by Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D.
The NASA A-Train satellite constellation symposium I attended last week in New Orleans was in some sense a celebration of the wide variety of global satellite observations we are now collecting from Earth orbit.
This really is the Golden Age in satellite data collection of the global climate system. While a few A-Train satellites are still to be launched, other older satellite assets in the A-Train are now operating well past their planned lifetimes.
There are no plans to replace many of these one-of-a-kind instruments, so much of what we will learn in the coming years will have to come from the analysis of previously collected data.
Unfortunately — at least in my opinion — the existence of this superb national resource depended upon convincing congress almost 2 decades ago that manmade global warming was a clear and present danger to the world.
Manmade Global Warming as the Justification
Since I believe the majority of what we now view as “climate change” is just part of a natural cycle in the climate system, I argued from the outset that NASA should be also selling “Mission to Planet Earth” as a way to better prepare ourselves for natural climate change — something that history tells us has indeed occurred, and we can be assured will occur again.
But behind the scenes there was a strong push for policy changes that even most of the scientists involved supported — ultimately culminating in the governmental control over how much and the kinds of energy sources humanity would be allowed to use in the future.
Cap and Trade, as well as potential regulation of carbon dioxide emissions by the EPA, are the fruits of the labor of politicians, governmental representatives, bureaucrats, the United Nations, and activist scientists who have used global warming as an excuse to accomplish policy goals that would have never been accomplished on their own merits.
Of course, most who speak out on this issue continue to point to the supposed “scientific consensus” on global warming as the justification, but those of us who knew the players also knew of these other motives.
I am often asked, “So, are you saying there is a conspiracy here?”
No, because the ultimate goals were not a secret. Just a bunch of elitists carrying out plans that the politicians supported — with continuing promises of congressional funding for research that those politicians knew would support Job #1 of government — to stay needed by the people. Many of the scientists involved are just along for a ride on the gravy train. Even I ride that train.
The elitism clearly shows through in the behavior of those who speak out publicly on the need for humanity to change its Earth-destroying ways: Al Gore, James Cameron, Harrison Ford, Julia Roberts, RFK, Jr.
These people apparently believe they are God’s gift to humanity. How else can we explain that they do not see the hypocrisy the rest of the nation sees in their behavior?
Unfortunately, I saw this attitude on a smaller scale at the New Orleans meeting. There are many new, young scientists now joining the ranks. They are being mentored by the older scientists who helped spread the alarm concerning manmade global warming. And they will be rewarded for playing the game.
Or will they?
The Times They Are A-Changin’
How is it that government agencies long ago decided to put all their eggs in the man-made global warming basket? Why have the movers and shakers around the world ignored natural climate change — even going so far as to claim it does not exist?
The only reason I can think of again goes back to their elitist beliefs and desired policy outcomes. The belief that a better-educated few should be allowed power over the less educated masses. That government knows better than the people do.
Tomorrow’s election is widely viewed as a referendum on the proper role of government in people’s lives. There is no question that the founders of our country intended there to be maximum of freedom on the part of individuals and the states, while placing strong limits on the role of the federal government.
Just read the Declaration of Independence if you want to see how pi$!ed off the settlers of the original colonies became at the King of England over his intrusion into their personal affairs.
And global warming legislation is now quite possibly the best opportunity the governments of the world have to increase the role of government in people’s lives.
The Basic Economics of Individual Freedom
Yet, many Americans believe that government can more equitably distribute the wealth generated by a country. This is a laudable goal on the face of it.
Unfortunately, history has taught us that trying to impose equality of outcomes only serves to make people equally miserable.
I like to think that I know something about basic economics. It was the subject of the 6th chapter in my first book –Climate Confusion — which received a nice blurb on the jacket from noted economist Walter Williams.
One of the reasons I am willing to stick my neck out and inform people of the uncertain nature of government-approved global warming science is because the basic economics behind any governmental (or environmental extremist) attempts to restrict personal choice in energy use will end up killing people.
