Job opening for: Environment Program Officer

People send me stuff. This WUWT reader (who shall remain nameless) writes of a job opening that some of our readers may very well be suitable for. The letter says they “…welcomes a diverse pool of candidates for this search”, so I think we fit.

And just think of the good they could do.

Dear Colleague,
I hope you’ll forgive the somewhat impersonal mass email, but I wanted to reach out to you regarding an open Environment Program Officer position at the Hewlett Foundation. The job description is below and also posted to our website here. I’d appreciate any suggestions you have for talented candidates. Also, please feel free to forward this to any networks you think are appropriate.

Here are the highlights of the job:


  1. The position is focused on climate and energy grantmaking domestically and internationally.
  2. Candidates must have significant experience in climate and energy policy development and advocacy.
  3. The ideal candidate will have experience working in or deeply with nonprofit organizations.
  4. The Hewlett Foundation is a fantastic place to work and the Environment Team is an energetic, talented, and fun group that works well together.
  5. The position is based in Menlo Park, CA.

Interested candidates should send a cover letter and resume to Dan Sherman, President, Explore Company at resumes@explorecompany.com.
Thank you!
Best,
Tom Steinbach

Program Officer, Environment Program (Climate and Energy)

About the Foundation
The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation has been making grants since 1967 to help solve social and environmental problems at home and around the world. The Foundation focuses on education, environment, global development and population, performing arts, philanthropy, and issues that disproportionately affect disadvantaged communities in the San Francisco Bay Area. In 2011, the Foundation’s assets were approximately $7 billion, with annual grants totaling about $320 million. For more information about the Hewlett Foundation, please visit the website at www.hewlett.org.

Program Officer – Climate and Energy
The Environment Program typically makes grants of $50 million per year focused on three issue areas:

  1. Climate change and energy policy;
  2. Western conservation policy; and
  3. Environmental issues affecting poor communities in the San Francisco Bay Area.

In addition to this grantmaking, the Hewlett Foundation helped launch and continues to fund the ClimateWorks Foundation, which is working to reduce the risk of climate change by advancing policies in nations with the highest greenhouse gas emissions. The Foundation’s annual grant to the ClimateWorks Foundation is approximately $100 million.

The Climate and Energy Program Officer will report to the Environment Program Director and be based in Menlo Park, California. The Program Officer must have experience in climate and energy policy development and advocacy and be able to apply his or her experience domestically and internationally. Moreover, the Program Officer must have a proven ability to think strategically and understand how policy advocacy creates policy change.

In addition to developing and implementing climate and energy grantmaking strategy, the Program Officer will serve as a catalyst and convener—bringing together environmental leaders and other public and private sector stakeholders. Consequently, the Program Officer must have a demonstrated record of success working with a diverse array of partners to achieve specific policy and programmatic outcomes.
The Program Officer must thrive in a work environment filled with the exploration of new ideas and approaches to addressing complex problems. Joining a team of ten professionals, the new Program Officer will be challenged to meet the following broad goals and responsibilities:

 

  • Developing, testing, refining, and implementing climate and energy grantmaking strategies.
  • Communicating strategies to grantees, staff, and partner funders and making other presentations as needed to a wide array of audiences.
  • Assessing the organizational development needs of grantee nonprofit organizations and helping to develop organizational development plans to strengthen the ability of grantees to achieve their goals.
  • Developing and tracking effective measures of progress toward achievement of the Foundation’s climate and energy goals and leading evaluations of climate and energy grants and initiatives.
  • Making site visits, attending conferences, and representing Foundation programs to the public and to climate and energy leaders.
  • Reviewing and assessing climate and energy grant proposals.
  • Contributing to the Foundation’s interest in and practice of strategic philanthropy including due diligence, goal-setting and review of business plans, knowledge building, and evaluation.
  • Maintaining knowledge of trends, practices, laws, and other related aspects of the field.
  • Developing and maintaining effective working relationships with diverse groups of professionals and professional organizations, foundations, and funding sources.

