Marco Anglesio <mpa at the-wire.com> writes
"I do wonder why that article started with the header James gave it as it seems to have little if nothing to do with a decrease in personal income, merely in personal greenhouse-gas production."
You miss the point. Englishman Richard Barry calculated his own personal production of greenhouse gases and compared it with the Kyoto target divided by the number of people. Barry's conclusion is that his consumption habits gave rise to three times as much CO2 as Kyoto allowed him. Translate that into the expected change in income, his wages fall by two thirds.
Being honest, as opposed to wilfully vague, Barry - who plainly sympathises with the Kyoto agreement - looks at where he can save and thinks that it is unlikely he can substantially.
And why should he, says I? In whose interests is an agreement that calls for a cut in wages by two thirds? -- James Heartfield The 'Death of the Subject' Explained is available at GBP11.00, plus GBP1.00 p&p from Publications, audacity.org, 8 College Close, Hackney, London, E9 6ER. Make cheques payable to 'Audacity Ltd'