In fact, it already has.
The biggest threat to humanity is poverty. Wealthier is healthier. When governments make energy more expensive, or environmental organizations pressure foreign countries to not build hydroelectric dams, poor people die.
Those already living on the edge are pushed over the edge. Energy is required for everything we do, and artificially raising the price of energy cannot help but destroy wealth generation.
If these elitists really were interested in the poor, they would be doing everything they could to help individuals take control of their own economic destinies. One billion people in the world still do not have electricity.
Worried about population growth? Then encourage the generation of wealth. It is the poor of the world that cause global population growth. The wealthy countries of the world have close to zero population growth.
Of course the main argument against this view is “sustainability”. Can the Earth sustain even more people consuming natural resources?
Interesting how those who ask the question have already gotten theirs, and now want to prevent others from doing the same.
But I would ask, can the world sustain the poverty-stricken? Poor countries have had most of their trees cut down. Imagine if global society collapsed and billions of people had to make do on their own with what they could scavenge from nature.
Now THAT would lead to a pollution problem.
What ensures sustainability is free markets. As natural resources of one type become more scarce, their price goes up, which makes alternatives more attractive. People are incentivized to develop new answers to old technological problems. This is why fossil fuels will never be used up. At some point, they simply will become too expensive to extract.
Mass production by factories and corporations should be embraced, rather than derided. It represents the most efficient way of providing goods and services. Waste is minimized because it hurts competitiveness.
But What About Equality?
Equality of outcomes is an illusion. It can never be achieved…unless we totally destroy the people’s motivation to make a better life for themselves.
A vibrant economy is what maximizes the tax revenue collected by the government. The two largest periods of growth in tax revenue collected by the government occurred after two major tax-CUTTING initiatives: JFK’s in the early 1960’s, and Reagan’s in the early 1980’s.
If you really want to help the poor, then help the country grow economically. Want to make sure the poor are taken care of? Then encourage businesses to grow, which will lead to more jobs. Economic activity is what is needed, and since the tax revenue the government receives is a “piece of the action”, more action means more money for government programs.
And whether we like it or not, the only way to ensure this growth happens is to give business owners and entrepreneurs some hope that their risk-taking and creativity will pay off for them personally in the future.
Yes, in the process, some people will get rich. A few will get obscenely rich. But this only occurs because so many consumers want the goods and services those rich few can offer them.
Call it a necessary evil, if you must. But it is, indeed, necessary. The end result will be more money for the poor, not less.
A New Fight Begins Tomorrow
The basic economics and desire to help the poor that have motivated me to speak out in the last 20 years on global warming policy will, starting tomorrow, be the subject of a national debate regarding the proper role of government in helping its people.
Tomorrow’s election is only the start. From then on, education about the practical importance of economic freedom will be central to that debate.
There is no question that our country has an unsustainable growth in our yearly budget deficits, and our total national debt is staggering. Everyone agrees this must change.
And reducing government expenditures must, of course, be part of the debate.
But increasing tax revenue to help support those programs is ALSO part of the solution. And since the only demonstrated (and sustainable)way to accomplish this is to grow the economy, it requires personal economic freedom.
So, what is the primary role of government in all this? In my opinion, it is two-fold: (1) make sure people play fair, and (2) get out of the way.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
As Professor K.Abdusamatov said: “HOLLYWOOD SCIENCE”</b
The only reason I can think of again goes back to their elitist beliefs and desired policy outcomes. The belief that a better-educated few should be allowed power over the less educated masses. That government knows better than the people do.
Although I agree with much of this blog’s critique of AGW science, this post is typical of its slide into political advocacy, and advocacy of a low order. So-called conservative claims are trumpeted and AGW is exhibit A for the prosecution. The Tea Party/Republican/Libertarian constituency howls its approval in comments. Little of value is contributed.
Like anyone else, scientists are capable of close political analysis, but what appears on this blog is usually just sloganeering. No different from the drivel offered up on sites loyal to the opposite side of the aisle.