The Program Officer should possess the following professional qualifications and personal attributes:

Professional Qualifications:

  • Extensive experience and broad recognition as a climate and energy policy leader with a proven track record of success working on policy issues at state, federal, and/or international levels.
  • An understanding of the key climate and energy issues in the United States and ideally, other high greenhouse gas emitting nations such as China, the European Union, and India.
  • A sophisticated knowledge of policymaking and a demonstrated ability to navigate these issues diplomatically.
  • Knowledge and experience working with nonprofit policy advocacy organizations.
  • Experience with strategy development, implementation, and evaluation.
  • Strong ability to manage multiple high priority projects simultaneously and to consistently meet deadlines.
  • Graduate degree in the sciences, public policy, or related fields.
  • Proven talent in staff management and budgeting.
  • The ability and flexibility to travel extensively.

Personal Attributes:

  • Articulate, with proven ability to write effectively and speak persuasively.
  • Superlative interpersonal skills, including a willingness to listen to internal and external constituents and learn from their best ideas.
  • Highly motivated with intellectual curiosity, approachability, and openness to input from all levels of staff.
  • Personable, diplomatic, and possessing impeccable integrity.
  • Exceptional analytical, strategic, and tactical abilities.
  • Proven team player and leader able to motivate and inspire staff as well as colleagues to work well as a team.
  • Good sense of humor.

Compensation and Benefits
The Foundation offers an excellent benefits package and a salary that is commensurate with experience and education. This position is exempt and full-time.

 

To Apply
Please email your resume and cover letter to Daniel Sherman, President, Explore Company, at resumes@explorecompany.com. Refer to the Hewlett Foundation Climate and Energy Program Officer position. No phone inquiries please.

The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation is an equal opportunity employer and welcomes a diverse pool of candidates for this search. The Foundation uses an outside firm to check the accuracy of information supplied by applicants.

About these ads

70 thoughts on “Job opening for: Environment Program Officer

  1. I don’t know if it’s a case of deja vu all over again, but I’m sure I remember a similar post some time back. I’ve had a look though and can’t find it yet.

  2. “Foundation’s assets were approximately $7 billion, with annual grants totaling about $320 million”. & “advancing policies in nations with the highest greenhouse gas emissions”

    Hope they give all their money away to China, then might safely be neutered and do less damage in North Am.

  3. ok. So sceptics are outfunding this lot using big oil? Wow, I’ve got a lot of catching up to do!

    Think I might go hug a tree. It makes more money.

  4. $50 million per year

    Just one foundation provides $50M per year in funding for climate actions/policies/etc…

    Sure dow outshine Big Oil!

  5. Mike Borgelt says:
    December 20, 2011 at 2:43 pm
    “Is that Hewlett as in Hewlett Packard? If so I’ll never buy another HP product ever.”

    From a while ago:
    the Carbon brief
    funded by European Climate Foundation
    funded by
    The Arcadia Fund
    http://www.arcadiafund.org.uk
    The Children’s Investment Fund Foundation
    http://www.ciff.org
    The ClimateWorks Foundation
    http://www.climateworks.org
    The McCall MacBain Foundation
    http://www.mccallmacbain.org
    The Oak Foundation
    http://www.oakfnd.org
    The Sea Change Foundation
    http://www.seachange.org
    The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
    http://www.hewlett.org

    Hewlett is sooo deep into CAGW.

  6. How many gas/oil stoves with fuel and/or solar ovens would $350 mil. buy to save the forests of Africa from becoming charcoal???
    Maybe they could re-forest the slopes of Kilimanjaro and bring back a healthy ecosystem and help restore the snows!
    Oh, that’s right, they want the US/Euro/Aussie taxpayers to fund that through the the UN.
    And we all know how efficient they are with program $$$, right???
    sarc/off

  7. “Articulate, with proven ability to write effectively and speak persuasively.”

    By whose standards, Michael Mann?

    Me Mann, you Skeptic Criminal!
    Tree Ring Proxy good, Empirical Science evil!
    Cause good, Judgment evil!

    Or how about Trenberth?

    Me Trenberth, you Denialist!
    Reverse the Null Hypothesis!
    Heat sinks beneath buoys – without detection!

    If anyone on The Team wins a Nobel it will not be in Letters.

    What they need and want is:

    “Hype Artist, with proven ability to write gorgeous and alarming prose that hypes The Cause at the drop of a hat.” /sarc (for the kids)

  8. The Hewlett Foundation has a habit of meddling in Canadian affairs by providing funding to junk science activist groups like Tides Canada and David Suzuki.

