Eva Joly campaign 2012. Candidate and President ... one day?

[Christophe]

Following this topic: https://www.econologie.com/forums/quel-candi ... 10547.html and especially this info https://www.econologie.com/forums/post207971.html#207971

It's official: with 58,16 votes from the primary ecologists, Eva Joly is now the candidate of Europe Ecology-The Greens (EELV) for the 2012 presidential election. Nicolas Hulot collected 41,34% of the votes. Turnout for this second round, 69,49% of the 32 registered, slightly decreased compared to the first round (896%).

This topic therefore aims to follow his candidacy, his campaign and his results.

Hoping that the 5% will be exceeded, which is quite possible given that the Greens made 18% in Wallonia to the last Europeans in 2009: https://www.econologie.com/europe-ecolog ... -4087.html

Econology "admires" certain words of Eva Joly for a while, cf:

https://www.econologie.com/forums/lute-contr ... 10103.html
https://www.econologie.com/forums/eva-joly-c ... t8606.html
https://www.econologie.com/forums/eva-joly-e ... t6199.html

There are other less good things like this: https://www.econologie.com/forums/post205510.html#205510

The Greens program: green jobs and ... taxes (new or updated ...)!

Joly (EELV): the ecological conversion of the economy would create 500.000 jobs

PARIS - Eva Joly, candidate for the primary in Europe Ecology-The Greens (EELV), assesses Wednesday in Les Echos at 500.000 the number of jobs that would be created through an ecological conversion of the economy, based on the development of renewable energies.

Ecological conversion is a great job creator, says the former judge. In Germany, 270.000 jobs have already been created by the development of renewable energies and we expect 500.000 in 2020, she explains.

One can think that the number will be comparable in France if one carries out new policies, estimates Mrs. Joly, who calls to compare (this number of jobs) with the 50.000 jobs related to the nuclear sector.

Reinforcing the insulation of buildings would create four times more jobs for the same turnover as the development of the gas sector, which is essentially based on the import of raw materials, continues Ms. Joly.

According to her, the need for financing ecological conversion is estimated by the European Commission at 2,5% of GDP, or around 50 billion euros per year.

In this 50 billion, 15 billion must come from public investment because they will never be profitable, specifies the MEP. To finance them, we will also remove 10 billion anti-ecological tax loopholes, such as reduced VAT on pesticides, such as the exemption from VAT on kerosene used on domestic flights or subsidies for biofuels, warns Joly.

We will also remove the reduced VAT on catering, the tax exemption on overtime, she adds.

This fiscal policy would be supplemented by new standards, suggests Ms. Joly. For example, a transfer of property cannot be made if the insulation work is not carried out, specifies Ms. Joly. It also proposes to oblige insurers to invest in financially profitable green investments thanks to the energy savings achieved.

Source: http://www.romandie.com/news/n/_Joly_EE ... 111106.asp

50 billion per year, that's what we give for the burden of the public debt (interest only) ... for "nothing" ...

[dedeleco]

This point of the program:

For example, a transfer of property cannot be made if the insulation work is not carried out, specifies Ms. Joly

thus formulated is anti-electoral (attack on private property) by causing voices to be lost without thinking, and with very perverse effects, because in fact very unfair, in fact the poor, having bought with difficulty a poorly insulated junk, with no way to insulate properly better (prices often inaccessible for exterior insulation at 200 € per m2), will see themselves dispossess the value of their property without ever being able to resell it !!

Result this majority of poor people will not vote ecological !!

An absurdity in this electoral program !!

An electoral platform must be considered, constructive and without perverse effects, with incentives to isolate but not by destroying the value of the house owned by the poorest, by making it unsaleable!

For many, ecology seems to them especially reserved for the rich !!!
With scams of pseudo ecological companies at € 30000 or € 19000, current, and this clause in the program, this impression is not likely to change.

[Christophe]

thus formulated is anti-electoral (attack on private property) by causing voices to be lost without thinking, and with very perverse effects, because in fact very unfair, in fact the poor, having bought with difficulty a poorly insulated junk, with no way to insulate properly better (prices often inaccessible for exterior insulation at 200 € per m2), will see themselves dispossess the value of their property without ever being able to resell it !!

I don't know what you mean by "poor" but we must not have the same definition because given the increase in real estate a poor owner no longer exists and if he sells at the current market price he will earn money, a lot of money next when he bought and where he is !!

It is not a question of dispossessing but of updating oneself as much as possible!

ECD is already compulsory, upgrading to standards is just the next logical step ...

In Belgium recently for any rental or sale, you must have a DPE and a diagnosis of the electrical installation (cost for 2: 1000 to 1500 €!)

Result this majority of poor people will not vote ecological !!

Bis: a poor man lives in social housing and / or is a tenant for life, he is not the owner ...

In any case, he rarely votes green. Ecological considerations are a "luxury" !! When we just have enough to make ends meet and we don't necessarily eat well every day, we hardly care about the environment ...

An electoral platform must be considered, constructive and without perverse effects, with incentives to isolate but not by destroying the value of the house owned by the poorest, by making it unsaleable!

I don't see how it would destroy the value !! Stop telling anything !!

If the "poor" wants to resell a property after insulation work, believe me it will inflate the sale price accordingly ...

I'm sure the banks will be delighted to offer "pre-resale work credit" products that are easily accessible to owners by making a mortgage and using a posteriori money on the real estate transaction!

For many, ecology seems to them especially reserved for the rich !!!
With scams of pseudo ecological companies at € 30000 or € 19000, current, and this clause in the program, this impression is not likely to change.