Peter Taylor,
The climate is changing, eh? FYI, the climate has always changed. In fact, it is currently changing less than usual. To use that as an excuse to promote your ‘ecology’ is disingenuous.
You and your ecologist/eco-theives are a major part of the world’s problems. In fact, I would say that you are the problem. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and the bricks in that road are supplied by people who mistakenly believe they are doing good for mother Gaia. They are either deluded or conniving.
You blame this country for what your own ancestors did when they immigrated here several hundred years ago:
I get it: the U.S. is evil. But you never have an unkind word for the truly evil countries in the world. China, Russia, almost all of Africa get a free pass. But it makes you feel good to demonize the U.S., doesn’t it? No doubt your pals nod and agree when you lie to them that this country is the source of the world’s problems – and that lots more American dollars are what is needed to put things right.
The hypocrisy of do-gooders, who take other people’s money and funnel it through the hopelessly corrupt UN is on display here. You are convinced by their smarmy assurances that the money will be spent wisely instead of being pocketed by UN kleptocrats and siphoned off by the leaders of corrupt client states, in return for voting against the US and the West, and crying crocodile tears over the fact that almost all of it is completely wasted, ending up in the pockets of connivers.
If you had integrity you would ask for charitable contributions instead of taking the wealth confiscated from honest working people, and use the religious organizations that you admit are the most effective at alleviating poverty, to honestly distribute the contributions. Your hand-wringing over the corrupt system is no antidote to the ongoing theft of already hard-bitten taxpayers.
You are as hooked on other people’s money as the rest of the world’s kleptocrats. It’s time to re-think what you wrongly presume to be ethical behavior. No doubt you believe yourself to be beneficent, but you are simply an enabler of the scam that targets honest working people, using wonderful sounding words as a cover to get government hands deep into their pockets – when you admit that very little of the money taken will ever reach those in need.
Americans are by far the most generous, charitable people on the planet. I voluntarily give thousands of dollars a year to the few charities that pass on at least 90% of their income to the intended recipients. And I am sick to death of people who think they are doing good – by confiscating other people’s earnings, and giving them away to scoundrels. All you are doing is enabling the ripping off of honest working folks to give a monetary crutch to the people you think you are helping. As long as there are ‘ecologists’ around, or eco-anything, the poor will have their crutch – or at least the promise of it, and they will never learn to walk without it. If you want to be a do-gooder, do it with your own money.
Well said! – bravo Dr Spencer!
Why can’t we just say what is really going on? Progressive policies are not misguided. They are an attempt to secure their own power by depriving it to others.
As for those who want to pose the “no government” argument, get real. Nobody is arguing for no government. We argue for constitutional government. There is a big difference. To assume that there will be no social order if social security is dissolved, is to assume that state governments do not exist.
This is a battle over the power of the federal government. Nothing more. Progressives know that securing federal power is the easiest way to achieve their ends. This is warfare. You must understand their tactics to defeat them. The encouraging thing is that our constitution is the battle plan. We just need to restore it to it’s rightful place. Don’t like the constitution? Amend it.
@”Anton says:
November 1, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Who does the quality of life rankings? The U.N.? Do you see millions of people around the world trying to immigrate to Scandinavia?”
Uh… yes. Yes, that is exactly what millions of people around the world is trying to do.
@”evanmjones says:
November 1, 2010 at 7:57 pm
The only trickle down effect I have ever felt is from the sibling in the bunk above me when I was a very young child.
If you ever worked for a boss, then, by definition, you experienced it again even if you failed to feel it.”
If this is true, then by definition no boss or company owner with an employee would be able to make money. You don’t hire an employee to ‘trickle’ your wealth away at him. You hire him so that his wealth (defined by his work) flows into your company, and you trickle back the equivalent value (more or less) in the form of pay.