    “Tides, and the U.S. foundations that fund it, have incredibly deep pockets. A large part of Tides’ funding comes from the Gordon & Betty Moore Foundation, the William & Flora Hewlett Foundation, the David & Lucile Packard Foundation, the Pew Charitable Trusts and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. These are The Big Five. They give away about US$1.2-billion every year. If these foundations decide to undermine a foreign industry, they probably can.”

    http://opinion.financialpost.com/2010/10/14/u-s-foundations-against-the-oil-sands/

    “Based in San Francisco, the Packard foundation is a charity created by a co-founder of tech giant Hewlett-Packard. With $5.6-billion in assets, it is the ninth-largest foundation in the U.S. and grants about $300-million per year.”

    http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/01/26/packard%E2%80%99s-push-against-b-c-salmon/

    “The U.S. foundations that fund Tides are not without their own agenda. Back in 2004, the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation paid Tides Canada $70,000 “to develop a strategy to address the oil and gas industry in British Columbia.” Since then, Hewlett has granted $7-million to Tides USA and $2-million to Tides Canada, which in turn fund at least 30 groups that target the Alberta oil industry and seek a federal ban on oil tanker traffic on the coast of B.C.”

    http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/06/13/junk-science-week-tarred-by-science/

  9. They forgot the most important qualification: Ready, willing and able to shove one’s head up one’s (_!_) !!!!!!!!!!!

  10. I like it that under “Professional Qualifications”, holding a Degree (of some sort) came only 7th out of the 9 bullets: weird, at least in my world.
    Having just read the Wiki entry about the Hewlett Foundation, it seems that a genuinely philanthropic original intent has been hi-jacked after the founders have long gone, and the “science is settled” movement has been discredited.

    I don’t know why you’re laughing Mr Tisdale, maybe you could kick some sense/knowledge into them!

  11. > whois explorecompany.com

    Registrant:
    EXPLORE COMPANY
    5 Rokeby Ct
    Kensington, Maryland 20895
    United States

    Registered through: GoDaddy.com, LLC (http://www.godaddy.com)
    Domain Name: EXPLORECOMPANY.COM
    Created on: 04-Sep-99
    Expires on: 04-Sep-13
    Last Updated on: 11-Jun-08

    Administrative Contact:
    Nathan, Marc register@marcnathan.com
    Simply Computers Plus
    20307 Crown Ridge Ct
    Germantown, Maryland 20876
    United States
    +1.3018401438 Fax —

    Technical Contact:
    Nathan, Marc domains@marcnathan.com
    Simply Computers Plus
    20307 crown ridge ct
    germantown, Maryland 20876
    United States
    +1.3018401438 Fax — +1.4257907800

    Domain servers in listed order:
    NS01.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
    NS02.DOMAINCONTROL.COM

  12. Mike Borgelt says:“Is that Hewlett as in Hewlett Packard? If so I’ll never buy another HP product ever.”

    Ohhh yeah!

    I used to champion HP back in the 80’s for their high tech test equipment and readily recommended their products. That’s the initial reason I favored their printers later and recommended those as well.

    No more HP! You won’t be able to wash off that ‘green’ stain very easily when the hammer falls on this scam- we won’t let you. Despite BILLION$ spent by the federal government every year to keep the scam alive, it’s dying because the planet stopped warming over a decade ago. Someday, soon I hope, you and many other companies are going to look awfully stupid to have kowtowed to the socialist and fascist thugs who influenced you to mollify your number one priority as a corporation – make a profit for your stockholders.

    So Mike B., I too now avoid HP because I can’t stomach the idea that part of the price I pay for their product is like a ‘green’ tax that will be used to make everything else I buy more expensive and help to downgrade my children’s future.

  13. Deeply entrenched and fortified with stacks -o- money from ‘big tech’. It will take major treatment to remove this societal cancer. What a waste of good intentions.

  14. Anthony Watts says: December 20, 2011 at 2:34 pm
    Bob could bury them in graphs.

    Anthony, GOOD point and I concur. Besides, the graphs all look alike to me except for the pretty colors.

  15. Seems to me that it is a private foundation, and it can spend and hire however it likes. Of the three main issue areas, I’m not sure how anyone can object.

    I think we’ll all agree that studying climate change is important. We all recognize that climate changes all the time. Trying to understand the how, why and the impact of any regional change (regardless of sign) is interesting and important. I think most agree that more study, and study by a wider group of scientists and interested amateurs, is not only necessary, but required.

