often have a competitive advantage, and push out from the marketplace those who are more socially responsible who spend the money to capture and dispose of the pollutants.