To those idiots who continually blame Bush and Wall Street for the current recession, it was neither. It was the socialist programs of FDR that did it. FDR created Freddie Mac. From that point on the government has continually interfered in the housing market, nudging banks and Wall Street to find ways to lend to those who could not and cannot afford a house. Socialism is the problem here.
http://mises.org/daily/3045
Dr Spencer, thank you for that beautifully clear, cogent, rational and well-argued statement. I haven’t yet read your book but it’s definitely now on my reading list. I wish you every success in continuing to try and get that message across – and against those who will go on doing their utmost to denigrate, distort and deny the truth of what you’re saying. I wish you could come over here and beat some sense into the heads of the UK politicians who are, almost without exception, hell-bent on driving this country into the ground on the back of the CAGW mantra.
Lichanos says:
“Although I agree with much of this blog’s critique of AGW science, this post is typical of its slide into political advocacy…”
What are your thoughts on the American Lung Association’s slide into political advocacy?
Today is election day in the U.S. It is to be expected that WUWT readers, who know a thing or two about how politics has corrupted science, would take an interest in the country’s change in direction.
WUWT will continue to post articles on science, to the exclusion of almost everything else. But among other things, today is a referendum on the government’s science policy. With the eco-fascists usually calling the shots, it is a rare opportunity for the citizens to say, “WHOA!”
Mr Green Genes;
I trust you aren’t including the British in your rant.>>
Error of omission on my part. To add to that, Britain stepped up in Iraq. WMD’s or not, it was British and American fighter bombers that, for ten years prior to invading Iraq, flew daily missions to prevent Sadam Hussein from exterminating the Kurds. DAILY for TEN YEARS. In the same vein, Britain showed up, as did Canada and others, to put an end to the attempted extermination of the Muslim Albanians in Bosnia. Number of Saudi troops there to support their Muslim brothers? 0. Egyptian? 0. Syrian? 0. Norway, Sweden, etc? Don’t recall but insignificant at best.
Sad however that in the recent flare up between Britain and Argentina re the Falklands, the president of the “new” USA took a neutral position.
James Sexton;
YW
The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office. Their principal device to that end is to search out groups who pant and pine for something they can’t get and to promise to give it to them. Nine times out of ten that promise is worth nothing. The tenth time is made good by looting A to satisfy B. In other words, government is a broker in pillage, and every election is sort of an advance auction sale of stolen goods.
~ H.L.Mencken
Ed Murphy;
Other than you have who married wrong, may I point out that John McCain is a decorated US soldier who spent considerable time as a prisoner of war during which he was tortured, starved, and nearly died. An elitist would have hired someone to do it for him.
From Each According to His Ability to Each According to His Need
Student; Uhm, I got every question on this exam correct. Why is my mark 67%?
Professor; We needed your marks for something else.
Student; And my lab partner hardly got any right at all, be he got 67% too.
Professor; Yes, that’s what we needed your marks for, we gave some of them to him.
Student; Why him?
Professor; Because he needed them.
Student; Why take them from me?
Professor; Because you have the ability.
Student; So, if I don’t study at all, don’t learn the material, I’ll get 67% anyway?
Professor; No, you will go to jail for shirking your responsibility to the State.
Student; If you put me in jail, who will build that nuclear reactor you need so bad?
Professor; Your lab partner.
Student; Are you insane? He’s a moron. He doesn’t have a clue what he is doing.
Professor; Not true. Look at his last exam paper. 67%, just like you. Suggesting you are smarter than him is elitist, and threatening to not study makes you a traitor. I’m confiscating the rest of your marks and giving them to your lab partner. You will go to jail and he will be a genius with a mark of 200%.
20 Years Later
Scientist – hey, we can’t run this experiment in the Chernobyl nuclear reactor because it exceeds design limits and the safety systems trigger a shut down.
Genius – Well, turn the safety systems off then.
Scientist – is that safe?
Genius – Of course. I looked at the numbers and decided it is safe. After all, I’m a genius.
davidmhoffer says:
November 1, 2010 at 10:32 pm
God bless America. May she soon find her way back to the path she has walked for so many years, and done again the mantle she once wore so proudly. Leader of the free world. I see no one else stepping up to that responsibility, just complainers yammering away while getting a free ride.