    Clearly energy policy is also important. At 85 mbbl/day world-wide demand, even the median 7 billion bbl ANWAR reserves only last 82 days, assuming one can pump it that fast. There is an end, someday, but the price will grow exponentially as the demand curve grows and the supply diminishes. This, however, is completely orthogonal to climate change. It is something that needs to be addressed now (since any replacement technologies will require current energy technologies to develop and deploy, the more expensive the current energy becomes, the less the EROEI will be for any replacement technology – if there ever comes a point where the EROEI is less than unity; well that will be not good). Nuclear, along with orbital solar seem to be good technologies to be spending time and money on developing as replacements for baseload generation. Synthetic liquid hydrocarbons or alcohol-based fuels for transportation must also be researched, along with energy storage technologies with better energy density than current battery and fuel cell technologies. There is no one energy answer (even if abiogenic heavy hydrocarbon production occurs, the repleneshment rate is unlikely to make up for current and past extraction).

    As for the environmental impact on poor communities, I don’t see how anyone who has visited Richmond California can believe that such communities aren’t poorly served from an environmental air and water quality standpoint.

    I still remember struggling to breath in Los Angeles (Pasadena) in the early 1980’s, on a saturday, trying to reach first base on a strong single – it is quite clear that some regulation of air quality is clearly necessary. That was a second-stage smog alert day. In 2000, there were no first stage (the mildest) smog alerts (versus 110 in 1975). One cannot argue that the emissions controls for automobiles (and other controls on stationary emitters) didn’t make life better for the residents of the Los Angeles basin (and to a lesser extent Houston, et. al.).

    I don’t see CO2 as a problem worth spending any time on, Roherbacher has that one right on point, but then I didn’t see anything in the Hewlett foundation quotes above about CO2.

  16. SO…Why is the UN and the US Government trying to tax MY transportation and energy to get some Climate Ca$h? Just go to Hewlett and Packard – they apparently have gobs of Climate Ca$H!

  17. Is there a climate realist hereabouts who could land this position and work from within to direct all those millions away from bogus ‘research’ aimed at legitimizing the ‘global warming’ political agenda and toward real science?

    Just askin’.

    /Mr Lynn

  18. All joking aside, THIS is one major way they get their funds. This one alone 350 million per year. I suggest it needs study and investigation as to how they gain control of the trust and thus direct how the funds flow. Now multiply this by several major trust and see how money talks.

    As one poster said, just imagine what that amount of money could do to alleviate real problems, real poverty real disadvantage.

  19. Mike M says:
    December 20, 2011 at 3:54 pm

    Mike Borgelt says:“Is that Hewlett as in Hewlett Packard? If so I’ll never buy another HP product ever.”

    So Mike B., I too now avoid HP because I can’t stomach the idea that part of the price I pay for their product is like a ‘green’ tax that will be used to make everything else I buy more expensive and help to downgrade my children’s future.

    ———–

    Do you have any recommendations for a heavy-duty laser printer (black and white)? I use still use HP even though I know I shouldn’t because the machine I have works well. However, I cringe whenever I have to replace a cartridge knowing where the money is going (not to mention the extortionate expense.) There’s a host of reasons beyond the CAGW fiasco this company and its charitable foundation should be avoided – definitely it’s an anti-human organization.

  20. “The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation is an equal opportunity employer and welcomes a diverse pool of candidates for this search.”

    Which actually means “…white, hetrosexual males need not apply unless you have already received the nod from senior management…”

    Believe me, it does.

  21. the Hewlett Foundation helped launch and continues to fund the ClimateWorks Foundation, which is working to reduce the risk of climate change by advancing policies in nations with the highest greenhouse gas emissions.

    By how much is the “risk” of climate change reduced by spending all the money in the world?
    Answer: Not at all. No matter how or why you spend the money.

    Climate will change. Get used to it. And getting used to the changing climate is where the money should be going. Not to “air-conditioning” the universe to some dubious “optimum”.

  22. TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
    You have two cows.
    You sell one and buy a bull.
    Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows.
    You sell them and retire on the income.
    COMMUNISM
    You have two cows.
    The state takes both and gives you some milk.

    FASCISM
    You have two cows.
    The state takes both and sells you some milk.

    NAZISM
    You have two cows.
    The state takes both and shoots you.

    BUREAUCRATISM
    You have two cows.
    The state takes both, shoots one, milks the other and then throws the milk away.