Right, but "we" are here to change that!

So personally speaking about new taxes in an electoral program worries me more! People are stupid, have been rolled around for decades by electoral promises, we know that, but I don't think they are stupid enough to support a candidate, too honest and too frank, who advocates raising taxes ... although if it is a broken promise ... ultimately it may be a very fine tactic on the part of Eva

Intellectual honesty and frank speaking by Eva Joly are surely among his greatest human qualities but these are also his greatest political flaws (psychological diplomacy). (like me and some members of these forums... hihihi)

A "good" politician is above all a good manipulator, a good liar, a good seducer ...

This is especially true in recent years ... We can talk about the sarko campaign and the results on the ground ... for those who are not convinced ...

[dedeleco]

To isolate an old colander house, by dividing the losses by more than 4, almost amounts to rebuilding it at the price level, and therefore such a law blocking the sale amounts to dispossessing those who have an old poorly insulated house to redesign and therefore to rebuild, when they have been duped by past standards, or even recently, by buying very expensive poorly insulated old houses, as we often see, with otherwise inaccessible prices !! We even see scams with rotten houses on the verge of collapse !!

It is necessary to encourage, help but not oblige, nor make lose their houses to the poor owners who, have nothing more after buying their house !!

Very honest people at the start like the communists, without foreseeing it, allowed the advent of dishonest people !!
There are honest laws with perverse effects, such as freezing prices and rent.

The more you put in complex regulations, the more the prices go up, very clear with the €, paying lots of specialists !!

It is especially necessary to imagine the techniques to decrease the prices !!!

[Christophe]

To insulate an old colander house, by dividing the losses by more than 4, almost amounts to rebuilding it at the price level,

Hope you realize the "monstrosity" (hihihihi) you just said?

There are certain extreme cases which can prove you right ... but you are wrong for 99% of the cases.

Insulating lost attic with 25 to 30 cm it costs almost nothing and it already saves 30% with the "colander" ...

Limiting the heating is a FREE solution that saves you up to 40-50% in extreme cases (for those who go crazy at 25 ° C and who would drop to 17 ° C !!), ditto for nighttime regulation and daytime, low investment, immediate return ... put double curtains for those who cannot change the chassis ... etc etc ...

Then who asks you to divide the losses by more than 4?

ps: I already explained to you, a poor owner (that is to say who paid his mortgage) it does NOT exist ... and if he does not want to sell this law would not concern him!

[dedeleco]

Insulating the attic is not enough, the walls are essential to insulate the exterior, make it waterproof, change all the windows, VMC double flow, to reach BBC, like any ecological program must (pass with insulated roofs and even a little walls, from 200KWh / m2an to 50KWh / m2an, is divide by 4 !!)

And there are a lot of owners with houses, who have become poor with the vagaries of life, divorce, unemployment, illness, death, widowhood, etc. and who have to sell in order to continue living elsewhere cheaper in taxes or regain a job !! and who would like not to lose everything with an ecological law with perverse effects not foreseen !!

We can even say that these unfortunates of life abound !!

[Christophe]

(to pass with insulated roof spaces and even a little the walls, of 200KWh / m2an to 50KWh / m2an, is well to divide by 4 !!) [/ ​​b]

200 kWh / m².year I don't call this a colander but an average house in France (I think the national average must be in these waters: 2000L of fuel oil for 100m²) ... a colander, for me, it's is at least 300 kWh / m².year = 3000L per 100m² ...

It is more interesting and easier to pass all the dwellings which are currently 300 kWh and more at 120-150 than those which are 200 to 50 ...

Do not forget that we are talking in Primary Energy (exhaustible): prohibit direct electric heating for new buildings ... and favor wood heating (which has a coefficient of less than 1 see the table on this subject: https://www.econologie.com/forums/normes-et- ... t9153.html ) are 2 other ways to improve your ECD ... WITHOUT ANY ISOLATION WORK ...

[dedeleco]

So we agree, with, pick up the free wood and plants that hang everywhere, (at least around my home), also, teach the poor to do better, encourage them to sell efficient stoves cheaper in trade .
In an electric apartment, without a fireplace, it is difficult to switch to wood heating, without disturbing the entire condominium.

Instead of obliging by prohibiting the sale of old and difficult to insulate housing, encouraging, learning to do better is much more effective is less traumatic.

Already the new standards, elevators, maintenance, greatly increase the costs of co-ownership and some are almost unable to pay these excessive charges (recent report on the A3).

[Christophe]

In an electric apartment, without a fireplace, it is difficult to switch to wood heating, without disturbing the entire condominium.

If you are an owner and have an apartment with a balcony (many have 60 to 70%, I think it is very easy to install a pellet stove (turbine) which has no need for draft chimney ! I believe that 2 m high of small diameter pipe (12 cm) is enough! Completely installable on a balcony! Must see what the trustee authorizes ...

Then you have to mount the pellets in the apartment ... if no elevator, so much the better it is sport (when you do sport you heat less: double economy!)

Without a balcony it's much more complicated.

[dedeleco]

Must see what the trustee authorizes.

The trustee does not care, he applies the laws.
It is the co-ownership regulations and the other co-owners who decide, in general not much, even strictly nothing, because impossible to modify the exterior (unanimous decision for all for major modification !!!!!)

This unanimity blocks very expensive collective insulation work.

Also, the pipe must be taken out in a catamini, camouflaged in a flowerpot, or in climbing plants !!
Until the day a grumpy neighbor finds out !!