=========================================
Thank you David
Oops, I was sleepy, groggy, and dozing off. Sorry.
Well, I’m off to vote for people who can remember how many cars and houses they own.
not filthy rich old coots coaxing a ton of mileage off doing his duty
While we’re talking about economic cases, why doesn’t anyone bring up Clinton? Yes, his presidency was during a period of economic strength, but I attribute it to the elder George Bush finally compromising on taxes with the Democrats which also led to his defeat. Clinton is the one that pushed the service “industry” over hard manufacturing and start our downfall into a third rate country.
Ed Murphy says:
November 2, 2010 at 9:03 am
Oops, I was sleepy, groggy, and dozing off. Sorry.
Well, I’m off to vote for people who can remember how many cars and houses they own.
not filthy rich old coots coaxing a ton of mileage off doing his duty
=======================================================
Go get ’em tiger! Maybe if we try hard enough we can make sure none of our representatives were ever financially successful or served in our nation’s military. I’m sure that’d be a big help! Maybe if we found a very effective community organizer……….
Djozar says:
November 2, 2010 at 9:31 am
While we’re talking about economic cases, why doesn’t anyone bring up Clinton? Yes, his presidency was during a period of economic strength, but I attribute it to the elder George Bush finally compromising on taxes with the Democrats which also led to his defeat. Clinton is the one that pushed the service “industry” over hard manufacturing and start our downfall into a third rate country.
=======================================================
Well, I agree, Clinton did push the service industry over manufacturing. And he did reap benefits of a set table by the 2 previous administrations and a congress that insisted on balanced budgets. Obviously, we’ve more problems than that. One day this nation will wake up and decide to start producing tangible goods again, drill our own oil, mine the energy necessary and quit exporting jobs while importing workers. The H1B program has imported over 1,000,000 workers to compete in the tech industry in the U.S. Other programs import in different areas of the labor market.
latitude;
YW
It may be appropriate to repeat the words of one of the most famed journalists in Canadian history, Gordon Sinclair. He had enough of the American bashing and said so on his radio talk show. If you read through the following transcript, you will see his firm support for the role of the United States in the world, and his unwavering belief that the Americans would put the recent market crash behind them, get their act together, and once more lead the free world on all fronts. Keep in mind as you read it that market crash in question was in 1973, and came during a much maligned United States withdrawl from Vietnam:
The United States dollar took another pounding on German, French and British exchanges this morning, hitting the lowest point ever known in West Germany. It has declined there by 41% since 1971 and this Canadian thinks it is time to speak up for the Americans as the most generous and possibly the least-appreciated people in all the earth.
As long as sixty years ago, when I first started to read newspapers, I read of floods on the Yellow River and the Yangtse. Who rushed in with men and money to help? The Americans did.
They have helped control floods on the Nile, the Amazon, the Ganges and the Niger. Today, the rich bottom land of the Mississippi is under water and no foreign land has sent a dollar to help. Germany, Japan and, to a lesser extent, Britain and Italy, were lifted out of the debris of war by the Americans who poured in billions of dollars and forgave other billions in debts. None of those countries is today paying even the interest on its remaining debts to the United States.
When the franc was in danger of collapsing in 1956, it was the Americans who propped it up and their reward was to be insulted and swindled on the streets of Paris. I was there. I saw it.
When distant cities are hit by earthquakes, it is the United States that hurries into help… Managua Nicaragua is one of the most recent examples. So far this spring, 59 American communities have been flattened by tornadoes. Nobody has helped.
The Marshall Plan .. the Truman Policy .. all pumped billions upon billions of dollars into discouraged countries. Now, newspapers in those countries are writing about the decadent war-mongering Americans.
I’d like to see one of those countries that is gloating over the erosion of the United States dollar build its own airplanes.