    AMERICAN VENTURE CAPITALISM
    You have two cows.
    You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows.
    The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.
    The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more.
    You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States, leaving you with nine cows.
    No balance sheet provided with the release.
    The public then buys your bull.

    A FRENCH CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    You go on strike, organize a riot and block the roads, because you want three cows.

    A JAPANESE CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
    You then create a clever cow cartoon image called “Cowkimon” and market it worldwide.

    A GERMAN CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    You reengineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month and milk themselves.

    AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
    You have two cows, but you don’t know where they are.
    You decide to have lunch.

    A SWISS CORPORATION
    You have 5,000 cows. None of them belong to you.
    You charge the owners for storing them.

    A CHINESE CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    You have 300 people milking them.
    You claim that you have full employment and high bovine productivity.
    You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.

    AN INDIAN CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    You worship them.

    A BRITISH CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    Both are mad.

    AN IRAQI CORPORATION
    Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.
    You tell them that you have none.
    No one believes you, so they bomb the crap out of you and invade your country.
    You still have no cows, but at least now you are part of a democracy.

    AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    Business seems pretty good.
    You close the office and go to the pub for a few beers to celebrate.

    A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    The one on the left looks very attractive.

    A GREEK CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    You borrow against the cows from the Germans.
    You kill the cows and make souvlaki.
    You can’t pay the interest, so the Germans lend you more money.
    You can’t pay the interest, so the French lend you more money.
    You can’t pay the interest, so the Italians lend you more money.
    You can’t pay the interest, so the Spaniards lend you more money.
    You can’t pay the interest, so your people hold a general strike.
    You can’t pay the interest, so the EU bails you out.
    You drink more ouzo.

    THE IPCC
    You have no cows
    You announce that everyone will die from cow farts
    Unless they agree to pay trillions in new taxes for cow fart credits.
    Scientists, politicians and financiers sign-up in droves hoping to cash in.

  23. Notice how so many of these foundations started by conservative capitalists get taken over by far left wing kooks? Alfred Nobel’s foundation, started by a mega capitalist now gives “peace” prizes to people like AlGore and Obama. The Ford Foundation started by Henry Ford, The Carnegie Foundation – Carnegie built libraries all over the USA to promote literacy and education, even podunk little towns of around 2,000 people got massive concrete and stone library buildings. What has the Carnegie Foundation been doing for people lately?

    With the Hewlett Foundation’s emphasis on environment, one would think the Hewlett Packard company would have adopted a much “greener” and less resource using design for their inkjet printer cartridges with a separate head and tank like other companies. Naw, couldn’t do that! Chuck the whole thing and buy a new one instead of being able to easily refill the tank and having a printhead that lasts the life of the printer.

  24. From the requirements of the Hewlett Foundation, it sounds to me like Lord Moncton would be perfect.

    Still laughing over two cows…

    John Andrews

  25. This is the clearest glimpse into the anatomy of the green gravy train and how the oh-so-sacred NGOs operate that I’ve ever seen.

    All I can say about HP is “never again.” Does Epson have its own foundation? I need a new large format film scanner and Epson fits the bill.

  26. ferd berple says:
    December 20, 2011 at 7:34 pm

    Re: Two mad cows, surprised you included that scam too on a sceptical site.

    (How many died from BSE? How many children die every day in USA from picking up guns left lying about the house? You have two cows, one dies from the ricochet perhaps?)

  27. Nigel S says: December 20, 2011 at 9:38 pm

    Since you asked, according to the CDC there were 1520 gun related deaths among children 0-17, out of a population of 74,340,127 in 2007. There were 1683 deaths in that age group for passengers in motor vehicles. Your point was?

  28. Nigel S [December 20, 2011 at 9:38 pm] says:

    “(How many died from BSE? How many children die every day in USA from picking up guns left lying about the house? You have two cows, one dies from the ricochet perhaps?)”

    Nigel man, that post was clearly in humor, don’t take it personal. Only liberals don’t have a sense of humor. Adding something tragic like kids getting shot defeats the purpose, doncha think?

    Robert E. Phelan [December 20, 2011 at 10:27 pm] says:

    “… according to the CDC there were 1520 gun related deaths among children 0-17, out of a population of 74,340,127 in 2007. There were 1683 deaths in that age group for passengers in motor vehicles.”

    Yep, it is even lower once the statistics are un-adjusted from the intentional gang-banger bloat. They add in ‘kids’ who are 13 to 17 who are actually no longer kids but street thugs, blasting away at each other in the ‘hood’ protecting their stupid colors and drug turf. If they make it out of their teens alive they will be career criminals.

    There are certainly a few horrific cases where curious kids find their idiot parents’ guns and get tragically killed. What usually happens then is the DA refuses to prosecute the idiot parents for gross negligence because they lost a child (an admittedly tough call). And so we are left with mere statistics all lumped together for propaganda purposes. No differentiation between the tragic accidents and the rampaging gang wars in inner city liberal cesspools.

  29. I won’t buy another HP product again primarily because all they produce now is crap. Part of the reason is that I have a Laserjet 4P printer that I bought in 1993 and it still functions very well. The print cartridges are made by a non-HP manufacturer and print far more pages than the page-limited HP cartridges for their newer printers. At some point HP decided that making good products was not a viable business strategy and I stopped buying HP products. Now I have an even better reason to never again buy an HP product.

    What I’m hoping is that the Canadian government introduces similar legislation to what the US has to prevent foreign organizations from funding political campaigns in Canada. I first found out about the US legislation when I was prevented from donating to the NRA during the 2008 presidential race because I resided outside of the US. Now that we have Sun TV in Canada, campaigns like the Chiquita banana company to not use oil-sands derived gasoline to transport their bananas have led to a growing boycott of their product in Canada. The Tides foundation message may resonate with Vancouver moonbats but is resented in the interior of BC where a surprising number of people are employed in oil-sands related work.

  30. Robert E Phelan,
    The point about BSE or Mad Cows is that the whole thing was just another unsubsantiated scare, like AGW or salmonella in eggs.
    Read Chrisopher Bookers book about it.

  31. oldseadog says: December 21, 2011 at 12:46 am

    But Nigels wasn’t talking about Mad Cows, was he? That looked like yet another euro-flake pushing an agenda about cowboy Americans and how we should think of the children. I am thinking of them. Teach them to shoot. An armed citizenry is one that won’t be enslaved.

  32. I’m very saddened that the name of a good man is associated with the AGW nonsense. Bill Hewlett died in 2001, he was an innovative engineer and helped introduce an enlightened management philosophy to the workplace. I wonder what he would think of AGW.

  33. vigilantfish says:

    Do you have any recommendations for a heavy-duty laser printer (black and white)? I use still use HP even though I know I shouldn’t because the machine I have works well. However, I cringe whenever I have to replace a cartridge knowing where the money is going (not to mention the extortionate expense.)

    You can get inexpensive, good-quality, printer-specific toner refills here: http://www.tonerrefillsplus.com/

  34. Blade says:
    December 20, 2011 at 11:20 pm

    Robert E. Phelan [December 20, 2011 at 10:27 pm] says:

    “… according to the CDC there were 1520 gun related deaths among children 0-17, out of a population of 74,340,127 in 2007. There were 1683 deaths in that age group for passengers in motor vehicles.”

    Yep, it is even lower once the statistics are un-adjusted from the intentional gang-banger bloat.

    I think it’s much lower once suicides are removed. The reason that they aren’t is to mendaciously let readers get the impression that “gun-related deaths” are accidental deaths or deliberate murders.

  35. Robert;
    No, but ferd berple was at 7.34; British Corporation with two mad cows; and I thought that was the point that was being made by Nigel, i.e. the Mad Cow scare was just another scam like AGW.

  36. Robert;
    No, but ferd berple was at 7.34; British Corporation with two mad cows; and I thought that Nigel’s point was that the Mad Cow scare was just another scam like AGW.

  37. How does such an obvious politically motivated organisation manage to have a tax exempt status?

    From the job description they are obviously campaigning for political change and should be taxed as such.

    Steve

  38. Herein lies a structural problem in our Constitutional Republic: through the tax code, we allowed tax-exempt foundations to have eternal life, and to have an unaccountable voice to advocate for policies they favor. Foundations do not have shareholders who can vote for a new Board of Directors, they do not have customers who can boycott to force a change in direction or attitude. What they do have is a self-sustaining, self-appointing Board. Further, if a foundation is sufficiently endowed, if it earns more in investment income than it is required to give away each years (only 5%), then the foundation has eternal life.

    The solution is to make foundations mortal again. Raise the 5% payout to 7 1/2%. Foundations will then eventually spend themselves out of business. We will benefit from the increased tax revenue that generates. We benefit as a nation. The founding fathers never envisioned unaccountable voices in the public square, let alone ones exempt from all taxation.