Come on… let’s hear it! Does any other country in the world have a plane to equal the Boeing Jumbo Jet, the Lockheed Tristar or the Douglas 107? If so, why don’t they fly them? Why do all international lines except Russia fly American planes? Why does no other land on earth even consider putting a man or women on the moon?
You talk about Japanese technocracy and you get radios. You talk about German technocracy and you get automobiles. You talk about American technocracy and you find men on the moon, not once, but several times … and safely home again. You talk about scandals and the Americans put theirs right in the store window for everyone to look at. Even the draft dodgers are not pursued and hounded. They are here on our streets, most of them … unless they are breaking Canadian laws .. are getting American dollars from Ma and Pa at home to spend here.
When the Americans get out of this bind … as they will… who could blame them if they said ‘the hell with the rest of the world’. Let someone else buy the Israel bonds, Let someone else build or repair foreign dams or design foreign buildings that won’t shake apart in earthquakes.
When the railways of France, Germany and India were breaking down through age, it was the Americans who rebuilt them. When the Pennsylvania Railroad and the New York Central went broke, nobody loaned them an old caboose. Both are still broke. I can name to you 5,000 times when the Americans raced to the help of other people in trouble.
Can you name me even one time when someone else raced to the Americans in trouble? I don’t think there was outside help even during the San Francisco earthquake.
Our neighbours have faced it alone and I am one Canadian who is damned tired of hearing them kicked around. They will come out of this thing with their flag high. And when they do, they are entitled to thumb their nose at the lands that are gloating over their present troubles.
I hope Canada is not one of these. But there are many smug, self-righteous Canadians. And finally, the American Red Cross was told at its 48th Annual meeting in New Orleans this morning that it was broke.
This year’s disasters .. with the year less than half-over… has taken it all and nobody…but nobody… has helped.
Gordon Sinclair
1973
Since read into the Congressional Record multiple times
a couple of tiny tweaks, and he could be speaking of today.
and he would be right (again)
davidmhoffer says:
November 2, 2010 at 7:56 am
Mr Green Genes;
I trust you aren’t including the British in your rant.>>
Error of omission on my part.
==========================================================
No problem, my friend. At this time of year in the UK we are commemorating our service personnel who have died in conflict over the past hundred years and that does include Iraq, Afghanistan and the Falklands conflict of 1982.
“Maybe if we found a very effective community organizer……….”
LOL – Like Gore, Cameron or Mann 😉
“”””” davidmhoffer says:
November 2, 2010 at 7:56 am
Mr Green Genes;
I trust you aren’t including the British in your rant.>>
Error of omission on my part. To add to that, Britain stepped up in Iraq. WMD’s or not, it was British and American fighter bombers that, for ten years prior to invading Iraq, flew daily missions to prevent Saddam Hussein from exterminating the Kurds. DAILY for TEN YEARS. In the same vein, Britain showed up, as did Canada and others, to put an end to the attempted extermination of the Muslim Albanians in Bosnia. Number of Saudi troops there to support their Muslim brothers? 0. Egyptian? 0. Syrian? 0. Norway, Sweden, etc? Don’t recall but insignificant at best.
Sad however that in the recent flare up between Britain and Argentina re the Falklands, the president of the “new” USA took a neutral position. “””””
Well David not exactly; but I do get your point. The USA did have obligations under the OAS treaty that it couldn’t simply ignore, and had to tread lightly around. I can’t speak of the current administration whose anti-British rudeness is a total embarrassment to Americans.
But you might remember in the battle for liberation of the Falkland Islands from their foreign invaders; the UK did have a UN directive to the invader to “get out or else”. And then there was that small matter of the supply of Sidewinder missiles, that PM Thatcher and her Defense Minister, had omitted to put on the shopping list. OOoops !! Well the US did conclude that we could do without some for a short duration; so we did loan the UK an adequate supply.
As I recall you blokes fired 48 of those damn things from your Harriers; and three of them missed ! What the hell was that all about; I would have expected better out of the UK flyers.
The Falkland Islands were among those lands in the South Atlantic, that did NOT become part of the Nation of Argentina, when those people obtained their freedom from Spain.
Oddly, the battle for their Liberation commenced when Sea-king ? helicopters attacked and sank at the dock an Argentinian submarine that was trying to off load a couple of hundred troops to reinforce the garrison on South Georgia Island; who presumably were there to enforce new Argentinian rule over the penguins; so expecting no resistance, the dumbass Submarine commander sailed in to a British port on the surface on the morning of April 25th.
Obviously he was not a student of history. April 25th is ANZAC Day; and not a good choice for a date to take on the British; in light of what happened on that date in 1915 on the Galipoli Peninsula of Turkey.
So David; we didn’t forget y’alls; nor how Mrs Thatcher handled the whole thing. It was that event that really convinced me that I AM British. Of course now I’m a yank; but still proud of my origins.
“”””” Peter Taylor says:
November 2, 2010 at 5:15 am
I have recently completed a review on international development – investments from the private sector and official aid run to $250 billion per annum, with about equal amounts in the two sectors. Most official aid goes to help national budgets. Less than 10% of that aid or investment reaches the poorest 2 billion people without adequate food and water, with impoverished soils, poor sanitation, poor health and virtually no role in the wider economy. “””””
Well Peter; if we had just all stayed in Africa, then we all could be living like President Barack Hussein Obama’s destitute half brother in his native Kenya; which the First Lady describes as Barack’s Country. Well then there wouldn’t be so many of us; and there wouldn’t be any of those “indigenous ” peoples to come to the new world, and figure out how to drive a herd of buffalo over a cliff; to get a steak dinner.
Left to their own ends some peoples in every region of this planet, have created wonderful things; from Cambodia to the jungles of Guatemala. But most of the worlds people have accomplished exactly nothing; but their own disease ridden subsistence.
And it wasn’t central planners who created those wonders, and provided for the betterment of a large segment of the world community.
I once attended a lecture by an esteemed Stanford Economist Professor; and he declared that we could completely bankrupt all the economies of the developed world; and sitll never solve the problems of Africa. Those people have to want to do it themselves; and surprisingly a great many of them have; and done it in the face of genocidal wars among themselves. We can help them; we can encourage them; we can help educate them; but we can’t make them successful; they have to do that themselves. Same goes for lots of other places. You cannot thrust the good life on people who don’t seem to want it.
George E. Smith;
Well David not exactly; but I do get your point. The USA did have obligations under the OAS treaty that it couldn’t simply ignore, and had to tread lightly around. I can’t speak of the current administration whose anti-British rudeness is a total embarrassment to Americans.>>
I’m speaking of the rhetoric from Argentina of just a few months ago re-asserting their claim on the Falklands. The Obama administration took a neutral position. As for anti-British rudeness from the current administration, you can add rudeness to Canadians, Israelis, India, half of eastern Europe… if it is politeness you seek you had best hail from Iran or Syria or Russia. Sad to watch as Obama reaches out with the hand of friendship to those who spit in his face while backhanding his allies like they were small children in need of a good cuffing for not doing exactly as they are told.
That said, and with no lack of respect for those who fought and died over the Falklands intended, it did result in one of the most amusing memories of my life. A day or so after the initial take over by Argentina, one of the weekly news magazines published a cartoon on their cover without even a caption, because the drawing said it all. It was a characture of a lion, aged but powerful. A tiny soldier in full uniform that tells you where he is from is poking holes in the lion’s tale with the bayonet of his rifle. The lion’s take is just a bit thicker than the soldier is tall. The lion is just turning its head backward to see what is going on, and the WTF? look on the lion’s face was priceless.
Still makes me chuckle when the topic comes up, but the fact that Obama couldn’t say even a single word of support for Britain on the more recent issue is troubling. Particularly if you are from say Taiwan, South Korea, India, Israel, Japan, anyone who borders Venezuala or others for whom that should have been a wake up call.