  39. “Robert E. Phelan says:
    December 20, 2011 at 10:27 pm
    Nigel S says: December 20, 2011 at 9:38 pm

    Since you asked, according to the CDC there were 1520 gun related deaths among children 0-17, out of a population of 74,340,127 in 2007. There were 1683 deaths in that age group for passengers in motor vehicles. Your point was?”

    I assumed it was a reference to the british coalition government, although in fairness, not everything done by Cameron in the last few weeks has been completely “mad”.

    All I know is it was funny as hell (maybe you can include Canada next time? We like getting ripped on!)

  40. Roger Knights [December 21, 2011 at 3:02 am] says:

    “I think it’s much lower once suicides are removed. The reason that they aren’t is to mendaciously let readers get the impression that “gun-related deaths” are accidental deaths or deliberate murders.”

    Right you are.

  41. At $320 million per year, the The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation could permanently solve the homeless problem throughout the entire SF Bay Area, all by themselves. And I don’t mean by hand-outs but by constructive involvement.

    But that would mean dealing with gritty reality and smelly people. And it’s *so* much more satisfying to be socially pious.

  42. “Highly motivated with intellectual curiosity, approachability, and openness to input…”

    They really had me until they finished the sentence with:

    “…from all levels of staff”

  43. I’ve just exchanged a couple of emails with no less than a member of the Executive Staff of the Hewlett Foundation (a gentleman kind enough to reply even though he’s on vacation), in order to ask a set of questions I’ve posed to various large corporations about what justifies their AGW position. The gentleman essentially sidestepped the questions, but in answer to whether an outright skeptic had any chance of being considered for the advertised position, he replied, “… we are deeply commItted [his typo, not mine] to getting the science as right as possible and would be pleased to meet with a qualified candidate whose views differed from those of mainstream climate scientists.”

    (…glad to provide this email directly to Anthony, in case anyone thinks I’m making this up…)

  44. I worked at HP for 13 years from the end of the “Bill & Dave” era (when it was an engineering company) through John Young up to Carly. I think the first blow to HP came in the mid 80’s when in the effort to “Downsize” but still stay true to “The HP Way” they offered a very attractive voluntary severance package that drained a lot of the real talent and left those who were (mostly) good at facilitating meetings and then the MBA crowd started to change things, by the time Carly took over (and I left for the lure of start-ups) there were fewer engineers than MBA’s

  45. “Program Officer – Climate and Energy
    The Environment Program typically makes grants of $50 million per year focused on three issue areas:
    1.Climate change and energy policy;
    2.Western conservation policy; and
    3.Environmental issues affecting poor communities in the San Francisco Bay Area.”

    What happened to the last Program Officer of Climate and Energy? Couldn’t they get anything good for AGW and gay issues on the Hill for $50 million a year? This job could be much more challenging than it looks, so a little respect here, folks.

  46. A NORWEGIAN CORPORATION
    You have two cows.
    You get subsidies from the government, and become the richest man in the village.
    Thats it.

  47. Well many HP fans or at least former fans, believe that Bill and Dave took the HP Way with them when they left. So the Hewlett foundation would not be the first or last foundation endowed by technology giant’s great enterprises while here on earth to be co-opted by the very enemies of everything the founders stood and worked for. Not that I am suggesting any malfeasance here; but I somehow doubt that Bill Hewlett, thought that catastrophic climate change disasters were in our future, or that we could do anything about that.
    Just remember what the Ford foundation used to be; and where Henry Ford put his efforts to benefit mankind.

  48. “”””” Nigel S says:

    December 20, 2011 at 9:38 pm

    ferd berple says:
    December 20, 2011 at 7:34 pm

    Re: Two mad cows, surprised you included that scam too on a sceptical site.

    (How many died from BSE? How many children die every day in USA from picking up guns left lying about the house? You have two cows, one dies from the ricochet perhaps? ) “””””

    There are strict laws against leaving loaded (or unloaded) guns around the house, in most States (of the USA).
    There are no laws against leaving five gallon buckets of water around the house. More children are drowned each year by toppling head first into five gallon buckets of water around the house, than die in left around gun accidents. So we should outlaw five gallon buckets.

    Read John Lott; “More Guns, Less Crime.”
    and “Why everything you have heard about Guns is wrong.”

Comments are closed.